EP83: Alfredo Roces and the Living Pulse of Still Life | On Filipino Heritage, Criticism, Castañeda

Alfredo “Ding” Roces (b. 1930) is a Filipino painter, writer, and art critic known for bridging art-making and cultural discourse. Trained early under Dominador Castañeda, he later studied Fine Arts at the University of Notre Dame and at the Art Students League of New York under George Grosz. Alongside his painting practice, he became a respected voice in Philippine art criticism and writing. Roces takes us back to where it all begins: Still Life. Trained as a painter from a young age, he shares how Still Life became foundational to his artistic education—not just as a subject, but as a way of seeing. In the controlled space of the studio, objects become more than objects; they are exercises in perception, discipline, and painterly sensitivity. But for Roces, this traditional training evolved into something far more intuitive. Today, his process rejects rigidity. Instead of detailed sketches or pre-planned compositions, Roces embraces immediacy and imperfection. Whether painting fish, fruit, or everyday objects, he begins with quick impressions—sometimes completed in as little as 20 minutes—capturing urgency, especially with perishable subjects. From there, the work transforms into a second phase: a prolonged dialogue between artist and canvas, where meaning slowly reveals itself over days, months, or even years. He gravitates toward subjects like fish, vegetables, and even flowers in decay—objects that demand speed and responsiveness. This sense of urgency ties subtly to the historical roots of Still Life, from memento mori to vanitas, though Roces approaches these ideas less as doctrine and more as a way to evoke memory and personal recall in the viewer. His works are intentionally open, inviting audiences to bring their own meanings and associations. Beyond the canvas, Roces reflects on his parallel life as a critic and writer. Rather than seeing criticism as a hindrance, he views it as an essential counterpart to creation—a tool for self-evaluation that must be carefully balanced. Too much logic, he warns, can strip a painting of its life. What matters is knowing when to trust instinct and when to step back and assess. The conversation also traces his artistic journey: from early training under Dominador Castañeda at just 14 years old, to his studies at the University of Notre Dame, and later at the Art Students League of New York under German artist George Grosz. These experiences shaped both his technical foundation and his evolving philosophy of art. Roces also opens up about the challenges of being both artist and critic—how his writing career sometimes overshadowed his painting, and how recognition in one field complicated acceptance in another. Yet through it all, he persisted in both practices, driven by what he describes as equal creative urgencies.