WHAT DOES YOUR
SCREEN SMELL LIKE?
INTERVIEW WITH ARTIST SASHA
BOWLES
In opposition to
Sasha’s preference of all things in the flesh, we interviewed her by e-mail
A painting carries the suffix ing, denoting a
verbal action that might propose a process of interpretation and understanding
in the mind of the viewer. How then might this be compromised when documented
on a computer screen? Does painting simply become paint?
I think it is worse
than that. The paint doesn’t become anything. It loses all quality of being paint.
You are just looking at an image. There is no scale, no medium and no presence
of the artist. A barrier is formed between the viewer and the work.
What the computer and our digital age seems
to produce is a constant changeability. Thousands of images can be stored,
carried around and viewed on an ipad for example, but how can this be rivalled
by the permanence of a single painting?
A single painting
seen in the ‘flesh’, is much more powerful. It is real, you can feel the
artist, you can see the marks they have made. A painting is not a flat back lit
image; it is tactile and an object, it has its own entity. The idea that images
can be seen anywhere at any time undermines the importance of a painting and
dilutes its significance.
To exhibit in a garage space is a gesture
that might suggest a desire to confront a sort of tangible, almost nonfictional
reality. Might the art objects become absorbed into this realm as well?
I think where you
exhibit does change how the work is interpreted. To exhibit in a garage without
any of the usual white walls or pretences of a gallery space is very exciting
and means that the work has to stand up for itself. You may find that the environment
overwhelms or undermines the work, but it will also ground it of any
pretensions.
What is the point in moving when one can
travel so magnificently sitting in a chair? What would you like to say to all
the sofa surfers out there?
Sofa surfers should
find the time to get off their fat arses- come and smell the art.
I wonder if the painter’s desire for a live
audience matches the sculptor’s. The screen presents a sculpture as a bite
sized package, too small for a bodily exchange. The painting although condensed
regardless of its size, is reproduced at the expense only of its object, not
its image. Is painting’s exclusivity towards the surface an advantage in the
mechanical age of reproduction?
Painting may have an
advantage over sculpture in reproduction terms as usually only one view point
is needed. However your term ‘bodily exchange’, is very poignant as I believe
to be in the presence of the painting, to stand where the artist has stood is
very important, if not essential. The images on a computer screen all begin to
look the same, one after another flashing before our eyes, tweaked and edited
for our ease.
It is almost better
to have seen a reproduction printed in black and white than on a screen,
because your expectation of the real painting is more obviously removed from
the original.
What does your screen smell like?
I would have to say paracetamol
as I feel a mild headache coming on.
www.sashabowlesart.blogspot.co.uk
www.sashabowlesart.blogspot.co.uk
