“[…] Maybe you’re not a “mad scientist” after all, but rather an archaeologist of sorts who has come from the distant future, bringing with him material remains or “evidence” from our contemporary civilization which he dug up somewhere in an effort to understand mankind in the early twenty-first century. Because this man from the future has to somehow identify meanings, functions, and connections – which is not always possible from the remote future perspective – he has to invent them anew based on the few bits and pieces of information that he has already.
I guess that’s why your work sometimes appears both archaic and futuristic at the same time. And that’s where I can see affinities between your works and those of Panamarenko and Auke de Vries. You all seem to be talking about contemporary society from a more or less outside position, as though you were looking at us from an entirely different perspective and commenting on the absurdities you discover in our culture, trying to figure us out – but not really grasping everything, so that your perspective is somewhat off. But this being “off” is what makes the works so fascinating. That’s what makes your works appear so “in between.” Maybe that’s why they can be read in so many different ways, on so many different levels…”
– Gérard Goodrow, 2019www.willemharbers.nl