LYNN HERSHMAN LEESON: WHEN YOU GROW UP WITH SUCH EXCLUSION – WHEN THE ONLY WAY YOU COULD SHOW IN A GALLERY WAS BY BEING MARRIED TO A MAN WHO WAS SHOWING THERE – IT BECOMES SO NORMALIZED THAT PEOPLE DON’T EVEN SEE IT AS EXCLUSION. THEY SIMPLY ASSUME WOMEN DID NOT MAKE ART. SO, WHEN OPPORTUNITIES
FOR CONNECTIVITY, CONVERSATION, AND GENUINE EXCHANGE APPEAR, IT WAS AND IS INCREDIBLY EXCITING. AS A FEMALE ARTIST FORTY YEARS AGO, I HAD NO COLLEAGUES, NO COMMUNITY, NO ONE TO DISCUSS ISSUES WITH OR EVEN TO DEBATE. REALIZING THERE COULD BE MORE POSSIBILITIES WAS A COMPLETE SHIFT IN PERSPECTIVE. NOW THERE’S MORE FREEDOM, MORE PROGRAMS, BIGGER AUDIENCES, AND FAR GREATER OPPORTUNITIES FOR COMMUNICATION. THE ISOLATION IS LESS PREVALENT THAN BEFORE. COLLABORATING WITH ALL KINDS OF PEOPLE – ESPECIALLY YOUNGER GENERATIONS – BRINGS NEW ENERGY. WHEN YOU GET OLDER, YOU REALIZE YOU DON’T KNOW EVERYTHING. YOU NEED YOUNGER PEOPLE IN YOUR LIFE TO LEARN FROM, AND HAT’S WHERE THE VITALITY IS.

LHL: PEOPLE TODAY DON’T ALWAYS REALIZE HOW DIFFERENT IT WAS. YES, PREJUDICE AND DISCRIMINATION STILL EXIST, BUT IT’S NOT COMPARABLE TO 40 YEARS AGO, WHEN WOMEN HAD ALMOST NO VOICE. THERE WERE ZERO FEMALE CURATORS OR MUSEUM DIRECTORS. I REMEMBER THE FIRST FEMALE MUSEUM DIRECTOR IN SAN FRANCISCO, SUZANNE FOLEY. BACK THEN, YOU WERE COMPLETELY ISOLATED,
AND NOBODY TOOK YOU SERIOUSLY. IT’S VERY DIFFERENT NOW BECAUSE AT LEAST THERE’S A CHANCE. SUCCESSFUL WOMEN ARTISTS, CURATORS, AND MUSEUM DIRECTORS HAVE PAID THE PRICE AND PAVED THE WAY FOR OTHERS TO HAVE MORE OPPORTUNITIES.
AS TIME GOES ON, EQUALITY IS BEING INSISTED UPON MORE AND MORE.

LHL: I WAS THINKING ABOUT DANIEL SPOERRI. THERE WAS A DINNER FOR HIM WHERE HE FLIPPED THE TABLE UPSIDE DOWN AND THREW ALL THE FOOD AGAINST THE WALL, AND EVERYONE THOUGHT IT WAS HILARIOUS. THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT IT LIKE IT WAS GREAT. IF I TRIED TO DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT, I’D BE BANISHED FROM THE CITY, MAYBE EVEN THE COUNTRY. BUT BACK THEN, PEOPLE ACCEPTED THAT KIND OF BEHAVIOR AS JUST BEING AN ARTIST OR BEING INTERESTING BECAUSE THEY WERE THE RIGHT DEMOGRAPHIC. AT THE SAME TIME, THERE WAS ALWAYS PREJUDICE ABOUT WHAT WOMEN WERE ALLOWED TO DO AND HOW THEY HAD TO BEHAVE JUST TO BE INVITED INTO PUBLIC SPACES. SOMETIMES, PEOPLE DON’T EVEN NOTICE WHEN WOMEN ARE BEING EXCLUDED OR OVERLOOKED. IT’S BETTER NOW BECAUSE THERE ARE QUOTAS THAT PEOPLE HAVE TO MEET, BUT IT’S STILL NOWHERE NEAR WHERE IT SHOULD BE.

LHL: I WENT THROUGH A LOT OF DEPRESSION AND STRUGGLED TO UNDERSTAND WHAT I COULD DO IN THE WORLD, ESPECIALLY GIVEN ALL THE DISCRIMINATION. EVENTUALLY, I REALIZED THAT I COULD DO SOMETHING NO ONE ELSE COULD – THAT IF I CREATED MY ART, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER ANYONE EVER SAW IT, IT WOULD BE SOMETHING UNIQUE TO ME. THAT’S WHAT KEPT ME GOING. I’VE ALWAYS EQUATED BEING AN ARTIST WITH BEING ALIVE BECAUSE I’M NOT SURE I WOULD HAVE SURVIVED WITHOUT THAT UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT I COULD DO AND CONTRIBUTE TO THE WORLD, WHETHER OR NOT IT WAS RECOGNIZED DURING MY LIFETIME.

LHL: I DIDN’T EXPECT IT TO HAPPEN. I WAS AMAZED WHEN THE OPPORTUNITIES FINALLY CAME, AND THE BIG BREAKTHROUGH WAS WITH PETER WEIBEL AT ZKM KARLSRUHE. THAT WAS THE FIRST TIME THAT WORK WAS SHOWN, AND SOME OF IT WAS OVER 50 YEARS OLD. I WAS IN MY 70S, AND SOME OF THE WORKS HAD NEVER BEEN SEEN BEFORE. AGAIN, IT WAS KIND OF A MIRACLE THAT IT HAPPENED, AND IT ONLY HAPPENED BECAUSE I KNEW VALIE EXPORT WHO WAS ANOTHER WOMAN ARTIST. SHE HAD COME TO SAN FRANCISCO AND NEEDED A PLACE TO STAY. AT THAT TIME, PETER WAS VALIE EXPORT’S BOYFRIEND, AND THAT’S HOW I MET HIM. SO, GOING FROM NEVER EXPECTING TO HAVE ANY EXHIBITIONS OR BOOKS IN MY LIFETIME TO HAVING THAT SHOW MADE A DIFFERENCE. IT ALSO MADE A DIFFERENCE FOR OTHERS BECAUSE IT WAS WRITTEN ABOUT, PEOPLE NOTICED IT, AND WORK THAT OTHERS HAD BEEN CREDITED WITH – WORK I HAD DONE 10 YEARS EARLIER – WAS FINALLY RECOGNIZED. I STARTED TO GET SOME REAL REVIEWS, WHICH I HADN’T RECEIVED BEFORE UNLESS I WROTE THEM MYSELF. THEN, SLOWLY, PEOPLE BEGAN TO INVITE ME TO PARTICIPATE IN THINGS. THAT WAS REALLY THE BEGINNING. I DON’T THINK ANY OF THIS WOULD
HAVE HAPPENED WITHOUT THAT SHOW. HISTORY STARTED TO CATCH UP, AND IT HAPPENED DURING MY LIFETIME.

LHL: THEIR NAMES WERE PRUDENCE JURIS, GAY ABANDON, AND HERBERT GOOD. YOU CAN’T PLAY INTO EXISTING PREJUDICES; YOU HAVE TO BE CLEVER ABOUT HOW YOU
APPROACH IT SO THAT YOUR WORK IS NOT JUST ACCEPTED BUT ALSO MAKES A DIFFERENCE. BUT I ALSO THINK YOU HAVE TO STAND YOUR GROUND – YOU CAN’T BE SUPPRESSED. YOU HAVE TO FIND A WAY TO GET AROUND THOSE BARRIERS. WRITING A REVIEW ISN’T THAT MUCH WORK, ESPECIALLY WHEN IT’S ABOUT MY OWN WORK. WHEN I WROTE BIG ARTICLES FOR STUDIO INTERNATIONAL THAT REQUIRED MORE RESEARCH,
IT WAS A DIFFERENT PROCESS; WRITING FOR DAILY, THROWAWAY NEWSPAPERS WAS JUST JOTTING DOWN MY IMPRESSIONS. ACTUALLY, IT WAS FUN, AND IT EVENTUALLY BECAME MY MASTER’S THESIS. I DIDN’T START IT AS A THESIS, BUT I LATER DECIDED TO USE IT FOR THAT PURPOSE, SO IT WAS USEFUL.

