Exu

In the Yoruba and Afro-Brazilian cultural traditions, Exu is the lord of communication, movement, and the negotiation between forces. He does not organize the world through purity or separation, but precisely through encounter, friction, and exchange. So when I say that I operate from an Exu-inspired perspective, I am affirming that my work is built within this field of tension. It is the crossroads as a method. It is not merely a matter of placing opposites side by side, but of sustaining the conflict without attempting to resolve it quickly. Art and spirituality, institution and terreiro, individual and collective body, memory and the present. These fields do not appear in my work as stable categories, but as forces in constant negotiation.

Exu is the one who clears the path, but also the one who demands consistency. There is no crossing without consequence. So this space demands responsibility for what is set in motion when I trigger an image, a gesture, or a word. In practice, this means that my work does not seek comfort. It seeks transit. It creates situations where different worlds come into contact, find each other strange, recognize one another, or reject one another. And it is in this movement that something new can emerge. The crossroads, for me, is not a symbol. It is a territory for the production of meaning.

When I put myself in that place, I accept that I don’t have complete control over what unfolds. But at the same time, I take responsibility for sustaining that space through ethics, listening, and presence. That’s the place from where my work happens.

Ancestral technologies

In Brasilidades [Braziliannesses], the bowls and clay do indeed appear as objects imbued with meaning, but not as symbols illustrating a spirituality. They function as ancestral technologies. Within Afro-diasporic traditions, the bowl is a vessel for preparation, offering, and transformation. It organizes the relationships between body, food, territory, and energy. When this object is transferred to the realm of art, it does not lose this dimension, but neither is it reduced to it. It creates tension in the exhibition space because it carries a function that is not aesthetic in its origin. Clay, in turn, is the material of origin. It is linked to the idea of the body, of forming, of returning. It is a material that holds the potential to be shaped, but also to fall apart.

Clay and concrete

Clay carries memory, malleability, ancestral gestures, and the continuity of knowledge that spans time. Concrete, on the other hand, is the materialization of a modern, urban project, often associated with imposition, containment, and erasure. What interests me is precisely the point of friction between these two states. It is not a matter of simple opposition, but of forced coexistence. Clay does not disappear into concrete; it resists within it. This relationship sparks discussions about coloniality, permanence, and transformation, where what appears rigid is, in fact, permeated by layers of history and conflict.

When I consider clay in relation to concrete, I am dealing with an overlap of time periods and epistemologies. Clay evokes systems of knowledge that operate through continuity with the earth and the collective. Concrete points to a construction project that is often established through rupture, imposition, and the pursuit of permanence.

Braziliannesses

The title Brasilidades [Braziliannesses] arises from the need of dealing with the idea of Brazil not as a fixed identity, but as a field of contention. I am referring to a “Brazilian-ness” that is neither homogeneous nor conciliatory, but rather constructed through constant overlaps, tensions, and negotiations. The title employs the plural form as a strategy, acknowledging the multiple cultural, social, and spiritual layers that coexist—often in conflict—within the same territory.

Traveling Exhibition: Rio de Janeiro

Reconstructing the work within an exhibition space significantly alters how it is interpreted. When presented outdoors, in an urban setting, it engages directly with the surrounding environment, with everyday use, with wear and tear, and with the public’s unmediated presence. In the exhibition space, there is a shift. The work comes to be framed by a more controlled, more contemplative regime of attention. This does not weaken the work, but reveals other layers. What was once a direct encounter becomes, in part, a reflection. The institutionalization of the work highlights how certain discourses are absorbed, organized, and, to some extent, neutralized. This shift interests me as part of the work.

Presenting this work in Rio de Janeiro adds a specific layer of interpretation. Rio carries a very particular history of Brazil’s symbolic construction, both in the national and international imagination. It is a territory where the tension between nature, urbanization, inequality, and spectacle are very evident. Placing Brasilidades [Braziliannesses] within this context allows the work to engage with other narratives of the country’s construction, especially regarding the visibility and invisibility of certain stories. The work takes on new resonance as it traverses this territory, without losing its foundation, but expanding its interpretive possibilities.