She was trying to figure out the paintings: “They’re political, but they’re paintings they’re paintings, but political.” It was exactly what I was trying to achieve: something you would look at not because you had been told to look at it or because it was illustrating a specific political situation, but because your eye would be caught by something expressive in the work the paint was metaphorical in itself. I was describing a studio visit with a curator and gallerist interested in political art, including racial and sexual issues. Mira Schor: Let me go back to the “honey trap.” I used this expression in the 1990s, when I was working with the imagery of sexualized but also politicized gendered body parts. You wrote that painting is a “honey trap for contemporary discourse.” 1 To what extent is the language of painting capable of representing contemporary historical reality? Matylda Taszycka: Recently, the political situation has had an important influence on you and your work. Mira Schor, New York Times Intervention #121, The New York Times, Decem© Mira Schor.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |