ARCHIVED ARTICLES
DARIO ROBLETO
interviewd by Regine Basha

Detail image of:
A Color God Never Made
Cast and carved de-carbonized bone dust, bone calcium, military issued glass eyes for wounded soldiers coated with ground trinitite (glass produced during the first atomic test explosion, when heat from blast melted surrounding sand), fragments of a soldier’s personal mirror salvaged from a battlefield, soldier’s uniform material and thread from various wars, melted bullet lead and shrapnel from various wars, fragment of a soldier’s letter home, woven human hair of a war widow, bittersweet leaves, soldier made clay marbles, battlefield dirt, cast bronze teeth, dried rosebuds, porcupine quill, excavated dog tags, rust, velvet, walnut
HAIM STEINBACH
interviewed by Ginger Wolfe-Suarez

Detail view of the installation at Matrix UC Berkeley Museum. Display #63 - Influx, 2005
H 85” L 540” D 16”
15 metal shelving units; various objects; VHS tapes and skateboards/collectibles of Joseph Bay, Oakland CA

ANDREA BOWERS
interviewed by Cara Baldwin

Detail of Diabloblockade, Diablo Nuclear Power Plant, Abalone Alliance, 1981
2003
Graphite on paper

ALSO IN THIS ISSUE OF INTERREVIEW

Some Notes From 1973 by Charles Harrison

Artist Projects by: Andrea Bowers, Dario Robleto, Haim Steinbach
Writings by: Sarah Conaway, John Lowther

and many more writings about each featured artist; Andrea Bowers, Dario Robleto, Haim Steinbach.

 

Annette Lemieux
interviewed by Rosetta Brooks

RB: Your professional career has spanned twenty years now. And I’m happy to say I was the one to write the first feature article in Artforum about your work. So it seems like a good opportunity to look at your art to date: changes in content, genres, context and so on. Our world in 2004 is radically different from the world in 1984, both globally and in our daily lives. I wonder how that has affected not only the way you create your art but also how your art is received? What issues were you dealing with in your work at the beginning of your career, for example?

AL: In 1984 I was just trying to make work and I wasn’t trying to do anything else. The works were always based on ideas, and then I would produce the piece based on the idea.


Read more here:

Michael Asher
interviewed by Ginger Wolfe


Ginger Wolfe: In your years of art practice have you noticed over time an internal modification within institutions that have therefore changed the nature of your critical response?

Michael Asher: Museums are much more aware of my practice but this hasn’t altered my approach. Since the onset, my response to an institution in developing a work is quite direct, the way an institution presents itself is something I take as a preexisting way of working, and this is what I respond to. So your question is have they changed? Have they gotten used to this way of working? They still remain very diverse, in other words some invite me because they feel obliged for me to participate when they feel I obviously belong but then become reticent with my proposal. On the other hand there are others that have followed me for years and know my work very well and are very open to anything I propose even if they are critical of my proposal which did happen recently. Though, they disagree with it, they are still interested in doing a project along those lines even if it’s inimical to their interests.


Read more here:
Four emerging women speak out on Mary Kelly’s Circa 1968: Danielle Gustafson-Sundell, Cara Baldwin, Marisa J. Futernick, and Andrea Bowers.

Danielle Gustafson-Sundell on Circa 1968
Circa 1968 is more complex, reflective (of a here and now and then), reflexive (of a here and now and then), full of more potent signage and intentional nostalgia than the majority of work being made by a younger generation riffing on the same cultural history. This was especially apparent within the context of the 2004 Whitney Biennial.

Kelly’s use of layered structure, materials, and consideration of the viewer and viewer’s position within and to the work, feels fresh and challenging, working as rich pulls into a set of ideas. This differs greatly from my generations (born near 1968) fascination with the imagery of the same period but where, for the most part, the image is used as empty sign.

Read more here: