“I don’t know- Bataille asserts- anything in t his world which seerned adorable at any rnornent, which didn’t exceed the need to use, which didn’t devastate and didn’t shock enchantrnent, in a word, which couldn’t be stood anymore.”(1)
“Our aim has to be clear in our heads before starting the process. I’m interested in the limits, the void, and the edge. A man is all men; a gesture of pain is all men’s pain.”(2)

Ambiguity is evident in conternporary artistic attitudes, so that it is difficult to know· if they are forrns of semiotic resistance, poses of true revolutionary decadence or cynical gestures where dramatization has substituted any other critical strategy. Radicalisrns finally show their parodic structure, abstraction derives to a self-satisfied omarnentation and conceptualisrn reveals, in a lot of cases, the extreme ideological impotence. Every religion starts as a worship crisis, as the ghostly dancing of a traurnatized society and, then, we find ourselves in a situation where the dissolution of all the expierences that create a community leads to a museum ritualisrn of everything that served as sorne kind of “escape” (precisely, the dancing, reduced by some artists to something that needs to be accepted or introduced into the canonizing and cleaning institution of collectors or as the turbulence of desire, the abyss of sex turned into standards or slogans, the everyday opened to a surprising obscenity), assuming t he silence of the aesthetic contemplation (equivalent to “do not touch”) as a prayer. We take communion with t he greatest astonishment. As a last resort, the problem of contemporary plots is not amnesia, because there is not hing worthy of memory, but disconnection. The spectacle society has taken art and even critics to the field of carpentry, so the material that has to be created, the “work of art”, is a mixture of souvenirs that point out to a pathetic end. (3)

There is no doubt that Lidó Rico establishes a resistance line against the hegemonic aesthetic of trans- banality, spreading out choreography of the body with extreme gestures and poses. He comes out of the wall as if it was a prison, offering t he spectator a spectacle of intense disruption. In creator has an evident obsessive component, both in his radicalization of portrait and in his fide lity to some materials such as resin that allow to create, from t he “negative” of plaster (the place where immersion has taken place) the double anomalous of the subject. “I don’t remember – Lidó Rico writes- the moment I started to use transparent resins, the miracle they contain; if water is a elemental form of organic life, these materials give me all the necessary elements to feed my parallel world”(4). It is a material that sometimes looks like meat, and sometimes resembles bread (5), something that calls for the other’s touch. Precisely the hands were Lidó Rico’s first symbo-lic fixations; he used them to embody a specific questioning of painting (6), as he pointed out, the hand was a fundamental motif for self-reflection (7).As Elías Canetti pointed out, before creating anything, primitive men fingers and hands must represent something (for example, both hands intertwined fingers representing the first basket). “We can imagine those objects, in our sense of the word, have no value, because they were created by ourselves, they firstly appeared as signs of the hands.”(8) The hand is the limit of thought, what turns us into “human beings”. That crucial extremity, amputated and fossilized has some other sense (9), in Lidó Rico’s subtle, and at the same time convincing, aesthetics. Those hands are signs that make a reference to the human presence, gestures that claim or mark our impotence.(10)

In reality, those hands are the beginning of a deep plastic mediation Lidó Rico will develop on the self-portrait. This selfreference must be described as authentic (11); the elements that emerge from the hygienic limits of Art are man’s prints. Javier Hernando Carrasco suggested that the universalizing and suffering self-portrait is, in this artist’s work, the metaphoric support of the interior fragmentation.(12) Those self-portraits immersed in dramatic soliloquies can take us up to the funerary bottom of the “representation of the ego”, to that finitude which, paradoxically, stands in front of our eyes as something definitive. “The absence is assumed as the occasion for the figuration act, as the portrait reason . The scenery that gives life to the invention is a sentimental device: the image represents the absent, the one who is going to go “abroad”. (13) The face, an element impossible to capture in any portrait, is an epiphany impossible to embrace. Variations and small differences refer to a repetition of the lack of bottom, where a potency of simulation can be found , that is, together with the efficiency of the displacement and the weakening of the ap pearance in a costume. (14)

It may happen that the face will just be the curtain of a scene that can only be seen in intervals; it is something that suffers a continuous metamorphosis, but changing its face isn’t easy at all (15); Deleuze reminds us that it can drive us mad. It is not a coincidence that the schizophrenic Losses, at the same time, the sense of the face, even of his own and other’s faces, the sense of the Landscape, of Language and its dominant meanings. “Changing the face -as it is pointed out in Mil mesetas- is
the same as going through the wall of t he signifier, getting out of the dark hole of subjectivity”.(16) We also know that fantasy governs reality and it is impossible to wear a mask without paying a high price for it. The Other may have the same features as an abyss, as the symbolic arder is hidden by the fascinating presence of the ghostly object. “We experience it each time we look of other person’s eyes and we feel the depth of his/her Look”.(17) It’s better to take into account that in the moment when the subject is too clase to fantasy, the (self)-erasing takes place. The only thing that remains is art as aphanisis.(18) The Loo k of a Gorgon links together, definitively, sleep and death.(19) In Explorer 215-516 (2004) we see how a suffering rower drives a canoe full of skulls, a peculiar Caronte that materializes “the restless worry of the artist”.(20) Worry is, as Heidegger thought, a way to understand our own existence, but mythically, it is also the print of the body, the image that, crossing to the kingdom of death, wants to stay alive.(21) lidó Rico can be located in distress; his obsessive imagination catches the look cathartically.” “Wishing to get an aim, the subject

– Lacan warns- considers the world as a spectacle that possesses him. He is the victim of a trap, that is why what comes out and confronts him isn’t the truth a, but its complement. the spectacular image i (a). He seems to come from it. The spectacle captures the subject, who cheers up, rejoices.(22) ( … ) The trial is what happens in the phenomenon of the unheimlich. Each time that. suddenly, in any accident caused by the Other, the Other’s image has no look for the subject, all kinds of ploys disappear from the situation where the subject is captive of his wish for an aim, and it means turning back to the most basic di stress’.(23)

Without any doubt. Lidó Rico uses his body to express states of pain, “of distress, that doesn’t refer to himself, but to a generic object: the current man”(24) Lidó Rico’s works of art have a disturbing character, they are fascinating and repellent(25) at the same time, an ambivalent experience as it happened with the corpses that were thrown from the north wall of Athens, as Plato told, which were some kind of transgression of the primitive taboo of looking at the dead, up to personification, the central figure of allegory.(26) All the painful gestures of the face (27) are the result of the radical determination Lidó Rico needs to bury himself in plaster in order to get the self-portrait (28) The artist, literally, finds his print, although lately he turns the void result into a mask he wants to get rid of. “But also -Nietzsche writes in some meditations about Heraclites- men of sensible hearts avoid having a similar mask, as melted in bronze”. Maybe, the only thing we can do is whispering the essential, drawing and erasing what we desire.(29) The obscure enigma we are trying to discover has to do with what we would call the “hiding of eroticísm”. Bataille considers that the dialectic of transgression and prohibition is the condition and the essence of eroticism. But what happens to eroticism is that it dissolves, it destroys the closed beíng that is a participant’s normal state in this game. Nakedness is a way of extreme violence and Lidó Rico assumes it with no problem, because it is a paradoxical state of communication or even better, the being’s heartbreak, a pathetic ceremony where humanity gives place to savagery.(30) Bataille also experiments a sacred feeling which mixes fascination and fright; it is equivalent to the act of killing: sacrifice arises there (vertiginous horror and drunkenness) (31) Passion commits us with suffering and it is, as the last resort, the search for the impossible. What describes passion is a halo of death which manifests the beings’ continuíty: “Images that excite or provoke the final spasm are shady, wrong: if they seem to perceive horror or death, they do it surreptitiously.(32) The field of eroticism is destined to astuteness; death is deviated by the other field.

