Alberto Storari’s pictures are fine. “Here is a truth valid for each living and thinking being”, wanting to gloss the incipit of Schopenhauer’s work, The World as Will and Representation. This judgement holds in itself an urgent danger, that vulgata current criticism gives the same value to attributions of beauty as to empty truism of foolishness. Saying that Alberto Storari’s pictures are fine means a lot. They graze grandeur, I was about to say sublime. So: fine they are fine, but not sublime. Now, before causing the eventual readers (and Storari himself) an attack of tachycardia, I will follow on introducing my thesis. His neutrally accomplice fascination for romantic temperament, evocated by the representation of colossal wreckages, beached and decontestualized as whim in reality, can be matched to tipical romantic emotion of Sublime, terme of comparison for thinkers (Immanuel Kant and Edmund Burke, after the Great Precursory of Sublime, of course, the Pseudo Longino) and painters (William Turner, Caspar David Friedrich et cetera).

But Storari has a very personal view about romantic climax: a neutrally  accomplice rivisitation, has we said before, through eyes and means of the 21st century. For whom concerns Sublime, even if intrinsically not representable, the emotion of infinitely big and infinitely powerful are strongly evocated in these pictures, that draw precise and definite objects, leaving open a possibility to a sort of hermeneutics of senses, intrinsically subjective and therefore incline to a democratic metatheoretic approciate on sensible knowledge: think less, think all. A short look into history. The vexata quaestio around Sublime starts, according to west culture, from the work The Sublime (Peri hypsous) of the anonymous Pseudo Longino. It was written in the first century after Christ, when “sublime” was the name given to the highest style of eloquence, that is considerated the greatest and most severe style ever: Pseudo Longino in his treaty compares it to the eco of a great spirit, describing it as a thecnical/stylistical quality serving “high feeling”. We need to attend the 1600s to find in Nicolas Boileau works a strictu sensu aesthetic interpretation of it (and therefore not binded to a tecnical/stylistical dimention) that covers the sphere of wonder and amazment, generated by infinit greatness. From then onwards Sublime will become a concept straightly joined to the idea of Beautiful, at the highest point of meditation on work of art. In the second half of 1700s, the Irish Edmund Burke, called the British Cicerone,will proclame, agaist the subjectivism of the Scottish philosopher David Hume, the objectivity of art rules, rised from connections between feelings and natural objects, that bring to the feeling of Beautiful or to the feeling of Sublime. In Immanuel Kant’s work Critique of Judgement (1790) Beautiful and Sublime will be considerated objects of a pure aestetical judgement, apratical and atheoretical, that will refer to a free disinterested contempletion, above necessity. According to the önigsberger thinker, the judgement of Beautiful will concern a delimited object, with a precise form, while the judgement of Sublime will be related to an indeterminated and unformed object, based on the harmoniccontrast between immagination and reason. Not a mere trifle, considering that in a kantian prospective reason is the ability of unrepresentable, that means it is a reason’s idea, intrinsically exceeding the sensible sphere. Therefore, Sublime will be the display of an idea, given by the contemplation of infinitley big objects (mathematical Sublime) and infinitely powerful (dynamic Sublime), in the harmonic contrast between humiliation of imagination (uncapable of representing what goes beyond sensibility) and exaltation of reason (that elevates human finitude to its oversensible destination). Therefore, in matter of Sublime, immagination is the ability capable of finding the figure or metaphor of this harminic contrast, projecting the sublime feeling into that terrible event, as for exemple a wreck, which has the power to make void of me, its spectator. After all, wreck is above all the romantic element. And Alberto Storari’s beached colossus, antagonists of decline, rival project of the past, spectral wreckages of what has been, betray a fascination for romantic dimention, re-actualized without mocking the english or german great predecessors. Certaintly, mind goes back to Friedich and Turner, but Storari’s relationship with matter re-actualizes this romantic fascination, entirely projected on rich, crumbling, declining and lived pictorial surface, from whom rises an ancestral element, as if it comes over a damask thought net. A surface representing a journey, a history, an underskin memory that interferes with painting. It is the longing of presence, the amazement for something rather then something alse, colossus marked by time stranding where before was the sea, the symple interpretation of these fossilized wreckages of memories and experiences, that cherish the reminiscence of the past, as if in a sarcophagus. Alberto Storari in tris way brings memory back to an objective dimention, the wreckage emerging on a demask surfice, charging the object of representation of a tautological value: the beached scafe that quotes and describes itself, bringing to surface its memory and interfering with the present (speach that can be refered to human being: what you are and what you were). A conceptual hinterland created through a working handicraft method, consisting in the research of damask fabrics, selected among the most “lived” and signed of history. From here he moves to the strictly composing stage: draft of fabrics, silver-planting, stiffening of the picture with gluers, application and traitment of tin-foil paper. A mutual balance among “wrinkles”, where Alberto Storari puts his hands and leaves, traicing the beached colossus through a progressive subtraction of form, until he reaches the evocated balance between immagine and ground. A sort of diminutio of complexion, because Storari forgets about the representation of that scafe (as the picture that shows the beaching of a turchish boat at Marina di Lesina, for exemple). He lets it go, because what really counts is not the representation of that thing, but the evocation of this appearance’s precarius balance, lost in its own distance. The iconographic pretext is there, it really exists. But memory does not need to be told, but only evocated. A work of art, Storari’s one, deeped in Litterature (Joseph Conrad and Herman Melville above all), but that also influences the imaginary of the Seventh Art (as the Adventure of Poseidon) and reality (the amazing Aral Lake, between Uzbekistan and Kazakistan). For his brave will in evocating amazment and wonder (“I arrive to a beach and I find in front of my own eyes a colossus signed by time, lost in nothing, where before was the sea”, Storari dixit, more or less), his work can be approached through memory- and with permission - to the feeling of Sublime described before, renewed through the contemplation of that immobile and out of time gigantism that, from above its majesty, full of the sense of past, seems to threaten and at the same time amaze the observing. Therefore, Storari’s work hids an inedit sense of Sublime, that, following the romantic idea of dinamic Sublime, can be called immobile Sublime: that is- and will always be- a pseudoconcept, an idea that, for its iconologic power, exceeds the given of senses without finding an appropriate objectivation, remaining at the human landing - too human, paraphrasing Nietzsche- of Beauty. An eneven struggle that, as Storari now, employed poets, philosophers and painters, trying to express what maybe only Giuseppe Ungaretti, even if in a different spiritual dimention, was able to express with fuor symple words: “M’illumino d’immenso.