LHL: WHEN YOU WRITE SOMETHING, IT HELPS CLARIFY WHAT YOU’RE THINKING ABOUT, SOMETIMES EVEN THINGS YOU DIDN’T REALIZE YOU WERE THINKING ABOUT. IT’S THE SAME AS WHEN YOU TALK INTO A CAMERA; ALL OF A SUDDEN, YOU START TALKING ABOUT THINGS YOU DIDN’T EXPECT. IT’S A WAY OF GETTING CLEAR ABOUT WHAT’S INSIDE YOUR BRAIN. LATER, I WAS TRYING TO TEACH MYSELF HOW TO USE A CAMERA, AND AT THE TIME, AROUND THE EARLY 1980S, I COULDN’T GET ANY FORMAL INSTRUCTION. I WAS TEACHING, SO I WOULD BORROW A CAMERA AND A MICROPHONE, BUT NOBODY WOULD ACTUALLY TEACH ME HOW TO USE THEM. IT WAS ALL TRIAL AND ERROR. I COULDN’T AFFORD TO HIRE AN ACTOR, SO I JUST SAT IN FRONT OF THE CAMERA AND STARTED TALKING. THAT’S HOW THE ELECTRONIC DIARIES BEGAN – RECORDING MYSELF SAYING THINGS I DIDN’T EVEN REALIZE I WAS THINKING ABOUT. THEN OTHER PEOPLE STARTED TO RELATE TO THOSE VIDEOS. I KEPT GOING WITH IT BECAUSE IT WAS EASY TO DO; ONCE I LEARNED HOW TO OPERATE THE EQUIPMENT, I DIDN’T NEED ANYONE ELSE.

LHL: WELL, I WANTED TO TRY WORKING WITH CHATGPT BECAUSE WRITING A SCRIPT IS A LOT OF WORK. I THOUGHT THAT IF I HAD CHATGPT WRITE IT, I COULD SEE WHAT IT
CAME UP WITH. BUT IT WAS REALLY DISAPPOINTING BECAUSE IT HAS NO SENSE OF HUMOR AND NO REAL RESONANCE OR DEPTH. I HAD TO BE VERY CREATIVE IN THE QUESTIONS I ASKED IN ORDER TO SHAPE A SCRIPT THAT MIGHT BE WORTH PRODUCING. IT WAS AN IN- TERESTING EXERCISE, BUT ALSO
DISAPPOINTING BECAUSE I THINK I WAS PROJECTING HUMAN POSSIBILITIES ONTO A PRO- GRAM THAT SIMPLY DOES NOT HAVE THEM. WHAT IT WROTE WAS VERY STRAIGHTFORWARD
AND, FRANKLY, BORING.

LHL: NO, I PUT THAT ASIDE. I DIDN’T FIND IT INTERESTING ENOUGH TO WORK WITH, MAYBE BECAUSE I TRIED IT SO EARLY WHEN IT WAS JUST STARTING. IT DIDN’T HOLD MY INTEREST BECAUSE THE RESPONSES WERE TOO BORING, AND I HAD TO SPEND TOO MUCH TIME PRE-CONFIGURING MY QUESTIONS JUST TO GET SOMETHING INTERESTING. IT WAS NOT A DIALOGUE AT ALL. MAYBE IF I TRIED IT NOW, IT WOULD BE
SMARTER OR OFFER MORE DEPTH. BUT AT THE TIME, IT DID NOT DO ANYTHING FOR ME. IT WAS VERY STRAIGHTFORWARD AND NOT SOMETHING YOU WANTED TO KEEP TALKING TO FOR LONG.

LHL: WELL, IF I WANTED TO LEARN ABOUT SOMETHING, I HAD TO DO IT MYSELF. THERE WAS NOBODY TO HELP IN SCHOOL – IN FACT, THEY OFTEN MADE FUN OF ME WHEN I WANTED TO DO SOMETHING OTHER THAN TRADITIONAL WATERCOLOR. THEY WOULDN’T ACCEPT MY WORK, AND I WASN’T EVEN ALLOWED TO SUBMIT IT FOR REVIEW. THE ADMINISTRATION INSISTED I CHANGE MY MAJOR, SO I SWITCHED TO BIOLOGY.