As a last resort, desire is fear. Although there is no doubt that we would like to live wonderfully.(33) The real catches us and, besides. It escapes from all symbolization, it is ineffable.(34) Lidó Rico works of art are reluctant to “verbalization”, from their excess of gestures; through those different faces which are always the same, we access to an inhospitable dimension. We must bear in mind that for Freud. The “most shocking” example of the unheimlich experience is the (re)appearance (Spuk) of the dead (35) In Lidó Rico’s experiences. what we see is the violent touch of corporality (36); it is evident that this artist needs the corporal print; he wants to ímmerse, to mix with his materials (37) Derrida warns that what he calls “body” ísn’t a presence: “The body is an experience in the sense of the most mobile word (voyageur). It is an experience of context, dissociation and dislocations.”(38) As Michaux pointed out, the artist is the one who resists to not leaving trails, leaving the materials in a territorial situation similar to the scene of a crime (39); the trail is the evidence that doesn’t disappear. It is never present in a definitive way. In a period when we have assumed, maybe too calmly, what Derrida calls destinerrance, opposite to the virtual idea of the “world”, there are many hidden situations, different trails, indications which take us to the creative drift: “we leave prints everywhere -virus, lapsus, germs, catastrophes-, imperfection signs which are as man’s signature in the heart of an artificial world.”(40) Art can be an obsession, but also a viral process, as the figures that multiply in Lidó Rico disarticulate “normal” communication.(41) The barred subject Lacan refers to (42) takes us dose to desire that can open from indecisiveness, from the impossibility to speak or even from destinerrance.”Thus – Derrida writes- I think death, impossibility to speak or what he called “destinerrance”, the gesture possibility of not getting to its destination, is the condition of the desire movement that, in some other way, will die beforehand.”(43) Desire is a mixture of joy and dissatisfaction that can’t be solved as an “essential absence”; maybe, if we abandon the different suffering, we will renounce to ourselves and, of course, to the difficulty of establishing an encounter with the other. Lyotard spoke about the postmodernist formula, in a conflictive imaginary, as leaving the answer in a pause, without excluding that there is something of the Other, “a bit of lack and a bit of desire”(44).

Lidó Rico suffers and, as in his paradoxical imaginary, he enjoys building his own body, his process has a little bit of performance or action painting.(45) What we ha ve isn’t the remaining, and nor the process is something unessential, on the contrary, immersion and the final sculptural body, the act of getting into plaster and the figure coming out of the wall are, in all sen ses, the same work of art.(46)

In Lidó Rico’s work, there is some kind of initial transfiguration through the dip in the body (47). This human twister of gesturing bodies (48) is brilliantly located in the exhibition place to raise the voyeuristic impulse. In some way, this artist gives a voice to what cannot be thought.(49) His plastic shade starts from the maximum harshness of the enigmatic and subtle, so if he uncovers his feelings, he also protects what we call intimacy. “A guideline -lidó Rico writes- that I have always maintained in my Life is the shelter in the strictest intimacy that for me is as necessary as breathing.”(50) He is sure that from intimacy, he can get wherever he wants.(51) From contemporary ruins, a strange intimacy emerges: “Intimacy is what remains of the community broken by the city. Remains, Residues, Fragments, Rags, Pieces, Dispersed.”(52) It is the familiarity with the fallen, in a period when we all trace an insurmountable barrier with the excluded. When we talk about intimacy, a fortified subjectivity or a conservative ideology of property mustn’t appear: “Intirnacy isn’t the new prison. Its need for bonds will create, Later on, another politic. Nowadays, psychic life knows that it will just be salved if thcre is time and space for uprisings: breaking, remembering, doing.

From prayers to dialogues passing through art and analysis, the capital event is always the great and infinitesimal liberation that has to start again.”(53) The rebel spirit, frequent in the artistic experience, impulses us to go beyond normal flatness to propose other situations, to escape from a logic of equivalence in order to pay attention to the discreet, that is, to that pleasure which is a gift and a detail at the same time.

In the plastic scenarios, the predominant element is an upset: everyday-ness. It seems as if banality would be idolized, in this suspension time that. parodying Barthes, could be called thc xerox degree of culture. Baudrillard spoke about some kind of trans-aesthetic of the banality, the kingdom of insignificance or nullity can take to the strictest indifference. Art is destined to a pseudo-rituality of the suicide, a sometimes embarrassing simulation, where the banal increases its scale. The world has fractalized and each part offers a different image, depending on how takes or leaves it. There is no drama, so we enjoy ourselves with the perversion of sense; after the sublime and the heroic, and after the orthodoxy of the trauma, we can find the gravedigger’s ecstasy or, in other words, a third grade simulation. Contemporary art duplicity appears in his will for nullity, insignificance, nonsense, “hoping to nullity when everything is already. Hoping to nonsense when it is not enough. Wanting to get to the surface in superficial terms. However, nullity is a secret quality that not everybody can claim. Insignificance -the victorious defy of sense, the art of sense disappearance – is an exceptional quality some strange works of art have and they never hope to be insignificant.”(54) In that time of removal, we suffer a convulse zapping rhythm that hypnotizes us and takes us to impotence.

