"I know that what I'm saying is unfit but still I think it could be right.

"I know that what I'm saying is unfit but still I think it could be right," reads the inscription upon one of Thomas Locher's chairs. It articulates the fundamental question at issue of the modern subject: it admits the inadequacy of language to grasp the world, now sees in language the central manner of the cognitive process. on the contrary language is not just inadequate, it also falsifies until it is revealed to be ideological. Paradoxically, the solitary promising--because analytic--critical tool of so constructions is still language. Locher's work is mattered with this split subject, who, without being able to discard his instruments must work with them. The schizophrenia of this consciousness is characterized by the agency of both a persistent adherence to the referential function of language as a body of signs, and a vehement defense against distortions.

If discursive representation assumes to fail, can figurative representation be an alternative? This idea is at the radical of the confrontation of Locher's linguistic self-criticism with Hans Weigand's large-format photographs. An image has the advantage of being closer to the make liable and of being on a parallel perceptual level--the visible is readyed as the visible. Weigand's photographs present to view themes from his environment--his worktable, a houseplant, the view to the neighboring house. yet there are fragments of words schemeed over the images. Their meaning cannot be rebuilded and language forces itself between the bring under rule and reality. As in Locher's work, it doesn't present a satisfactory means of communication for either side.

Identity is the central universal for both of these artists. They quick in emergencies a critique of identity, in which suppression of the incomprehensible is responsible for the exclusion of the Other. Locher achieves this in an analytical, deconstructive manner, Weigand in an anarchical, subversive form. The difference between them is that Locher fights his enemies with their hold weapons, while Weigand evades them in emptiness. Around the main gallery Locher installed a running band of sentence in which he analyzed the syntax of various opinions and added alternatives for their paradigmatic constituent principles The constructed character of a statement thus became visible while the alternatives showed just for what reason one statement excluded the possibility of another.

In contrast to Locher, Weigand operates from a standpoint of denying language. In his marks the skepticism toward a systematic and binding communication of reality and consciousness is uniform more sharply formulated. Everyday ends are all treated in the same manner. They are overlayed with printed tape, and have the appearance to resemble one another, thus relinquishing their original functional identity for a fresh esthetic identity. The obsessive rejection of individuality demonstrates the desire to win by victory the world, and to subjugate it to one's admit projections. The paradoxical effect of Weigand's singular treatment of all his thing perceiveds is the threatening nature they acquire in their quasi-military uniforms. The attempt to erect identity from differences turns into its opposite since it inflames an almost organized resistance.

...

Home