The project Dialectics of Substance deliberately positions itself within a cultural logic rooted in postmodern ideologies that proposed eclecticism and the anarchy of meaning as significant sources of artistic expression. Andreea Pricop and Ioana Palamar decided to bring together two markedly different artistic approaches—distinct themes, stylistic languages, practices, and media of expression—and to present them to the public in the form of an exhibition functioning as a signifier whose semantic stake revolves around the idea of opposition (and around the absence of coherent relationships between the two bodies of work on display).
In my view, as a commentator, such a premise establishes a connection—paradoxical, if you will—between the ancient idea of harmony and the contemporary logic of relational aesthetics (as theorized by Nicolas Bourriaud), according to which the viewer becomes an active participant in the production of meaning. In the case of this exhibition, the connection follows a simple line of reasoning: harmony presupposes the presence of opposites and their “dialectical” distillation into a harmonious substance; once the presence of opposites is ensured, the act of distillation can be transferred into the domain of the public.
In other words, in my opinion, the project of Andreea and Ioana finds its fulfillment—beyond the obvious formal and plastic qualities of the works (which no longer require commentary)—in a very natural way within the gallery space, through a generous act of investing the viewer with artistic discernment. I believe that, aside from personal vanities (or other kinds of whims), this simple relationship between artist and audience is the secret dream of many artists: I create the works, and you will surely know what to do with them. I also believe there is considerable truth in Nicolas Bourriaud’s observation that “art is produced in the gallery, just as Tristan Tzara considered that “thought is produced in the mouth.”

– University Professor Mihai TARAȘI