The domestic scenario is, in a sense, sinister and produces subjective and evident worry. The sinister takes place when the limits between fantasy and reality disappear. For Freud it is the “intimatedomestic” which has been repressed and turns back to the uncomfortable (familiar, but hidden at a time). Every effect of an emotional impulse, whatever its nature is, turns into repression of distress: “the sinister isn’t anything new, but something that has always been familiar to psychic life and that became strange through the repression process.”(55) Lidó Rico’s aesthetics express a sinister and even cruel corporality (56) without getting into hegemonic obscenity, always trying to locate the compass of art as an experience; “his pieces –Roberto Castrillo Soto explains- don’t adapt to the environment, they tense it violently taking it out of any kind of neutrality, from the passivity of the routine related to everyday life. Thus, it is not an approximation from the conceptual to the real, but ·from its reverse.”(57) Maybe an art that makes us see reality (58) has to turn to the trompe-l’oeil which takes to the scatological, to waste (59),or in Lidó Rico’s case, to the fragmentary fixation of the body. Plaster works as another kind of mirror. According to Lacan, what the subject finds in his body altered image is a paradigm of all the similar forms that will apply to the world of objects a hostile overtone that projects the future of the narcissistic image. This image, thanks to the jubilant effect of its encounter with the mirror, turns into confrontation with the fellow, venting the strictest intimacy. Sometimes, we stand still as a transitional object. “a piece of the object we Love that we can’t separate from our Lip of from our hand.”(60) Let’s pick up the thread of the idea that freedom and castration are part of the subject’s emergency. “Castration means joy has to be rejected so that it can be caught up in the inverted scale of the Law of Pleasure.”(61) The body cut into pieces, cut and offering hands; convulsed faces in Lidó Rico’s pieces take us to the dimension of the castrating mirror, and even to the idea that beauty doesn’t protect us, but frightens us because it makes a reference to death.(62) We must understand reference to death as an ontoLogical derailment, a gesture of non-investiture which takes us to the dissolution of Libido: what drives the individual
crazy (in his constitutive process) is the traumatic meeting with pleasure. Around ego, constituted as a mirror, there is just a plot full of rubble, and that is why it strengthens (63); when it sees itself as a unitary subject, a form of visual repression is implied. If desire always takes to the impossibility to get satisfaction, the reference finds satisfaction in the movement that represses the same satisfaction. ”While the subject of desire is based on the constitutive error, the subject is based on a constitutive surplus: in the excessive presence of something intrinsically “impossible” which mustn’t be in our present reality: that thing is, in the final, the own subject.”(64)

During the Middle Ages the only accepted presentation of the body was as waste, “fragmented, dismantled or also ‘stuck again’ or reassembled according to unbelievable procedures”(65), however in the Baroque, corporality is excessive, “the soul was regulated through the image of the body.”(66) Javier Hernando Carrasco has lucidly underlined the (neo)baroque dimension in Lidó Rico’s work, close to Michelangelo’s terribilitá.(67) Christine Buci-Glucksmann points out that the baroque dramatizes existence; it is the Logic of ambivalence that takes reason to the Other’s reason, who is continuously overwhelmed.(68)

The baroque is chaos, excess and the dark dimension of the modern. It personifies the division: the shadow of the Enlightenment wants to exclude. The baroque world is distinction, even dualism, a difference that fiddles with infinitude: “It is a difference that doesn’t stop unfolding and folding in each one of the sides, and it doesn’t fold one side without unfolding the other one, in a development of the Being’s disclosure and concealment, of its presence and disappearance.”(69) The body appears and disappears from the wall; lidó Rico’s works of art generate a real baroque shock.(70) Those tableaux vivants (71) captivate and worry us: we don’t know if the living body has stopped or if it is a statue that will start moving.(72) Spinoza said nobody knows what a body is capable of: as Lidó Rico does, we must learn to stay there, although we sometimes can start suffocating. The artist, turned into a diver inside his own body has a perseverant or even obsessive attitude; he wants to get there, although it can be a torture: he is nearly going to be caught in order to get a “negative” and positive identity. (73) If, on the one hand, this artist’s work is very deep and physical, on the other, an intense reflexive component can also be seen in some of his pieces from the
beginning of the nineties (74) up to the exhibition that he presented in White Box (New York) in 2006. In the series Pensamientos (Thoughts) Lidó Rico wants to materialize the conceptualizing process, to catalyze reflections and to fix the distressing.(75)

There is a peculiar search for the unconscious (76) in Lidó Rico’s corporal aesthetics, linked to an experiment with the time of the things.(77) The artist descends, or even better, gets into the dark space where everything is distress, where the question is more important than the answer: “from the secret -Lidó Rico reveals- I get to the enigma and from the mystery to the puzzle.”(78) There are broken bodies coming out of the white box; the aseptic walls of Art reflect pain as an existential way.(79) In a brief passage of Poetics, dedicated to the different ways of artistic diction, Aristotle defines the enigma like this: “The enigma consists of relating impossible terms by saying existing things.” There is a particular density of metaphors in the enigmatic, but also an impossible combination or connexion, the mixture of literal and figured senses.(80) It may happen that the expectation of the enigma will, unavoidably, take
us to disappointment (81) , although we also know that the answer to the enigma, the collapse of the Sphinx, has to do with the most obvious answer: man. The truth is that Lidó Rico always returns to the same answer; a sentence can summarize all his obsessions: Reducing everything to a man, means making a reference to all men.(82) “Self-portrait is my creative theme, a man represents all men; the only difference is the content, not the container, trying to understand the world is useless if we don’t have a precise notion of ourselves.”(83) If Michelangelo knew that sculpture was within a stone block, Lidó Rico gets into plaster to leave his print, trying to find all men at the same time (84)

We are dominated by the aesthetic of a pathos overdose; reality turned into a show imposes, in the whole world, the banal. “If the subject has Lost his capacity to extend his pretensions and retentions through temporal multiplicity, and to organize his past and future in a coherent experience, it is difficult to imagine how that subject’s cultural productions will give as a result “Lots of fragments” and the practice of the eventfully heterogeneous, fragmentary and fortuitous. However, these are precisely sorne of the terms where the postmodernist cultural production has been analysed (and even defended by ‘ts apologists).”(85) The “Victorian” will to say everything (maybe because of a secret intention to catalogue the mean, controlling general delirium, at the same time), and vertigo to reality turned into show. hasn’t anything to do with creative memory, on the contrary, they are the symptom of what according to Heidegger can be called ejected subjectivity. Lidó Rico “reflects” that crazy world, for example, in a powerful exhibition such as The Factory (2002), materializing an absurd world, marked by almost beckettian nonsense.(86) The conversation is short-circuited; the gesturing subject sometimes panics because of a tetephone (87) an ohject that now can’t help us to establish a relationship with the other.

Lidó Rico assumes the posthumous destiny of art, its “coming later” is, according to Hal Foster, related to the spectral.(88) The absence of the ego or the myth takes to the need of accepting the ruinous.(89) In his works we can appreciate cruelty, violence and beauty (90) represented in a very intense gesture. This artist, who is especially interested in his own transformed face, comments that art is ”just searching for life”.

Lidó Rico is a life spectator, but, at the same time, he goes inside it, creating pieces which are, Literally, emotion knocks.(91) His fantasies or oneiric processes (92) have a Little bit more of strict double blind, a predicament where visions are challenged thanks to “familiar” bodies.(93) Lidó Rico -Francisco Jarauta explains ·in a text from 1994- insists on the internal fragitity of the work and its representation.”(94) The work of art equilibrates what our look sees and hides·, an appearance of body fragments which obliges us to finish what happens, that is, to ”dive” in the disturbing. “Liquid, we are -Lidó Rico points out- liquid, all liquid, fluids that sometimes think, energy that goes aground in its fragile and weak vanity, heat that attracts and buries a common, cold and enigmatic destiny.”(95) Transparent resins cheat the eye, are an allegory of fragility.(96) This autobiographical work settles a heartbreaking Look of the world: his exhibitions are metaphors of a crazy world.(97) The artist catches instants, he has the experience of his fluid materials that finally harden; he knows the hope of the body is perpetuation. “Man is – Lidó Rico asserts- an unknown for himself, my pieces Look for answers, just a single image can contain and express so many things; it gives the keys about our existence that is just a brief vision justifying a whole life dedicated to art.”(98) We just have to hold our breath in order to fix the print of the body. ”The beautiful – Lidó Rico explains- is just an image, the rest is cruelty. In each work of art there is an interior panic, a difficult breathing.”(99) Distress pronounces the name, our shadow and the prints never leave us: man goes on being the unexpected, the enigma.

