Inside/Outside THE ATYPICAL FACE TO FACE

This painting presents an atypical face-to-face between the Outside and the Inside, a curious and unusual window open from the outside dominates the image of rural architecture, emblem of the attachment to traditions and customs, unfortunately decompartmentalised and abandoned. The outside develops a progressive popular irruption, it outclasses its own spatial notion to become a thought, a way of life and a culture.The inside seems to be lonely. Deserting the traditions and mores transmitted from generation to generation would be synonymous with withdrawal, passivity. It would be an "admission of failure", "a form of renunciation".

THE ATYPICAL FACE TO FACE

Many of us sit at the window to escape, to communicate, but also to admire a landscape to which we now have only partial access. In these troubled times, looking out of the window is a way of escaping from reality, of forgetting the constraints. As soon as I get up in the morning, I got into the habit of opening my window to rediscover the outside, a new life opens up before my eyes, a way of linking two worlds, an inner world and an outer world, different but complementary, the relationship between these two worlds is central thanks to the place given to the window. 

One day and in order to transform the window into an understanding of the geographical and sociological space, I changed the place to open one from the outside, it was a visual reversal towards the inside which could lead the viewer to look at himself, a simple psychological transformation of the gaze.

Should we first admit the validity of the primitive concept of the inside/outside relationship, that mode of inhabiting (separately) halfway between the geographical one of kind of life, and the sociological one of way of life. What relationships must exist between inside and outside, between the closed and the open, between the private and the public, for each living space to be inhabited in well-being! So I find myself confronted with this paradox that I have always tried to avoid. 

A/Inside: Self-exposure and abandonment of private spaces

Privacy can sometimes mean anonymity and a desire to stay out of the public eye. When something is said to be 'private' for a person, it usually means that special feelings, customs and personal and family traditions are attached to it. Indeed, it seems easier to know what is inside us than outside. This impression is linked to knowing oneself well. In many countries, there are laws that sanction violations of privacy by governments, corporations or individuals. These laws can sometimes even be found in the Constitution. 

Nowadays, however, we are witnessing more and more outside intrusions into private life, a veritable invasion of language and community values, a change in customs, not to mention irrevocable culinary changes.

B/ The outside: a predominant way of life.

Moreover, the inside presupposes the outside and vice versa, while we tend to radically separate the "outside" from the "inside", contemporary life has taught us that being-in-the-world today, and thus living fully, places us out of ourselves. From the front, the outside develops a progressive popular irruption of the inner world, it overcomes its own spatial notion to become a thought, a way of life and a culture. The outside world manifests itself to us, impacting our 5 senses, and this creates new sensations and new behavioural habits, so the acquisition of new habits is an arrangement of principles of continuity.

C/ Inside/outside: Living on the other side of the canvas, is the inside inhabited by the outside?

It seems to me that contemporary thought exposes us to the idea that the inside is always inhabited by the outside and that it is in this relationship to the outside that we know if we have really evolved. 

How then can we understand that we are led to live externally? And, with this inevitable openness to external space, where does traditional thinking stand and where does the subject stand? Are we heading for an imminent desertion of morals and privacy? Are we heading towards the loss of customs, the erasure of individual and family specificities? Are we in danger of detaching ourselves from the tradition handed down from generation to generation? Are we heading for the erasure of the inner world? Is there a danger of becoming generic? To desert would be synonymous with withdrawal, abandonment, passivity. It would be an "admission of failure", "a form of renunciation". If this happens, following the herd can create a conformist society and conformism can reduce to zero the sense of human diversity, making the crowd a dangerous object because it can be manipulated at will. You have to know where you stand to know what to do.

According to Nitsch the world is divided into two categories of people, those who follow their own will, and those who follow the will of others, the former are strong and do not let anyone rule them, the latter are weak and are content to reproduce what others do.

D/ DESERTION

This painting presents an atypical face-to-face between the Outside and the Inside, a curious and unusual window open from the outside dominates the image of rural architecture, emblem of the attachment to traditions and customs, unfortunately decompartmentalised and abandoned.The outside develops a progressive popular irruption, it outclasses its own spatial notion to become a thought, a way of life and a culture.The inside seems to be lonely. Deserting the traditions and mores transmitted from generation to generation would be synonymous with withdrawal, passivity. It would be an "admission of failure", "a form of renunciation".

Written on April 7, 2023 . ELLOUMI MOURAD

https://sure-realism.com/