Sexus

Interview with Jacki-Ruth Meyer

 

J-RM: How has the city of Albi and the history of the Cathars influenced this project ?

KG: I have for a long time now been quite curious about the cathars and their beliefs. I am particularly curious about their relation to their bodies and towards the physical in general. On the one hand they conceived of this world in gnostic terms, as literally being hell. Thus they denied their bodies and certainly did not engage in any sensual or physical pleasures. On the other hand there seems to be the suggestion that they were also influenced by the gnostic texts relating to Mary Magdelene and that within the higher ranks of the order, or perhaps on special occasions, the body was used as an initiatory vehicle through which the sexual being could be used as a method of physical and spiritual transformation.

J-RM: Mary Magdalene is a figure in the history of religion and art that's of particular concern to you. Why is this? ?

KG: I am very drawn to the figure of Maria Magdalene because she alone stands out amongst the disciples of Jesus as a very complex and also very strong woman. She is one of the very few in the bible to be given both a first and a surname, an honour that was rare even amongst the men. I am especially drawn to the aspects of her characterisation that are the embodiment of the Egyptian Goddess Isis. Magdalene is alone in the Bible as a person who not only lived in the moral borderlands but was able to crisscross them and still find salvation.

J-RM: What gave rise to the choice of eroticism as the theme of your show in Albi?

KG: The Cathar contradiction of denying the body and then using the sex to initiate transformation is very close to the methods I have used in my art practice. The attraction/repulsion of the sexual taboo is not unlike the scene of a crime or a motor car accident on the freeway, something that as hard as we try to deny it, it calls us in in some way affirms our existence inasmuch as we are external to the subject. The erotic is not about sex really but the idea of sex, being external to the literal act of intercourse and the opposite of procreation.

J-RM: The denial of and ban on sexual--that is, lay--ecstasy lie at the heart of the predominant religious and philosophical doctrines of our civilizations. You bring this ecstasy out of the shadows, you expose it and what is more you present female pleasure as autonomous, by way of masturbation, in a large work. Is this an attempt to break free from the systems of thought which control us?

KG: Right from the outset the Christian faith was built upon the solid foundations of older pagan faiths. There is a latent sexuality that defines the most basic of Christian structures that was hidden and repressed in order to make better "Soldiers for Christ" - this repression is the same that Wilhelm Reich speaks about in his book "The Mass Psychology of Fascism." I think that unfortunately a great deal of modern feminism also derives from the same repression that does not as much create equal sexual relations between the male and female as much as reduces women to the same repressed level as male soldiers. With "Madonna au bord de l'eau" the viewer stands outside of the sexual process and is unnecessary for pleasure. The Madonna pleasures herself and is complete as she is, however the light from the ball, carefully placed upon her symbolic architectural clitoris, projects across the entire room decapitating the viewer with rays of light. Its about the moment when Actaeon discovers the bathing Diana and spies on the naked Goddess, a pleasure for which he will pay with his life. The viewer is transformed into the voyeuristic Actaeon and the choice of spying or turning away embodies the process whereby his decision has its consequences and he is transformed into a Stag that will be devoured by his own dogs of lust.

J-RM: Why pay tribute to Henry Miller ?

KG: Henry miller exemplifies a particular vision of the real through which the crude everyday becomes poetic and even absurd in its brutality. I am drawn to "the revolution of everyday life" and the micro-political in its brutal raw and unrefined state. The difference between "fucking" and "making love" is about class as much as its about language and how value systems are embedded within the words we use to express ourselves.

J-RM: Erotic representation is a constant factor in the history of art: What do you think about Courbets l'Origine du Monde ?

KG: Of course its impossible to be an artist today and not reflect upon "l'Origine du Monde" and moreover its influence upon "Etant Donne." perhaps more the latter inasmuch as it was conceived within a lie for Duchamp had told the work he was not working and had given up on art. Courbet was my first love and perhaps my most important role model in the way that he was able to bring together the disparate worlds of the personal, the political and the sexual. If you look carefully you will see the influence of "l'Origine du Monde" in many of my pieces.

J-RM: Why depict the sex act ? What is important about this choice ? Sharing pleasure ? Love ? The connection to the others body ?