(1) Georges Bataille: “Carta a René Char sobre las incompatibilidades del escritor” in La felicidad, el erotismo y la literatura. Ensayos 1944-1961, Ed. Adriana Hidalgo, Buenos Aires, 2001, p. 141.
(2) Lidó Rico in Gontzal Diez: “Querella en las paredes del Almudí” in La Verdad, Murcia, 17″‘ September 1999, p. 54.
(3)”For the first time, the arts of all civilizations and all periods can be known and admitted as a group. It is a “souvenir collection” of art history that also implies the end of the world of art. In this time of museums, when there isn’t any artistic communication, all the old moments of art can also be accepted, because none of them suffers the loss of their specific communication capacities in the current general loss of the conditions for communicat ion” (Guy Debord: La sociedad del espectáculo, Ed. La Marca, Buenos Aires, 1995, fragment 189).
(4) Lidó Rico: text from Lidó Rico. Provisionario, Horno de la Ciudadela, Pamplona, 2003.
(5)”Meat and bread, bread and meat, hunger-man, no colour, life colour, a concept that hypnotizes , imposes, resounds and muffles up to madness. We are soft” (Lidó Rico: text from Lidó Rico. Provisionario, Horno de la Ciudadela, Pamplona, 2003)
(6) And Lidó Rico’s closed hands can be translated into signs that the artist offers about his work. He gives up the gesture of painting and expresses it unconsciously, separating the fingers which are no longer joined by the hand; now they alllive in an autonomous and obsessive presence” (Christine Fontaine:
“Lidó Rico: “¡Como los dedos de la mano!” in Lidó Rico, Sala de Exposiciones del Club Diario Levante, Valencia, 1992). José Martínez Calvo already noticed that urgency to liberate works of the beginning of the nineties from painting: “Irreverent in his technique and a quite iconoclastic, Lidó Rico does not doubt when he has to free his pictures from the slavery imposed by the traditional two dimensions, as he also eliminates from them the classical canvas or any of the traditional elements of painting” (José Martínez Calvo: texto in Lidó Rico, Galería Rita García, Valencia, 1991).
(7) “The motif of the hand is for me sorne kind of punishment, of selfreflection, because anytime I represent that motif I start from an original cast, I don’t use a mass production machine. Each hand has a position, different from the thousands existing, and these positions represent a precise creative moment, that is to say, a different instant of conscience” (Lidó Rico in Pedro A. Cruz Sánchez: “Diálogos con el arte murciano. Lidó Rico: “Todo aquello que no me sirve para crear, no existe” in Diario 16, Murcia, 6’h october 1997, p. 29).
(8) Elias Canetti: Masa y poder, vol. 1, Ed. Alianza, Madrid, 1983, p. 213.
(9) “If we relate the vision of a hand with other images, we are giving to each image, to each concept the character of a hand, a lacerated and persistent remembering, almost as a fetish, so that we may think that we are looking at the artist’s physical and psychic amputations. Merleau-Ponty, in his Phenomenology of Perception warns us that in amputations ‘the ghost limb keeps
the same position as the arm had in the moment it was wounded: the war wounded still feels in his ghost arm the shrapnel that lacerated his real arm”‘ (Mara Mirá: “El jardín de Lidó” in La Opinión, Murcia, 12’h April 1996, p. 18).
(10)”(…) they are gestures for lack of communication, inefficiency or mistakes” (José Ramón Danvila: “Mano tras mano. Lidó Rico expone su obra en el Espacio Mínimo de Murcia” in EL Mundo, Madrid, 12 .. April 1996).
(11)”( … ) they are all self-portraits. My job is a continuous self-reference to my biological form. ( … ) The gestures that can be found in my works are authentic. That feeling of panic, the fear which reflects, is my own fear”. (Lidó Rico in Mara Mira: “Mi obra es una continua autorreferencia” in La Opinión, Murcia, 4’h September 1998, p. 9).
(12)”That universal individual, that human archetype of the late modernity that the artist represents through corporal remains, seems to escape from the reclusion it is submitted to behind the mass of the wall. His huge efforts to get it emphasize his suffering even more” (Javier Hernando: “Terribilitá. Lidó Rico “Vertidos” in Tráfico de Arte” in EL Mundo/La Crónica de León, 6 .. February 2001, p. 64).
(13) Jean-Cristophe Bailly: La Llamada muda. Los retratos de EL Fayum, Ed. Akal, Madrid, 2001, p. 106.
(14) Cfr. Gilles Deleuze. Diferencia y repetición, Ed. Jucar, Madrid, 1988, pp. 460
(15) Lidó Rico talks about one of his own figures without face, and how irritating it is: “a subject without a face because he tare it off and now he is transforming and modelling it with its own hands” (Lidó Rico: text in Lidó Rico. Provisionario, Horno de la Ciudadela, Pamplona, 2003).
(16) Gilles Deleuze y Félix Guattari: Mil mesetas. Capitalismo y esquizofrenia, Ed. Pre-textos, Valencia, 1988, p. 191.
(17) Slavoj Zizek: “La sublimación y la caída del objeto” in Todo lo que usted quiso saber sobre Lacan y nunca se atrevió a preguntarle a Hitchcock, Ed. Manantial, Buenos Aires, 1994, p. 145.
(18)”There is a breach that will eternally keep apart t he ghostly core of the being from the subject of the most “superficial” forms of its symbolic and/ or imaginary identifications – I can’t assume completely (in the sense of symbolic integration) the ghostly core of myself: when I’m too clase to it, the aphanisis of the subject takes place: the subject losses his symbolic consistency and disintegrates. And, maybe, the fo rced acting in the real society of the ghostly core of myself is the most humiliating form of vio lence, a violence that undermines
the base of my own identity (my “image of myself ‘)” (Slavoj Zizek: El acoso de las fantasías, Ed. Siglo XXI, México, 1999, p. 197).
(19)”So the image of the dream elevates when we sleep. It is Hipnos’hypnosis. And if the intermittent sleep produces a dream, what is the “great dream which won`t produce the eternal dream of death? What is the image that won’t live in the tomb? Fragment 3 about Alcmán is even more precise about the similar effects of these three powers so difficult to distinguish: “Through desire (póthos) that breaks the limbs (lysimelés) the woman has a Look that turns crazy (takerós) more people than Hipnos and Tanatos”. That erotic, hypnotic and “tanatic” look is the one of Gorgons”(Pascal Quignard: El sexo y el espanto, Ed. Minúscula, Barcelona, 2005, p. 77).
(20) Manuel Romero: “Lidó Rico: la inmersión hechizante” in XXIII Biennal of Alexandria, Spanish Pavilion, Alexandria, 2005.
(21)”The fable ( of Hyginus, incorporated by Heidegger to Being and Time) turns worry into an allegoric figure and he tells us that, once she was crossing a river, she distinguished sorne kind of clayey mud and she took some to model it. As she was thinking about what she had created, Jupiter arrived. The worry asked him to give a spirit to her image of clay and Jupiter did so. She also wanted to give her own na me to her work, but Jupiter banned her saying that it was his name the one that the work should have. While both of them were arguing, Tellus, the earth, woke up and claimed that the work had to be called with her name, because it was made with a part of her own body. They asked Saturo to be the arbitrator and his opinion was: “You, Jupiter, have to recover the spirit after death, because you gave the spirit to the work; you, Tellus have offered part of your body, so you will receive its body again; the
