OtherPeoplesPixels Interviews Art Vidrine

Sub ads (found intervention), 2015

Interdisciplinary artist ART VIDRINE is concerned with how we perceive the surrounding world and how our literal and metaphoric lenses affect the meanings we make. In photography, collage, sculpture and video, he modifies and destabilizes our existing cultural frameworks, calling into question individual agency through abstraction. Art earned his BA in Comparative Literature from the University of North Carolina (Chapel Hill) in 2002, and went on to earn his MFA in Fine Art from the School of Visual Arts (New York) in 2014. He was curated into Miami Projects in 2014. In 2015, his work has been included in Battle of the Masters at Open Gallery Space in New York and Plus One at Sideshow Gallery in Brooklyn, and in January 2016, will be included in Abstract Preferences at NIAD Art Center in Richmond, California. He is a participating panelist on an upcoming episode for TransBorder Art titled Discomfort, which will appear on public television (tentatively in December). Art is a contributing writer for ArtSlant and lives in Brooklyn.

!OtherPeoplesPixels: How did your undergraduate degree in Comparative Literature set the stage for your photography, sculpture and video work? !

Art Vidrine: Before the degree, there was a love of literature, which was rooted in early childhood, much earlier than any affinity for visual art. From adolescence, I was attracted to what creative intelligence has to offer in making sense of the world: empathy, reflection and imagination. I mention this because no matter how driven by abstract ideas my art may be at times or how rationally I discuss it afterwards, my work still draws heavily from those human qualities I find in literature. Comparative Literature allowed me to explore multiple languages (and consequently multiple perspectives) and lots of theory. Undoubtedly, my obsession with certain themes was formalized in college, especially with that hobbyhorse of reader-response theories: audience agency.

Just for You, 2014 Wood, resin, paint, hot glue, spray foam, detergent, hardware, carpet, headphones, sound, black lights, Arduino box - 48" x 48" x 48", carpet - 72" x 96"

OPP: Do you think there is a difference between textual thinking and visual thinking, from a process point of view?!

AV: Yes and no. At their best, both textual and visual thinking defy conventional thought and form. The origin of that creative impetus is the same (an attitude), and the process is similar (channel that attitude into a communicable form). That being said, there is definitely a difference between the two, which manifests itself most acutely when talking about work with other artists. Some can ascend the heavens with a brushstroke or click of the shutter, and yet their tongues can barely get them off the ground. Textual and visual thinking are somewhat different skill sets with different vocabularies and differing dependencies on concepts. Both can be strengthened, but only up to a certain point. After that, talent and desire take over. Parenthetically, I do think some artists read and relate to work differently than others. Some of my friends are painters for whom the brushiest brushstroke or the richest hue is like a conversation with God. They are transported in ways that I will never be in relationship to painting. They look for different things in those works than I do. Conversely, the cleverest conceptual project can send chills down my spine and leave them feeling cheated of a meaningful experience. If the difference is just a matter of picking up on nuances in the work (i.e. references, interesting decisions made when making the work, etc), then that is something that can be rectified over time with more exposure to art.

Durational, 2015

OPP: Could you talk about the categories— Agency, Perception, Abstraction and Surroundings—you use to organize the work on your website? AV: These days, the art world prefers artists to have a “thing” – an identifiable, readily digestible and marketable focus, a singular purpose that can fit nicely into an elevator pitch embodied in press releases and talking points with board members and collectors. There is certainly value in sustaining a tunnel vision commitment to one thing in depth, whether it be a process or topic. But my interests do not coalesce so easily. In fact, the topics themselves that interest me do not play well with reductive boundaries, opting instead for cross-pollination. Abstraction, perception, and agency are interdependent. I elaborated on this in my graduate thesis, which anyone can read from my CV & Writings section if they need something to help them fall asleep at night. Honestly, the categories on my website are really meant to make the constant themes that I return to more apparent for those who do not know me or my work. I see the thread, the relationships amongst the different media, forms, and subjects. That thread consists of three intertwined topics: Abstraction, Perception, and Agency. Work in one category could also exist comfortably in another. The choice of which work belonged where had a lot to do with what I saw as the predominate concern of each work. Surroundings exists as a category for sharing my love for landscape and cityscape photography, which often have a hard time fitting into one of the other three categories. One’s environment unequivocally shapes how he or she experiences the three topics mentioned above. Sometimes, it’s hard to classify how.

OPP: What role do lenses, filters and screens play in your practice, literally and/or figuratively?!

