The Fish 

Editor: This work is simply titled *The Fish* by Vasile Dobrian. It appears to be an acrylic painting, rendered in bold, flat colors with clear outlines, reminiscent of Pop Art. The orange fish stands out starkly against the black, surrounded by aquatic blues and greens. It feels almost like a playful emblem, yet there's something unsettling about the exposed bone structure inside. What cultural layers can you uncover in this work? Curator: It’s interesting you find it unsettling. That interplay of attraction and unease is key. The fish itself is a powerful symbol. Think of its early usage as a signifier of Christian identity—the “Ichthys.” Does Dobrian consciously echo this? The orange perhaps evokes warmth, vitality, yet paired with the stark bone structure and bold, almost graphic, execution… Do you feel a tension there, as if a joyful facade is concealing a more existential concern? Editor: Definitely! It’s not just a pretty picture. It’s… charged. That bold style, is it meant to flatten the symbolic content? To make it easily consumed? Curator: Perhaps. Consider the visual language. The hard lines, flat colors - hallmarks of Pop Art certainly invoke consumer culture. Could Dobrian be suggesting that even profound symbols can be commodified, emptied of their original weight in a sea of endless reproduction? The ‘bones’ of the symbol laid bare, if you will. What do *you* make of the surrounding blues and greens? The jagged edges… Editor: They look like choppy waters! Maybe hinting at instability? Like the waters in which the fish/symbol swims are troubled, eroding its meaning? Curator: Precisely. Or consider that choppy waters are dangerous, that it could threaten the Christian symbol. Or, even a premonition from the author on the subject. This painting is deceptive in its simplicity, isn't it? Editor: It is! I’ll never look at a fish the same way again. I see that images aren't always what they seem. Thanks!