In an interview with Robert Rosenblum
Notes about her life: She went to University of Iowa and was interested in "Hollywood narrative structure"
She talks about how it has to do with prejudices in the culture - against snakes and scaly, hard surfaces "reptilian" "as well as Jungian or Freudian yearnings for things soft and cuddly." Her "Walking on Eggshells" has snakes and bunnies in it. AHHHH.
But then there is this shift "for example, the purpose [with Radioactive Cats] there was to undermine the stereotype in our culture of the cute, domesticated pet. The cats are meant to dominate the scene as survivors in a postnuclear situation because they've adapted by turning green."
This is really interesting to me for a few reasons, One is a little dumb, I'm fascinated by this convention that bright lime green is automatically this science-fictiony, radioactive, creepy.
This idea of things taking over, crawling, something inocuous becoming a real problem, is something I love, and she has one called "Atomic Love" where RAISINS are covering everything. And that is so great. Because a raisin is so cute and small and actually kind of funny to me, and then there are thousands of them and they totally make me want to scream and run away. The interviewer in this book describes it as "the kind of horrific conversion of infinitely small things suddenly blotting out humanity . . . it's such a fascinating mix of supermarket abundance and the extinction of us poor individuals . . . " (emphasis mine). This is so fascinating to me that abundance, which I have previously talked about as being safe and secure in it's plentitude, actually becomes horrific at a certain point. I love when it becomes threatening.
She said something about drawing a line between an art installation and a fun house. I LOVE THE FUN HOUSE. So creepy. :) I kind of secretly wish I could create things like that, a room full of the balloons, mirrors, floating up to the sky. Loosing your balloon, or being overwhelmed by other balloons. This also has the do with a stalker thing - "YOU ARE SO SPECIAL." So much so that i bought you 900 balloons. CREEP.
She did one called "Sock Situation." I think this is FANTASTIC. She talks about how the objects in the photos break up the space, almost crawl across the surface, which I can totally see in this one. The best part is the guy trying to vacuum one up. :) She did this for a display window in Barney's Dept. Store, by the way.
Her choice of color, she says, was about rejecting the black and white photography of the 70's and "just wanting to be bad, in poor taste, and make something that was aggressive on the wall."
They talk about how her work has to do with horror, science fiction, and Suburbia (!)
"Science fiction presented a landscape that reflected the depth of my experience of suburban life in America because it's a landscape of openness, of empty space, and a lot of anxiety going on in that open space."
"To me, terror is more terrifying if it relates closely to ordinary life. If it's more plausible, its more terrifying."
-------
Carol Squiers:
"Throughout her work Skoglund sets up a series of disquieting oppositions, among them visuality versus content, celebration versus critique, whimsy versus horror, the banal versus the extraordinary, the dream versus the nightmare." I LOVE THIS.
This author also talks a lot about what the photograph means as it is displayed next to the installation. Which makes me think about what a painting might do next to a thing, or how one might not have to abandon painting things in order to utilize other media. Because the relationship between the two (even trying to figure out what is different -- in her case the presence or absence of actual humans is pretty huge-- is really interesting.) The photograph is the lens through which she composes the whole installation, though, which is really cool. She makes sure none of the animals overlap or obscure eachother from the camera's viewpoint.
She did an early performance piece where she kicked "colored candies" (jellybeans and gumdrops) around the floor and swept them up in a "parody of abstract expressionism" which the author calls her first experiment in what she calls "the inappropriate use of food." I like that phrase too. Candy is an untapped area here. To me anyway, because the kid fantasy, and even an adult fantasy, is to have just TONS of candy, so much more than you could ever eat -- the whole thing with saving Easter bunnies a whole year just so there is another one to replace it. So . . .
She said she was "trying to make something that my relatives could understand."
They mention how "orderly repetetivness" can give a "nightmarish quality." Like marching bands? :) [ much of my previous work is about marching bands ]
On why she sculpts the animals herself: "I didn't want to critique 'catness' as seen by our culture, which is what would happen if I went out and got a found-object cat to photograph; using found objects is inevitably very toungue-in-cheek, coy, kitsch. So I decided to make a cat." I like this too.
They talk a lot about her flattening visual space with the colors or the pattern.
Revenge of the Goldfish is so great because they are floating. How aresome is this??
And now, here are just a deluge of images of her and her work:
Also, I am constantly amazed that people don't bring her up more often, either to me because I'm really into repetition, animals, weirdness, etc, but in general. People don't see to know who she is, yet I find all of this to be fantastic and great and overflowing with content.
No comments:
Post a Comment