Even in calm and monotonous daily life, we get to encounter a certain moment suddenly every now and then. At such moment, even our usual routine that we are familiar with gets to be experienced as something that is completely different and distinctive. At such secret moment, even the silent, familiar things around us get to be exhibited as they are as things that have their own uniqueness. Just like that, each of the things becomes freed from the pieces of space time and manifests themselves plainly, that is, their own existence. Those are the moments when objects expose themselves and also we get to pay attention to the objects plainly as they are. Those moments are so-called 'phenomenological manifestation'. Artist Hwang Sun Tae's works also not just approach to us with the images or contents each of them contains but let us focus on a certain moment in particular time and space or the object itself in general. Because of this, the artist's work is not always oriented to what is shown in each work, that is, visible things, but leads us to what's beyond that and in that sense, relates with what functions in invisible area. This may be called as 'the area of thought'. Like this, the reason the artist's work intrigues us is that it raises the power of thought that's never simple through the absolutely familiar figures of usual things and delivers the strength of thought that is not any light. The profound existence of a thing or phenomenon subtly declares that an existence itself is not a thing having nothing to do with us like that existing somewhere beyond reality but art also is the chances holding the existence itself weakly after all.

However, existence shows itself not that easily unlike it is said. The artist, too, seems to have gone through a lot of ceaseless trials and processes for that, and perhaps the artist's systematized work itself seems to have been serous trials to hole the existence of each object each time. The works to be exhibited this time are also the products of such hard work and they will be the chance to connect the artist's works to be unfolded afterwards. The artist has conducted his work to exhibit the existence of objects up until now largely from two aspects. First, he has talked about the existence of objects through plane work such as photo drawing or glass drawing, and second, he also has tried to analyze the details about the shapes of objects and their relations with the surroundings through cubic work or installation work. This exhibition is closer to the first aspect but also is combined with the second. More precisely speaking, the attitudes toward two objects have coexisted all the time, and this exhibition attracts our eyes in that it focuses on the construction of space exposing the existence itself in addition to the combination.