LHL: THERE ARE NEW POSSIBILITIES, BUT IT’S NOT AS REVOLUTIONARY AS DIGITAL ART. WITH DIGITAL ART, YOU COULD DO THINGS THAT WERE COMPLETELY NEW, ESPECIALLY
FOR PEOPLE WHO HADN’T HAD ACCESS TO THAT BEFORE. IT OPENED UP A BROADER AUDIENCE AND THE ABILITY TO COMMUNICATE INSTANTLY AROUND THE WORLD. AI IS BASICALLY A SOPHISTICATED SEARCH ENGINE. I THINK PEOPLE ARE BECOMING MORE DEMANDING ABOUT WHAT TECHNOLOGY SHOULD BE ABLE TO DO. WE’VE HAD MAJOR BREAKTHROUGHS IN THE LAST 10 YEARS, BUT RIGHT NOW, I DON’T SEE ANY REAL BREAK- THROUGHS – EXCEPT MAY- BE THE POSSIBILITY OF LEAVING THE PLANET. STILL, PEOPLE EXPECT AND WANT MORE. I HAD AN ADVANTAGE LIVING IN THE BAY AREA BE- CAUSE YOU GET TO HEAR ABOUT THINGS BE- FORE THEY BECOME PUB- LIC OR TAKEN OVER BY TECHNOLOGY. UNDERSTANDING WHAT SILICON VALLEY IS DOING, THE PROGRAMS THEY’RE WORKING ON, AND THE PROGRAMMERS THEY BRING HERE HAS BEEN REALLY HELPFUL IN MY CAREER. I DOUBT I WOULD BE DOING THE KIND OF WORK I DO IF I LIVED IN NEW YORK. LIVING NEAR SILICON VALLEY MADE IT POSSIBLE.

LHL: I SPENT A LOT OF MY TIME GROWING UP AT THE CLEVELAND MUSEUM, ALWAYS WANTING TO BE THERE, LOOKING AT REMBRANDTS, CÉZANNE, AND ALL THE DRAWINGS. BUT IT WAS SOMETHING FROM THE PAST. I USED TO COPY THEM, TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE ARTISTS WERE THINKING WHEN THEY MADE THEIR WORK AND WHAT THEIR LIVES WERE LIKE. BUT IT DIDN’T DEAL WITH THE PRESENT OR THE POSSIBILITIES THAT EXIST SINCE THEN. THE BEST ARTISTS INVENT THINGS THAT HAVEN’T BEEN DONE BEFORE, THINGS THAT REFLECT THEIR PARTICULAR TIME. SO FOR ME, GOING BACK AND DOING THOSE KINDS OF THINGS WOULD BE MORE HISTORICAL WORK RATHER THAN EXPLORING NEW POSSIBILITIES WITH CURRENT INVENTIONS.

LHL: I DIDN’T DO THINGS TO BE THE FIRST; I DID THEM BECAUSE THEY WERE INTERESTING OR DIDN’T EXIST YET. I HAD TO CREATE TECHNOLOGIES AND MEET PROGRAMMERS
TO DEVELOP TOOLS THAT WOULD ALLOW ME TO MAKE WHAT I WANTED. IT WASN’T ABOUT BEING FIRST; IT WAS ABOUT MAKING SOMETHING I WANTED TO CREATE. FORTUNATELY, LIVING IN THE BAY AREA MEANT PROGRAMMERS WERE ACCESSIBLE AND AFFORDABLE. THEY LIKED DOING THIS KIND OF WORK AND ENJOYED GOING TO EXHIBITIONS WHERE THEY HELPED CREATE SOMETHING. I STILL WORK WITH SOME
OF THOSE PROGRAMMERS AFTER ALMOST TWO DECADES. SOMETIMES, NOT HAVING RESOURCES FORCES YOU TO INVENT BETTER WAYS OF DOING THINGS. WE MADE THE FILM TEKNOLUST IN JUST FOUR DAYS USING VIRTUAL SETS I INVENTED SO I DIDN’T HAVE TO BUILD PHYSICAL ONES. TEKNOLUST WAS PRODUCED ON A MODEST BUDGET BUT IS KNOWN FOR ITS INNOVATIVE USE OF TECHNOLOGY AND STORYTELLING. EVEN WITH THE FINANCIAL CHALLENGES, IT BECAME AN IMPORTANT WORK IN MY CAREER AND HAS BEEN SHOWCASED IN RETROSPECTIVES AND EXHIBITIONS. IT WAS A DIFFICULT PROCESS BECAUSE I LOST THE BUDGET FOR TEKNOLUST SHORTLY BEFORE FILMING STARTED. THE PRODUCER AND ATTORNEY ANNOUNCED THE NIGHT BEFORE
TILDA SWINTON WAS CAST ON A “PAY OR PLAY” CONTRACT THAT THERE WERE NO FUNDS AVAILABLE. DESPITE THIS SETBACK AND NEARLY FACING BANKRUPTCY, I PUSHED THROUGH AND COMPLETED THE FILM.

