The exhibition “Unforeseen Perspicacity” does not represent; it exposes the very impossibility of representation as a consequence of the act of observation. The graphic objects here are not signs, not metaphors, not even traces—but residues of ontological friction arising at the point where attention meets that which strives to remain unnoticed. Within this friction, the object is not revealed but de-constituted: its form, subjected to the gaze, becomes the carrier of an alien texture—dense yet empty, visible yet inaccessible.
In this system, the gaze is neither subjective nor subjectifying. It operates as an autonomous agent of alienation, governed by a logic that aligns neither with the observer’s intention nor with the object’s resistance. In “touching with the gaze,” an illusion of participation may still persist; but in “expropriating observation,” that illusion shatters: attention becomes a procedure of ontological extraction, in which the object loses not only its content but also its right to its own boundary. What remains is not merely a form or a drawing, but an architecture of loss.
The exhibition’s central paradox is the unforeseen nature of perspicacity: it does not result from the subject’s effort but emerges counter-intentionally—as a byproduct of observation. Here, perspicacity is not enlightenment, but a state of cognitive exposure in which the object becomes transparent not to another, but to itself—and in that transparency discovers it was never whole. Transparency does not reveal essence; it demonstrates its absence.
Even affect (for instance, “cheerfulness”) does not express an inner state here, but functions as a surface-level code imposed by the regime of visibility. Beneath it lies not concealed kindness, but the unkindness inherent to the very act of observation: the gaze is neither malicious nor cynical—it is indifferent to integrity, and therefore inevitably destructive.

Thus, the exhibition abandons dialogue with the viewer in favor of exposing the viewer as an instance embedded within the chain of alienation. By entering the field of the works, the viewer does not merely contemplate but activates the mechanisms of loss already embedded in the structure of each graphic object. Perspicacity is neither a gift nor a privilege—it is the unforeseen consequence of the gaze’s presence in a system where to see is to deprive.