This afternoon I conducted my first artist interview under the auspices of The Outer Box. I met with Madeleine Peck Wagner at her home and we spoke of her work, art in general, art collecting, choosing subject matter, authenticity, the beauty of impermanence, wabi-sabi, and local bars, of course!
Listen to the entire 49-minute interview here or download the mp3 for later listening. Below I transcribe the first 15 minutes and another 6-minute portion. After which I give the time-stamp for various highlighted topics for the whole interview. (In the transcription underlined portions are approximations to make up for sound glitches in the audio.)
Madeleine Peck Wagner: I'm Madeleine Peck Wagner.
RM: Ok. And uh here we go. So we were just talking about —which is just great cause they won't know— the work that you have at R Roberts Gallery. How long is that going to be on view there?
MPW: Well, I believe it's coming down at the end of this week, Nov 20th. But then, Jen spoke to me about putting it back up for December because I believe that she has an obligation with another artist. She says that the reception has been really good to my work and she's really excited about it, which is tremendously heartening to hear.
RM: So they're going to have some other opening and then put some of your stuff back up?
MPW: I think that's what she had indicated to me a couple weeks ago.
RM: How many pieces are you displaying there right now?
MPW: I have nine.
RM: Nine? I think I only saw three of them. So I definitely need to get back. [laughter] Or, I noticed the three big ones.
MPW: Right. I really enjoy working in larger formats but I try to temper that with some smaller pieces. Just because it is hard to assimilate a 3 foot by 5 foot piece into your home.
RM: When I was at the opening, you said — I don't think you actually said it I think you were quoted as having said that in your art you create a problem and then your work is resolving the problem?
MPW: Yes.
RM: Which I totally gravitated towards because I feel similarly about my own work. So I was wondering if you could explain that a little bit more or elaborate on that...
MPW: Yeah. Well, it's a concept that an undergraduate professor of mine introduced me to because it's so easy to "get away" with making something that is really aesthetically pleasing and kind of beautiful and summarizes itself really quickly so if you create a problem you have to solve the problem it makes the work more interesting. [RM: Absolutely.] It creates almost a narrative of the process. [RM: Yeah!] And for me the process is really important even though a lot of it is, sort of, just it's the rendering itself again and again and sort of this obsessive process since I'm using— since I'm focusing on this one horse image right now.
RM: But it's not just one horse... [MPW: No.] You make it... I mean, maybe it is the same horse — I don't know your horse! — You make it different by the different poses and positions that its in.
MPW: Actually, you're right. It's not the same horse. I should've been clearer and said I'm using this one icon again and again. [RM: Right.] And I'm sort of re-imagining it and it has ties to my childhood...RM: But somehow it's not... I mean, I've read some of what you've said about the choice of the horse image, and I don't have those same associations, but I still like it. You know? And I have a different reason for sort of grabbing onto the horse. [MPW: Right.] And I don't find, even though you're repeating it, I don't find it like a tired gimmick that you're doing.
MPW: Thank you.
RM and MPW: [laughter]
MPW: I mean, I certainly worry about that. And I worry about that maybe I'm easing into fetishism or something like that. But I kind of think that as long as I enjoy making them and I think that they're fresh then I'll probably just indulge myself.
RM: Well, you — OK, you've said fetishism and indulging and then in your statement you say "obsessively redrawing and re-imagining this figure..." [MPW: Mm-hmm.] So do you really think that you're... is it an obsessive thing?
MPW: I don't think it's obsessive in that it's compulsive, but I do think that there's a certain permission-granting that I had to give myself because I'm very very interested in contemporary abstract art and works that are more conceptual and works that are more distilled. And somehow I can't get there.
RM: Well, this sort of grounds you. [MPW: Mm-hmm.] Because I look at it and what I see: the colors, I see the context that you place the horse in... I don't see it as a horse painting or drawing [MPW: Right.] or representation; I see, I don't know, I really see a complete picture and nothing — you wouldn't want to take any of it away...
MPW: Well, that's what I hope for, but I have to be candid and when people ask me about it I say, "Well, I do feel it's a little bit obsessive." Not that I can't escape from it, but I — even in my writing or even in earlier art work, it's like I like to think about these things over and over and over again. Sometimes with words I'll get stuck using a word and my editor will have to be like, "You know what? You've used that word five times in the last three articles you've submitted. Please think of something else." It's almost, getting caught up in the language or in the meaning of the image or of the word and then just thinking about it backwards all the way down to it's roots and sort of just having this fantastic, imaginary run and tying it into all these different historical things.
