This process also marks a departure from the purely painterly abstraction that has characterized much of my previous work. Instead, the series moves toward non-figurative assemblage, where painting intersects with construction and material salvage. Rosalind Krauss has noted that assemblage practices challenge the conventional autonomy of the pictorial surface by introducing objects whose physical histories disrupt the illusionistic space of painting (Krauss, 1979). In these works, the salvaged architectural fragments retain their material specificity even as they participate in abstract composition.

The exhibition also engages conceptually with the architectural theory of spatial discontinuity. Rather than prioritizing seamless continuity, spatial discontinuity foregrounds rupture, fragmentation, and the generative role of gaps within spatial systems. Bernard Tschumi has argued that architecture is fundamentally shaped by tensions between space, movement, and event, suggesting that discontinuities can produce new forms of spatial perception (Tschumi, 1996). Similarly, Peter Eisenman’s architectural investigations emphasize fragmentation as a strategy that destabilizes conventional spatial order, creating structures that resist unified interpretation (Eisenman, 1999). Anthony Vidler has further described how fractured architectural forms reflect broader cultural conditions in which modern space often manifests feelings of uncertainty and anxiety (Vidler, 2000).

Within the works in this exhibition, these theoretical concerns appear in material form. The seams between fragments remain visible; irregular edges, cracks, and voids interrupt the surface. Rather than concealing these breaks, the compositions allow discontinuity to become an organizing principle. The viewer’s gaze moves across uneven planes, encountering transitions between paint, raw material, and structural seams. The result is a spatial field that sway between painting and object.

Assemblage practices have long engaged with such disruptions of visual unity. Brian O’Doherty has observed that the introduction of real materials into art collapses the boundary between pictorial space and the physical world, destabilizing the traditional neutrality of the gallery surface (O’Doherty, 1986). Nicolas Bourriaud later described contemporary artistic practices involving found materials as forms of “postproduction,” in which existing cultural objects are reorganized into new relational systems (Bourriaud, 2002). In this sense, the salvaged architectural fragments operate both as remnants of a specific disaster event and as elements within a broader language of contemporary assemblage.

Through this process, materials once associated with destruction are repositioned within new aesthetic relationships. The fragments do not attempt to erase their prior identities; rust, cracks, and weathered textures remain visible within the compositions. Instead, the works acknowledge rupture as an intrinsic part of form.

Ultimately, this exhibition reflects an attempt to transform the physical consequences of environmental catastrophe into a visual language of persistence. In a country where architecture often bears the marks of repeated natural disturbances, reconstruction becomes not merely a technical necessity but a cultural condition. The assemblages presented here embody that condition: fragments of damaged space reorganized into renewed structures of perception.

In these works, discontinuity is not simply evidence of loss but a generative force. Debris becomes surface, rupture becomes structure, and the scars of disaster become sites through which new aesthetic possibilities emerge.