AV: The lens (mental and physical) with which we view the world is directly related to the three main themes my work addresses. I do not set out to emphasize lenses, filters, and screens as a material. That happens naturally as a result of my chosen themes. They are merely the metaphorical conduit for a reflection on perception, and consequently perception’s influence on agency.

Intermediate, 2015

OPP: What was your process for creating Performative Utterances: A Symphony (2015), in which you translate political rhetoric into music? Why did you choose the particular speech that you chose? !

AV: I transformed Netanyahu’s voice into MIDI notes, multiplied those notes into different layers, and then assigned each layer a software instrument. I tweaked some notes—shifting octaves, changing a couple to a different note and extending the duration for some—but mostly kept them untouched. I adjusted the parameters for the instruments to achieve the sounds I wanted and gradually added in or removed instruments as the performance progresses. Who knew Netanyahu was so musically talented? I chose this speech because of the theatrical nature of the spectacle. This is not to say that Netanyahu’s speech was not good or relevant. He has some legitimate concerns. It’s just that the whole event felt like a night at the symphony or a rock concert, with adulating fans roaring, sea

swells of standing ovations, a maestro’s swagger. There is even the analogous handshake with the first chair, the singer’s wipe of the mouth between songs. It made me wonder how much of the speech’s political content could be conveyed even without words, which then made me think about the long history of the relationship between music (the most abstract art form) and politics. This was as much about abstracting political content from speech to sound as it was about discovering a new way to build a symphony. I’m sure classically trained musicians will disagree with the distinction of this work as “a symphony,” “classical,” or even “music.” But I think it functions quite well as a kind of avant-garde symphony. Netanyahu was trumpeting an aggressive, antagonistic position, so I gave him (literally) the brass his speech (figuratively) conveyed.

Performative Utterances: A Symphony 2015

OPP: In your artist statement you say, "The cultural framework we inherit prescribes meaning and intelligibility to things." Then you ask, "But how does our relationship to the world alter as our conceptual frameworks are challenged? As our lives are increasingly mediated through technology, simulacra, and mass media, how does our physical, experiential grounding within the world evolve?" These seem to be the long-term questions of your practice. I'm wondering if you have any answers, or at least theories, yet?

AV: Hmmm. . . If I did, I don’t think I would need to make art anymore.

Featured Artist Interviews are conducted by Chicago-based, interdisciplinary artist Stacia Yeapanis. When she’s not writing for OPP, Stacia explores the relationship between repetition, desire and impermanence in cross-stitch embroideries, remix video, collage and impermanent installations. She is an instructor in the Department of Fiber and Material Studies at The School of the Art Institute of Chicago, where received her MFA in 2006, and was a 2012-2013 Mentor-in-Residence at BOLT in Chicago. Her solo exhibitions include I Still Haven’t Found What I’m Looking For (2013) at Klemm Gallery, Siena Heights University (Adrian, Michigan), Everything You Need is Already Here (2014) at Heaven Gallery (Chicago) and When Things Fall Apart, a durational, collage installation in the Annex Gallery at Lillstreet Art Center (Chicago). Form Unbound, a two-person show, also featuring the work of Aimée Beaubien,just opened at Dominican University's O’Connor Art Gallery (River Forest, IL) and runs through December 19, 2015.

Interview with Art Vidrine & Hakan Topal MFA Graduate Seminars IV, Spring 2014 Art: How do you balance the different expectations of academia and the art world in your artistic work? Research, knowledge production, and dissemination in academia value objective, rational analysis that can be verified, built upon, or contradicted in further academic studies. Art often pursues ambiguity, complexity, and room for subjective responses that may not hold up to scientific scrutiny. How do you approach the two sides in your work? Hakan: I see my academic studies as an extension to my art practice. I can say that I am interested in in-situ knowledge production and my work is usually based on some sort of a social research. While I would certainly not consider my scholarly work as my art, over time, they became increasingly interconnected. For instance reading, writing, teaching, discussing provides me a space where I can develop new ideas and concepts, in return I apply them to my artistic research. I agree with you that artistic work is “ambiguous and complex” which constantly calls for new interpretations. But how is that different from so-called “social-scientific” work? I ask this question often. I identify that social scientists, especially ethnographers and anthropologists are using methods that may be considered as “artistic”. They use creative writing, video and photography to express their ideas. They even present their work in various exhibitions. At the same time, I see that artists are increasingly using social-scientific tools to explore new areas of inquiry. This form of interdisciplinarity is certainly a good thing. I am more inclined to works that cross old disciplinary boundaries of design, architecture, art, social sciences or technology. In that regard—although they are hierarchical–I believe that academic institutions provides the certain cross-boundary freedom, at least for artists. That is perhaps why I wanted to stay within the academia. Art: How do you see your work evolving over the next few years now that you have completed your PhD? In what ways has working on your dissertation influenced the form and content of your artistic work? Hakan: Ph.D. was a necessary evil for me. As I mentioned, I wanted to work within an academic institution. For that reason, I had to dedicate a period of time in my life for the doctoral education. I forced myself to sit down, read and write. I haven’t met anybody who did not go through this torturous period without a self-doubt. “Why am I doing this PhD.? In certain aspects, it is total misery!” Like climbing a mountain, or doing a marathon. Once you are done, you feel great! Of course, when you spent so much time on a particular topic, you become obsessed with it. I was fortunate that I wrote my dissertation on something that was already interesting for my art practice. I looked at the Prospect New Orleans biennial, its relationship to the city of New Orleans and the art projects which were realized all over the city. Of course thinking about the biennial as a temporary institution, and possibility of alternative institutional models provided me a lot of good ideas. When it comes to content of my work, I am not sure yet. I think it certainly influenced the way that I think about socially engaged art practices. When I write proposals, New Orleans is always back of my head, calling for comparison. Recently there has been number of discussions about the long term viability of MFA programs (please see: http://www.vulture.com/2013/12/saltz-on-the-trouble-with-the-mfa.html and http://www.blouinartinfo.com/print/node/989814 http://www.salon.com/2013/09/12/wall_street_needs_an_mfa/ ). On the one hand artists are sought after

by the contemporary global economy [Wall street needs MFAs] as flexible hybrid-creative producers, on the other hand they represent the most vulnerable groups in the job market. As a new MFA graduate, can you please reflect on your experience and your expectations? Art: Firstly, thank you for sending the links. While I had read the first two before, the third was a nice surprise. In fact, the last article speaks less to the desire of businesses to poach creative thinkers than it does to the ability of artists to create empathetic audiences with a moral backbone. Art’s political efficacy in the world is something I think about a lot. It is a bit utopian to believe that art can change the world. I do not think it can do so on a large scale, like massive protests can. But I do think it can change the individual by allowing that person to experience and encounter the Other, the overlooked, the marginalized, the things that escape reductive and instrumental thinking. Art embodies values, and consequently can be used to influence its audiences in ways that are beneficial to the world community, as the last article you provided suggests. It can inspire alternative ways of thinking and acting; it can make us empathetic to difference. This is why I use art as a way of trying to understand and engage with the world. The first two articles on MFA programs did not tell me anything that I did not already know or think about before deciding to attend SVA. The amount of debt incurred going to graduate schools today is insane! On one hand, it’s highway robbery as Saltz indicates; on the other, it’s invaluable. My time at SVA has significantly influenced the way I think about my practice and art in general. My teachers and classmates have pushed me towards different ways of thinking and creating, towards a clearer understanding of what I desire in art and how I see it interacting with the world. I did not go to SVA with the expectations of landing a gallery right out of school or immediately finding a tenured teaching job or any other quantifiable measure of my degree leading directly into employment in the field like a technical degree. I saw my decision as an investment in myself: in challenging and developing the way I think, create, engage with social issues, etc. I think of the benefits of my graduate education as having long term returns (to use a financial concept)- something that will have continuous influence on my creative practice for many, many years to come. My expectations coming out of school are to find full-time employment related to either the arts or education (what I see as the two most important factors in positively influencing society), while developing my art and writing on the side. Hakan: This is very speculative question but if you were running a radical art-educational institution, how would you re-imagine the idea of education? Art: I like this question. I won’t speculate on how I would work out the running of the institution fiscally, because that would be an entire conversation in itself and require a lot of brainpower and wishful thinking. From the educational perspective, I think I would propose the following as a basic structure: - assign a faculty mentor to each student for his or her duration in the program; someone who can challenge the student and monitor his or her progression - connect each student with local artists and arts organizations for optional paid summer internships between the first and second years of the program (working as an assistant, but not focused on administrative duties like paper pushing and data entry) - have more critical theorists, scholars on staff to head a variety of seminars that students can choose from (but that are kind of like creative and critical think tanks for tackling a variety of global issues with one’s practice) - have a structured introduction to alternative ways of showing work, alternative art practices, ways of sustaining a practice with few resources - create an optional social practice project each semester for students to work on collaboratively - create an optional art writing and media class, focused on writing art criticism, reviews, engaging in theoretical debates in a variety of publications, learning to incorporate social media into one’s engagement with the art world that is more meaningful than simple networking - have an e-zine for the program, for students to post thoughtful reflections and debates on a variety of topics

