In her New Haven, Connecticut studio, artist Jessica Stockholder discusses the relationship between beauty, pleasure and taste, and how all three have a role in defining and being defined by politics — alongside documentation of an exhibition of her sculptures at Mitchell-Innes & Nash gallery in New York City.
A pioneer of multimedia genre-bending installations, Jessica Stockholder’s site-specific interventions and autonomous floor and wall pieces have been described as "paintings in space." Her work is energetic, cacophonous, and idiosyncratic, but closer observation reveals formal decisions about color and composition, and a tempering of chaos with control.
VIDEO | Producer: Wesley Miller & Nick Ravich. Interview: Susan Sollins. Camera: Mead Hunt & Joel Shapiro. Sound: Merce Williams. Editor: Jenny Chiurco. Artwork Courtesy: Jessica Stockholder. Special Thanks: Jay Gorney and Mitchell-Innes & Nash, New York.
I am involved in this process of making things because it matters. It matters to me a great deal and then think about why it matters and try to unravel and figure out.
Why it matters to me and then why it might matter to other people. I think the work is beautiful, but what's beautiful? You know, then I step back. What does that mean to think the work is beautiful?
I mean some people think my work is not beautiful.
I think beauty has to do with both biology; bees like flowers, I mean people like certain things but also history and culture and fashion.
I think pleasure is very political. Pleasure is part of what controls people. Advertising is directed at our pleasure.
And homophobia is about where people find pleasure and taste is tied to class
and hierarchy and social structure and has something to do with beauty too. Those words get mixed up, what’s tasteful and what's beautiful.
And it shifts, but for me it has something to do with struggle; I mean things that are beautiful are beautiful because they are difficult
and then structured somehow. It has something to do with stretching what’s easy, kind of expanding what I know; opening up a little more space in my own mind.
I mean the work is personal and I think everybody's work is personal. Anybody who does any kind of job, the work is personal in someway and every artist's work is personal,
but a work isn’t interesting to other people because of my personal life. It’s interesting to other people because something about my personal life and what I am making of it
matters to other people, cause people struggle with similar issues and so how you make sense of living,
how you make sense of emotional life, and how you make sense of struggle and pleasure. Those things have social implications and political implications,
but I am not working here trying to change the world. You know it’s not political in that sense and I am not illustrating you know political propaganda
or someone or an agenda. I kind of discover what the politics might be in the work through the process of being engaged in it.
Amazing -
Post new comment