Listen to me carefully, you bunch of snobs. Here is an artist who knows how to make brushes dance just as others know how to make bodies waltz through space. Kitti Narod, born in 1976 in Thailand, cheerfully surpasses the conventional classifications of contemporary art to offer us a vision of humanity that breathes as much as it challenges. His canvases, populated with silhouettes with fluid contours and perpetual movements, constitute a visual laboratory where a sociology of the intimate flourishes with remarkable acuity.
Behind this seemingly simple work lies a particularly interesting theoretical complexity. Because behind these curved lines and sharp colors is an artistic project that dialogues with the major issues of our time: how to represent otherness without reducing it, how to depict social movement without freezing it, how to give shape to utopia without falling into naivety?
A Framework for Reading Narod’s Art
Georg Simmel, an early 20th-century German sociologist, bequeathed us a revolutionary approach to social life that finds a striking illustration in Kitti Narod’s work [1]. For Simmel, society does not exist as a substantial entity but is constituted through reciprocal actions between individuals. This dynamic conception of social interaction is strikingly materialized in the compositions of the Thai artist.
Let us observe Narod’s canvases: they invariably present human figures in interaction, never isolated, always caught in a network of relationships that goes beyond the pictorial frame. In “Horizon” (2019), this monumental work created for the exhibition “Spectrosynthesis II”, we witness a true staging of forms of socialization. The characters kiss, hold hands, look at each other, creating a relational fabric that constitutes the very essence of society according to the German sociologist.
Simmel distinguishes the content of socialization (motivations, desires, individual interests) from its forms (modes of interaction that allow these contents to socialize). This distinction finds a remarkably precise visual translation in Narod’s art. The motivations of his characters remain deliberately ambiguous; are they driven by love, friendship, or desire? But the forms of their interaction are perfectly readable: embraces, collective dances, and sharing of daily activities.
Thus, the artist operates a sociological abstraction with the brush. He shows us that what matters is not the individual psychology of his characters but the form their relationships take. Their faces, often simplified to the extreme, even anonymized, become variables in a larger social equation. Narod does not paint individuals; he paints individuated relationships.
This approach finds its full expression in his series dedicated to domestic life with his partner Gwyn Faemol. These works, far from being mere autobiographical snapshots, reveal the universal dimension of forms of cohabitation. When Narod depicts two men having breakfast or falling asleep together, he is not only documenting his own experience; he is analyzing the forms of common life as they unfold independently of the gender or sexual orientation of the protagonists.
Simmel teaches us that social forms have a relative autonomy from their contents. They can accommodate different contents without losing their own structure. Narod’s art illustrates this plasticity of social forms: the form “couple” remains identical whether it is embodied by two men, two women, or a man and a woman. It is this sociological intuition that gives his art its universal significance.
The Thai artist also reveals the aesthetic dimension of social forms. Simmel had intuited that some human interactions reach a degree of formal perfection that brings them close to art. Narod’s choreographic compositions, where bodies articulate according to complex but harmonious geometries, give body to this intuition. His characters do not merely interact; they compose together visual figures that bear witness to the intrinsic beauty of successful social forms.
This aestheticization of sociology goes hand in hand with a sociologization of aesthetics. Narod does not seek to produce beauty for its own sake, but to reveal the beauty that lies at the heart of the most ordinary human relationships. His utopia is not that of a perfect world, but that of a world where the beauty of social forms would finally be perceived and appreciated at its true worth.
Thus, the artist’s work constitutes a genuine phenomenology of contemporary forms of socialization. Through his brushes, Simmel’s intuitions find a visual actualization that reveals their relevance for understanding the social issues of our time.
Dance as a Metaphor for Social Movement
If Georg Simmel offers us a sociological framework to understand Kitti Narod’s art, it is in the universe of contemporary dance, and more specifically in the work of Maurice Béjart, that we find the key to his poetics of movement [2].
