Anthony Koutras' "Pylon", 2010, Courtesy: Stephen Bulger Gallery

Q.: What is wrong with a “passive encounter with the everyday”?  After all, can we not assume that sometimes a garbage can is just a garbage can?
A.: I don’t feel that there’s anything necessarily wrong with a passive encounter with the everyday.  I find that people become familiar with things and that creates our personal definition of everyday objects.  That’s why travel to other cities and countries are of interest to a lot of people.  Traveling to other places exposes you to an unfamiliarity of the everyday.  Your usual recognition is thrown for a loop.  It’s this recognition that’s interesting to me, and what I’m exploring through this new work.
As an artist I try to look past the recognition that creates our perception of the everyday.  I find myself really looking at my surroundings and curating my own surrounding elements.  As I walk through the public space I constantly find fleeting compositions and objects that are visually interesting to me.  In choosing a garbage can to photograph it has to hold certain characteristics that are personally interesting.

Q.: Does an object have to be disconnected from its original context in order to be viewed differently?
A.: No, I suppose objects can be viewed differently without their being disconnected from the original context.  I suppose it would require the viewer to take it upon him or herself to consciously think about viewing it differently, while the original form, location and function of the object remains in front of them as they do so.

Anthony Koutras' "Cardboard Box", 2010, Courtesy: Stephen Bulger Gallery

Q.: Removed from its context, can’t the meaning of anything be altered?  Why not simply take the pylon and place it in an art gallery?  Why use photography?
A.: It’s true, and Duchamp addressed this issue with his readymades.  I think I continue to use photography because I’m drawn to photography’s inherent ability as a medium to record exact depictions of what the lens of the camera captures.  I’ve found through working with photography over the years, I began to look at the medium itself and the qualities it holds.  Essentially it’s an encapsulation of space, scaled and flattened into a two-dimensional depiction. The question I ask myself is, “what can I do with those qualities?” Through that investigation, over the last 8 years I developed an interest in creating art with an association to the public space. My work expanded into a somewhat interdisciplinary practice, incorporating aspects of photography, sculpture and installation, and was predominantly sourced from the public arena.
In my current series Explication, I take the approach of using photography to speak to the medium of photography itself.  I’m assigning the work the task of opening a dialogue about the mediation of the photographic image.  I incorporate elements of my practice from the public through the use of streetscape objects as a vehicle to speak to this topic.

Q.: What attracts you to certain objects?  For example, why this garbage can instead of that fence?
A.: I found that in this current body of work, the original streetscape object tended to be freestanding and somewhat close to a human scale, mainly because the objects were designed to be functional.  I began to see a physical correlation between the objects and us, each object holding it’s own unique individual character traits much like a personality.  The Hot Dog Garbage was one example of an object that I felt was funny, unique, and somewhat reflected our society through remnants and traces left on the object.

Q.: There is a sculptural element in the way the objects are presented.  All of a sudden, the everyday becomes akin to installation and sculpture and, as such, becomes “art”.  Does this not risk that the object, viewed as art, will lose all of its “reference of origin”?  In other words, garbage can as commodity (it could be argued this is what it becomes the moment it enters the gallery) is no longer a garbage can.  It is art.  Therefore all reference to its history is moot.
A.: Oh, for sure there’s a sculptural element. The large-scale photographs are actually photographs of an 8-inch tall folded photographic composite I made.  The print is refolded, curled and glued back into a sculptural depiction of the object.  The original objects on the street are directed through a series of forward moving embodiments, away from the actual source object.  It’s completely true; the work is an art object that’s shown in a gallery.  It’s absolutely severed from the source. It’s a hollow representation of the perceived object, an example of an object stripped of the original function.  The photographs in the gallery have lost the direct reference of the origin and I would like the loss of origin and the pure recognition of that object to create a playful duality and tension in the photographs presented.
I don’t actually feel that the process I put the objects through renders the history of the object moot.  The history is still there and we tend to want to know where it was located and possibly a story as to how I came upon it.  It simply comes down to it becoming a more complicated history than first assumed.  I’m interested in the history seen through the veil of multiple translations of visual information.

