My paintings are born from dialogue with people.
For many years, I have worked as a fortune teller, listening to the stories of more than 40,000 individuals. People come to me carrying deeply personal and urgent concerns—about love, family, work, illness, and major life decisions. Within these encounters emerge emotions that are inseparable from being human: anxiety, hope, hesitation, and determination.
I do not attempt to explain these stories through my paintings.
I simply receive them.
Over time, these countless dialogues have accumulated within my body. When I paint, I do not use brushes. Instead, I touch the canvas directly with my hands and fingers.
Through this physical contact, the emotions and tensions I have absorbed from innumerable conversations begin to appear as movements and layers of color.
What emerges on the canvas is not a depiction of specific individuals or narratives.
What remains are traces of encounters—traces of experiences born through dialogue with many people.
Those who have shared their stories with me remain anonymous. Therefore, my work does not portray any particular person. Yet within each painting, fragments of many lives overlap. Emotions such as anxiety, hope, confusion, and resolve manifest as abstract forms.
In this sense, my work is not simply an expression of personal emotion, but rather the emergence of experiences shaped through human relationships, appearing as an abstract visual field.
My paintings arise from the accumulation of countless dialogues. Through the body, and through the act of touching the canvas, these dialogues take form as painting.
I call this approach:
“Embodied Dialogue Painting.”
My paintings attempt to remain in a state prior to resolution or harmony. Within them exist anxiety, despair, conflict, fluctuation, and a breath that has not yet disappeared. I do not depict these elements as resolved; rather, I seek to hold them on the surface as conditions that continue to exist while still being carried.
In my recent practice, the notion of “incompleteness” has become increasingly central. However, this does not mean something unfinished or abandoned midway. Instead, it is a method of consciously sustaining the moment in which a painting is pressured to close into a stable conclusion—yet resists fully doing so. It is about not resolving completely, not stabilizing entirely, and deliberately holding that tension.
What I aim for is not the presentation of a completed order. Collisions of color, overlapping traces, interruptions of movement, imbalances of density, and remaining spaces—these heterogeneous elements are not organized into a single answer but continue to coexist within the same surface. In this, I see something close to the way human beings live in reality. We do not resolve all wounds or fractures before continuing to live; more often, we move forward in time while still carrying them. For me, painting is a space to re-encounter such unresolved states—not as negation, but as affirmation.
In this sense, “incompleteness” is not merely an impression in my work but is becoming a structural decision that allows the painting to exist. How far to proceed, where to stop, what to leave unresolved, which conflicts to retain, and which spaces to preserve as breath—through these choices, I explore the possibility of a painting that is constituted by not closing.
In my current practice, I am deepening this “affirmation of incompleteness” as a serial body of work. While each piece differs in color, structure, temporality, and emotional density, the central question remains consistent: how can a painting come into being while still holding what cannot be resolved? For me, affirmation does not simply indicate brightness or redemption. It appears as the persistence of what does not collapse, as the survival of breath, as the presence of openings within excess, and as the acceptance of existence without erasing its wounds.
My paintings are not intended to present a single, completed world. Rather, they attempt to create a space in which multiple emotions, multiple temporalities, and multiple traces coexist without fully closing. This incompleteness is not a lack, but a form for remaining open—and within it, I find the urgency that painting can still hold today.
Hiroko Saigusa’s paintings originate from a fundamentally different point than conventional abstract art.
Their foundation lies in her long-standing practice as a psychic, engaging in dialogue with others.
Having encountered more than 40,000 individuals, her work has been rooted in deeply human experiences—love, family, work, illness, and life choices.
These dialogues are accumulated within the artist’s body and eventually emerge as physical movement within the act of painting.
Saigusa’s works do not depict specific people or narratives.
However, the canvas bears traces of emotions and tensions hope, uncertainty, and intensity absorbed through years of dialogue, appearing through gestures and flows of color.
In this respect, her paintings are not expressions of a personal inner world.
Rather, they can be understood as abstract manifestations of human experiences formed through dialogue.
While no figures are represented, multiple fragments of lives overlap within the surface.
Saegusa’s work can thus be read as an emotional landscape of society an accumulation of anonymous human experiences.