The ambiguous, and seemingly absurd statement made by this work 'Nothing is obvious' (so, although we can't see anything else, we can see nothing) reminds of Andy Warhol's statements: 'Nothing is very sexy', 'nothing is substantial', 'nothing is great', 'nothing is acceptable' (taken from FROM A TO B AND BACK AGAIN). At the same time, NOTHING IS OBVIOUS contradicts the very arch idea of ideological control, the stranglehold of the natural, the obvious, the 'facts that speak for themselves'.
Ideology surreptitiously sets the boundaries of what we think of as 'good' and 'normal'. It makes it impossible for us to think outside of set parameters, impossible to ever step outside the world it constructs 'for us'. Two techniques are used for this: first it refers to the self-evident: 'Can't you see for yourself?' or 'But, it is obvious!'. Second, the domination seems 'natural' - it happens without us ever being aware of it.
The text of NOTHING IS OBVIOUS is, like all ideological assumptions, 'cast in concrete' and, like ideology, the message is subtle, it blends into the background, it is difficult to perceive at first glance. But the message is clear: 'Nothing is obvious', the facts never speak for themselves - they are made to speak and, 'no, we cannot see for ourselves'. We are thus free from discursive hegemony - we are free to think that which is not obvious - free to think for ourselves.