Maybe so, maybe not

Many paintings are often composed of a separate and frontal “figure”, and a “ground” which serves as the backdrop. However, in Inoueʼs works, graph paper, which has primarily been used to depict the ground, becomes the figure. The “figure” and the “ground” become inverted. At the same time, because the repetitive lines are the drawing of a “ground” which depicts no subject in particular, one could also say that it becomes a “drawing that does not draw anything.” In other words, Inoue creates a suspended state in which “something might be drawn there, or nothing might be drawn there at all.”

Digitally-reproduced lines limit all outcomes to one of two states: “Is (1)” or “Is not (0)”. However, as long as Inoue remains human, no matter how she attempts to draw the same line over and over again, she will never be able to create an exact replica of any line. The varied lines that Inoue draws do not all exist in the same way such that they can all simply be defined as “1”. Between “Is (1)” and “Is not (0)” exists an infinite gradation.

Allowing the reversal of “figure” and “ground” forces the viewer to swing back and forth between “understanding” and “not understanding.” Making the judgment to “understand” the drawing as a grid can, in the next instant, become the gateway to “not understanding” when one realizes that the drawing may actually be a drawing of nothing.

In Japanese, the word “to understand (wakaru / 分かる)” is derived from the same root character as wakeru (分ける), “to separate.” The etymology of the word “understand”, therefore, comes from the idea that one must “separate the world and think about it.” Understanding is achieved by distancing oneself from the world and organizing and categorizing its chaos. Then, what is “not understanding”? If “understanding” is to reach a certain destination, then “not understanding” must mean that the destination remains unreached. However, understanding can not be summarized with such a dualistic definition. To not understand something does not mean that that “something” does not exist. Even if one has not arrived at understanding, there is still definitely something there to be understood. The relationship between understanding and not understanding is absolutely different from the relationship between 0 and 1. “Not understanding” has the possibility of “becoming something” someday, and like the lines Inoue draws, it exists in the infinite world between 0 and 1. Indeed, the majority of human action cannot be simply divided into 0 or 1. However, this inability to be categorized is the very essence of what it means to be human. And of the possibilities that exist within this space of “not understanding”, we just might or might not find the possibility of human potential.

In an age where the world is becoming increasingly digitized and we are expected to create 1 from 0, we hope that you will view this exhibition as a reminder that the gap between these two numbers is infinite.