In my diploma thesis, large scribbles plow across the canvases. Reusable gestures and fleeting strokes are sharing the space with enlarged, almost monolithic details. The ambiguity and openness of the works invite you to focus on the poetry of the images.

The work you see in the images was created in the last two years. A fundamental question in all of them is how to translate drawing into painting. I see screen printing as a connection, a bridge between those two ways of working.

The starting point for the work was a sheet of paper full of scribbles, which I enlarged using an office copier. I prepared the images for screen printing using analogue and digital translation processes. These processes leave behind their own traces and artifacts, that are then inscribed into the work: the office copier adding marks, changing the size of the images, the screen influencing the printed image depending on the density of its mesh.

My work process is always analytical: I enlarge, filter, sift through, take apart and put back together again. The canvases measure 1.10m x 1.60m. For each canvas I use nine A3 sheets, which are divided into 3 screens. The format determines the material.

The energy inherent in the line is distilled and made reproducible. Each time I screenprint, using a large screen, it requires strength, that I have to apply repeatedly. Therefore screenprinting, although often viewed as mechanical, is a very bodily process. During the printing process, I reenter the process as a decision-maker.

The accumulation of traces is also noticeable in the materiality of the canvas. The fabric is discernible through its weave as well as the fraying edges. The initial rectangle of the canvas is distorted by the application of multiple layers of paint. Here, too, the process is inscribed directly into the material, which becomes deformed and does not only provide the basis for content, but becomes part of it.