stuarthartley

The curatorial and editorial project for systems, non-objective and reductive artists working in the UK

Patrick Morrissey i nterviewed Stuart Hartley

May 2014

PM Given that your work is often displayed in a very public and permanent environment, i.e. public buildings, commissioned sites, does that affect your intention when considering a piece, or do you simply stick to your own aesthetic intention? Is there a clear separation between the work you are commissioned to do and a distinctly separate area of autonomous practice?

SH Commissioned work and studio work both stem from the same pool of thoughts and ideas but there are distinct differences. The studio side of things allows for a lot more freedom and experimentation, some work and some don’t. But it’s fine to make failed work in the studio and bin it, it’s a lot more difficult to do that on a 10m x 10m wall in the public realm, using a couple of thousand pounds worth of materials and weeks of man-hours. I find that the exploration side of a studio practice informs and allows the larger commissioned works to happen and it’s an essential part of what I do.

PM Thank you, Stuart Hartley, for participating in this interview.

www.stuarthartley.com

Pathway 1, H55 x W55 cm, resin and acrylic on board, 2013

Dorothy, H23 x W14.5 x D12 cm, resin and acrylic on birch wood ply

PM Stuart, what is your starting point for a piece of work?

SH I suppose I have a core or backbone of thought that runs through my practice and informs the work, whether that’s for pieces I’m making as studio work or commissions for specific places or collectors, it all starts in the same place. These are ideas around surface, support, objecthood, colour, space and encounter. This starting point is just that, a starting point, and I’ve learned to gradually let the work shift and slide around closer or further away from these as it evolves. On a more practical level, I regularly critique the work I’ve been making, pulling out the strong elements and questioning the weaker ones. This often leads onto the next work.

PM What are your influences, if any, and how have they translated into your current practice?

SH Donald Judd is a major influence, as well as Elsworth Kelly, Blinky Palermo, Dan Flavin, John McCracken, James Turrell, Robert Irwin, James Hyde …. and many more. They all inform ideas and thought in varying degrees from day to day, but to nail it down I suppose Judd’s essay on specific objects is a seminal work that had a huge influence on my studies at art school and hence the direction my work went after that. I think as an artist you are always picking up influences from other artists and throwing them into the mix to see what happens with your own work; sometimes the effect is instant and at other times it only comes into play years later.

PM How do you see the role of the applied arts in relation to fine art? Is there a distinction or is this becoming blurred, with the onset of digital media and other contemporary phenomena?

Untitled, H300 x W300 cm, resin and acrylic on tulip wood 2013

Mirror Bounce H75 x W85 cm, resin and acrylic on tulip wood 2008

Through the Barricade, H120 x W300 cm, resin and acrylic on tulip wood, 2008

SH Digital media, 3D printing or any other new development is just another tool for the artist to use, it doesn’t make it good or bad art - that’s all down to the artists themselves. I use a 3D program called FormZ to sketch and render initial ideas so I can see how they work from different points of view and quickly make numerous adjustments to form and colour. It’s a great tool for sketching with and I’d love to have a go at some 3D printing. History shows that artists have always explored new developments in technology and they will in the future, we’re an inquisitive bunch. Whether or not these take hold or not, only time will tell. With regard to applied art and fine art (I’m guessing you’re asking in relation to manufactured or hand-made etc.) there is often an overlap between the two, but whether something is manufactured or slaved over in the studio is down to the artist’s choice, and if that distinction is relevant to their practice, in the end its all just a way of realising work.

PM At first sight, your work seems to be concerned with a generative, systems, and/or geometric dynamic. To what extent would you situate your work within the traditions of abstraction and systems art?

SH As I mentioned earlier, my work explores space, encounter and objecthood and to that extent I’ve found the grid a useful structure that allows a formal reading in the same way a sentence does. It provides direction and movement through space, especially when used on a large scale. I also use separate elements in a work, as I see them as individual moments of contact between artist and materials, like the first touch of brush on canvas. Other than that, I don’t use systems, the works are more formal enquiries about encounter and object, using colour to identify spaces and draw the viewer around the work. They are about your individual encounter at the moment of seeing in that space, and not about someone else or somewhere else.