Anthony Koutras' "Hot Dog Garbage", 2010, Courtesy: Stephen Bulger Gallery

Q.: How do you, as an artist, maintain the object’s “history”?  What role, if any, does the “history” of the object play?
A.: To me the history is important, but specifically in relationship to the history of the photograph used as an archive tool. The selection of the object within the photographic frame is inherently tied to a preservation and archive of something: a moment in time or an object in danger of disappearing. I feel images have been adopted to act as a surrogate for memory and retain details that would otherwise be forgotten or altered. By way of photography, we attempt to hold on to the passing moments. By photographing these commonplace objects—a memorializing action—I give them importance. The geometric form of each object becomes a sponge, taking in a multitude of written communication, weather, damage and decay: each object indexing time.

Q.: How would you describe Canadian Contemporary art?
A.: I think Canadian Contemporary art is full of amazing artists and Canadian work is being shown in more places than ever before.  I feel Canadian Contemporary art is where it is today because of the talent and creativity of so many, combined with the development of support systems to foster individual artists and collectives. Those who worked so hard early on to establish artist run centres, commercial galleries, publication opportunities, and grant systems are all owed a huge thank you.  They helped create a setting to ensure Canadian Contemporary art keeps moving forward in a the positive way it has been in recent years.

Internationally recognized Swiss artist Marck took time from his busy schedule to answer some questions.  He answered first in German, then in English (I edited some of the English).

Marck at work in his studio

Q: What is it about video art that attracts you to it?

A: Da mich das Medium Film und somit die Möglichkeit der nichtstatischen Erzählung und die Formgebung bei Objekten und Skulpturen, ja Design überhaupt schon immer faszinierten, war es für mich nur logisch diese zwei Gebiete zusammen zuführen. Mit dem Video ist es mir möglich der Skulptur ihre Statik zu entziehen. Umgekehrt kann ich mit der Skulptur dem Video reale Grenzen setzen.

Film offers the possibility of non-static narrative while the shape of objects and sculptures offers a design that has always fascinated me.  It was only logical for me to combine these two mediums. With video, it is possible to take away the static from sculpture. Conversely, I can set real limits with the sculpture to the video .

—

Marck's "sichel", 2009

Q: Do you see video art as a growing medium in the art world?

A: Nein, ich denke in der kunst bleibt es ein Nischenprodukt,im kommerziellen bereich hingegen werden wir uns in der zukunft nicht mehr retten können davor, überall werden interaktive Bildschirme herumhängen und uns mit inhaltsloser Information berieseln, um uns irgendwelche Produkte oder Meinungen anzudrehen.

No, I think in art, it remains a niche product. On the other hand, the commercial sector will probably see an increase in the use of hanging interactive screens which sprinkle us with meaningless information or to sell us products or opinions.

Q: Do you see it as growing potentially tiresome to the viewer?  For example, how many times can we see what in the end becomes a predictable and repetitive action?  Also, is there a point to the repetitive action?  Is it a commentary on all our actions which, in a way, are predictable and repetitive?

A: Der Inhalt muss zwingend einen Spielraum für die eigene Interpretation haben.Das Video darf keine Geschichte erzählen, sondern muss beim Betrachter ein Gefühl auslösen, sonst wird es wirklich langweilig. Einen Spielfilm schaut mann ja auch nicht 100 mal hintereinander an. Ein Bild aber schon. Weil es die eigene Geschichte erzählt und auch immer wieder eine andere, je nach dem emotionellen Befinden und der Situation des Betrachters.

It is necessary that the content provide room for individual interpretation. The video should not tell a story but trigger an emotion by the viewers.  Otherwise it will be really boring. It is not like looking at a movie 100 times in a row. It tells its own story.  Moreover, the story it narrates continually changes depending on the viewer’s emotional condition and situation.

Q: There is an aprox. fifteen year life span to the video after which the screen will need to be partially repaired.  Whether it gets repaired or not is, ultimately, up to the purchaser.  This raises an interesting “power-exchange” between the artist (creator) and the collector (who also becomes a creator by being given the choice of continuing its life).  What are your views on this?

A: Nichts ist, das ewig sei – alles ist eine Auseinandersetzung mit der Vergänglichkeit. Gerade die Kunst ist nicht ausgenommen, sogar wenn sie viel kostet. Die elektronische Kunst ganz im Speziellem; sie ist tatsächlich schneller vergänglich als andere Kunst, darum aber sogar wertvoller, weil der Besitzer irgendwann mal, wenn ein technisches Problem auftritt mitentscheiden muss was jetzt getan werden kann, um das kunstwerk zu erhalten. Wenn es z.B. keine Orginalteile mehr gibt und es muss ein moderneres technisches Teil eingebaut werden. Ist es dann noch ein Orginal vom Künstler?
Ich denke diese und andere Entscheidungen müssen dann vom Besitzer gefällt werden und spätestens zu dieser zeit ist wieder eine Auseinandersetzung mit dem Kunstwerk und auch mit der eigenen Vergänglichkeit nötig.

Nothing is to be eternally- Everything is a confrontation with the transience.  Art, especially electronic art, is no exception, even if it costs a lot. The fact that electronic art is more transient than other art is what gives it value. If a technical problem occurs, the owner needs to decide what to do with the videoartwork .  When it is not possible to fix the work with original spare, is it still considered an original work from the artist ? I think this poses some very interesting questions about the artwork and the question of transience.

Marck's "frauenkiste", 2008

Q: We are traditionally accustomed to thinking that art will last forever (or at least outlast us) and yet the idea of a fifteen year lifespan raises the question of the “impermanence” of a work of art.  Is this an inevitable sign or our insecure times?

A: Die 15 jahre Lebensdauer ist eine Schätzung. Es kann durchaus länger dauern bis ein defekt zutage tritt. Nur, ich finde tatsächlich diese “vergänglichkeit” passt in unsere Zeit, früher haben die menschen Bücher geschrieben von hand die noch heute lesbar sind, Häuser gebaut die noch immer stehen,Kunstwerke gemalen die jahrhunderte später  immer noch  zum bestaunen sind, dazumal wurde für die “unsterblichkeit” produziert, heute ist alles vergänglicher geworden, ein Haus wird keine 40 jahre alt und es wird abgebrochen weil es etwas neues weichen muss, Bücher werden digitalisiert oder nur digital herausgegeben um dann bei einem technischen defekt auf nimmerwiedersehen ins digitale nirvana zu entschwinden.und alle privaten digitalen bilder archive  werden von ihren enkeln sehr warscheindlich nie angeschaut werden können, weil es keine technisch funktionierende player mehr gibt. Also passt diese vergänglichkeit gut in unsere schnellebige zeit wo immer kurzfristiger, und weniger nachhaltig gehandelt wird. positiv gesehen sind elektronische Kunstwerke viel sensibler,das gefällt mir. Jeder Tag, an dem die Vidoeskulptur den inhalt wiedergeben kann, ist eine freude zu leben. (Es lebt noch…) Im Gegensatz zu nicht elektronischer Kunst, die doch wie verteinert für die nächsten jahrzehnten einfach da steht oder hängt und keine “Es funktioniert noch”Emotionen auslöst. Es ist wie das eigene Leben, immer wieder eine Freude, dass man den Tag überlebt hat.

The 15 years lifetime for an object is an estimate. It may well take longer until a broken light occurs.  If anything, I actually think this “impermanence” fits our way of life and our time. Sometime ago humans wrote books from hand and you can still read them today. They built houses which continue to exist, they painted pictures – some which date hundreds of years back – and you can still view them today in a museum. At that time people produced for “immortality”. Today everything is getting transient. A new house might or might not last for 40 years and it doesn’t matter because something new will replace it. Books are digitized or only published digitally, but what happens when a technical problem occurs and they disappear in the digital nirwana. Our grandchildren will probably never see our digital pictures because they will not have the right player. Sustainability is not our Zeitgeist.

On the positive side, electronic art is much more sensitive, I like that. Each day on which the Vidoeskulptur reflect the content can be a joy to live.(It’s still alive…!) In contrast to non-electronic art,
which stands or hangs petrified for the next few decades and no “It still works,” emotions are triggerd.  It’s like your own life, always a pleasure that you have survived the day.

Q: You mention that your video art is not about women’s issues, but more a commentary on society.  What kind of commentary?

A: Grenzen sind allgegenwärtig, doch innerhalb dieser manchmal sehr engen, manchmal weiten Grenzen kann/darf sich das Individuum „frei“ bewegen. Einschränkungen sind aber auch oftmals selbst gemacht. Durch Selbsteinschränkungen sperrt man oftmals auch die Anderen ein. Aus Angst etwas nicht zu tun, erwartet oder fordert man vom Gegenüber dies oder jenes auch nicht zu tun. Es besteht die Gefahr, auch das Gegenüber einzusperren, zu beschränken und kontrollieren zu wollen. Ein gutes Beispiel dafür ist die Religion.

Borders are everywhere, but within these sometimes very narrow, sometimes wide limits the individual himself is allowed to “move freely”  Restrictions are also often made by ourselves. Through self-restraint someone often imprisons the others. We become afraid to break out of our restrictions and we come to expect restrictions. There is a danger when we want to oppose restriction, confinement, and control.  A good example is religion.

Marck's "Tuerkisches bad", 2008

Q: Why not use men to make a commentary?  Or children?  How would the commentary change by changing the gender or age of the subject?

A: Die Männer reagieren anders als die Frauen auf meine Videoskulpturen. Die Männer sehen die Enge der Frau im Video weniger. Sie sind es ja, die mehrheitlich die Frauen im realen Leben in diese Rolle drängen. Männer haben sogar die Tendenz die Viedeoskulpturen erotisch zu interpretieren. Frauen hingegen sehen in den Skulpturen ihre Rolle in der Gesellschaft wiederspiegelt. Als Mann kann ich besser das andere Geschlecht beobachten und sehen wie es sich in der Gesellschaft bewegt.

Ich finde das Männerthema sollte von einer Frau angegangen werden. Da man in der eigenen Rolle gefangen ist, wird eine künstlerische, objektive Umsetzung schwierig oder plakativ. Leider sind viele Künstlerinnen mit Frauenthemen oder Kinderthemen beschäftigt. EIne intensive künstlerische Auseinandersetzung mit dem Mann sind selten.

Meine Themen sind eindeutig Erwachsenen bezogen. Sie handeln von Gefühlen von Menschen, welche schon von den Zwängen der Gesellschaft geprägt worden sind. Es werden Situationen dargestellt, aus denen Erwachsene auszubrechen wünschen. Diese Themen mit Kindern umzusetzen wäre sonderbar und würden falsch interpretiert werden. Videokunst mit Kindern müsste von Ängsten und Gefühlen aus Kindersicht handeln. Ich würde mich klarer ausdrucken wollen. Interpretationen fände ich sehr gefährlich. Es wäre eigentlich genau das Gegenteil von meiner momentanen Kunst, in der ich dem Betrachter gerne grossen Interpretationsraum lasse. Kinder in der Kunst find ich sehr schwierig. Meiner Meinung nach hat man eine Verantwortung bezüglich der Interpretation.

The men respond differently than the women on my video sculptures.The men see less the narrowness of the woman in the video. They are the ones who push the majority of women in real life in this role.
The men have a tendency to interpret my Viedeosculptures erotically. On the other hand, women see in the sculpture their role as it is reflected in society. As a man, I can better observe the opposite sex and see how it moves in society. I think the “Man Theme” should be addressed by a woman. Since we are caught in one’s own role as an artist, objective implementation is difficult without becoming trivial. Unfortunately, many female artists are engaged with women’s issues or children’s issues.  An intensive artistic confrontation with “Man Themes” are rare.

My works clearly relate to adults. They deal with human emotions which were shaped by the constraints of society. My art deals with showing situations from which adults want to break out of. These issues implemented with children would be strange and they would be misinterpreted. Video art with children would have to deal with fears and feelings from a child’s perspective.  I do not have this perspective which could result in a misled interpretation which could prove dangerous. It would be exactly the opposite of my current art,in which normally, I allow viewers to reach their own interpretation.  Children in art I find very difficult. I believe that one has a responsibility regarding the interpretation.

Marck's "Maria", 2009

Q: Video art presents to the viewer a short clip, almost like a trailer to a movie.  Is there a story beyond what we see?

A: Ja das stimmt. Meine Videosculpturen sind wie ein Clip für den persönlichen Film im Kopf. Die Geschichte wird in den Köpfen der Betrachter individuell vollendet.

Yes that’s true. My Videosculpturen as a clip for personal movie in the head. The story is individually finished in the minds of the viewers.

Q: What’s next for Marck?

A: In den letzten Monaten bin ich viel herumgreist. Es gab diverse Ausstellungen im Ausland. Ich habe viele Ideen und Eindrücke gesammelt Nun versuche ich diese technisch und gestallterisch umzusetzen. Darauf freue ich mich sehr. Auch werde ich versuchen mein Englisch zu verbessern…:;-)

In recent months I have traveled a lot. There were several exhibitions abroad. I have collected many ideas and impressions. Now I’m trying to implement this technically and artistically. Thereon I am pleased. I will also try to improve my English….;

Part of Joseph Tisiga's "Indian Brand Corporation", 2009

Q: Why is there always this underlying implication (or maybe not so underlying) that Canadian art is different/distinct from First Nations art?  For example, we never say Quebec art or Ontario art, but we do say First Nations art.

