All too deeply buried by the consequences of the man-nature pseudo-dichotomy, there still lies that commune and un-ignorable instinct of belonging. In our day-to-day, we refer to nature mostly as what remains outside of the “man-made things” category, as if to say that our species’ actions through its intention and purpose alone intrinsically carry this ability of transformation. A whole Epoch, the Anthropocene, is focused on this exact distinction, theoretically and scientifically structuring an era (all too short by geological standards) according to an action-consequence-based system, where the only principal actor is human.

Regarding the conceptual framework, Cosmin Frunteș gravitates around this balance as a core problem of being, without limiting himself to the generally accepted points of view which regard nature as simply inhabitable. Between these general theoretical aspects and the purely subjective and artistically framed intuition, there can be found an element which, by itself, can provide the reorientation necessary to close this long-lasting human-nature wound: memory.

As subject mater within the artistic process, nature expresses a universally resounding nostalgia. Maybe that remaining sentiment of unconditional belonging can be traced back to a place of early formed memories, at once lived and told, where nature needed neither a name nor an explanation to be understood. In the same sense in which we possess remembrance, natural space can be understood as a keeper of memories in its ability to preserve traces. The landscapes captured by Cosmin Frunteș emerge both by returning to this kind of early and conceptually unscathed perception of nature and by attentively highlighting its holding aspect. The field views are especially highlighted in his art as a place of convergence for these two views, informing one another firstly through nostalgia, then as leftover marks of labour and exploitation.

Nature’s ability to propagate, receive, and preserve these more or less intentional traces is present within Horizons, a NOIMA group performance from 2016. The looped video recording presents the creation of a subjectively traced and pluri-perspectival horizon line. The artists undertake this action of abstraction using the most graphic element: the line. In the end, each tree is branded with the mark of a purely estimative infinity, while the actual horizon is born by each of them in turn, and by none in the end. A convention meant to guide the view through an unending continuum creates a reversed effect, where some elements of fragment and division bring forth the certainty of disorientation. The video performance is echoed by Cosmin’s painted Horizons which anticipates the result of the group’s action. Without the direct video reference, this painted image can attract multiple interpretations – a liminal place free of time and direction, or an absurdly crafted hiking trail, where the randomly marked trees guide you to an inevitable meandering.

An important point is the absence of humans and any sort of elements associated with ownership. However, signs of our presence can be found through the traces imprinted within the natural spaces. When we encounter the element of the chopped tree, for example, what we see and assume is more closely related to the same human absence, than to what takes place within the representation. The trace left behind acts as hard evidence of an action, and so produces a reverse impact upon space, giving voice to its memory.

Understood in a natural, physical, or biological way, the light permanently articulates the shadows of these trace-like memories. Each painting visually depicts light as a source of the natural world, without negating its immaterial and metaphysical aspects.

Cosmin Frunteș’s landscapes shed light upon a freshly unearthed nature not yet altered conceptually or aesthetically, capable of bearing its enormous burden of memories. Although the artist thematically approaches the contextual human-nature relation, the conclusion does not succumb to the ideal and complete communion. Within his works, nature appears in its brute and potentially brutal form. Moreover, it appears as a complete mix of substances, resembling a sort of primordial concoction that was only recently transformed into a simply “objectifiable” platform for life. Every element flows and melts in accord with the spontaneous impulse that generates the whole surface. Textures are important agents of this unification, engaging the viewers through their rough tactile impression. Ultimately, the works exhibit a firmness of expression meant to affirm both the space within and beyond the actual representation.