INTERVIEW WITH VANESA MUÑOZ. AFTER 5 YEARS OBSERVING HER 3DIMENSIONAL POETRY AND HOW SHE USES SCULPTURE AS A MODEL OF THOUGHT.
CARMEN HUST | FEBRUARY 2020

What motivates you? 
I would say that my motivation is basically vocational, if it would not be quite complicated to explain the sometimes agonizing path of the sculptor and her creative process. Well, the sculptor's work is, I think, the most prosaic of creative processes. It is quite similar to the work of a mason, sandpaper, cut, weld. Everything weighs and we emit noise.

In my case, the creative process is not an impulse to get carried away, a catharsis. Moreover, it is a matter of control of technique and matter, since I conceive that through the excellence of Techne the message can be reached more precisely by the observer without the need for prior knowledge of the abstract concept that is revealed in each of the pieces.
         And also, and not least, if I do not maintain some control in the process I can really have losses, in the best case a mistake can lead to losing expensive material, at worst, you can lose a finger with the radial.

It is more in this world of hyper production with such a convulsive historical context, sometimes one argues that it makes sense to produce objects that do not satisfy any basic need, this ethical crossroads is sometimes a big slab ... that is why the answer is simple, the need to create is stronger than the structural coherence of society, that is when the vocation becomes the engine, in which you have the constant motivation to perform the task day by day turning it into a PASSION and the sole purpose of life.
         It is a method to face the chaos of the physical world, by means of the technique I turn said chaos into something understandable for the subsequent digestion of reality, that makes my limits dissolve and transform the chaos into a generating light of creation.
         Sometimes as an artist, I feel like that Sisyphus of Albert Camus who embraces the absurdity of useless work.

What is your prefered media and why? 
My path of creation has always been the three dimensions, all my aesthetic ideas are configured with volume in my head, it would be in the Kantian style to say that the creative process is formed from the transcendental aesthetic a priori my ideas are formed with defined space and time.
         Although I work with previous sketches to acquire a clearer idea of where to approach the form and master the technique so that the message is clearer, the sculpture must speak for itself and through size, material and play with space intuit the nature of the idea behind.
​

The materials that I work on are very subject to the concept, because the emotional power of the materials is such that it cannot be ignored when creating, it is not the same sensitive perception a sculpture of lead wings, as in light feathers. In some it will give a feeling of lightness and others of heaviness thus maintaining the same form, the material transmits very different experiences.
         If I talk about reality constructions, I usually deal with wood that shows us the root of nature, if the piece talks about physics or mysteries of the universe, I deal with metals and aluminum, materials that I believe are energy communicators.

The size is concluded in the same way, it is not the same to treat mundane issues, which size will be of a dimension in accordance with man that if they are themes of the universe dimensions in which the subject cannot cover it. In the face of the tiny and the monumental, the body itself reacts in different ways.
 
Are your Works pre-thought or do the idea emerge on its own? 
Let’s assume that in 80% of the time I make way from a solid pre-thought idea, because otherwise I feel that the work lacks personality and simply falls into an ornament.

My source of inspiration is in the books of physics, mathematics and philosophy. In the case of physics and mathematics with the humble vision of a person of letters reading these books although at the time they put purists and very technical people I lose myself considerably, I understand the aesthetic structure behind that theory, if that idea it is in blue of iron or wood, if it is organic and simple or has to represent the uncertainty in optical games, it is the simile of listening to a song of foreign language, in which you do not fully understand the message but cannot stop humming because this symphony reaches you and it shakes you. And you could even create a totally coherent choreography based on that foreign language melody.
         The topics that interest me most are the construction of language and word as a unit of reality, the entanglement of particles, entropy and certain concepts of thermodynamics are highly attractive and rich in shapes and colors.

The other 20% work purely by instinct, but more as an issue of empirical knowledge acquisition to apply later to something more concrete. Where I experiment with contrasts, textures and possible successes and discards. The latter are usually destroyed in favor of blank space.
 
What’s the key to a good composition? 
I think that good composition will always be in creative honesty, because there is nothing less authentic than the pretentious and the newshound.

Either a simple stroke or a complex monumental sculpture must be consistent with what you want to express and not with what the listener wants to hear. The key to distinguishing a work of art from a simple decoration is in the equilateral triangle between head - hands and heart.
         If only the heart is applied in the composition, it can fall into the decoration, aesthetically effective but conceptually boring. If we only apply the head in the composition, we can enter a flat work without soul and strength. Without a doubt, I strongly believe that good composition must have certain dose of courage.

The conclusion of a good composition in plastic art is when the viewer intuits the nature of the message without the need for justification. Perceive the work from the heart, but with the consistent basis of the concept.

Are you influenced by other artists? 
Over the years, both my personal and professional evolution has led to what influenced me or captured my attention will vary according to the vital moment in which I was. It was not what I saw but the experience I gained in the observation.

Without a doubt there was a fracture a turning point after attending art school and philosophy studies I moved away from the totally anthropological approach and embraced abstraction as the only way to creation, I no longer talked about what I knew but what I knew I wanted to meet. The only source of inspiration was of pure philosophical and physical themes. The more I read about these topics, the more insignificant the human being is to me and the more passionate I find the search for the axiom, the tautology away from every human whim.
         From the theories of quantum mechanics, Gödel's (1906-1978) theory of incompleteness, the Cantor (1845-1918) continuum hypothesis or the discoveries about black holes are infinitely more interesting to me than any kind of existential problem.

---

So, I went from being influenced by sculptors like Louise Bourgeoise (1911-2010), Eva Hesse (1936-1970), Joseph Beuys (1921-1986). I also had some sympathy for the Russian constructivists and their utopian way of thinking about social evolution through art and thus raising awareness of the possibility of change. I was interested in both the formal and chromatic tensions of Anish Kapoor (b. 1954) or Richard Serra (b. 1938). The abstraction of the form and emotional value of chromatism. Influenced by the games of perception and coldness of the optical art of Cruz Díez (1923-2019) and the austerity and excellence of Oteiza's (1908-2003) forms and philosophical ideas about the aesthetic being reinterpreting Heidegger

This article about VANESA MUÑOZ is elaborated as a dialogue with the artist. Her participation in the magazine was in, ARTICULATE #3. Read, download or order your print version of the prior publication below

---