worry, however, as she was the image creator, will be its owner during its life. But about its name, it will be called homo, because it was created from humus. (Hans Blumenberg: La inquietud que atraviesa el río. Un ensayo sobre la metáfora, Ed. Península, Barcelona, 1992, pp. 165-166). \Ve can think of this fable as a synthesis of Lidó Rico’s work, with his obsession for materializing men, with that print that makes us wonder ourselves, and of course, with the intense meditation about finitude.
(22)”There are disconcerting pieces that can obsess us. Aggressiveness, sense of unease and distress get to the spectator: once he gets to this state, he really feels the strength of the cultures. Visitors walk around the maze of the exhibition hypnotized by the mermaids’ chants. The attraction lidó Rico’s work takes the new Ulysses to the rocks of disturbance” (David Alpañez: “la perturbación como metáfora” in Lidó Rico. Sumergidos, Museo de la Universidad de Alicante, 2002, p. 23).
(23) Jacques Lacan: De los Nombres del Padre, Ed. Paidós, Buenos Aires. 2005, p. 81.
(24) Javier Hernando Carrasco: “Agonía interior” in Lidó Rico. Sumergidos, Museo de la Universidad de Alicante, 2002, p. 25.
(25) “Lidó Rico’s last works are a search in the reins of the disturbing, of that thing which attracts and repel us, that magnetizes and ñightens. • (Gontzal Diez: “los resortes de la luz y de lo turbador” in La Verdad, Murcia, 17″ October 1997}.
(26) “When a human being has a taboo idea or desire and he can’t help that creature in his imagination, “the immediate consequence (Freud points out) will surely be a partial paralysis of his will and the mcapadty to make a decision on any of the actions where !ove is the motor force”The paralysis is dearty evident in the story of the ambivalent emotion by Plato, based in the “taboo of the dead”, in the pñmitive tradition of looking at the dead: “The story (we read in The Republic by Plato) tells
that leoncius, Aglaion’s son, coming from the Piraeus, saw severa! bodies on the floor, next to the north wall in the place executions took place. He doubted for sorne minutes and he covered his eyes, but in the end his desire won and opening his eyes, he ran to the corpses, saying: “Look. unhappy, get fed up with this wonderful image’: In the moment when the paralysis state disappeared, there was a splitting of the conscience. leoncius splits his body actions from the actions of his authentic ego; he blames them using a central figure of the allegory, the personification”(Angus fletcher: Alegoría. Teoria de un modo simbólico, Ed. Akal Madnd, 2002, p. 220).
(27)”Distorted gestures of the faces of lidó Rico’s figures, immerse us in contemporary man’s pain; physical pain as comparison with spiritual pain, the facial deformation as spontaneous sign of the uncontrolled interior impulses.” (Javier Hemando Carrasco: “Agonía interior” in Lidó Rico. Sumergidos, Museo de La Universidad de Alicante, 2002, p. 27).
(28) “1 remember the ñrst immersions, the terrible heat in the studio tur· ned baths in plaster into sorne kind of balm for that suffocating temperature” (lidó Rico: text in Lidó Rico. Provisionario, Horno de La Ciudadela, Pamplona, 2003).
(29)( … ) the word ‘mystery’, that is to say, silence, hasn’t been clearly explained until now. If it is true that in its original form the centre of experience wasn’t knowledge, but suffering ( … ) and if that pathema was excluded from language, it was a not-being-able-to-say, a whisper, then, that experience was
also close to the experience of man’s childhood.” {Giorgio Agamben: Infancia e historia. Ed. Adriana Hidalgo, Buenos Aires, 2003, p. 89).
(30) The decisive action is to undress. Nakedness opposes to the closed state, that is to say, to the state of discontinuous existence. It is a state of communication, which reveals the search of a possible continuity in the other world. Obscenity is a disorder that disrupts the state of the bodies, depending on what it possesses, on the individual and Lasting individuality.” (Georges Bataille: El erotismo, Ed. Tusquets, Barcelona, 19B5, p. 31. Cfr. Mario Perniola: “Entre vestido y desnudo” in Fragmentos para una historia del cuerpo humano, Parte segunda, Ed. Taurus, Madrid, 1991, pp. 245·246).
(31)” Cfr. Georges Bataille: Las lágrimas de Eros, Ed. Tusquets, Barcelona, 1997, p. 244.
(32) Georges Bataille: El erotismo, Ed. Tusquets, Barcelona, 1985, p. 370.
We also have to take into account the completely ambiguous character, in Lacan’s theory, of the horrible, depending on the image of fantasy: “Horror isn’t plainly and simply the intolerable Real hidden behind a curtain of fantasy –the way he draws our attention, imposing as something unknown, and that is why it is even more essential for the reference point. The Horrible can, in itself, work as a screen, as fascinating effects which hide something “more horrible than horror”, the fundamental void or antagonism. (Slavoj Zizek: El acoso de las fantasias, Ed. Siglo XXI, México, 1999).
(33)”Maybe ‘” this context there is a different view of the need of living wonderfully, instead of living fantastically. Normally we live in an environment where our life belongs to fear. 1t controls our everyday life filling it with mediocrity, a mediocrity that can adopt the apparent form of pleasure. The terrible return to the unrepeatable of our existence is sustained by the wonder of living. But terror of living is, at the same time, joy and happiness of doing it. lt isn’t fear for everyday life happenings, but plain terror to the wonder of existing. That is why the modernity is for Hegel the performance of a different way of the wonder silence and at the same time, the shout for a need of Liberty. (Angel Gabilondo: Mortal de necesidad. La filosofia, la salud y la muerte. Ed. Abada. Madrid, 2003. pp. 160-161).
(34)”The roman taedium extended until the 3ª century. The Christian acedia appeared in the 3ª century. It reappeared as melancholy in the 15th century. It came back in the 19th century called spleen. And in the 2th century it was called depression. They are just words. A painful secret inhabits them. It is ineffable. The ineffable is the “real”. The real is just language. And everything that isn’t language is real.” (Pascal Quignard: El sexo y el espanto, E d. Minúscula,Barcelona, 2005, pp. 171-172).
