A - TOPOS
Athens School of Fine Arts
RePLACE - ReSEARCH II
"KRONOS" factory, Eleusis
LA PIETRA E I LUONGHI
"SENZA - ASSENZA - PRESENZA"
The works of sculpture of Theodoros, anti-demagogic and anti-spectacular, as they are, subordinate choise of form and material into discurse, pf which they become the medium. The artist’s social and ethical function counterposes to any formalistic or decorative requirement.
The works of sculpture are never isolated, but enter into immediate dialectic with time and space, creating relationships with the people of the place, its history, its culture and modes of behaviour.
Anna D’ Elia
Exhibition "Sanat - Τεχνη"
MSU Instanbul Museum of Painting and Sculpture
The central concept is composed as a “passage”, where the work stands in dialectical relationship with the environment of the old building and the function of the Museum. Developing the relationship IN-OUT, the installation is set to the AXE – from the exhibition hall to the colonade, which drives to th egarden, where the round pool with the swan is.
The work is suggesting indirectly the geographical, political, social, cultural and economical relationship “in-out”, which conditions the cultural communication between different people, from which the title IN- BETWEEN derives.
The elements of the work: “Wooden rectangular frames, as “gates”, which are connected and balanced with ropes. In the upper inclined frame a square crystal square with the word FRAGILE is in equilibrium, functioning as a gate which leads to the other inclined wooden frame floating in the pool’s water. A frame gate from which is hanging the “matraque -phallos” like a question mark…
The swan as a living element compliments the composition.
IN BETWEEN II
Sculpture Symposium "SIMPPETRA"
Antonio Duarte Museum in Caldas da Rainha, Portugal
Sculture – Installation realised in the framework of the SYmposium of Sculpture “Simppetra’, where the main material was stone frome the quarries of the area – marbles, granites, in varrious hues.
The central concept is composed as a “gate”, as it was designed to function as a “counterpoint” to the previous installation in Instambul, IN – BETWEEN.
Four rectangular blocks of local stone in equal dimensions. Two of them interlocked to create a triangular arc, which is set upright on two other blocks of stone, horrizontaly placed and balanced by their weight.
The whole composition is connected with the rope from the local harbour, while on the horizontal surface the four points of the horizon are carved.
RePLACE - ReSEARCH
Saint-Georges Ramparts, Rhodes
[…] During the development of his journey within the current historical events of his time, he changes only the manner in which he attempts to create, every so often, the sensation of the pendulum, the sensation of the “suspended hypothesis”.
At the same time we know that the thread on which we must balance our journey in time is attached to two mobile and not steady points: past and future. These two are never joined and our suspended journey never allows us to touch them completely. For this reason these two points are never fused in the present.
Theodoros has repeatedly stressed this subject. He is not interested in restoration, is not preoccupied with the fantastic construction of the identity of the future, and even less with the illusion of the present. Besides, today there is no dearth of propositions and works which con-
front these three aspects. There is, however, a great scarcity of the pleasure obtained by cross-
ing these domains without being trapped in any one of them.
Theodoros knows that. It is to this purpose he has worked for years now. For this purpose in Rhodes today he attempts to trace itineraries for the viewer, leading him between heteroge-
neous spaces and forms, where the connecting link and communication thread will be the flow of the journey from one point to the next and from one space to the next and the reverse.
This kind of experience reveals that, “the current public function of contemporary sculptural expression” may be understood and function in a manner that converts it into a living medium of communication. In other words, the response to Theodoros’s questions is but a matter of experiencing his involvement in time and space.
The written reply cannot convey but the mental meeting of two different languages within an area of common self-inquiries. Replies are possible as long as the significance of art in the con-
temporary physical and social framework is considered a matter of dynamic projections to the actual questions that are incessantly posed by the mobile poles of our course in the past and the future. Contemporary man lives in a space that is characterized alternately by the approach and withdrawal from these poles. He feels that he does not dominate this space. In spite of that, he lives in the hope that he will become the ruler of his space and master of his time; that, finally, he will not be compressed.
For years now Theodoros has stressed this role which transmits hope for such a dynamic development, without closing gaps, cracks and wounds, without passing over in silence the attenuated significance and power of art. For this reason his work is always a dynamic hypothesis and by extension, it tells us that art may fulfill our hopes, but perhaps not our needs.