| 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:
|
| |