The late Cuban musician Agustin Fernandez developed a gloomy, gritty human body of works that imagine a hyper sexed, electronic corporeality.

PARIS A visceral, hyper sensibility that is sexualized through the extravagantly fashionable oeuvre of Cuban musician Agustin Fernandez, whom resided here from 1959 to 1968 and passed away in new york in 2006. The effectiveness of plucky erotic dreams and intimate innuendos, Fernandez’s leitmotif, often supersedes respectful social significance, so one part of Fernandez’s inventive art is forever likely to be libertine, even if tempered by our knowing that the dominance for the right western male position is not any longer unquestioned in art. Gender is socially ( maybe maybe not naturally) constructed and, whenever thought to be a fluid concept in art, defies simple recognition. Needless to express, there is nothing less specific in art than sex, and even though irreverent works like Yoko Ono’s cheeky film “Four” runetki sex cam (1966), Valie Export’s “Action Pants: Genital Panic” (1969), Kembra Pfahler’s “Wall of Vagina” (2011), and Betty Tompkins’s Fuck Paintings may recommend otherwise, a lot of women feel there will be something profoundly feckless, or even downright alienating, about decreasing the human anatomy to its remote intercourse components. Not too in Paradoxe de la Jouissance (“Paradox of Pleasure”), the chutzpah stuffed exhibition of Fernandez’s controversial late work insightfully curated by Jeanette Zwingenberger during the town hallway of Paris’s arrondissement that is fourth.

Agustin Fernandez, “Untitled” (1998), oil on canvas, 94 x 144 cm (courtesy and Agustin Fernandez Foundation; picture by Daniel Pype)

Art historically, Fernandez’s slightly sadomasochistic and semi that is obsessively erotic paintings of constrained human anatomy components squeeze into the context of mannerist (or decadent) belated Surrealism, which delighted in degradation by interpreting it as a work of alchemical transmutation delivering transgressive freedom from puritanical imposition. Used by the second day Surrealists, Fernandez revealed with Francis Picabia at Galerie Fürstenberg in 1965 in accordance with Yves Tanguy, Salvador Dalí, Hans Bellmer, and Pierre Roy at Galerie André François Petit in 1966. Fernandez’s surreal, elliptical, and bent that is erotic maybe many obviously illustrated in the present show by his coolly sadistic painting “Untitled” (1998), which illustrates a severed, splayed, and distorted purplish bird headed human anatomy lacking volitional control while undergoing coitus. Beyond constrained, psychosomatic, surreal fantasy imagery and a broad slippery device ambiance, it recommends in my experience a specific exaggerated erotic desire that values the vulnerability of abused individual flesh held in bondage with a imagined non intimate post biological truth. A piquant wind blows you ponder the poking device directly linking the humanoid sexual system’s electronic signals to some pitiless bio controller probe, foregrounding the frailty of human flesh when pierced by the somber impregnability of technology through you as. Right right Here, and regularly somewhere else throughout the diagrammatic, fetishized stage covered into the exhibition, Fernandez disregards the beatific (if banal) blooming mood typically related to intimate imagery by painting in a gritty, dark, and greasy metallic palette that distances his work through the tropical chromaticism usually related to their indigenous Cuba.

Agustin Fernandez, “Taboo” (2004), oil on canvas, 180 x 180 cm (courtesy and Agustin Fernandez Foundation; picture by Daniel Pype) Agustin Fernandez, “Untitled” (circa 2003), oil on canvas, 152 x 228 cm (courtesy and Agustin Fernandez Foundation; picture by Daniel Pype)

Other more minimal paintings showcased right right right here have constrained, quasi ritualistic rigor about them that recommends separated, zoomed in glimpses of intimate bondage and humiliation, such as the exquisitely medieval searching “Taboo” (2004). Bound and freaky cyborg parts abound in the work, nonetheless “Taboo” goes further into complexity since it merges intimate kinds of both sexes by depicting a gleaming isolated black colored woman’s breast aided by the indentation inside her nipple formed to resemble the opening in a penis. Once again, in other very idiosyncratic hybrid paintings, feminine areas of the body seem to have now been coerced in order to outstrip the dichotomy between technology plus the human anatomy.