A: There are probably a lot of reasons for the distinction, so I’ll stick to what initially comes to mind.

First, I think that everyone is still trying to figure out how to understand and appreciate First Nations art. Both First Nations people and “non”  First Nations alike. It seems to me that we are still making the transition from a tradition of art making seen as “craft/curios/artifact” into a “modern” form of creation that everyone can feel comfortable just calling “art”.

Another distinction might arise for the same reasons we specify culture, race, nationality, school of thought, medium…etc, when we talk about any artist. I think it’s our impulse to classify, and within that notion of classification we have people who are identified (or self identify) as First Nation and are inspired by the stories, symbolism, history…etc, that they as artists relate to as being “First Nation”. I think having this context is important, but for some First Nation artists I know it can be frustrating because at times you can’t escape the labeling and association to history and the current condition many First Nations live in. These influences inevitably create a distinction within First Nation art, for better or worse, but I think that increasingly artists feel less restricted by this and are allowing these influences to exist as a piece among the many pieces that compose an identity.

One consideration however, when discussing the context of First Nation art, is that there’s a lot of diversity within what is considered “First Nation”. It’s like saying anything made by “white” or Occidental hands is European art, regardless of medium, process, inspiration or intent.

Joseph Tisiga's and Kyle Caslen's installation for Red Wagon Union Art Collective's "Dark Days" exhibition

Q: There are several pop art references in your art – on the one hand they offer a contemporary commentary on Western iconography juxtaposed against First Nations references and yet, on the other hand, the out of sync juxtaposition of the two is reminiscent of the historic “white man’s” invasive introduction of measles, booze, and Christianity to the First Nations – do you see a forseeable point where the two (First Nations and Western) can meet harmoniously?

A: I think that harmony is circumstantial and ultimately a personal sentiment. It is impossible for me to ignore the necessity of First Nation and Occidental influences coexisting in whatever I make, and although I experience moments of peace and resentment with the marriage of these realities, it is a circumstance that I have grown to understand more and more. It’s like trying to find beauty within brutality, a basic human conundrum that everyone will approach differently. I find that kind of harmony in so many artists, like Brian Jungen, Kent Monkman, Sonny Assu, Annie Pootoogook, Jim Logan, Lawrence Paul Yuxweluptun and many others. Then there are non First Nation Artists who’s work I feel is inspired by elements of the Indigenous spirit and that is just as important. Harmony may simply be in embracing each other and seeing how the Indigenous can inspire the Occidental and how the Occidental can inspire the Indigenous, not leaving it to one or the other to conform.

Q.: How vibrant is the First Nations art scene and why don’t we hear more about it?

A: I’m not really to sure how vibrant it is. I live in Whitehorse, so I’m somewhat removed from anything that could be considered a “scene”, although I do get out and travel sometimes, most of what I’m exposed to is whatever I read. I’m definitely aware of all the amazing people out there making great work, but I don’t see there being much a “group” mentality within First Nation art. Probably because everyone is spread out all over the country, and I don’t think that there are a ton of contemporary artists to begin with, so it’s hard to connect and keep up on what people are doing. That said, I think that for everything that’s going on for First Nation arts, there is a billion other things happening throughout the world of art, and media being as limited as it is and as focused on certain elements of art as it is, it makes sense to me that we don’t feel like we hear a lot about what’s going on in First Nation art because it may be overshadowed by everything else.

Q: What would it take to bring it to the forefront of Canadian art?

A: If First Nations art is to be at the forefront of Canadian art I think it would have to be something that happens naturally, because the public feels compelled to see and identify with it. Possibly focusing less on racial themes, not that we shouldn’t talk about those things, but considering the spectrum of influence that can exist within a work. Also, artists becoming less inhibited with experimenting/exploring medium, motivation, symbolism and other cultural perspectives. It’s really hard to say what, ultimately would attract more attention to First Nation work, but it seems to me that attention would be a natural result of the public identifying with what they see. I don’t know how that happens, but if there were more artists making more work, showing more, more representation however that looks, more resources… then the likely hood of work that is sought out will be better.

Joseph Tisiga's "Anthropomorphic Antler", 2009 (one of the RBC runner-ups)

Q: In his book, A Fair Country, Saul talks about a civilization’s ability to survive depends on its ability to describe itself.  Is First Nation art a victim of its own identity/history or is it this that gives it such power?

