It is one of many tasks of the artist to reach beyond what can be seen and to capture the intangible aspects of the scenes they portray. An artist might achieve this through detail, arming the viewer with as much information as possible to understand their vision. But how much detail is too much? At what point is the artist forcing their subjectivity on the viewer? Do details cloud the message, assuming there is any message at all?

The artists participating in the group show Hiding in Plain Sight might argue that depth is best achieved by removing details. Each artwork in the show introduces a human figure whose context is enigmatic to the viewer. Perhaps their facial expressions or bodily movements have been abstracted away. Perhaps their setting offers no clues as to where they came from, where they are going. Perhaps some clues contradict others, leaving the viewer with more questions than answers.

Questions are exactly what these artworks demand. They invite the viewer to use their own creativity to fill in the blanks. This embrace of ambiguity is an exercise usually left to artists, but in a world where nothing is as obvious as it seems, perhaps it is one we can all benefit from practicing.