(35) Derrida has made sorne extraordinary considerations about that (re)appearance, which has a lot to do with the head. Spuk has to do with the disturbing surprise, it is that repetition that terrorizes us: “We said that we must receive someone as we apprehend him with the distress and desire of excluding the stranger, invite him without accepting him, domestic hospitality that welcomes without welcoming the stranger, but a stranger who is inside (das Heimliche-Unheimliche), more intimate for himself, absolute proximity is a stranger whose power is singular and anonymous (it’s spuk), an unmentionable and neuter power . that is to say, unspeakable, nor active, nor passive, a nonidentity which occupies invisibly and doing nothing places that, finally, are not ours, not theirs.” (Jacques Derrida: Espectros de Marx, Ed. Trotta, Madrid,1995, p. 192).
(36) I must confess in any case that I have been shocked by the anthropomorphic and violent change Lidó Rico configures in his recent work. Death, ecstasy, guilt, self-injuring and even decomposition and laceration fill with surgical coldness the dense conjunction of metaphors which active the expositive space.” (Gloria Moure: text in Lidó Rico. Los duchadores, Palacio Almudi, Murcia.1999).
(37) “My journey needs a great quantity of protocols. 1 suffer most of them physically, up to imprudent levels for the body, but that trip is, for the time being, the only one that captivates me. lt is not just a matter of sinking and being shtpwrecked, of mixing my body with different substances, but a mixture of natures; the skin print coming into contact with any substance, triggers a senes of absurd and involuntary reactions which are essential for me” (lidó Rico: text in Lidó Rico. Explorer, 515-516, Galería Fernando Latorre, Madrid, 2004).
(38) Jacques Derrida: “Dispersión de voces” in No escribo nunca sin luz artificial. Ed. Cuatro, Valladolid, 1999, p. 159.
(39) Cfr. Ralf Rugoff: “More than Meets the Eye” en Scene of tM Crime. The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1997, p. 62.
(40) Jean Baudrillard: “La escritura automática del mundo” en La ilusión
y la desilusión esteticas. Ed. Monte Ávila, Caracas, 1997, p. 85.
(41) “The virus is the parasite which destroys and introduces disorder within communication. Even from the biological point of view. the virus derails a communicative mechanism, its codification.” (Jacques Derrida: “Dispersión de voces” in No escribo sin luz artificial, Ed. Cuatro, Valladolid. 1999, p. 153).
(42) “Lacan’s ‘barred subject’ isn’t empty in the sense of a psychologicalexistential ‘void experience’, but in the sense of a dimension of negative self-reference that avoids the domain of the vécu, of the already lived experience.” (Slavoj Zizek: El espinoso sujeto. El centro ausente de la ontología política, Ed. Paidós, Buenos Aires, 2001. p. 276).
(43) Jacques Derrida: ¡Palabra! Instantáneas filosóficas, Ed. Trotta, Madrid, 2001, p. 42.
(44) Jean-Francois Lyotard: “El imaginario postmoderno y la cuestión del otro en el pensamiento y la arquitectura” in Pensar-Componer/Construir-Habitar, Ed. Arteleku, San Sebastian. 1994, p. 38.
(45) “As in Action Painting, where the gesture of painting ís considered as an integrating and fundamental part of the work, Lídó Rico’s immersion in plaster is a piece of art because it is an act full of effort, expressivity and emotion.” (David Alpañez: “La perturbación como metafora” in Lidó Rico. Sumergidos, Museo de la Universidad de Alicante, 2002. p. 19),
(46) “The conception and execution process of the pieces isn’t for Lidó Rico a phase before the final piece, because in his work both moments ldentify.”(Roberto Castrillo Soto: “Fragmentos de la experiencia” in Lidó Rico. Sumergidos, Museo de la Universidad de Alicante. 2002, p. 16) “All the genesis process in lidó Rico’s work is dominated by what can be called the immersion protocol, is the result of a series of habits that have been codifying as time has gone by. Those habits are: the careful preparation of plaster until it gets the thickkness the artist wants; the implementation of some safety measures so that when he buries his head in plaster, it can’t get into his nostrils and ears (that is why he covers his head with a shower cap); and finally, the act of immersion. When the artist puts his head into any material he always makes sure that his mouth is out of it, so that he can breathe during that complex and sometimes risky process.” Miguel Á. Hernandez Navarro: “Las perfiferias del
cuerpo. Antagonismo, invisibilidad y tautología” in Peripheres of the body, White Box. New York, 2006. p. 36).
(47) Cfr. Manuel Romero: “lidó Rico: la inmersión hechizante• in XXIII Biennale of Alexandría, Spanish Pavilion, Alexandria, 2005.
(48) “The trip goes on, the human twister disintegrates in a glossary of insurrections that eat, devastate, expurgate, reveal, melt, interpret, terrify, explode, implant, draw, detonate, wrap, doubt, swipe, ditsturb each other, irritate. overcome and fall, mention and omit, submit and retain, harden and manufacture, they manufacture inexhaustibly. Provisions.” (Lidó Rico: text in Lido Rico. Provisionario, Horno de la Ciudadela. Pamplona, 2003).
(49)All these pieces were created in the territory of the inexpressible, In the border of the things that can be said, where we feel without thinking, but materially. Now we are at the other side of the world, where the “voyeur” can’t enter, maybe because harsh violence destroys the sign”· (Gloria Moure: text in Lidó Rico. Los duchadores Palacio Almudí, Murcia, 1999).
(50) Lidó Rico: text in Lidó Rico. explorer, 515·516, Galería Fernando latorrre, Madríd, 2004.
(51) “Between my work of art and what I am, there is no distante, Because from intimacy we can get wherever we want.” (Lidó Rico in Josefina lópez: “Siempre tiene que existir la sorpresa,si no la muerte está cerca y ésta es la Rutina” in Diario 16. Madrid, 12 th Dicember 1994, p. 40).
(52) Jose Luis Pardo: La intimidad, Ed. Pre·textos, Valencia, 1996, p. 291.
(53) Julia Kristeva: El porvenir de una revuelta, Ed Seis-Barral, Barcelona, 2000. p. 98.
(54) Jean Baudrillard; 11El complot del arte” in Pantalla total, Ed. Anagrama, Barcelona, 2000, pp. 211-212.
(55) Sigmund Freud: “Lo siniestro” precediendo a E.T.A. Hoffmann: El hombre de arena, Ed. José de Olañeta, Barcelona, 1991, p. 28.
(56) “The usual gets a sinister and strange face, an almost unrecognizableidentity where there are still fragments.” (Roberto Castrillo Soto:Fragmentos de la experiencia” in Lidó Rico. Sumergidos, Museo de la Universidad de Alicante, 2002, p. 15).
(57) Roberto Castrillo Soto: “Fragmentos desde La experiencia” in Lidó
Rico. Sumergidos, Museo de la Universidad de Alicante, 2002, p. 15.
(58) “Idea, thus, of an art out of visual that shows the “authentic reality”,a visible heart. Two functions: allow looking and pointing out to the real, which condense in: an art that allows us to see the real.” (Gérard Wajcman: El objeto del siglo, Ed. Amorrortu, Buenos Aires, 2001, p. 199).
