Structure and Movement
Contemporary Landscape Painting Between Order and Flow
For as long as I can remember, I have been deeply preoccupied with one question:
How can I capture my experience of nature — not as a depiction, but as a spatial condition?
I am less interested in representing landscape than in revealing its inner structure.
Not the horizon. Not the motif.
But the framework of movements and formal relationships.
Again and again, an apparent opposition emerges:
structure and movement.
Structure stands for placement, stability, architectural clarity.
Movement stands for shift, permeability, transformation.
In my recent works, I no longer try to reconcile this opposition.
I allow it to operate.
Space as an Open Framework
The paintings evolve from movements of color that are not immediately stabilized.
Areas remain permeable.
Color events arise without being fully explained.
Space is formed less through classical perspective than through energetic application.
What emerges is a landscape that cannot be clearly located.
No clearly defined top or bottom.
No fixed center.
Instead, a structure that moves between order and flow.
Contemporary Landscape
Perhaps this is one possible form of landscape painting today:
not the depiction of a place, but the investigation of a spatial condition.
Nature does not appear as something external, but as movement within the pictorial space itself.
In March, I will travel to the United States — a change of place that inevitably shifts perception. I feel the need to look beyond familiar boundaries.
Following this, I will participate in the GEDOK centennial exhibition at the Morat-Institut Freiburg titled “Shedding.” A large-scale work of mine will be shown there.
Both contexts engage with the motif of displacement.
Structure and movement are not opposites.
They are two aspects of the same space in which we breathe.
If you would like to see new works from this series before their public release, you may subscribe to my Studio Updates here: