Traditionally, human beings have established strict barriers with the rest of the living beings, understanding that our way of organising ourselves in society and relating to the environment made us different from the animal world. However, in the same way that resistance to the theory of the biological evolution of species has been overcome, it seems increasingly evident that our behaviour is also the result of the same long evolution. This is particularly evident in the case of feelings of territoriality, which, mainly due to the need to cover our primary needs, makes us attach ourselves to specific geographical areas, very much in line with the thinking anticipated by Robert Ardrey*1 a few decades ago in his work ‘The Territorial Imperative’. The defence of territoriality has been a constant in the history of mankind, occurring on many different scales and, of course, also between various neighbouring countries that are currently engaged in disputes and confrontations.

Extrapolating it to our society, it can be interpreted as a tendency to protect ourselves, to find threats in the face of what we do not know and therefore to avoid them as a defensive measure, and this is done with the tools at our disposal, with violence and intimidation, in the same way that a dog barks with increasing intensity.

In this sense, in a more geopolitical context, nations have historically seen enemies where there are none, and have even been able to feed back their existence by creating the image of a threatening enemy over time, justifying their warlike actions.
This work is an attempt to ridicule our mental ghosts, which are, in most cases, our greatest enemy. It is a call for peace in all its senses, in all spaces.

*1 R. Ardrey defined Territory, in the ecological sense, as ‘the space, whether aquatic, terrestrial or aerial, which an animal or group of animals defends as its primitive reserve. And the internal compulsion of animate beings to possess and defend such space is called territorialism’.