Maurice Béjart, French choreographer born in 1927, revolutionized dance by freeing it from the traditional codes of classical ballet to make it a universal language of human expression. His conception of dance as “the art of movement organized by time and space” finds a striking echo in the way Narod conceives painting.
Béjart asserted that “dance is the art of movement” and that it must correspond to the modern world. This philosophy is found in each canvas by Narod, where the characters seem perpetually in motion, frozen in moments of dance that overflow the pictorial frame. The Thai artist does not paint poses; he paints suspended movements.
This kinship with Béjart’s universe is not accidental. Like the Marseille choreographer, Narod conceives his art as a means to unite bodies and souls in a collective momentum that transcends individualities. The circular compositions that characterize many of the artist’s works recall the round choreographies dear to Béjart, where dancers formed perfect geometric figures.
This circle aesthetic, notably found in “The Pool” (2020), is not just a formal choice. It reflects a worldview where humanity forms an organic whole, a community of linked destinies. Béjart used the circle to symbolize cosmic unity and universal brotherhood. Narod adopts this symbol to suggest that, beyond differences of gender, sexual orientation, or cultural background, we all participate in the same humanity in motion.
Béjart’s influence also appears in the way Narod handles corporeality. The French choreographer cultivated a certain cult of the male body, which he presented as a synthesis of strength and grace. This aesthetic is found in Narod’s male representations, where athletic silhouettes unfold in space with a natural obviousness reminiscent of the dancers from Ballet du XXe siècle.
But it is especially in the conception of the stage space that Béjart’s inheritance is revealed with the greatest sharpness. Béjart dreamed of freeing dance from conventional halls to take it to non-traditional places, sports palaces, courtyards, and public spaces. This aspiration to democratize art finds its pictorial equivalent in Narod’s art, which carefully avoids bourgeois interiors to situate his scenes in undetermined spaces, accessible to all.
The Thai artist shares with Béjart the same faith in the transformative power of art. For the choreographer, dance was to allow spectators to live an experience of communion that would change them lasting. Narod nurtures a similar ambition: his works aim to awaken in the viewer a feeling of universal empathy that would reconcile him with all humanity.
This spiritual dimension of art manifests in the way Narod handles temporality. His characters evolve in an eternal present, freed from the constraints of chronological time. This temporal suspension recalls the “moments of eternity” that Béjart sought to create on stage, those moments when dance seemed to abolish time to reveal a transcendent truth.
Béjart’s legacy finally appears in the implicit pedagogical approach of Narod’s work. Béjart considered that art had to be accessible to the greatest number and developed a dance pedagogy that favored expression over pure technique. Narod adopts a similar approach by favoring emotional communication over pictorial virtuosity. His canvases speak immediately to the spectator, without requiring prior technical knowledge.
This accessibility implies no easiness. Just as Béjart knew how to create choreographic complexity from simple movements, Narod elaborates compositions of great sophistication from a deliberately stripped visual vocabulary. This economy of means serving maximum expression is one of the most characteristic features of his art.
Social Utopia in Action
Kitti Narod’s work stands out for its ability to give form to utopia without falling into naive idealism. His canvases propose an alternative vision of society where harmony arises not from the erasure of differences, but from their creative orchestration. This utopia is not situated in an inaccessible elsewhere, but unfolds in the here and now of representation.
The artist proceeds by accumulation of everyday details which he transfigures by the grace of composition. A couple having tea, friends watching television, swimmers in a pool: so many banal situations which, under his brush, acquire an epic dimension. Narod reveals the extraordinary that lies dormant in the ordinary.
This transfiguration of the everyday relies on a remarkable mastery of color. The artist uses bright and saturated tones that give his scenes a dreamlike quality without cutting them off from reality. His dazzling reds, deep blues, and luminous greens create a parallel world that remains connected to ours while distinguishing itself through its chromatic intensity.
