This mixture places the observer before a tension of various moments that, in merging, create a neutral time, distant from a purely present state. The material clay has a direct relationship with the idea of landscape. A material that comes directly from the earth, clay can be modeled and transformed into imaginary shapes. This idea of an imaginary landscape that models and transforms itself establishes a rapport between the material and the concept of fantastic landscapes that form part of a collective imagination of hidden, mysterious lands that have never existed. The idea of landscape is tied to a specific point of view that a certain panorama can compose. In a sense, landscape is generated by a unique point that is multiplied by an infinity of other points placed at a fixed distance.
[...] The subtle border between nature and artifact diminishes in Arancio’ s art; it dissolves into a state of uniqueness between one thing and the other. It is no coincidence that the concept of cabinet of curiosities becomes central to his work. This frontier between art and nature, between history and geography fades, giving way to a dimension where science and history lose their conventional coordinates. Time becomes the most fragile and multiple element. With his technical and aesthetic recuperation, Arancio manages to re-discover some plural definitions of time; channeling the observer’s moment at the heart of many and various moments. The observer relives some parallel dimensions. This is less about an absence of time than a multiplicity of time, a diffuse temporality.
The present dissipates into a constant tension between an impossible past and an imaginary future. And the observer finds himself before the technical difficulty of finding the contemporary dimension. The contemporary is challenged in its propensity to constantly look for speed and superficiality. This temporal dimension that binds art and the culture of the last decades into an area of synchronicity is undermined. Arancio works with the concept of contemporary time in a kaleidoscope of different moments. His references are never explicit quotations, but one cannot not think of an indistinct sharing of a literary and scientific phenomenon— imagination as an almost retroactive way of rethinking the world.
And yet, there is no presence of science fiction or of the dystopian narrative. We do not have the feeling that we are in front of an alternative form of the present. Reality is not questioned by the work, but rather elaborated and amplified. Arancio questions a dimension of the present that is related to the speed of the flow of our times. He finds in the depth of the present a complexity that refers to other epochs and creates different versions of our times.