THEORETICALLY:
If we rely on the latest approaches in art history, we could classify ourselves in contemporary art. We use numerous media, many supports that we implement in what resembles an installation. Our works are outside the frame, off the pedestal, we occupy a space. Some forms of our creations are closer to performance than to exhibited objects. We do not create a unique work but a concept that develops and adapts to the projects submitted to us.
In terms of sub-category, the one that covers the largest area of our creations is certainly digital art. All our means depend on digitization. We use digital images, electroacoustic music, new realities (augmented reality), interaction and its array of programming and sensors.
Beyond this attempt to classify our work, we also distinguish ourselves from these families because, in the same object, we write stories. Narration allows us to pull back the focus and look at the whole. The world around us drowns in the flow of event details. This only creates emotions, reactions, and much less perspective.
We also distinguish ourselves by wanting to go beyond the framework of art that defines, critiques, and challenges art. What interests us, those we want to meet, observe, and touch with our works are the public. We like to be present with the work in its place of dissemination to exchange, listen, hear, and see. From a work, what matters little is the experience that the spectator gains from it. Each person is important for the very uniqueness of the reading they make of the events that affect them.
OBVIOUSLY:
For us, digital remains a tool and not an end in itself. We use digital means like painters use brushes or rather how they adopted new gouaches to gain mobility, and new acrylics to work faster.
We, of course, work on the modalities of interactivity to continue the shift that transfers a work from the artist’s hands to those of the spectator. Since Marcel Duchamp, everything has led us towards an increasingly important role for the spectator.