LHL: I DIDN’T ORIGINALLY KNOW IT WAS GOING TO BE A FILM. I JUST NOTICED THERE WERE WOMEN DOING AMAZING THINGS IN ART. WHENEVER A WOMAN ARTIST CAME TO SAN FRANCISCO, I’D GET A CAMERA AND INTERVIEW THEM IN MY LIVING ROOM, NOT KNOWING WHAT WOULD COME OF IT. IT WAS A WAY TO MEET THEM AND SEE WHAT THEY WERE DOING FOR MYSELF. EVENTUALLY, I HAD SO MANY VIDEOTAPES OF
THESE INCREDIBLE WOMEN THAT HARDLY ANYONE HAD HEARD OF, AND SINCE I WAS TEACHING, I THOUGHT I NEEDED TO PUT IT ALL TOGETHER SO PEOPLE COULD SEE WHO THE WOMEN REALLY MAKING BREAKTHROUGHS WERE. THAT’S HOW IT HAPPENED. I DID SEVERAL INTERVIEWS OVER TIME – SOMETIMES I’D INTERVIEW SOMEONE, THEN TWO YEARS LATER THEY’D COME BACK FOR ANOTHER, AND IF I WENT TO NEW YORK, I’D DO LONGER INTERVIEWS WITH THE MOST INTERESTING ARTISTS. THE WOMEN WHO WERE INVENTING THE WORK MADE A REAL DIFFERENCE, BUT ALSO HOW THEY
COMMUNICATED MATTERED. SOME GREAT ARTISTS CAN’T TALK ABOUT THEIR WORK WELL, SO THEY’RE HARD TO USE IN A FILM. OTHERS ARE ANIMATED, ARTICULATE, AND MAKE GREAT SUBJECTS. I USUALLY PREPARED QUESTIONS IN ADVANCE, BUT I RARELY USED THEM – IT WAS MORE OF A CONVERSATION BECAUSE I NEVER KNEW WHAT WAS GOING TO HAPPEN. I WASN’T EVEN INTENDING TO MAKE A FILM.

LHL: THE PROJECT WAS REALLY HARD. I AM GLAD I DID IT BUT WON’T DO IT AGAIN. MANY OF THE WOMEN WERE DIFFICULT TO WORK WITH AND HAD NEVER BEEN IN SITUATIONS LIKE THAT BEFORE. SOME WANTED TO RE-EDIT THE FILM TO MAKE THEMSELVES LOOK MORE IMPORTANT, AND EVENTUALLY, I DECIDED THAT WAS THE END OF IT.

LHL: IT’S QUITE A BIT MORE ANXIETY-PROVOKING THAN ANYTHING ELSE I’VE DONE. MY DAUGHTER WILL READ IT. I HAVE TO PREPARE HER FOR KNOWING THE PERSONAL HISTORY. YOU NEVER KNOW HOW PEOPLE WILL REACT. THEY MIGHT HATE IT OR MOST PROBABLY CRITICIZE IT, BUT IT WAS SOMETHING I HAD TO DO.

OB: There are certain materials like earth and flowers that I paint. The perfume was built behind the bright blue in the painting, and also behind the flowers, the earth, fertility, and humidity.

OB: Guerlain has supported me for many years. And its a perfect match since I love perfumes and have been collecting them for a long time.

OB: A collaboration with a brand is much more complicated. You have to take certain criteria into account. At the same time, it is very interesting because it opens your work to the public and pushes you out of your comfort zone.

OB: Exactly. Also, when I make a collaboration like this, there is a deadline – and that is good for me. I need it.

OB: I would tell her to be prepared for everything and to stay true to herself.

YS: I became interested in figurative sculpture and started exploring different ways of making them. I think the first figurative work that I made was right after this show in London and in some way was the other side of that screen I discussed—in that it shows the person in front of it. The work was a self-portrait made of a down jacket that is
stuck in an empty desktop computer tower, the object people used to have in offices and homes below the desk before Laptops. The jacket is arranged or draped to look like there is an actual person in the jacket, so that the mental picture that is created is of someone actually living in the computer, or being stuck in a computer. Art doesn’t translate too well into language, so it sounds silly here. But as a sculpture I think it was formally quite interesting and successful. I later scanned this work and had it cast it in plaster, which totally changed the character of it. I showed the plaster cast on a little rabbit fur for my degree show in 2014.

