“There has been, since ever, an almost innate obsession for space and its domain through the most varied forms and ways. This domain goes several times beyond intended expectations, such as, self-control that we could or should have about something to which we call “place”, where things happen, grow and bloom, since space is, in its entire definition, more genuine, original and infinite.
When we think about space, our reminiscence bring us immediately for a certain “place” where this can or not evoke good memories, passed situations or even situations/circumstances that might be about to happen.
It is, in these spaces, that the most diverse “objects” emerge or stanch, creating some kind of symbiosis between these two phenomenons. These “objects” many times create and have the gift to give life to spaces through an almost divine force that overlaps to some other thing.
It is clear that this tendency has two sides, on one hand, we have the filling of space through the “object” that occupies its place, metamorphosing what it would be an original landscape (shall we say) and on the other hand, we have the filling of that same place with aberrations that time decided to abandon and live it at drift.
Although these fillings could be considered ambiguous, it is necessary to regard that the beauty of things is in its essence, and frequently, an old van in a putrefaction state in the middle of a ravine can have its beauty, although not everybody agrees with that.
In this way, these are the questions of the presented project, the insertion of perfectly banal “objects” from the common day, incorporated in a space that beside being for everyone, it won a captive place in the soul of the represented “object”, as if, and in a natural way, embraces and creates since the beginning an almost inseparable bond with its own landscape.
Is this real? Or is this the purest of the falsehoods? I cannot find the answer for this question. The most probable is the existence of an alliance that allows a harmony between the two exposed perspectives.
As it can be verified here in the images presented, the spaces can be only constituted for the space itself, trying in this way, to establish one relation between this same space and the notion of the evolving emptiness for itself, even knowing or perceiving that the emptiness acquires a characteristic almost apparent, because it cannot, several times, link to reality as it is known. Therefore, there are two questions which we consider fundamental: the question of the inserted space, such as in time, as in “place”, and the question of time inserted and modified with the presence of an inanimate “object” that is or belonged to everyday life, but that now represents in all is fullness, the magnitude of the presence that is inserted in the same space.”
More of Tito’s work here