Materiality

Materiality: Porcelain as Metaphor

Materiality in The Invisibles is not incidental—it is constitutive. The figures are not simply white; they are porcelain. This choice of material is both aesthetic and philosophical, carrying centuries of cultural associations and metaphorical weight.

Porcelain: A Brief History

Porcelain has been revered for over a thousand years as the most refined of ceramics. Originating in China during the Tang Dynasty (618–907 CE), it was prized for its translucency, strength, and pure white surface. European alchemists spent centuries trying to replicate it, and when they finally succeeded in the early 18th century, porcelain became a symbol of luxury, refinement, and cultural sophistication.

But porcelain is paradoxical. It is strong yet fragile, permanent yet breakable, cold yet luminous. It can last for millennia, surviving burial and fire, yet it shatters with a single blow. This duality makes it the perfect material metaphor for the human condition.

Whiteness as Blankness

The white surface of porcelain is not just a color—it is a blank slate, an unmarked surface that refuses to carry meaning. In The Invisibles, this whiteness is the visual equivalent of facelessness: it is the refusal of identity, the refusal of inscription, the refusal to be marked by history, culture, or individuality.

Whiteness in art has a complex history. In Western aesthetics, white has been associated with purity, innocence, and the divine. Greek and Roman statues, which we now see as white marble, were once painted in vivid colors—but centuries of weathering stripped away the pigment, leaving only the white stone. The Renaissance idealized this accidental whiteness, and it became the standard of classical beauty.

But whiteness is also absence. It is the color of snow, of fog, of erasure. In The Invisibles, the white porcelain figures are not pure in the moral sense; they are pure in the ontological sense—they are reduced to their essence, stripped of all contingent properties.

Fragility and Permanence

Porcelain embodies a fundamental tension: it is both fragile and permanent. A porcelain vase can survive for centuries, outlasting its makers, its owners, its civilizations. Yet it can be destroyed in an instant, shattered by a careless hand or a sudden impact.

This duality mirrors the human condition. We are fragile beings—our bodies are vulnerable, our lives are finite, our identities are contingent. Yet we are also permanent in the sense that we leave traces, we create works, we form connections that outlast us. The porcelain figures of The Invisibles embody this paradox: they are monuments to human presence, yet they are always on the verge of dissolution.

The Coldness of Porcelain

Porcelain is cold to the touch. It does not warm easily, does not absorb heat, does not yield to pressure. This coldness is part of its aesthetic—it is distant, untouchable, aloof. The figures in The Invisibles have this same quality: they are present but unreachable, visible but untouchable.

This coldness is not a deficiency; it is a philosophical stance. It is the refusal of intimacy, the refusal of warmth, the refusal of the easy consolations of connection. The figures do not invite us to touch them, to hold them, to possess them. They remain at a distance, demanding that we encounter them on their own terms.

Porcelain in Art History

Porcelain has a long history in art, from Chinese celadon vases to Meissen figurines to Jeff Koons's kitsch sculptures. But in The Invisibles, porcelain is not decorative; it is structural. It is not an ornament but a medium, not a surface but a substance.

The use of porcelain-like surfaces in digital art is rare. Most digital images strive for photorealism, for the illusion of texture and depth. But The Invisibles embraces the flatness, the smoothness, the artificiality of the digital medium. The porcelain figures are not trying to be real; they are trying to be essential.

Materiality in the Digital Age

In an age of screens, pixels, and virtual reality, materiality has become a contested concept. Digital images have no material substance—they are patterns of light, arrangements of data, ephemeral and infinitely reproducible. Yet they can evoke materiality, can simulate texture, can create the illusion of weight and presence.

The Invisibles plays with this tension. The figures are digital, yet they evoke the materiality of porcelain. They are images, yet they feel like objects. They are virtual, yet they have a presence that is almost tactile.

This is not an attempt to deny the digital nature of the work; it is an attempt to explore what materiality means in a digital context. Can a digital image have materiality? Can it evoke the weight, the texture, the presence of a physical object? The Invisibles suggests that it can—that materiality is not a property of objects but a quality of experience.

---

Materiality in The Invisibles is not decoration; it is philosophy. The porcelain-like surfaces of the figures are metaphors for the human condition: fragile yet permanent, cold yet luminous, blank yet full of potential. They are monuments to presence, reminders of vulnerability, and refusals of the easy consolations of warmth and connection.