KG: I conceive of every work I create through my body. Before I do a project for instance I need to feel the space with my body, feel the wind, the heat, the cold, the texture of the walls, how damp it is, how the space is accessed or denied. My body guides me through its strength as much as through its fragility and vulnerability. Even when I am working on drawings for instance I use my entire body to make it rather than just my hands and certainly never a brush or a pen. I dont make any distinction between the worlds of art and life and thus sex, like politics, is just another dimension of my body. The act of sex is by definition related to creation even when pro-creation is denied. Its the same with art. Sex is about living and giving as much as it is about death and sacrifice.

J-RM: Why do you involve the supreme icon of the Catholic religion ? How do you interpret Picabias work on this same theme ?

KG: The "crucifix" and "holy virgin" are so iconic that in many ways they preclude any form of assimilation. They are so kitsch and so strong as images because they are in a way primeval. Every culture has its myths about a virgin, a whore and a hag and a sacrificial lamb. The image of the "holy virgin" is not unlike the pornographic image inasmuch as it cannot be re-presented outside its context without mediation. In that way its unrepresentable. Picabia's small drawing of "La Sainte Vierge" manages to escape the burden of representation in my opinion without losing any of the symbolism and emotions of that image.

J-RM: You've produced a series of ink works titled "La Sainte Vierge", "The Holy Virgin". What does this mean for you?

KG: This is really the first time that I am exploring the concept and object of drawing on such a grand scale. I am using my body to create these works and so I have selected images and a theme that is very emotional and very much about the body. The process is as much about destroying the image and in a destructive spirit as it is creative and fluid. I am nervous about these
works because they are perhaps the most poetic and beautiful I ever made and that scares me.

J-RM: You use pornographic images in some works. How can art work differentiate itself from pornography?

The pornographic image is perhaps the last to be recuperated within the art system. Every other voice of dissent and popular culture from football to fashion has been hijacked by art. I am drawn to the pornographic in the same way that I am drawn to politically incorrect jokes, violence and cursing because they remain outside the bourgeois conception of culture.

J-RM: How do you differentiate between the pornographic and erotic ?

KG: I would say that its about class rather than anything intrinsic to the image. The difference really lies within you and what you are able to conceive of and how your fantasies are constructed. One person's erotica is another person's pornography. If pressed to find a difference I would say that one finds pornography in a shop near the station with XXX neons outside whereas erotica is accessed through art galleries and expensive fashion magazines.

J-RM: What is the poetic dimension of the show ? How is it conveyed in the work ?

KG: As a young artist I consciously tried very hard to avoid all forms of the poetic in my work because it was for me a bourgeois conceit. Where the poetic manifest it was through the production process rather than the artist's vision. Most recently I have observed the poetic creeping into my work more and more and I am not sure really where its coming from. In part
my methods of production have literally become more fluid and more colourful and thus a degree of the poetic is unavoidable but it still remains something that I am deeply suspicious of.

J-RM: Do you think that the relation to the gendered body is still taboo today in spite of the spread of pornographic images ?

KG: There will always be a taboo even though the understanding of it will always be different. The definition of the taboo always says more about the time and who is making the definition than the taboo itself. I have found that there are very few truly universal taboos. Even the taboo of incest is broken by the concept of royalty. I dont really try to think much about taboos generally for I am much more concerned about my own limits and transgressions.

J-RM: Is there violence with regard to the viewer caused by mixing pornographic images and religious references? What are your intentions?

KG: As I said before I think that the most violent and erotic image ever made is the catholic crucifixion. I am jealous of that. The moment that I strive for is the simultaneous attraction and repulsion you feel when you drive past a violent car crash on the freeway or when you accidentally see a couple making love through their bedroom window. My relation with the viewer should always be an active one when the viewer accepts responsibility for their
relation to the work of art as much as I do. I do not force people to engage with the work nor even predetermine how they should interact with it, but once you have decided to engage then you must accept responsibility for that decision.

J-RM: Over and above the provocation represented by the comparison between eroticism and the sacred image of the suffering and death of the son of God, what do you mean by designating the crucifixion of Christ as the most erotic figure there is?

KG: The crucified Christ does not stand alone with the symbolism of Church, bathed in erotic violence. The towering steeples rise up into the sky like symbolic erections, the domes like breasts and the entrance is shaped like a vagina. Very often the Christ is seated at the entrance enclosed within an elliptic vagina. This is hardly surprising given that the old cathedrals were very often built directly upon the sites of ancient pagan temples where the sexuality of the God or Goddess was translated symbolically into the art and architecture in precisely the same manner. The image of the crucified fascinates me because of its violence and eroticism at the same time which appeals to both our sense of fear and compassion. We stand and stare in shock and horror at his wounds like the scene of a car accident and at the same time we are seduced by the femininity of his posture and the masochistic pleasure of his submission.

J-RM: On the one hand you demystify religious and pictorial icons, on the other you load sex trade icons with expression and sensibility--by overlaying them and treating them at the same level, you upset the perception of them. Is this a way of giving some meaning back to the image, or questioning its power?

KG: The image of the Christ or the Buddha are archetypes that are evoked from deep within our souls. These figures speak directly to our souls not because of the myths we have attached to them but because they speak directly to our deepest most primaeval fears and desires. They are our primal urges that have been culturally coded and translated into symbols that are more easy to accept socially. In that sense I dont think that they are any different from pornography or football. These archetypes are very difficult for an artist to work with because they do not shed their skin very easily. I have tried to introduce the sacred and the profane in order to see out that moment when our cultural codes fail us, when words are not enough. How can you reach out beyond the limits of your tongue and dive into the unsayable, the unspeakable, the unmentionable, to express that moment when you know exactly what you are feeling and thinking and the words are on the tip of your tongue but you never ever find them?

JR-M: You've wrapped historical and religious figures like Buddha and Christ in adhesive tape, with red and white stripes, and you've also said that you were referring to Daniel Buren's work, and in so doing you were "killing the father". These tapes are also used in building sites to indicate danger and prohibit access to a particular area. In fact you hide these figures and at the same time you summon them; hiding before bringing into view is a strategy that is often used by religions to bolster the aura of relics; it's also a way of eroticizing parts of the body. Are you trying to reinforce the emotional power of art?

KG: The chevron tape denotes a "work in progress," something that is incomplete and as such is potentially dangerous. It also denotes a border or a danger zone, beyond which lies some form of risk. Yes of course the reference to Buren is clear but where he applied his system to the architecture of the art structure, I am more drawn to its objects and symbols. In this sense perhaps the wrapping also evokes the early work of Christo (when he was still an artist) as well as the endless lines of Manzoni or the Egyptian mummies that were wrapped for a life that followed the one in this dimension. Whilst it is true that the object is venerated in contemporary art its for entirely different reasons than that of the past for the aforementioned is of interest only inasmuch as it embodies a financial value or social prestige a its most banal. The relic fascinates me because it was the physical embodiment of a belief system and an ideology to the extend that the authenticity or literal object was less important than the symbolism it expressed. Of course there was a great deal of masking going on that stimulated the imagination sufficiently to encourage such blind faith. We are now at the extreme opposite where our objects, be they art, design or Beck's sweaty shirt, still embody and express our value system and cultural codes but these codes are now very superficial and temporary. The art market is perhaps the purest expression of this Capitalist Faith where the value of totally useless objects or images become venerated by a social market driven by insider trading and a handful of players. The value and symbolism of a work of art is measured purely economically to the perverse extreme that a cheap trick by a Brit-Pop artist has greater value than a classic Duchamp from whence it all began.

J-RM: Your approach is hallmarked by a quest for truth, by a spiritual and ethical dimension. Are the images you "steal" from history and from religious, social and cultural current events the raw material of an ideological reconstruction?

KG: The older I get the more old fashioned I become and the more curious I am about this question of Truth. On the one hand I dont believe that it exists because as God gave me language so he taught me how to lie. On the other hand there is no denying that moment when language fails us and we are confronted with an experience that lies beyond words, a moment when the symbolic and the real touch one another on the horizon. We are living in a moment when the computer and internet now make it very easy to access just about everything in history and its only a matter of time until every image ever made, every word ever written and every detail of our cultural history will be accessible online. It has become too easy as even the ancient most dangerous secrets of the Kabbalists and Alchemists are now only a mouse click away but what of it ? The weight of history and the excess of information translates from a claustrophobic awe into a denial that has created a new religion out of the obsession with the present and a meditation on the superficial. How does one escape this Veneer Disease of the present condition ? My solution is to devour history like a Kannibal, to admit the symbols and codes from the past into the present but re-coded by my own experiences. I try to represent my time at the same time as to acknowledge that the present is also the dustbin of history and that in the bin is still plenty of fire for the barbecue. In that way its the same technique that the Christian Church has always used to deal with its predecessors, that is the building of one faith upon the bones of another much older one.

J-RM: Does art have a social, ethical or political responsibility ?

KG: The artist should be socially responsive but never socially responsible. To create is at the same time to react.