(59) “The trompe l’oeil creates a natural alliance with all kinds of wastes: leftovers, peels, shells, the use and bleaching of a paper, or some other objects that we take and use occasionally -documents, Letters, pens, combs, watches, cups, books, coins. In this eclipse of the human attention, the objects reveal their own autonomy: it’s as if they were the ones that configure the world, and the unconscious stored strength in apparently simple forms, no their human users. ( ..) The hyperrealist trompe l’oeil imitates and parodies in such a way that we feel that the real raises questions about the subject’s place in the world, and if the subject has a place in the world. During the fraction of second when the trompe l’oeil frees its effect, it provokes vertigo or a shock: is as we were looking at the world before the appearance of man, or once ,it was abandoned.”(Norman Bryson~ Volver a mirar. Cuatro ensayos sobre la pintura de naturalezas muertas, Ed. Alianza, Madrid, 2005, p, 149),
(60) Jacques Lacan: “Subversión del sujeto y dialéctica del deseo en el inconsciente freudiano” in Escritos, vol. 2, Ed. Siglo XXI, México., 1989, p 794.
(61) Jacques Lacan: “Subversión del sujeto y dialéctica del deseo en et inconsciente freudiano” in Escritos, vol. 2, Ed. Siglo XXI, México, 1989, p. 807.
(62) “We can look to something beautiful and think that it can be dangerous.
We look at it with no joy. By definition, the word “admiration” isn’t adequate: we venerate something that turns attractive into aversion. In the word we “venerate” we find Venus. We also find the word Plato uses to reject the distinction between beauty and horror. So we get dose to the French verb méduser. it’s something that prevents us from escaping and takes us to venerate our own fear, forcing us to prefer fear to ourselves, despite the risk of dying.” (Pascal Quignard: El sexo y el espanto, Ed. Minúscula, Barcelona, 2005, p. 73).
(63) The formation of the me (je) is symbolized by a fortified field or a stadium divided into two different fields where the subject wants to find the high and far interior castle, with a shape that symbolizes it in a shocking way.” (Jacques lacan: “El estadio del espejo como formador de ta función del yo (je) tal como se nos revela en la experiencia psicoanalitica” in Escritos1 vol. 1, Ed. Siglo XXI, México, 1989, p. 90)
(64) Slavoj Zizek: EL espinoso sujeto. El centro ausente de la ontologia política, Ed. Paidós, Buenos Aires, 2001, p. 329.
(65) Jean Clair: Elogio de lo visible, Ed. Seix Barral, Barcelona, 1999, p. 211.
(66) Jacques lacan: Aun. EL Seminio .20, Ed. Paidós1 Buenos Aires, 1981, p.140.
(67) « But the neobaroque identity in lidó Rico’s works embraces Michelangelo’s idea ·in a double sense: the creative experience as liberation of matter and as a painful act.” (Javier Hernando Carrasco: 11Agon1ª interior” en Lidó Rico. Sumergidos, Museo de la Universidad de Alicante, 2002, p. 26).
(68) Christine Buci-Glucksmann: La raison baroque. De Baudelaire a Benjamin, Ed. Galilée, París., 1984.
(69) Gilles Deleuze: El pliegue. Leibniz y el barroco, Ed. Paidós, Barcelona 1989,p 45
(70) “Despite Lidó Rico’s work is within the parameters of the most current art, it is also true that it shares aims and resources with the Baroque. In general, baroque sculpture wants to impact and move using different procedures: creating the sensation of movement, ornate the piece excessively, breaking the limits between the space of art and the spectator or getting the most dramatic moment of the action. All these resources can be perceived in Lidó Rico’s works of art.” (David Alpañez: “La perturbación como metáfora” in Lidó Rico. Sumergidos, Museo de la Universidad de Alicante, 2002, p. 20).
(71) Maria Garcia Yelo has related, in a text called “La cáscara del gesto”,
Lidó Rico’s work with tradition from the tableaux vivants to the art of gesture.
(72) In Elective Affinities, Goethe offers a good description of the creation of tableaux vivants in the aristocratic circles of the 18th century, a domestic entertainment that represented famous historie or literary scenes with the help of still people on an scenario, that is to say, resisting the temptation to move. The tableaux vivants are part of an old ideological tradition which considered statues as frozen or still living bodies, with no movement (normally because of an evil spell). Immobility of the statue means an infinite pain: the objed petit, created thanks to the rigidity of a living body as a statue, is a miraculous signal the statue uses to make us perceive its own pain: a drop of blood in the garden statue of the gothic novels or the tears of a virgin from a catholic country. The last representative of this series is the street actor who dresses
as a statue (normally as a knight with his armour) and stands still for a long time: he moves (makes a reverence) just when somebody puts some money in the collection plate.” (Slavoj Zizek: Lacrimae Rerum. Ensayos sobre cine moderno y ciberespacio, Ed. Destino, Barcelona, 2006, p. 246).
(73) ”When I dive in plaster, I feel free, because time stops, consolidates and perpetuates; I’ve always thought that the harshness and cruelty of the
process is implicit in the pieces: uncertainty, outrage, ignorance, rage, passion, satire, distress, dementia … all that group of gestures concentrates and changes inside resins, to draw the conclusion that man starts where reason finishes, from the impulsive and irrational they turn into the onty vehicle to know our thoughts, that is what we are all looking for. Why do I use my body? I suppose because I am a stubborn and persistent idealist, whose dogma is the inflexible idea that art occupies an art produced by and for man.” (Lidó Rico: text in Lidó Rico. Explorer 515-516, Galeria Fernando Latorre, Zaragoza, 2004).
(74) “That is why that escape and representative passion, that gesture, delirium, intervention of infinite forms build a different order of things where, as if it was a gallery of mirrors, the look gets lost without a realistíc recognition. The comfort of the vision remains, in this case thanks to Lidó Rico, who recreates and installs again and again his work. Not all the examples of art are representations.” (Francisco Jarauta: text in Lidó Rico, Galería Espacio Mínimo,ARCO 1994).
(75) “Thoughts shorten the distance with the spectator and explain nonremovable
concepts that have always accompanied me; from many years ago I work with transparent resins, liquid materials which are as us: waters that catalyze creating parallel universes; all men are the same, we catalyze thoughts in order to survive, in the same container, different and infinite stories, disturbing memories.” (Lidó Rico: text about “Pensamientos”, 2005).
(76) ”In the creation process, a strange strength takes us to unexplored areas, perception thickens and looks unconsciousty.” (Lidó Rico: Lidó Rico. Explorer 515-516, Galeria Fernando Latorre, Madrid, 2004).
(77) “Lidó Rico’s artistic career has been constant, a concept or an aesthetic disposition does not just affect his language, but also orients a permanent experimentation. It is not just a visual distance; not the irony that accompanies his pieces, always to the Limit of such a fragile equilibrium that can disappear at any moment; it is the idea of the time of things and his vision.” (Francisco Jarauta: text in Lidó Rico, Galeria Espacio Mínimo, ARCO 1994).
(78) Lidó Rico: text in Lidó Rico. Provisionario, Horno de La Ciudadela, 2003.
