María Alonso Borso: It is true, I am aware of this project having an undetermined duration in time; I could be working on it for years. What comes in this catalogue is just the sketch of the early stages, and giving it this initial shape has already been very hard. It is important to say that I do not believe in having attained the core of this project, but I am showing here some extracts of how this process is developing. You know, modern life and its deadlines.

S.S.: In the meantime, would you like to explain to me the meaning of this title "iyalo"?

M.A.: The origin comes from a Yoruba expression used in Cuban syncretism: "iyalocha", it literally means: "Mother of the Saint" (originally, "Mother of the Market"). One of the reasons why mother is important in religious iconography, is because it talks about origins and creation. I do not emphasize the female power, but our potential as human beings to fully develop the unity of both energies.

S.S.: Let me say that I have read the schema of the project with its divisions: you talk of a series of works centred in the primal elements (water, earth, etc.), followed by others centred in the combination of these elements in space (altars, mandalas), and in the body, circulation of the energies, and the archetypes.
So from these few notes, I seem to understand that you are making an operation which points at a revaluation of a universal symbolism, which has its roots in a past and therefore in a future also. In other words it seems to me that you are particularly attentive to the retrieval of an active and constructive thought, beyond the kind of consciousness and knowledge which is totally conceptualising...which serves those characteristics bound more to the myth than to the logos, more to the iconic than to the semantic. Do you agree?

M.A.: It is hard also to talk about mythos, because this word has a heavy philosophical background, and can therefore mean very different things for people. I do not make a hard distinction between mythos and logos, since one finds that they are interdependent, but I do try to deal with the image (I mean here one two-dimensional image) as the concentrated recipient of complex mental concepts, which would be too lengthy to verbally explain.
Being such, the image´s effect in the mind is extremely powerful.
The series, "mudras", is talking about this. I take a gesture (holding a flower between the fingers) that can be found in Egyptian art, renaissance paintings, Indian deities like Tara, or even tarot decks, etc., to convey meanings. There is no need for text, although I may later use some text in it for other reasons.

S.S.: And talking about this, looking at the piece "Archetype 0", this figure with a flower in hand over a green hill, the image inserted in a virtual space, reminds me of the "Lily´s Prince", and in particular, of the story told to me by the artist Fiorella Rizzo, about the first time she was in front of the Lily´s Prince. She told me about this strong feeling, of this image´s energy, so much so that looking for the second time at the wall, instead of the Lily´s Prince there was a note saying "back in five minutes". In other words, this story testifies to an imagination in constant action, always active beyond the space-time, which belongs to the work of art.

M.A.: Perfect, I think here you have said it all. There are certain type of images, the ones that I am trying to unveil, (or retrace, as you prefer), images that have a strong and healing effect on our minds. There is also the influence of oriental sciences, like Feng Shui, which are making people realize that art works can actually affect your life. So we are recovering a knowledge that was lost in Europe, and is now coming back into young people´s homes, and some public spaces.

S.S.: And still this attention of yours towards the sacred origin of art -its spiritual dimension etc, which we can redefine as attention towards the imaginary... I have a better understanding of the way you are proceeding, that the artist´s strength is not exhausted for you in the capacity of making, but rather in the capacity of observing. From this perspective, the artist is above all of those that observe, but not the one that produces, which naturally displaces the vision of art.
Regarding this, there comes to my mind a Jung commentary: Jung states that there is a factor quite neglected; the unconscious spirit of time. This unconscious spirit of time compensates consciousness´ taking of sides and anticipates future modifications. A clear example given by Jung is Modern Art". What do you think?

M.A.: For historians it is important to count time, but for mystics and for bare artists, all times coexist in this same moment. Jung put it in a very nice way, and there is no need to say more...unless we want to talk about the act of creation, and its stages of darkness.
Although the artist is an observer, and is experienced in working with ideas, the artist is precisely the one who can give a material shape to these ideas, and her/his work exists because there is a material world.
What I meant by telling you about painting/technology is how the medium is not what art is about. We can be seduced by using video, interactivity, etc. (and I do enjoy these things) but let us look carefully at what we are doing, and not so much at how many video projectors or big prints we are showing. I also wanted to reflect about my reasons to go back to painting, after 8 years of doing mainly video and installation work.

S.S.: I will explain myself better. What I wanted to introduce is the concept of the artwork´s extratemporal present, which is a term elaborated in the fifties by the art theorist Cesare Brandi. "The extratemporal present in the art work" has been a genial intuition which allowed us to theorise the continuous rebirth of the work, its regeneration to infinity opening to new interpretations (to make it clear, todays Majesty of the Duccio, has acquired new meanings with regard to the times of its creation, certainly losing some amongst the original interpretations, like those bound to the devotional sphere). The art therefore knows how to be interpreted by the society that takes it in. This raises the question whether the artist can dominate, predetermine or program this life of the artwork.
Not if we agree to recognise in the artwork an autonomous entity, (that one which Blanchot defines as the solitude of the artwork). Not, if we consider in human activity, and therefore even more in that of the artist, the unexpected, the accident, the chance. At this point it is necessary to take into consideration in the artist´s activity, the essential capacity of observing and critical-analytical probing of their contemporary society. This aspect seems to me very present in your way of working, as well as in the works. And it is therefore in this sense that the artist has the capacity to pre-see, pre-feel and pre-dict.
In this project of yours iyalo what emerges as the main faculty of the art praxis, of art itself, is memory (above all unconscious memory), the relevance of the image that has to act, nourish and reactivate the imaginary. It also seems to me that you attribute to this stratified archive of memory a "Prevedendum et praesagiendum" and from this perspective the capacity of art to influence life.

M.A.: I hope this work makes people aware of the moment we are living. At least in Europe, all sorts of information, cultures and peoples are enriching the mental and imaginary space, and I am simply trying to be a fair exponent of this experience. My work is acknowledging this fact and giving it a cultural visibility. I´ve gone beyond the use of whatever symbols or "interesting" images one may find, which would be another form of exploitation and disrespect. In this sense you could say that iyalo belongs more to the future than to the year 2001, especially after the last increase in war and violence. Understanding, sounds like a strange word today.
I am convinced that some works of art nurture the best in human beings, same as others can be very damaging, provoking anger, depression or stupidity. We need a huge amount of positive energy in order to end so much suffering: we could begin by fighting the hate and fear inside ourselves or/and in the world outside. I dare to say that the resources to do so, can not be found switching on the TV, or going to most of the available attractions and shows.
Probably what a classic work can do, is take us into another state of mind, no matter how or when it was done. For this, as for many other things, I do not have a good explanation: you either feel it or you don´t.
This is one of the reasons why I´m very critical about some contemporary works of art, and no less about the theoretical justification of these same works, but this should be another conversation...would you like to leave it here for today?

London / Valencia, December 2001