RM: Well, it's great that you see it as an obsession. I mean, you see a resonance with your repeated choices, whereas I would think, I would say, "Oh, I'm just being lazy. I'm using the same word over and over and over again." [laughter. MPW: Right.] But you've, um, you know, made it, I don't know, more interesting and worth something, I mean, you know... I really like what you said before about a professor who got you into the whole creating a problem and working through it, and especially the way you went on to describe it because I wonder if you find... does that sort of divide the response to your work? Because you said it would be too easy to just make a pretty picture that you can just look at and immediately get it and feel — and you want to create some tension. I find I try to do the same but in abstract purely, so that is a weird thing for me, but I find... People have come up to me before and said, "Oh, I like everything except this one part just really gets to me. Couldn't you change that?" And I think, No! You fool! [MPW: Exactly.] If it didn't have that part you would like it and walk away. I mean, don't you want something you're gonna grow with and have a relationship with instead of just, you know, oh it's a pretty field or a pretty...
MPW: Right. It's interesting that you say that. I have a — well, he's a newer friend, he's an artist that I interviewed and now I believe that we're growing into a friendship — his name's Richard Warholic. And he was very interested in Bloomsbury and he introduced me to Duncan Grant. And Duncan Grant was kind of a painter a little bit after the Impressionists, but let's say he was sort of England's answer to that. [RM: Okay.] He worked brushstrokey and dauby and very — at sort of the first pass very decorative, very pretty and satisfying, but then you go back and you look at it again and again and you emerge techniques or you can sort of see what he was thinking about and I think I hope that a lot of that happens in my work as well where you might initially be drawn to the color or the pose of the horse figure or even something completely odd. And then maybe come back and look at it again and enjoy it a little bit more — or not enjoy it, decide that you really don't like it, but that hopefully there's more than one read to the work.
RM: Well at least having a reaction. [MPW: Mm-hmm.] A couple of times when people react negatively or even angrily I smile on the inside cause I think, "Ooh, I've done something!" You know? [MPW: Right.] The worst possible thing is to look at a piece of art and just be like [sigh]...
MPW: Yeah, just move on...
RM: Or, even... That's why I think you and I would agree... Even if you like... Even if it's a pleasant [sigh], well, so what? What is that doing? [MPW: Right.] I mean, don't we have enough of that in, uh, I don't know, hotel rooms... ?
MPW: Exactly. Target makes wonderful, beautiful, affordable things.
RM: The one thing that somebody said to me at a recent Art Walk was... They were criticizing, saying what are people's main beef against abstract. And these were younger people and they go, "Well, I think nobody likes abstract anymore because it's just everywhere." And I said, "Really?" And they go, "Yeah, you can buy it at Wal*Mart." And I was like, I haven't seen abstract — I mean, I feel like we're inundated with landscapes and pretty pictures and things — Now I've got to go see if they're selling my abstracts at Wal*Mart.
MPW: Well, you also have to think about what defines abstract. I think that there's a sort of subgenre of really decorative abstract works that you might see at some of the more contemporary high-end retailers that you could see, say, at the St Johns Town Center. And the works aren't bad per se but they just don't offer anything up to the viewer anything more than say making a counterpoint to a sofa. And for me the process of collecting art and of acquiring art is much more personal. I would never want to... I would hope that I would never want to spend that kind of money at, say, a big-box retailer — or even a small-box retailer — I'm really more interested in supporting artists and galleries, and making very individual choices.
RM: I think, for people who do collect original art, it's about a relationship. And, usually they actually have a real relationship with the person who created it. [MPW: Right.] But even if you don't, you can look at it and know that someone created it as opposed to some committee or it was fresh off the presses in China or something [MPW: Mm-hmm.] — not to put down China — there's a little bit more heart, you know. [MPW: Right.] I mean, we all... Well, obviously we all can agree on that cause we're local artists!
MPW: Yeah. I mean, it comes down to ideas of authenticity. And just really of interest. I think most of the work here in my home and the collection that I have with [tattoo artist] Nick [Wagner, Madeleine's husband. See http://www.nicktattoo.com/], it's artists that we know and love and have a relationship with and even if we don't know them, we're not friends with them, we have a reason for collecting or having this piece beyond the purely aesthetic. Although that — I won't lie, aesthetics are a large part of what interests me [RM: Sure.] for my personal collection, not necessarily as a blanket statement for what interests me as art.
RM: Important, the interaction...
<-- 15:25 ... Jumping Ahead ... 20:40 -->
RM: I just think it's really complicated... [MPW: Oh God!] ...when you really delve into what draws you to a piece of art. It's not just, uh, not just the looks, not just who it is, [MPW: And the ideology...] how much it costs or who else likes it...