A: I don’t know if it would be right to say that it’s a victim. Identity and history are what give us orientation, then when we’re orientated, determining our direction is clearer. That manifests in how we make decisions and how/why we respond to the world as we do. This ultimately allows us to describe ourselves, unfortunately not everyone will enjoy it and not everyone knows what to do with it.

Q: Thomas Highway talks about Coyote, the trickster.  Is there a trickster in your art?

A: I’d say that the very nature of illusion created by an artist is the nature of the trickster. But I think that today we live in the trickster’s world, where we are saturated in illusion and absurdity. I don’t think it can be avoided, and though he manifests in so many ways I think we can invoke his different qualities. I like humor and uncertainty.

Q: Kent Monkman made an interesting comment concerning abstract art’s exclusion on First Nations’ artists in its denial of “storytelling”.   Your thoughts on this?

A: Not knowing the context in which the comment was made, it occurs to me that it may depend on the definition of storytelling we’re considering. It also seems to me that anything can be abstract if you don’t know what it is, it’s still “something”, consequently it must exist within some kind of context or story. It can be denied and the conversation ends there, but I don’t think this can reasonably exclude a culture from participating in the act of making art abstractly. I don’t think there are really any steadfast rules to making any form of art, and should an individual feel excluded for any reason, it may be their responsibility to consider why. Not that I’m saying exclusion doesn’t exist, but that it is ultimately illusionary and can be challenged.

Q: If you could use only two words to describe your art, what would they be?

A: Two words is difficult but I guess I’d say absurd and uncertain.

Q: Lately, there seems to be a return towards the miniature.  I’m thinking of artists like Do Ho Suh or, closer to home, KarineGiboulo and Jason Walker. Is there something about our society that isleading certain artists in this direction?

A: I start with miniature characters as a pictorial trick. It’s what allows me to create a larger scene on a smaller canvas.

Q: Your subjects – war, torture, ect. – are huge in and of themselves. Yet miniature is often reminiscent of childhood and hiding things in pockets… trivial innocence, fun, and somewhat secretive. Why choose to paint something “so big so small”?

A: In making it small we have an aerial point of view like God’s eye. I can make a bigger scene by using smaller scale characters.

Q: Miniature began with illuminated manuscripts – it was a means of conveying the written word.  The “written words” in your series are “devotion” (the title) and “HOLY”.  I think of the obvious and historic confrontation between Christianity and Islam and the present day confrontation. Are the works a political, post 9/11 commentary?

A: Yes, it’s inspired by 9/11 but the majority of inspiration stems from the AbouGhraib jail where the torturers picture themselves in action. Since always, each war brings out the same thing in those involved with it.  It’s the almost mechanized repetition of what it brings out that is explored in this series.

Q: There’s an incredible element of play in your work – the school bus, the police car juxtaposed in the middle of historically dressed figures.  Moreover, they too retain some of the “toy like” qualities that the figures possess…All of this lends to the work a certain nonchalance.  There does not appear to be any overt judgment on the various horrors going on.  I can’t help but think of our modern day immunity to the war and destruction that surrounds us.  Are the works an observation of our neutrality/indifference to our present day world?

A: Yes, there is a certain indifference with conflict in our society. I believe there is a disillusion and cynicism about everything. When it comes to my work, there tends to be two interpretations: Those who observe the critic in my drawings and those who see it as a sort of “Where’s Waldo?” game.

Q: You worked on this series for two years.  What was it that fascinated you about it?

A: The scene and placing of time with an anachronistic play is what I like best in my work. Create a universe where we can see a few small scenes and if we see all the drawing it forms a bigger different scene.

Q: How would the series be different if you had decided to depict the figures on a larger scale?

A: A few years ago, I began a new series (no longer miniature) entitled “Expiations” (the one on my website). The idea came from my wish to isolate a scene in order to make it larger. My desire was to express clearly the tensions of torture.

Q: There is something very abstract about your work.  What has prevented you from becoming purely abstract?

A: Abstract art has no interest in my practice except for the pictorial composition.. From far, my small characters look like stars constellations

Q: What’s next for Pierre Durette?

A: Next step is to finish the series Expiations. My next work is a series of photographs where I’ll go deeper into my research on traffic identity in times between middle age and science fiction.

All pictures for this article were provided by the Artist.  Checkout Pierre’s website at www.pierredurette.com.  Pierre is represented by galerie Orange at www.galerieorange.com