(79) For Lidó Rico, pain has atso a physical aspect as it tums the interior elaboration process of the work into a real performance. • (Javier Hernando Carrasco: “Agonía interior in Lidó Rico. Sunergidos, Museo de la Universidad de Aticante” 2002. p. 27).
(80) Enigmatic sense is evident as a formal unspeakable meaning, and that means two enigmatic levels on the one hand, the co-presence of two altenating and reversing comprehension projects (litera/figured) wich can be equally applied but inversely on expressions, producing, not ambiguity and ambivalence in the meaning, but incomprehensibleness, lack of understanding in the act of checking some meaning relationships; on the other hand, the checking of the semantic lack of expression is limited to the detection of two comprehension possibilities that take to nonsense or to contradictory sense.” (José M. Cuesta Abad: Poema y enigma, Ed. Huerga & fierro, Madrid, 1999, pp. 34-35).
(81) “The character of the enigma involves that the expectative mystery creates is always dashed, because the solution precisely consists of showing that there was just the appearance of the enigma.”‘ (Giorgio Agamberi: Idea de la prosa, Ed. Peninsula, 1989, p. 91).
(82) “My pieces -Lidó Rico points out in an interview- are a reflection about the human body; reducing everything to a single man, means extending it to everybody. 1t is a way of understanding Life, of understanding existence. With my work, with my body I try to look for answers. The answers can’t be found in the books or through a dialogue, they can just be found in Art.”
(83) Lidó Rico: “Vivir en el presente” in La Opinión, Murcia, 26th, January 2001,p.13.
(84)”(…) I get. into the sculptures to find man, that subject I dont know where he lives in this time when everything is planned for his cancellation. Maybe, I chose hard materials; the same surfboards are made of to by to perpetuate what we are: soft matter. Resins are some kind of miracle, water that turns into stone.” (Lidó Rico in Gontzal Diez: ,.Querella en las paredes del Almudí” in La Verdad, Murcia. 17 September 1999, p. 54).
(85) Fredric Jameson: “Postmodernism or the Cultural Logic of late Capitalism” in New Left Review, n° 146, July-August 1984. p. 71.
(86) “In the last four or five years, his almost exclusive .production presented situations or choreographies where he was the interpreter of the drama of affliction and torment, using his own body and the absurd coming from Beckett’s nonsense world.” (Mariano Navarro: “Lidó Rico: alternancia y conjunción” in Lidó Rico. Atmósferas, Palacio Aguirre, Cartagena, 2002, p. 3).
(87) “(… ) the only truth is that the one who has caused all this reaction is at the other side of the receiver and maybe, he is still waiting for an answer.”
(Lidó Rico: text in Lidó Rico. Provisionario, Horno de la Ciudadela, Pamplona,
2003). “Lidó Rico has a bearing on the figure of the telephone, directly related
to a phone box, and he describes it as an indivisible extension of our body, prosthesis, another joint. The artist thinks that communications, or in this case the impossibility to communicate, is one of the most evident symptoms of human alienation.” (Javier Hontoria: “ EL grito ahogado de Lidó Rico”, en Lidó Rico, Sala de Exposición del Consistorio de San Marcelo, León, 2004 ).
(88) “In order to describe that ghostly persistence in contemporary art, Foster reminds some considerations by Jacques Derrida: “After the end of history, spirit goes back as reappeared (revenant).” For Derrida “fantology” is the dominant influence on discourse nowadays”; ”it configures a dead that comes back and a ghost that returns again and again.” (Hal Foster: “Este funeral es por el cadáver equivocado” in Diseño y delito, Ed. Akal, Madrid, 2004, p. 135).
(89) “God absence is wider: it is diviner than God (thus I’m not myself, but an absence of myself). (…) Lasting or brief myths loose in the absence of myth, which is its mourning and its truth. The decisive absence of faith is unbreakable faith. The fact that a universe without faith is a ruined universe equals deprivation with the revelation of the universe.” (Georges Bataille: La ausencia de mito” in La felicidad, el erotismo y la literatura. Ensayos 1944-1961, Ed. Adriana Hidalgo, Buenos Aires, 2001, p. 77).
(90) “There is no doubt that Lidó Rico’s work during the Last years has been violent, but if we analyze, we realize beauty hasn’t disappeared under the veil of unease, and that the aesthetic care is kept despite the dramatic character of the issue.” (David Alpañez: “La perturbación como metáfora” in Lidó Rico. Sumergidos, Museo de La Universidad de Alicante, 2002, p. 22).
(91) “I think I am a spectator of Life, of that succession of cruel acts; a spectator and a devourer of my environment; there is no creation with a terrible appetite of everything and for everything.” (Lidó Rico in Gontzal Diez: “Querella en las paredes del Almudí” in La Verdad, Murcia, 17th September 1999, p. 54).
(92) “In this lethargic work (Vampirum Spectrum) the artist takes us to the unconscious,. an undefined territory where the mind goes back (as a vampire
looking of his hideout at dawn) when we dream, fantasize and even have hiding memories that catch and conceal reality.” (Mara Mira: ”El espectro del vampiro. Lidó Rico muestra sus vampiros en Espacio Minimo” in La Opinión, Murcia, 19tf, October 1997, p. 19).
(93) “Family is determined as double mind, a term created by Gregory Bateson which refers to the emission of two contradictory orders that make the subject go crazy in a situation of double predicament: “However, “which family doesn’t emit double minds? Which father doesn’t say to his son “I’m your best friend” and at the same time threatens him: “if you aren’t polite, I slap you”?” (Gilles Deleuze: Derrames. Entre el capitalismo y La esquizofrenia, Ed. Cactus, Buenos Aires, 2005, p. 60).
(94) Francisco Jarauta: text in Lidó Rico, Galería Espacio Minimo, ARCO 1994.
(95) Lidó Rico: text in Lidó Rico. Explorer, 515-516, Galería Fernando Latorre, Madrid, 2004.
(96) “I think one of the main features of these materials is transparency, and I like it because it can identify with human fragility.” (Lidó Rico in Pedro A. Cruz Sánchez: “Diálogos con el arte Murciano. Lidó Rico: ”Todo aquello que no me sirve para crear no existe” in La Región, Murcia, 61 h October 1997, p. 29).
(97) “His work has a compromise with the universe through metaphors. The scenes of torture, cruelty, disappearance, death and sense of unease are allegories of an agonic society. Resin sculptures turn into icons of the human behaviour; masks, multiplicity of faces or characters with no face are the symbols of hypocrisy, complexity of the mind and Lack of personality.” (Roberto Castrillo Soto: “Fragmentos de La experiencia” in Lidó Rico. Sumergidos, Museo de La Universidad de Alicante, 2002, p. 18).
(98)”Lidó Rico: “Vivir en el presente” in La Opinión, Murcia, 26th January 2001, p. 13.
(99)”Lidó Rico en Gontzal Diez: “Querella en las paredes del Almudi” in La Verdad, Murcia, 17th September 1999, p. 54.