On occasions, and in this exceptionality, we have to situate the aesthetic proposal of Eddie Mosler, that optical illusion that we understand as a work of art, in addition to being a fantasy that dazzles us and is not one of the subspecies with which the industry of culture deals, with the intervention of factors whose nature escapes the rational understanding, but which have been studied by neuroscience almost to the extenuation, becomes a transcendent and vital fact that places within our range an inexhaustible source of sensations and stimuli that not only alleviates the harshness of our daily life, so decisively predetermined by the impositions of the group to which we belong to, in which to confuse humility with resignation, melancholy with boredom, what is at rest with the stiff, and tradition with prejudice is a norm of behavior, but they activate our imagination and enrich all our abilities, even though we have not trained them with acquisitions, let’s say cultural, that we could treasure throughout our lives.
Neither those conditioning factors nor the constraints with which we are imposed, we have been able to avoid, that the human being, endowed by nature only to live in a non-extendable period of time but that behaves as if he lived in eternity without paying any attention to the roughing action of tempo and accumulating everything cumulative, even stealing it from others, but possessing very valuable qualities, so eloquently proclaims the course of history, is delivered to the enjoyment of that uselessness that is art as it does not meet any practical need, to make its existence tolerable.
From the Neolithic period in which the stone was first polished until the Middle Ages, when it was learned how dangerous it is to use free will, and from here to our era of statistics and robotization, in which it is customary to dispense from it and to get carried away by the counsels of unanimity, the human being, despite the progressive deterioration that accuse its capabilities comes to demonstrate the fact that after centuries of existence he has not found another procedure to make use of barbarism and violence to solve his disagreements with those of his own species, has ceased in his determination to practice it with all that was within his reach. Sometimes to embellish his domestic daily life, and some other times, less, to know more about what they know about their Self and the Self of others and to save themselves, singling out theirs and helping the other's to be singled out, from the impoverishing uniformity in which their lives should be run by.
These generalities, questions to the one who made us as he made us and to what made us as we are, that demand the most rational of the answers, do not respond to any other purpose than to substantiate, without the speculative vagueness with which one usually gets out of step when dealing with questions related to art, the artwork of this painter born in the Ecuadorian city of Quito in 1975, who resided in Guayaquil and, despite of his not many years of existence, with a very extensive curricular history both in his country and in other countries in Latin America, Panama, Colombia or Peru, as in the United States of the North of his continent, in England and in Spain, where he showed his works in the galleries Abel and Gaudi of Madrid in the year 2002.
His aesthetic ideology, if based basically on the symbolism of the form, configuration, contour and structure that this is its definition, it is articulated around the considerations that are contained in the previous circumambulations from which it is derived that we must understand his paintings as answers to questions that he himself formulates pushed by the dissatisfactions that produced him those that put at his disposal the books of philosophy of art, also those of history, those that deal with anthropology and the sacred callings that are kept in the highest inaccessible library shelves.
Hence his perseverance in perennating with lasting images his passage through this world so that those who arrive later know that he existed and how he resolved his existence, and from here also the hasty or calm chromatic cadences with which, disturbed by the visible reality or watching the placidity of the heavens, invigorates the spaces; the appraisement of color as the meaning and as a meaningful element; that messianic mysticism that leads him, according to his own words, to understand time as an eternal present whose gravitational center is he himself as an instrument of the universe at the service of people, and that his work seems to us that it does not come from any kind of theoretical assumed preconception, but can well be understood as the conclusion of a process of synthesis and elimination of the accessory or circumstantial, so we know hard as rewarding, which led him not only to dispense with any reference to the human figure and the constructive geometry of the environment, abstracting its components to make them disappear, but, bottoming out to not disappoint the cosmic redemptive and primary mysticism that defines his personality, to pay attention, rather than to the technique of the procedures, in how to make of the painting an instrument against the passivity and the indifference in which the aesthetic categories, despite the importance he gave to his learnings, these play a secondary role because what it really proposes is, with an essential language of who has eliminated discourse and reiteration, making him the bearer of emotions and feelings to give use to the so consensual uselessness.
De las Asociaciones Española e Internacional de Críticos de Arte
Madrid, August 2018