The work that associates with a certain, drowsy moment in daily life has peculiar spatiality. In the neutral, interior space where the details of routine are somewhat omitted, the interior space is expressed with minimum sides and colors created by thin lines, and here, the work is finished with the soft light that penetrates such interior space. With completely moderate lines, sides, and colors, and lights, he expressed the space itself that exposes a certain moment of daily life. Although time stands still, since it is closer to correspondence that is both a moment and eternity at the same time rather than a certain moment, the work makes us feel peculiar chastity that is calm but extraordinary. However, the light is distinctive from religious things like revelation or manifestation because it penetrates quite an ordinary space, but it is rather closer to a special moment of daily life that an object manifests itself. Because of that, it lets us feel special lingering imagery of daily life that is not any simple though it is ordinary. Maybe for that feeling, the artist's work makes us have the similar feeling we have when we appreciate the interior landscape of the 17th century Dutch paintings. It may be because of the effect that subtly highlights the object and space themselves through the light and shadow cast from the window. Of course, the basic approach may differ, but because of the setting of the light casting the interior space from the window, we may get to have such feeling. Here, the setting of a window through which the light comes from outside acquires crucial significance. It may differ by time, but with the window, we have been able to communicate with the world. The previous role of a window was mostly to be set as metaphor to recognize the outer world, that is, as a frame of recognition toward a visual world whereas the artist's work contextualizes it as a role of a medium that indirectly casts the existence of an object itself. Of course, it can be said that the setting of light as some unknown source meaning deeper source of existence is quite similar. For instance, it is closer to Lumen in the sense of metaphor as light of spirit rather than Lux simply referring to physical light; however, they differ in the sense that it does not emphasize the manifestation of God itself but manifests the existence of an object itself. And more particularly, when you find out the fact that the truth of the light set as the light source is just an ordinary fluorescent light, you will soon get to see that it is absurd to connect it with divinity. It is all significant that the fluorescent light always brightening the interior space of our daily lives is the source of soft light that penetrates the work. However, it is different from the role to cast light onto the space and its objects in the front but is a limited role to cast the objects indirectly so that the shadow can be just formed. In this context, it seems that the artist may be interested in the way that the indirect subtleness that uncertainty has instead of distinctiveness manifests the existence itself deeply. The setting of light, too, is to highlight the existence of an object indirectly rather than the aspect to make the shape of an object visibly, and it seems that the reason he shows interest in and pours endeavor for the material of glass is because of the unique way that the transparency (non-transparency) functions itself. The glass that either penetrates or non-penetrates something can make the objects lying in front of it exist in different ways through the degree of both direct and indirect media. Glass is the material that can make an object exist in the different form of visibility by controlling the brightness, color, and shadow and casting light according to its transparency, and the artist seems to have controlled the degree of the medium of that glass to highlight the existence of an object itself properly. And at the same time, the material of glass is hard as it is but also tends to be broken. In this sense, it is also the material that maintains its own properties of existence, that is, the original properties of the object which are the hard exterior and also the fragileness. Moreover, the artist accompanying photo work as the subordinate process of that work could manifest the properties of reproduction which photos have containing the world's real-like images, that is, he could realize the logic of existence beyond the logic of transparent reproduction effectively because of the medium of glass. As what he said, it is because those are the materials that can make us realize the fact that anything including the photos of objects seen obscurely through non-transparent glass cannot be transparent, either. Glass was quite adequate material to the artist who has interest in the existence of non-transparent objects rather than the reproduction of a transparent world. Through his expression of objects and space seen vaguely over the non-transparent glass, it plays a significant role in performing philosophical, aesthetic planning that exhibits the artist's thought to the world, that is, the existence of objects itself. For this reason, he has poured much endeavor for the glass work having a hard and difficult work process up until now. I guess the properties of glass itself which is sensitive and highlights the other objects by reflection instead of itself resemble the attitude of the artist toward his work. Passing through the long, dragging process, he may have become similar to it, I guess. At least, he may have wanted to reflect the light of a more radical world through it by cultivating various properties the particular glass has. And it seems that the reason he chose glass that was not expensive having some degree of non-transparency was that he did not have interest in the material of glass itself but had much thought on exhibiting the objects or space of daily life themselves by controlling the degree of either direct or indirect reflection which glass has or glass' original properties. Utilizing such properties of glass properly, the artist has conducted planning that can be even referred to as, for instance, archeology of shadow which tries to cast light onto the existence of objects staying on the other side of this clear, visible world.

This exhibition goes further from his previous works, "There, the object exists", and is in the midst of the journey intending to expand to 'Here, this space exists". And also going further from exhibiting an object itself, it acquires various meanings in that it captures a certain moment of daily life by expressing particular space. For this, the artist gathers usual images of everyday space and deletes each of the concrete stories and pieces of information to express absolutely neutral space with minimum lines and sides. No, it is not the expression of certain space but makes such everyday space merely exist itself. The proper cast of light with the material of glass, in fact, plays a role in completing the work. Through the controlling of light, he manifests a certain moment that is a moment of usual routine and also a moment that is still but lets us feel even perpetuality. The expression of such space is not only the continuation but also expansion of the previous exposure of existence that objects have, and it is because space also defines objects after all. However, the feel cannot be said to be pop-like but is not heavy or serious, either because spaces expressed in the works generally resemble the grammar of the general landscape of this contemporary era. It is not the heaviness of unknown being but acquires the seriousness of the ordinary being itself which is just positioned as it is in the familiarity. And as it is mentioned earlier, the fact that the light brightening the existence of the space and its objects is the very common fluorescent light is also highly significant. Is this because we can't notice the fact that the phenomenology of this age does never exist somewhere antique or profound but exists in the midst of our ordinary and trivial lives in this world? Therefore, although the artist's work just plainly exhibits the interior of simple daily life, it lets us notice certain moments of our daily lives and suddenly encounter the thin and also profound spatiality surrounding us where objects speaks themselves even though they were just the shadow of essence established with lines and the light, that is, the trap of senses.

Lines, and the light – The shadow of essence, the trap of the senses