In reading what has been written about Boaz Parnas’ work, I have come across the word “incongruous” more than once. Parsing through his archive again, however, I bristle at this description. Parnas’ practice is certainly rich with contradiction – Parnas, I think, would say as much himself – but to suggest that his work is “incongruous” is to insinuate that this contradiction is left unresolved; a series of loose ends left untied. Instead, Parnas revels in the delicate synthesis born of the uneasy dialectics often posited throughout, the resolution of the work being its foremost triumph.
Consider the work in Parnas’ solo exhibition, No Plaice Like Home, staged in 2025 at COLAB Tower, as part of Side/Step Festival. A central sculpture – a lounge chair emblazoned with St. George’s Cross – sits in the middle of the room, the fulcrum on which the exhibition spins. A kind of IKEA-fied Queen Anne Chair, the found object has been stripped of that which would give it any notable character, and by extension, historical context. Evidently mass-produced, its upholstery is a bland taupe, while its design lacks some of the trademark flourishes of the style. Yet, the “English-ness” of the object is brutally asserted: an unmistakable red cross is spray-painted directly across the chair’s front, turning it into a makeshift symbol of national identity. The contradiction between the dehistoricized object and its explicit national identity is central to the piece, eye-catching and seductive, yet it constitutes a recoupment of sorts. The English history of the object, the identity resultant from that history, becomes sutured back together; once more made whole.
Parnas’ paintings achieve a similar effect, albeit through different means. To the right of the central chair sits a small, framed painting of a hazily defined bear on a heavily textured white background. Again, Parnas plays with the ubiquity and non-identity of the mass produced: the work’s white frame may be that of print found at a chain hotel or cafe. However, the defining factor of the piece is its heavily worked surface. In thick strokes, Parnas has applied viscous white paint, frosting-like, across the work’s flat surface. This is only accentuated by the paint of the bear, thickly brown and applied with impasto stabs. The artist’s hand makes an indelible mark, asserting its presence. The work and its frame sit as contradictory, and yet the visual and functional operations of each remain coherent: the frame is relegated to the trivial, the personhood and presence of the artist made paramount. Contradiction is swallowed whole, with the artist’s work standing both in defiance of, and a synthesis of, dialectical opposition.
While incongruity is central to Boaz Parnas’ practice, it is only part of its operation. Contradiction becomes a vehicle for reconciliation; that which stands apart is always meant to come back together.
by Moses MacIntyre
MORE: @boa.zzz