YS: It was in that same period, exactly. I had moved from Berlin to London in 2012 for my Masters at the Royal College of Art, and the workshops there allowed me to try some new and more elaborate fabrication methods than I had used before. The first work I made there was a life-sized Emma Watson sculpture CNC-milled out of one solid block of Swiss pear wood. It took weeks to first program and then mill it, and I left it just like it came out of the machine. The only thing I added to the figure was this silver hedgehog necklace, because I had read online somewhere that it was her favorite animal. Since there was no other finishing or sanding, one can still see the way the robot was programed, the tracks it was running along and where it couldn’t quite get to etc. I find that quite beautiful.

YS: On a personal level, going back to what I said above, it came at at time when I was living in a long distance relationship, maybe feeling a bit lonely and spending a lot of time on my computer. On a societal scale I think the internet was still somehow new, especially social media, and there was this broader cultural shift towards life spent online, and the alienation that comes from it. It was also the time of the “dark web” with Silk Road and new online forums such as 4chan. There was a series of hacks targetingcelebrity phones which resulted in leaked private imagery— what you would call “nudes” today, and a lot of them
were fake. Living in London and being a Harry Potter fan, I was particularly interested in the attention that Emma Watson got online. I found it interesting to create a work that picked up on this contemporary moment, to reflect on this new character of the internet loner, but to address it within the traditional medium of figurative sculpture. I thought of Pinocchio and how one can now create a companion out of nothing by 3d printing or in my case milling it out wood. In an art historical sense it also aligned with this burgeoning movement in young art that came to be labeled as “Post-Internet” art, where people were interested in somehow bringing digital matter into physical space, or at least bridging the two worlds via objects in the real world beyond just phones and screens.

YS: Yes I presented a group of these sculptures with an Emma Watsons face but with fantasy bodies in my first major gallery show at Guido W. Baudach in Berlin 2014. The figures were in the nude with short hair, crossed legs and only their hands covering their breasts. The show got
some positive press coverage, which I think then came to the attention of a feminist Facebook group and some young London artists in specific. They took offense in the work and accused me of objectifying the female figure. I was called a misogynist, had magazines call me for comments and then fairs, exhibitions and sales canceled because of it. I would almost say that I was canceled before that was even a thing yet.

YS: I focused more on myself I think, and maybe lost a bit of my youthful energy at the same time. Shortly after my exhibition at Guido’s I moved to New York and did my first exhibition here at the Swiss Institute in 2015. The show was framed as a fictitious Honey Moon between a mermaid Emma Watson and me, and followed by an exhibition in Mexico in 2016 for which I created this stalker persona
obsessed with Kristen Stewart and Twilight. As a result of my move to New York maybe, and some other changes in my personal life, this fan fiction and celebrity part of my work slowly lost some of its relevance and interest to me. I tried to make work that was more personal and maybe more universal in subject matter at the same time. In 2017 I made an exhibition titled Single which had a picture of myself in the nude as an invite, and mainly consisted of ready-made sculptures of myself, sort of domesticobjects-assemblages. After that I did a show series called Primal in 2018 that presented very simplified, almost
pre-historic wooden figures. I combined these with a lifesized wooden Legolas sculpture, which I made after leaked nude images of Orlando Bloom appeared online. So the the celebrity aspect never fully went away, I just started to juxtapose it with other elements.

YS: Totally. In 2019 I did a show called Boys for which I made a plaster self-portrait of myself as a little boy based on a family video. In some way this was in response to the cultural climate of #metoo at the time, but it then also led me to the explore other elements of my past and the cultural archetypes that I grew up with. It led me to make the country boy plucking flowers next, and then the Snowman with the hearts as well as some of the new animal sculptures. Most recently I started combining all these figures into larger groups, which is something that keeps me busy and really excited today.

YS: The work you mention is titled Day and Night and I made the first iteration of it in 2021 for an exhibition in Mexico titled Eternity. In some way it is a reflection on masculinity which has been an interest of mine from the beginning and I guess heightened with the climate you describe. But I think this specific work comes without any feeling of guilt. I see it as an exploration of the relationship between softness and strength, much beyond the current moment I hope. What I see in the work is an oversized dandelion flower that props up a muscular Greek or Roman hero figure which is missing a leg. The flower is draped
around the torso so that it becomes the missing leg that the figure is precariously leaning on. I see the two elements as forming this fragile unit, but at the same time I could imagine them walking away together like this, him using the flower as a sort of crotch. I find it very poetic and nice how they together manage to defy the gravitational pull, which
is sort of the cleansing force of any standing sculpture.

