Jacky Strenz

PIETRO SANGUINETI
"the CENTER"

September 11 until October 30, 2010

The synthetic smoothness of the letters reveals no handwriting and so reflects the inherent neutrality of this smallest common denominator of language. Only by placing them together do they become carriers of meaning. The same goes for terms torn out of context: only the connection with others endows the directionless fragment with coherence. Just like the elementary particles that are common words, build meaningful forms through the way they are combined, so too do Sanguineti’s verbal wild-cards first gain content within the viewer’s field of association. Stimulated by the technical brilliance of color, form, and material, or also by semantic meaning, we fill unconnected empty spaces with interpretation.
This automatically occurring enhancement only works thanks to Sanguineti’s limitation to single words. If the multiplicity of meaning attached to his words is like that of verse, he avoids the plethora of association which occurs there through poetic combination in favour of an immersion in individual words. Such concentration on the fundamentals of language is the last thing we usually do, and perhaps the first thing we should do. Sanguineti’s dramaturgy grants the language molecule the space and time that are denied it in its normal use. Uninfluenced by past and future modifications, it echoes against the wall, ebbing into space, fading into the silence which emerges due to a lack of competing words. Without a link to acquired and seldom-questioned associations, not crowded out by words with signal character, the single word allows a less conditioned perception. The new sight this enables must not be confused with a completely unconditional awareness, for with language, we also learn the content stored within it; yet this presentation of single words with few distractions allows one to hear one’s self associating and to view freely the memories linked to the

The sight of the CENTER immediately calls up questions of the periphery. The center of what? This perplexity and resulting unrest emphasizes the reason behind the words public ubiquity. Like many other words preferred by Sanguineti, the shell of a word that ‘Center’ is has its pointlessness or – more diplomatically – its ambiguity to thank for its popularity. Without further comment, it is as meaningful as it is meaningless, could mean Center for Universal Studies or tyre center.
Yet the consideration of whether we think first of Center for World-Peace or kebab center only regards content. The aesthetic presence of writing is at least as relevant. Color, lighting, contour and spatial dimensions give the letters an impact, which their usual placement within a text does not allow. With this emphasis on the power of the printed word – not the sentence – Sanguineti’s writing bares similarity to advertising graphics. While the latter, however, go for maximum reduction of possible meanings, Sanguineti aims for the opposite, openness of meaning.

The definite article accompanying the CENTER underlines the claim for sole agency that this center has; its absence would point to it being a center, one of many. In order to highlight it on the other hand, as center of all centers, even in commerce one does not like to go without trusty additions such as ‘your personal X-Center’ or ‘the Y-Center for all the family’ and so on. Sanguineti’s refusal of such a personal approach makes it seem uniquely distinctive: the CENTER seems to have no need for such explanation.

The attraction of such an installation in a city center gallery is thanks to a second reading, more psychological than aesthetic. In terms of how we feel, centerd is rather the execption in a life which mainly swings between extremes. Being centerd, the stillness within the cyclone, is seldom as stable as those apparently solid types might suggest. Unlike enduring calm, equilibrium is just that: an incessant correction of unbalance with the aid of micro-movements. The rarer it is to be centerd, the greater the promise of the CENTER – although, or because, it ultimately promises the unattainable.
The unreality of the experience of equilibrium is also reason for the inflationary use of words such as ‘balance’ and ‘harmony’ in advertising. Like a provocation, the CENTER turns this promise out towards the window and so to the public – an almost impertinent claim of a mythical condition. The apparently universal validity of this word, common to many languages, is deceptive. Instead of taking a word that is near to neutral in its distribution, Sanguineti’s choice is the US-American version of a word which in the British catchment area is center. Therefore the fact that we unquestioningly accept the American version as the norm mirrors a political reality of the USA as perceived center.

The attraction of the CENTER comes down to the fact that it stands for both the actual and target state. We feel directly addressed simply by the sight of it; for every human being actually is center of the universe – the center of experiential reality. On the other hand it shows a target state because we subliminally tend towards the view that the CENTER stands for our rightful place, our ancestral home, where we belong – in the center.
In this respect, entering the exhibition promises the official recognition of secretly perceived truths. A glance in the mirrored center will finally confirm that it contains what one always suspected: ones self. And so can the center of the universe – the ego – finally take up its rightful place on the throne.
Barely does one seem to be on target, however, and the Fata Morgana dissolves. Unlike a spatial situation, writing does not allow us to reside in the center. Instead, our back is literally up against a wall, one which refuses all access, any setting of oneself in the center. The hoped-for collapse of word and content proves to be an untenable promise. Powerful, alluring and unapproachable, the center stands before us. We may look inside but once more it is so near and yet so far.