![]() |
| Kara Maria, Voluptuous Deconstruction, 2010; photo: courtesy the artist |
Kara
Maria talks with Sarah Burke at the SFMOMA Artists Gallery
SB: You use a lot of recognizable imagery in
your work such as political portraits and brand logos. Would you say that
today, those icons are comparable to the religious icons that were so prominent
earlier in history when art was mainly religious?
Kara Maria: It seems to me that the political images,
logos etc. of today are sort of layered on top of older icons such as religious
symbols from the past. Many of the older images have not disappeared. If
anything, we have more and more imagery to work with as time passes -
especially now that we have the Internet where we can see lots of it in one
sitting. That art was mainly religious in the past has more to do with
financing than anything else. In that sense, today's advertising might be a
better analogy - contemporary artwork (unless commissioned by a corporation, I
suppose) seems to serve a different function.
SB: Some of the imagery that you use is
"sexually explicit," and would make many people feel ashamed to be
looking at it. What's your purpose for employing imagery commonly thought
of as taboo?
KM: I have used a lot of pornographic source material in my work because
I find it interesting to work with. It is so loaded and yet so easy to access
that I consider it to be part of pop culture. The nude human figure has a long
history in art, and for better or worse pornography is one of the easiest
places to find images of nude bodies in our society. For me it is a great
source of "free" models to work from. I also find that the friction
those images create when combined with other elements is not easily to
replicate in other ways. It makes the work seems strangely "of the
moment" to me.
SB: For your piece "Voluptuous Deconstruction" you manipulate a
pornographic image until it is almost unrecognizable. Would you say that in
doing so you are pointing out the fluidity of the "sinful"
image?
KM: I'm not sure what you mean by the "fluidity" of the
"sinful" image. I don't find the original image, or any other
pornographic image, to be "sinful". I do find them, especially the
more low budget photographs, to be strangely human, tactile, almost too much
information. Once you really start to look at them, after any excitement, or
revulsion wares off, you realize what is actually going on. The absolute
openness, allowing such sexual acts to be made public, but for a profit - it's
a very complicated thing. I enjoyed subverting all that into a more abstract
image in "Voluptuous Deconstruction" - the complex issues are there,
but beneath the surface.
![]() |
| Kara Maria, Canonball, 2010; photo: courtesy the artist |


No comments:
Post a Comment