RM: ... We can talk more about Richard Warholic. ... The thing that I wanted to bring out that you've mentioned he said in your artist statement, he talks about "the beauty of impermanence"? [MPW: Mm-hmm.] And I think that's really something I like and feel when I'm viewing an original work of art is that someone made this, and we're all impermanent, and this work is impermanent... I was recently at a talk at MOCA. It was the Joan Mitchell talk a few weeks ago. [MPW: I missed that.] Someone said... [hems & haws] — I don't wanna say anything offensive, but — They were talking about the importance of impressing upon young artists using the correct techniques so that there works don't degrade. And that they're having, you know, some problems conserving, like, early, some of the Jackson Pollack's that he did without even priming the canvas, and you know, paint's flecking off... And as a painter and not a collector, I'm smiling and thinking, Good! You know? It's dynamic, you know. He's dead and his work is still changing. And someday his works will possibly deteriorate also. And I know that they're looking at it from the standpoint of a museum and a collector and "Why would you buy something that... ?" Um... But I mean, nothing's permanent.
MPW: No. And, I think, for myself — and I can only speak for myself — at a certain point, using a lot of archival materials spoke to a sort of a false hubris and I really was not comfortable not just spending the money but even sort of engaging in the act with Belgian linen and the finest oils, because I understood where I was and my level of importance and sort of understanding that what I'm doing then, and what I'm doing now is still very much a growing pattern and a growing event so I don't — I don't assume that anyone will want my work forever. Now, what I have done is I do take steps now to make sure that they are as stable as they can be within the realm of reason for what I'm interested in doing. I mean, I like to use oil on paper and I don't want to prime my paper. So, I, what I do is I coat the back with a gel medium so that effectively plasticizes it and renders it stable — it stops it from being too unstable. But I don't want to interrupt the surface of the paper because that's very...
RM: Important, the interaction...MPW: Important. So, I mean, when you get sort of the halo around the oil, I don't consider that a flaw, that is more interesting to me.
RM: Would you say there's a theme of sort of childhood memories in your pieces?
MPW: Oh, yes. A lot of it stems from sort of family lore and my own consuming, like, all-consuming desire when I was a girl to have a horse. And obviously I didn't.
RM: [laughing] Obviously you didn't? That's why it's not, um — that's why you haven't gotten rid of it, it's still an ongoing obsession?!
MPW: Exactly, yeah. I'm still drawing it into reality.
RM: Lisa Simpson.
MPW: Yeah, exactly.
RM: She wants a pony.MPW: Yeah, I want a... I rode as a kid. You know, I would go up to the stable and spend time grooming the horses.
RM: Where was this?
MPW: In Northern Michigan, where I spent my summers. And then in Cleveland where I grew up was a very urban setting. So I had this pastoral, these pastoral summers and this very urban fall-winter-spring. So it was an interesting disjunctive existence. But it didn't seem so at the time.
RM: No, I'm sure it seemed perfect.
MPW: Yeah, it was great.
RM: Is Warholic also the artist who talks to you about wabi-sabi?
MPW: Yes. Um, he became aware of the concept I think around 1996 or 1998 --
RM: I became aware of it last week doing research for this interview! [laughter] And then I was like, "That's it! That's describing what I'm already trying to do."
MPW: Yeah. I mean, it's the flaw as the way in. The idea of the handmade. The sort of human-scaled. It's a Japanese term I believe. And actually, I was — it's interesting — I was reading a biography of Isamu Noguchi and I'm almost done with it and so I'm in the latter part of his life and he talks about the concepts of wabi and of sabi. And, not — he doesn't put them together as sort of just one term, but when they quoted him in the book I thought, Oh I know exactly what he means. Or, I have an idea of maybe thinking that I know what he means, would be a more appropriate way to put it.
RM: So, did we define it for others?
MPW: No. Wabi-sabi is sort of the Japanese idea of working with your hands on a human scale, working with materials that are bound to the earth, sort of darkness instead of light, it's maybe comfort instead of sparingness...
RM: Well, my take-away from my brief reading about it is that, uh, it sort of honors the imperfections of human-made things, and therefore avoids perfect symmetry, which really — I mean, they showed an example of a Japanese pot, maybe it was a teacup or something, and, just, you notice the slight, you know it's not perfectly round, and the slight alteration in the shape. And I immediately thought, "Oh, right!" Cause it just feels good that way, [MPW: Mm-hmm. Exactly] to have that kind of object. And, I remember, I mean, when I was a kid my obsession was in symmetry and architectural symmetry and I thought, you know, of Monticello on the back of a nickel or something. And when you actually go to Monticello you realize that it's not symmetrical. [MPW: No. It's crazy.] ***[Ed note: I have more to add here.] And then you start realizing that whatever that was in me that wanted things to be perfect and symmetrical, now I feel I've grown away from that and think that's —
MPW: Well, because symmetry doesn't always equal balance. [RM: Hmm.] But balance can, I think, always be found. [RM: Yeah?] Not... I believe you can work towards it in one's work, you can work towards it and you can find it. And I think that's part of why I introduce sort of an obstacle or a mistake or a problem to solve. Because once it's harmonious or once it makes sense — or even disharmonious but in a way that is interesting according to the context —
RM: And complete.
MPW: Exactly, complete. I think that's the word I was really looking for, is, once it's complete, once it feels done, you can take a step back and breathe.
RM: Well, before I ever read wabi-sabi... I've been using in my artist statements this cheesy self-coined term of 'unbalanced balance' or 'balanced imbalance' or something — where I'm trying to say, um, you know I'm not going to — I do abstract — so I'm not going to have you know, "Well, I'm gonna have 3 balls on this side and 3 balls on this side!" No, but somehow you know the weight of a line might be equivalent to the weight of a shape on the other side — or even, it's okay to leave the viewer with a little bit of tension I think.
MPW: Yeah. Kind of a little awkward.
RM: Yeah. But you still want them to realize that it's a finished piece.
MPW: Mm-hmm.
RM: I think, I don't know, maybe unfinished pieces are interesting?!
MPW: Well, it's interesting because I was showing a piece of mine that actually is up at R Roberts right now and it's a large piece and the horse is very heavily worked and then the background is almost nonexistent. And, I was looking at it and I was really, really pleased with it. But someone else came in and said, "Wow, you — you're not quite done yet are you?" And I thought, No, I'm finished. Because I could imagine it once it was framed and the frame actually, in that case would sort of act as the final statement, the period at the end of the paragraph.
RM: Hmm.
MPW: Which is not the case with all of my pieces. But I do — Just to touch briefly on framing — I do prefer to present them in a framed manner because it protects them; it also makes it easier for a potential collector or buyer just to you know take it home and enjoy it.
RM: Right, it's ready to go!
MPW: And I do enjoy the sort of physical act as opposed to a more cerebral act of painting... I really enjoy physical act of working with the wood and struggling with it and sweating and all that sort of stuff.
RM: Well it turns it from a paper drawing into an object. [MPW: Mm-hmm. Exactly.] An art object that is, well, available for sale.
MPW: Exactly, yeah. It's then a commodity, which is an odd place to be. Because prior to this... I really like the aesthetic effect of just tacking drawings to the wall, but it's really — it's impractical.
RM: You've shown things that way before? Like a clothesline type of style, maybe?
MPW: Mm-hmm. And it's — I love, aesthetically I love it, it really resonates with me — but it's impractical and it opens up the pieces to a lot of, uh [RM: Oh, they might get ripped.] damage, and--
RM: And somehow they feel — I understand what you mean about the period — they might feel unfinished that way. Like you could still go back to them...
MPW: Yeah. Like you'd wanna go back and noodle on them some more.
RM: Maybe, yeah... You put 'em behind glass to protect them from you!
MPW: Yeah, and it's done. I can't — without being a complete obsessive weirdo, which has happened before. I have pulled things out of frames.
RM: Oh! Oh, oh...
MPW: I have, yeah. But for the most part, it is — it does say, okay, now turn your focus to this other thing.
<-- 28:14 ...
Themes covered:
00:23 Works at R Roberts
01:32 Creating a Problem and Then Solving the Problem
02:33 Repeated Choice of Horse Image/Icon
03:46 "Easing Into Fetishism"
06:12 More on Creating a Problem and Working Through It
07:18 Richard Warholic, Bloomsbury, Duncan Grant: Multiple "reads" to a single work
08:53 "Target makes wonderful, beautiful, affordable things."
10:00 Collecting Art is Personal
10:50 Authenticity
12:08 The Beauty of Impermanence & Avoiding "Preciousness"
17:04 "It's like a patina of authenticity and it links you in a very tangible way to the age and the sensibility of the piece." (MPW on cracks in surface of Old Master oil paintings.)
18:03 Choice of Frames
19:49 Sculptural Works
20:50 "A lot of it stems from... my all-consuming desire when I was a girl to have a horse."
21:50 Wabi-Sabi
24:00 Symmetry
26:00 Unfinished?
28:15 MPW's Process
28:44 "Noodles"
30:55 Guarding Against Too Much Orange
31:37 Hating Purple
33:21 "Hello, Crazy Time."
33:30 Conquering Life's Struggles Through Art
34:50 Thomas Kincaide!
39:00 People Value Art But Do Not Want to Pay for It
40:30 Works on Display at the Airport
42:47 Other Cities
43:00 Inventory
43:30 "Prolific"?
44:27 Brooklyn, RIP
45:16 Bouncing Ideas Off Fellow Artists
46:18 Commercial for Dos Gatos
48:38 Recap
Madeleine Peck Wagner's work is currently on view at R Roberts Gallery, 3606 St Johns Ave, (Avondale) Jacksonville, FL 32205; the Jacksonville International Airport "Emerging Artists" exhibition (through Jan 6, 2010); and this weekend (Nov 20 & 21) at Conmoto Festival. Madeleine maintains her own art blog: Art Isn't Rocket Science.
No comments:
Post a Comment