Daniel SanGiacomo

aka Daniel Aktas

Artist Statement 3.0

1 Comment

Daniel SanGiacomo

Artist Statement 3.0

My ceramic work appropriates the forms of childrens’ toys to examine aspects of emerging technologies. Technologies like unmanned vehicle systems, genetically engineered plant life, wearable electronics, and the mass collection of personal data all present the opportunity to solve and create problems that I explore through the constructed objects in my work. Each piece is guided by the discourse of a specific technology and built from a mix of appropriated and created objects. Using this methodology I have constructed objects like the Bee Drone that examine the sophisticated human-excluded operations offered by unmanned vehicle systems, constructed from forms of military aviation aircraft and anatomical body parts of birds and bees. My examinations depict the serious aspects of emerging technologies using playful toy forms to investigate possible positive and negative outcomes of their application.

One thought on “Artist Statement 3.0

  1. Aren’t some of your forms inspired by objects other than toys? I wasn’t present for your midterm crit so I’m sorry if this question is off base. Overall, I like this statement better than your previous statement, but the other statement addressed the material of ceramic and precious ceramic objects, which I appreciated. Knick-knackery, kitsch, collectibles, etc—those are referenced in your work, right? The connection between nostalgia and progress seems key somehow. Because, ultimately (and I haven’t seen how these objects will interact with your final arrangement/display,) that’s what’s happening, right? You’re starting from a place of whimsy and play, and, applying a specific scientific discourse and arrangement, combining toy forms with those of ceramic collectibles to create objects related to modern technological issues and debates. The work seems to draw parallels between the intuitive arrangement and sometimes collection of toys and the traditional collection and arrangement of ceramic figurines. Technology is infiltrating these traditional and intuitive arrangements, influencing their interaction with the viewer. I’m not always very interested in the “why ceramic?” question unless it is relevant in particularly surprising or meaningful ways. In your case, I think it leads to some interesting concepts.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s