In last week’s post I gave you my impressions of New York artist Amy Yoes‘ installation Catalyst at the CSU Art Museum. Ms. Yoes graciously agreed to be interviewed via email, and that interview follows below.
SV: To what degree was Catalyst planned before you visited the site; and to what degree was the form of the piece a response to the site?
AY: The initial form of the piece was a response to the intrinsic qualities of the space. Everything started to take shape after my first visit to the museum. The three columns in the middle of the room became the starting point for the work. I knew I wanted to integrate them in a sculptural way.
SV: Catalyst was accompanied by a minimum of wall text. Is it your preference for viewers to encounter your work without explanatory text? What, if anything, do you want viewers to know about the ideas and influences behind the piece?
AY: Everyone brings their own set of references and influences when reacting to an artwork. It’s interesting to allow that alchemical process to happen on its own, without directing it. Certain preoccupations are there for all to see. For me, the fractured topography of southern Utah, the precisionist, industrial landscape paintings of Charles Sheeler, and the set designs of El Lissitzky, are relevant. Others will make different associations. The meaning of a work sometimes coalesces over time.
SV: Collaboration (with Keith Jentzsch) was crucial in the constructing of Catalyst, and I see that you’ve done at least one fully collaborative piece (with Catherine Borg). Is collaboration an important an important part of your practice generally? How does the act of collaboration change the form that a work of art takes?
AY: I like to work in a variety of ways. Many times I am working alone; some projects require the involvement of others. My collaboration with Catherine Borg happened in a very organic way. As we started to discuss our ideas for the individual work we were planning for our event at the Peppermill Fireside Lounge, it became clear that it would be much more interesting if we collaborated on a single piece, since we were both interested in investigating the glossy veneer of Las Vegas. We discovered that we shared a similar sense of visual humor.
Working with others is exciting, but I don’t privilege collaboration over the activities of the sole creator. Both ways of working are equally valid.
When working on a big piece like Catalyst, a skilled fabricator/builder is crucial to the process. I made a scale model of the installation; the resulting dialogue with Keith about the materials and techniques required to realize the piece was crucial. When it came time for the actual construction, it was important to allow Keith the freedom to make decisions about the construction details. There are clear parameters in relation to finish and craft, but I don’t make detailed construction drawings for my pieces: I prefer instead to use the model as the starting point and allow the ingenuity and building style of the fabricator to play a part in the aesthetic qualities of the piece.
SV: How was the video Reservoir made, and what part did the students play in making this piece?
AY: I constructed the set of Reservoir with some of the geometric forms that I would use in Catalyst. I often employ a cannibalistic approach, where one project is launched by parts or ideas from another and materials and motivations flow between works. The students helped with the set up and with the animation. The technique I use for animation is very basic. I am the director and author of the piece, and other people that work on the pieces take over moving some of the elements. Everyone that animates objects on the set brings their own proclivities and personalities to the movements. I like to create an environment where ideas can be put forward — some will be incorporated, and some won’t.
SV: Something Keith said to me suggested that you might be moving from a more narrative drawing-based practice to something more formal and involved with design (ie, your Kitchen Project). How do you see the evolution of your work in recent years?
AY: My practice is multifaceted. Working in a variety of media reflects my thinking about art-making. I started out as a young artist with a multimedia perspective, and then spent many years focusing on painting. In the last five or six years I have come back to a multimedia, experimental approach. Painting, video, installation, sculpture, and photography can play a role in this scenario, as seen in my Kitchen Project. All mediums are linked, and lines are blurred. The Kitchen Project is an installation just as Catalyst is, only there is the extra requirement that it be a functional kitchen. When presented with a room to work with, whether it be a gallery space, or a domestic environment, the thing that determines the course of the work is discovering what can be done in the room.
Amy Yoes’ installation Catalyst is on exhibit through March 20, in the Robert W. Hoffert Gallery in the University Art Museum. Tuesdays through Saturdays, from 11 a.m. – 7 p.m. Free admission.
Recent Comments