YS: It differs. In the case of this work we just spoke about, the flower represents things like beauty or poetry or art in my mind, without wanting to load too much onto the work by saying this. I mean that it stands for what contrasts with the physical strength of the figure, but still supports it if that makes sense. In some other works the flower is personified I would say, even the next work where there are two flowers growing out of a concrete block. To me they become almost like figures, I see them as a couple that is flirting with each other in some way.
It’s this little moment of tenderness in a slightly hostile environment that I like about it. And then in some later works like in Laetitia, the flower to me represents a person outside of the arrangement. For this
figure the large flower is turned towards the woman and then child as if it was given to them.

YS: I’m glad to hear that. Damien Hirst speaks about having to make a fly piece after making a spot painting, just to balance the sort of good with the bad, the pretty with the ugly. I never had it like that. I like to make things that make you feel good, things that give you a deep and
hopefully warm feeling. In driving school you learn that if you look at the tree you will hit it, I think that is a good strategy for life also. If you want to be a happy person, think happy thoughts. The world moves by positive action not negative thought, so I really try to be engaged in the former 248

YS: I would need to think more about that. When it comes to the purpose of art, I often think about this quote by Gerhard Richter, who said that “art brushes the dust of the everyday”, which I find very beautiful and right. It can touch on the silly as well as the essential parts of the human experience, but in a way that is pure and complete. What I mean is that the world is always perfect within a work of art, not in a moral sense, but more in the way that a given moment can also be perfect. It’s like cleaning up your house, which gives you that one moment of enlightenment when things are all in place. Or that one first
breath of clean air when you step out in the morning, or looking at your kid when it sleeps or moves in a cute way. Art is exactly like this moment, but it never ends. It’s eternally perfect.

YS: I think it was Andy Warhol who said “Switzerland is great, it’s finished”. Which I think is a very interesting observation. My one friend always says about New York— it will be great once it’s finished. Which obviously it will never be. I’m not sure if this really captures anything at
all, but it’s easier to do things in New York. Someone once wrote about my work that “Nothing glamorous ever came from Switzerland,” which I think is an interesting observation. In Switzerland the ultimate achievement and thing another person could say about you, is that you are normal. It’s the absolute peak of Swiss-ness and the real ingredient if you want to belong—is not to stand out. As a young person I think this can feel limiting and disempowering. But the older I get the more I value the understatement and also the social cohesion in some way. There is a true sense of quality and people care about doing the
right thing and about doing things right. I appreciate that today.

YS: What I can see is that my work used to be much more loud and American while I was in Europe and much more Swiss since now that I’m in New York. Today I’m interested in making figures that are centered within themselves, not looking for attention or reliant on an audience or other people. The best I can hope for is to imbue them with a kind spirit, to put a little fire in their hearts. I read something the other day about monasteries, and how some of them are spectacularly modest. I really like that expression and idea, it’s something I strive towards. Maybe it’s my protestant upbringing but I do find true joy and beauty in restraint. I think the spirit lives in simple things. As Carl
Jung famously said, “if you are looking for god and haven‘t found him yet, you are not looking low enough.”

YS: In my mind the genuine opportunity of art is to speak about the things which don’t change over time. Art doesn’t get better with time, it’s not like technology where there is some kind of development and a strong notion of progress. I don’t think art gets better or worse. If I think about a person in a cave, they would carve a figure out of a piece
of rock or bone that might look quite similar to my onyx works. And in spirit and function it is probably pretty close to what I described with the Emma Watson work above—as in the first human carving themselves a friend or thinking about someone they saw in the forest. What I mean here is even though the Emma Watson work is extremely specific, and it took 2000 years of recorded cultural history to get to a place where all these references are in places, and where the technology exist to make it in such a realistic manner by a machine, to me it is no different than a piece of driftwood that barely resembles a figure at all. I’m interested in the whole spectrum of figuration, and think that especially the combination of these different forms, expressions and materials are thrilling to me. While there is a technological graveyard
for a lot of things that came in between, I would say that the earliest human artistic expression can still be as valid and meaningful as anything great made today. Art is like a perpetuum mobile that gives endless energy once it’s created, without ever losing any. Forever.