It could even be said that I am one of those who despise pictorial story-telling and/or moralizing; my practice is rather introverted, focused on the concrete, physical reality of the medium in use, i.e. painting. The subject of these works can best be understood in terms of the following question: "what happens when we look at a painting?" and thus explore the vitality of the relationship between a painting and its beholder, where possibilities of manipulation are of great importance.

A certain frustration, experienced while dealing with a contemporary painting, the lack of its power to captivate resulted in continuous doubt about the communication capability of this artifact we call a painting* (* a flat surface covered with colors, assembled in a certain order ). This at last got me to propose that a painting is not (necessarily) designed exclusively for the visual onlooker or else observation, but is (very well) capable of being more than a mere pasture for beholder's visual pleasure. Moreover it is (indeed) possible to establish some kind of direct participation or interaction between a painting and its "bystander".

However, this assumption " unintentionally" highlighted a wide range of questions. For instance: to which extend can we talk of a painting? Can an object that demand physical contact (still) be termed a painting? Where is actually the boundary between mental and physical perception of the world, how does these two concepts  influence one another, ...? Furthermore, the notion of physical contact with an artwork brings us even to social issues of our age. For example: what is the meaning of an intimate/personal space? Where does it start and where does it end? What is the role of a touch? How important is it for our communication? How to re-establish "an intimate/human" relationship with our surrounding? ...

From this standpoint the above mentioned limitation of my interest to the medium of painting, is in any case not made by chance. It stands as a dividing line from all these "participatory art" multi-sensory practices where the visitor is an indispensable part of the artistic utterance and it is noticeable that in this kind of spectacles a painting can appear only conceptually, as a mere component of an extensive proclamation. But then, my  departing question is oriented toward a painting per se defined as a product of a painting action and therefore the assumed active beholder is not a beholder (of fine art) in general, but an onlooker that stands in front of (this) painting. Cut down: an active (physical) interaction with an artwork is nowadays nothing un-usual, but what about painting? Can this object bear this kind of intercourse?