The title 1:1 asserts a relationship in which it remains questionable to what extent the actual work takes this into account or corresponds to it in turn: In the reduction to a crossed wall and a similarly crossed picture surface, the practice of exhibiting virtually exhibits itself. The arrangement has a model-like quality: surface before surface. The aspect ratios of the two surfaces, wall and picture, however, lead to different angles of the crosses and thus demonstrate their difference apart from mere size. Moreover, both surfaces have other peculiarities: The wall is part of an architectural space and draws functional adaptations from this context: an opening as a passageway, a partial reduction in height, presumably for reasons of illumination and visual articulation. The painting - mounted in front of the wall and seemingly perfect in its glossy surface - reveals on closer inspection flaws and damage that suggest deficiencies in manufacturing and handling.
In the structure of the work, the wall stands pars pro toto for the exhibition space, for the institution, for the curation of the exhibit. The picture as added stands for the artist and his work. In their combinantion, the wall and the picture create and cite the context of art in a way that is effective for the public. Only in the presence of a viewer and his/her judgment, however, does the work find its conclusion, while at the same time calling it into question again: without visual aids, the space or the angle of refraction of the human eye is too small to be able to see the work completely in the field of vision.
The supposed weaknesses of the individual reference systems (exhibition space, art object, viewer) fully reveal that the apparent reference character of the title as well as the work itself as an exemplary arrangement are by no means clarified but are based on manifold assumptions, habits and codes.


photo: David Kühne