User:I'm Ignatius/sandbox

IGNATIUS, the painter NAME: Ignacio Corral BORN: Madrid, Spain. Dec 1956 STUDIES: Medicinal Doctor (PHD,Autonomous University of Madrid). Visual Artist (Spanish Informalism). Philosophy (Complutense University Madrid). HIS VISUAL ART: His father was a mathematician and also a painter, and he introduce him to the Spanish Informalism (Abstract Expressionism in USA) since he was a very young boy. From the beginning of his painting career he was related to the Informalis movement, with artists such as Lucio Muñoz, Antonio Tapies, Paso Group (No trespassing… passing): Canogar, Saura, Millares, Feito, Juana Frances…

His way of understanding Art, Visual Art in general, is based on the conviction that the symbolism of an image is not what that image represents; it is, above all, the sum of all the complex cultural connotations existing at the time, in which the work is thought out. Because of this, it doesn’t make much sense to merely ask if a piece is or isn’t a work of “Art”. The question needs to be “What is being communicated?” in the piece.

His paintings form part of the complex mesh of thoughts and actions that make up the society in which we live. The contemplation of these works should therefore communicate by activating different memories and connections in the spectator, allowing him or her to receive certain meanings and sensations -especially emotions- and then comment on those sensations and preconceptions in a critical way.

He believes that we are living in the "total screen" age, a world in which reality has been substituted by its image. The computer, the tablet, the smart-phone, the TV… are the natural way for mass communication. His 3D paintings, as a form of expression, are capable of breaking the monotony of the flat plane that distinguishes the screen age and allows the viewer to actually enter the piece. In order to enjoy his work, the spectator must examine it from different angles and distances. This forces the presence of the spectator in the piece whilst contemplating it. This works don’t copy any other reality, they are real themselves, and, as such, they work as a counterpoint to our current reality

The Feminine: Is a woman merely a man who carries the burden of reproduction? When I ask myself what feminine signifiers are, a lot of questions arise. When I realize that almost all the images of women we see in paintings have been fundamentally represented through Patriarchal myths, he decided to find a way to express the feminine essence stripped of all Patriarchal signifiers. This already complex proposal is complicated even more so when we consider not only the doubt we have of being able to represent the idea of a feminine or masculine nature, but also the impossibility of doing so without referring to its opposite. In the same way that we tacitly evoke the convex when we think of the concave, or of clarity when we conjure up darkness, when we mention the feminine, the masculine inevitably lurks – and vice versa. If this were not the case, we would be talking about hermaphrodites and there would be no need to introduce the concept of male and female at all. So, how do we overcome this paradox of enforced duality?

In addition, the current social constructions of “ideology & gender” make it even more difficult to obtain feminine meanings through the classic bodily signs of Patriarchy. So, again, what is the essence of femininity? Is sexual differentiation nothing more than a strategy of nature? Is it possible to represent the “un-representable” of the feminine? I’ll try to answer through my paintings.