The treatment of space follows this same utopian logic. Narod avoids traditional perspectives in favor of flat compositions that allow different viewpoints to coexist in the same image. This multiplicity of perspectives suggests that there are several legitimate ways to apprehend social reality.
The artist thus develops a geometry of inclusion where each element finds its place without being hierarchized relative to the others. His compositions work according to a logic of addition rather than subordination: each character, each object contributes to the whole without being dominated by it.
This equality of treatment is also evident in the representation of bodies. Narod rejects any classical idealization in favor of a celebration of morphological diversity. His characters display varied silhouettes that testify to the richness of real humanity. The artist shows us that beauty does not reside in conformity to a single model but in the harmony created together by different individualities.
The Politics of the Intimate
Kitti Narod’s political engagement does not come through denunciation or direct criticism, but through the proposal of an alternative model of living together. His works function as laboratories of social experimentation where new forms of human relationships are tested.
This politics of intimacy is particularly manifested in his way of representing sexuality and affectivity. The artist treats these issues with a naturalness that disarms prejudices. His love scenes, whether involving heterosexual or homosexual couples, are depicted with the same benevolent tenderness.
Narod does not campaign, he shows. He does not denounce homophobia, he makes homosexual love visible in its most everyday and universal dimension. This strategy of display proves more effective than all militant speeches because it directly touches the spectator’s emotions.
The artist proceeds the same way with issues of gender. His often androgynous characters escape traditional binary categorizations. They evolve in a post-gender world where sexual identities no longer determine social roles.
This fluidity of identities is accompanied by a fluidity of relationships. The boundaries between friendship and love, between biological family and chosen family, between public and private, fade in favor of a relational continuum where everyone can find their place.
Narod’s engagement is finally evident in his conception of art as a space of freedom. His canvases offer an imaginary refuge where dominant social norms are suspended in favor of other possibilities of existence. This cathartic function of art gives it an undeniable political dimension.
An Aesthetic of Reconciliation
If Kitti Narod’s work strikes by its stylistic coherence, it is because it relies on an aesthetics of reconciliation that runs through all his compositions. The artist constantly seeks to harmonize elements that often come into conflict in social reality.
This reconciliation operates first at the formal level. Narod manages to make figuration and abstraction, realism and stylization, tradition and modernity coexist in the same image. His canvases demonstrate a remarkable ability to synthesize diverse influences without reducing them to their lowest common denominator.
The artist proceeds similarly with cultural references. His art draws as well from Buddhist iconography as from Western pop art, from the aesthetics of manga as well as from that of Matisse. This creative appropriation avoids the pitfall of syncretism thanks to the unifying strength of his personal vision.
The reconciliation extends to thematic contents. Narod manages to represent together elements which, in ordinary experience, belong to separate spheres: work and leisure, sacred and profane, individual and collective. His canvases propose a holistic vision of human existence where all aspects of life find their legitimate place.
This aesthetic of reconciliation culminates in the treatment of temporality. The artist makes different narrative moments coexist in the same image, creating a composite time that escapes linear chronology. This complex temporality allows his works to condense into a single image the full richness of a human relationship.
Narod’s art thus constitutes a true lesson in living together. He shows us that it is possible to reconcile divergent interests, to have different cultures engage in dialogue, to create harmony without uniformity.
Kitti Narod’s work offers us a reconciled vision of humanity which, without denying the conflicts and tensions of the contemporary world, outlines the contours of a livable possibility. This concrete utopia does not merely criticize the existing; it sketches the forms of a desirable future. In this, the art of this Thai artist constitutes one of the most stimulating proposals of contemporary Asian art. It reminds us that art, far from being a simple ornament of existence, can be an instrument of social transformation and a laboratory for human experimentation. Through his brushes dance the infinite possibilities of a humanity finally reconciled with itself.
- Georg Simmel, Sociology: Studies on the Forms of Socialization, PUF, 1999 (original edition 1908).
- Maurice Béjart, interview on his conception of dance, INA Archives, 1968.
