In The Mirror

If life is within art or art within life, then the limits between completeness and plausibility, between convincing and puerile, between neatness and redundancy, between emotion and asepsis, should be questioned.

In fact, Ariel feels at home painting. If the world collapsed, he would continue in his studio painting and doing everything he knows he is good at: seducing from the image. He would not change the themes due to demands of the medium or disturbed responses from others who demand from art what they do not understand or do not make an effort to understand. Probably that apparent minimalist fragility is nothing more than a pose that hides the animal that inhabits and possesses him. Everything indicates that this temptation of silence is reached by means of the approximation ritual that accepts the flirtation between the surface of the works and the variations of the beast condensed in the artist's body. The beginning, Ariel well knows, is important, but the decisive transition towards that true knowledge of the self only occurs if we erase the memory of that beginning and banish the origin. The painting of this artist moves away with all intention (confessed and manifest), from that idea of ​​origin, of primary culture.

If something I like about this artist's painting, it is his dispossession / emancipation of all tradition and that kind of tendency to fragment and to speculate. Ariel executes a painting that is fully fetishistic and manic. And it is because it shows a strange devotion (often pure irony) towards certain objects and articles of use that it deifies. One of those items comes to be himself. It is as if the work became an altar of the self, of the first person singular. His painting exalts and protects him, presents him on stage and at the same time withdraws him.

- Andrés Isaac Santana, Art Critic | Madrid, Spain.