Artist Interview: Ayşe Kipri ‘Architectural Surfaces and Regeneration’
“That is exactly what interests me: how that border is defined. Images are at and two dimensional but in my works, I am considering ways and materials to extend an image outside of its surface. My ideas often came to mind from windows, billboards and by observing architectural surfaces.”
Senem Çağla Bilgin: If we go back to the starting point, did you start developing this idea and absorbing it into your practice while you were a student at Central Saint Martins? Or what did this idea mean to you in the beginning? You mentioned you used to focus on temporality and urban change; the temporality of the city’s interface, changing buildings, space, and architecture. What are the ideas behind your current works in progress?
Ayşe Kipri: I don’t completely remember my starting point, but in my Degree Show works I was interested in the temporality and the sense of incompleteness that urban regeneration brings. My current interests are now taking a direction towards ideas about modernist painting, Robert Ryman or Donald Judd for instance. I am interested in how they developed the practice of painting to a point where a painting has exceeded its frame and includes the surrounding space as part of it.
My works don’t represent any ideas directly and aren’t technically paintings in a traditional sense. They are more like sculptures and constructions, assemblages… Rosalind Krauss’s essay Horizontality, explains that painting has traditionally been associated with the vertical plane of the viewer’s body and she focuses on the relationship and the physical experience of the viewer with the painting. If you think of it, architecture is similar in those terms; it occupies the vertical plane. The reason why I think of frames is that these standardised everyday surfaces; advertising billboards, posters in bus stops, train stations, the focus is usually on the content or the image itself. However, if you were to take out the image, the attention would be on the frame itself as an object. You would start questioning its essence, function, and the origin of it as an object. Perforated aluminium is one of the materials I use in my work, which is commonly used in vents and to cover lighting in public spaces. I often make use of such industrial and architectural materials.
In my previous works, I focused more on referencing urban regeneration, industrialisation, and construction sites, however, I now only take elements from these spaces and focus more on the questions and qualities of painting and sculpture. If you look at my works, you will notice none of them are paintings. The way they occupy 3-D space and their construction makes them sculptures, however, the vertical reading puts them into the field of painting. You can see how painting exceeds itself and how the space around it affects the work down to its core.
Ayse Kipri, Structure IV, V (left) and VIII (right), 2018.
S.C.B: There is a thick border between painting and sculpture, but your works stand on such a thin line that it applies to both disciplines. When I look at the works from different angles, it gives me different ideas of which techniques they may belong to. This also becomes about my physical relationship with your works. What would you like to say about that?
A.K: That is exactly what interests me: how that border is defined. Images are flat and two dimensional but in my works, I am considering ways and materials to extend an image outside of its surface. My ideas often came to mind from windows, billboards and by observing architectural surfaces, I am somehow continuing with this idea. The torn and falling posters in advertising screens for example. Or the empty metal advertising frames at the beginning of the New Year. I am interested in these everyday surfaces as physical objects.
“My works don’t represent any ideas directly and aren’t technically paintings in a traditional sense. They are more like sculptures and constructions, assemblages… Rosalind Krauss’s essay Horizontality, explains that painting has traditionally been associated with the vertical plane of the viewer’s body and she focuses on the relationship and the physical experience of the viewer with the painting. If you think of it, architecture is similar in those terms; it occupies the vertical plane.”
S.C.B: If we think about your works’ relationship with the scale, have you ever considered bringing them completely off the wall and what effect would that have on your process?
A.K: My works’ relationship with scale and space is important to me and I am planning on working on bigger, more ambitious scales when I have the resources (time, space, money…) I am thinking of making more site-specific works. Maybe a free-standing one. Or maybe making use of the ceiling or a corner of the room. Generally, you would rarely ever see the corner of a gallery space used for hanging works. The corners are usually unused spaces, but I am questioning why that is. I am interested in this physical relationship work has with the site it’s placed in.
Ayse Kipri, Detail from the diptych WBS70, 2019.
S.C.B: Are there any artists or processes of making that inspire you or that you follow?
A.K: I always look at the works of other artists and try to make references or find links. Robert Ryman for instance. Most of his works are white monochromes and he started painting with no formal art education but just out of curiosity to test out the material possibilities of paint and materials. He then took it forward and exceeded the surface of the painting to include the frame and supports. In my works, I am attempting to test the possibilities and limits of the materials I use. Windows are also an important motif in my work. I am observant of my surroundings on my way back home or train rides. It’s something we see so often. I am fascinated by Edward Hopper’s works and how he used the idea of looking into windows in the city as a motif for the isolating experience of the modern city.
For more information visit: www.aysekipri.com