- have free access for students to all museums in NYC (if possible) - have a centralized source (like NYFA) for all “relevant” grant, exhibition, and residency opportunities, arranged by deadline (relevant is relative, but NYFA often has way too many postings to sift through to find applicable ones) - have greater visibility for the students; outreach to a variety of art organizations, writers, curators, schools, etc to see graduating student work - have mini-, one day workshops on art grant writing, documenting work, maintaining a web presence (website, blogging, contributing to art e-zines), etc. - have faculty that really like pushing students just outside of their comfort zone and that are really critical and challenging to the student’s practice in hopes of inspiring an elevated self-criticality with his or her work - otherwise, I would keep some of the things that are wonderful about my program (diversity of faculty perspectives, large faculty to choose with whom to study, weekly workshops with faculty, lots of visiting guests for studio visits, lots of lectures by artists and scholars, interdisciplinary focus of students, etc) This may not seem radical, but it is how I would change SVA. Hakan: I really enjoyed your systematic answer. Perhaps this is a good segue to your own art practice. In what ways has a master education changed your views and practice as an artist? What are the aspects that you value the most in MFA art education? Art: To start, I am much more aware of how my body influences my decisions in the work I make. Before coming to SVA, I was making a lot of work that appealed to the mind more than the body. As I’ve had time, with the help of teachers and classmates, to identify the characteristics that I love most in my work and that of others, I realize how much I desire my senses to be involved in the experience of the work. Also, Grad School has given me the opportunity to experience a lot of different working methods and ways of thinking about art and the world, about ways of effectively engaging with an audience, and ways of being political without having to be direct in my work. The aspect that I value most in my MFA education is unquestionably the conversations that I had with classmates and teachers, especially when talking about someone else’s work. So much can be gained from just paying close attention to another artist’s work and hearing how differently the work appeals (or doesn’t) to each viewer. The second aspect that I value most in my graduate education is the amount of time I was able to devote to my practice- to researching, making, thinking, critiquing, etc. I’m not sure when again I will have this amount of focused time to spend on my art practice, undistracted by a full time job, family, and other obligations.

DIY (2013): 72” x 48” x 84”, found wood and chair, fluorescent lights, rope light, electrical hardware, zip ties, foil, and two monitors (for videos shown with sculpture)

Hakan: Your recent work includes variety of somewhat inexpensive materials such as chicken wire, cotton, chains, beer bottles, PVC, rope, foam, resin, paint, black lights, plastic, wood, styrofoam, garbage bags which can all be purchased from the closest hardware or convenience store. This makes me think that your intentional choices can be interpreted as a particular commentary. Can you talk about your sculptures, your artistic process in relationship to the materiality? Art: I’m really glad you ask this question, because I think it is something that gets overlooked in my work. I intentionally choose such DIY materials because I believe the best art not only provides unexpected encounters and experiences, but that it inspires others to imagine alternative ways of responding and relating to things in their own lives. To manipulate basic materials- that everyone has access to and that do not need specialized equipment or talent to turn into art- allows the viewer to see that he or she can creatively engage with his or her world too; that, all one really needs is a commitment to explore different ways of thinking and relating to everyday things. The work in which I built a seven foot satellite out of found objects and fluorescent lights and took out onto the streets at night in Manhattan, I named DIY, not only because I used DIY materials to build the sculpture, but because I was championing a kind of DIY protest- individual, poetic, quirky; of responding to issues in a public, but personal way. You can also read into it an intentional aesthetics of imperfection and an ethics of re-cycle and re-use, but these are secondary to wanting to draw people’s attention to the loaded potential of everyday objects and the democracy of responding and relating to things in one’s life in insightful, creative ways. Hakan: Do you have any ‘artistic’ procedures when you are selecting these “everyday” objects? Secondly, I assume that these objects are already charged with a lot of meanings, how do you deal with these pre-assigned significations? Art: I don’t use a specific procedure because that would limit my receptivity to the potential of the materials I encounter. However, I am attracted to certain types of materials: construction or extremely tactile materials like resin when I buy them new, or ones that are weathered, noticeably used, and unwanted when I pull them from the street. I don’t shy away from materials that are already charged with a lot of meanings. In fact, it is when they are charged with a specific meaning that I find a welcome challenge in creating an unexpected meaning or association. More often than not, however, I use something that is not usually charged and find a way to make it so. Your work addresses political issues, especially in ways that affect the individuals involved in the political conflict. What do you think is the threshold of addressing political issues indirectly before the work no longer communicates its political engagement? That is, how abstract and indirect can you be with the political content and form of your work before you feel that the work loses its political punch and becomes something bordering abstract formalism? Hakan: I see my work coming from conceptualist/minimalist tradition. Yet, I am deeply influenced by the research-based documentary practices as well. Yes, I do make a social, political and cultural commentary. Yet, I don’t want to see my art as activism. I would rather explore poetic possibilities, whatever they may be. I think art is about systematic research and production of expressive possibilities. Certainly I am interested in the spatial dimension where the artwork is presented, but also general context around it, the neighborhood, the city, the country etc. Like many artists, I’d rather not distinguish the form and the content of the work. Perhaps that is ‘traditionalist’ in me, I still believe that artist have the responsibility to the materials that they are using. They have to show some sort of a respect to the stone, paint, video or photography, or whatever the medium is. First and foremost, artistic work fulfills the space of art, which is a political space, yet it is not the space of [professional] politics. I make a clear distinction between the being political and being engaged with

