By drawing mutated animals and plants, I question nature’s place in the modern context. What is nature? What is natural? The subjects that I portray in my drawings reflect the ambiguity of such definitions. They show how I feel at loss to describe what is natural in our present day. Cross-breeding, genetic engineering, and so on; the ways in which humans can control and reconfigure the natural process become more abundant as technology advances. Should the results of such human-developed processes be construed as a part of nature, or should nature exist independently of human progress?
Take for example a tree or a forest specimen replaced in a city setting. Simply because we are able to nourish and grow a tree on top of a building, it doesn't mean that we can neglect the effects of doing so. Couldn't it be that we are moving the tree with enough tact and speed to keep our minds from realizing anything is different, while on a more fundamental level, even our most basic faculty of perception is becoming unavailable to us? A loose verbal rendition of the question I try to ask in my works is, "If a tree is removed from its natural habitat, even though the basic qualities of it stay intact, is it still the same tree, or better yet, is it even a tree at all?