politics. I see artistic activity and political activism, connected but different forms of activities. I am more interested in “being political”, understanding the possibilities of artistic space. Art: What do you think is the political efficacy of art? How is it most effective and ineffective in its engagement with political conflicts? Hakan: This is a very tough question. I am not sure I have a simple answer for it. All I know is that we need to be honest with our work. The political engagement in art has to be generated somewhere that is very close to us. I am not interested in being the “voice of the others” I am interested in being close to “others”. I respect and love the art that takes you so close to the subject matter, always operate in the boundaries, but never transgress the space to be the actor of the subject. I think artists have some sort of duty in society. It is both an intellectual duty and a shamanic one. We need to heal the society, even if we take it to the verge of collapse. Art is not about moral values, but it is about establishing an ethical relationship with the work. I see that the political nature of art is generated from this ethical dimension. Art: You say, “Artistic work fulfills the space of art first.” This is something that I agree with, but the space of art is constantly questioned in work that seeks to merge art and life, making the art indistinguishable from everyday life actions and objects. What do you think are the strengths and pitfalls of such work? Hakan: I feel that “merging art and life” is a very dated concept and overused. I make a clear distinction between the idea of creativity and art. I think that everybody is creative; people use their creativity in various everyday activities to solve problems, to express themselves. In that regard creativity is life. I am happy with the idea that art has—finally—divorced itself from the burden of creativity. Artistic space is a space for systematic knowledge production. I do not think that we can simply fill that with creative actions. Advertisement, design, engineering corrupt art. I think we have to resist the temptation merging/mixing all together. We need to claim this fragile space called art. I do not want to call it “autonomous” but the space has to be dedicated for art so that meaningful conversations can be formed around it. Art: What are you looking forward to exploring in your work over the next few years? Hakan: I have been working as a collective for a long time. Since 2012, I am continuing “solo”, so this is in a way a transition period for me. These days I am more interested in sculptural aspect of things: material, space and installation. I see myself making things more, getting away from the discursive aspect a bit, but not completely… What about you? Art: In the last year or so my work has increasingly focused on sensory perception in response to something psychologically or politically charged. I’m really looking forward to exploring the gap between the sensory information we receive and our attempts to make rational sense of it, specifically where these reductive mental efforts reveal a culturally inherited bias…and consequently a limitation. If you could pass on a word of advice to younger artists, what would it be?

Hakan: This is a good one. I think any teacher/professor would have a lot of advice for younger artists. This is our job in some ways... I would think that most advice would be wrong. I would say simply follow your passion, be bold. If you believe what you do and why you do it, if you respect your own work, people will do the same. Then there is a possibility of a real dialogue around your work, which should be the ultimate goal for an artist… I would say that never ever produce anything simply for money. Money and power corrupts. We need to be very careful handling it. Focus on your own work but be active. Organize, discuss and share what you have. As we share, we grow stronger.

Point of View (2014): monitors – 13” x 22”, filters on screens – 11” x 20”, two monitors, filters, videos, wood, paper glasses with filters for lenses