ART IN CONVERSATION
Julie Mehretu with Allie Biswas Portrait of Julie Mehretu, pencil on paper by Phong Bui.
kettle’s yard | january 22 – march 24, 2019
O
n the occasion of her current exhibition at Kettle’s Yard, Julie Mehretu spoke with me about her work from the past two decades. The images she has been creating during this time, in the form of paintings and drawings, consider the world we live in today through references to cities, architectural sites, geo-political events, and histories. She shows us an urban landscape that is dynamic and chaotic; constantly in motion. Simultaneously, Mehretu’s fascination with mark-making, and her commitment to drawing as an intuitive force, is vital to how she functions as an artist and to what she makes. Mehretu was born in Addis Ababa in 1970 to an Ethiopian father and an American mother. She grew up in East Lansing, Michigan, and now lives in New York. The following conversation took place over the course of a day in London, in October of last year, when an exhibition of Mehretu’s paintings was on display at White Cube. Allie Biswas (Rail): I wanted to start by asking you about the role that drawing initially played in your work. Julie Mehretu: When I started my MFA, I was making big, abstract oil paintings that looked gestural and expressionistic, even though I wasn’t interested in them looking like that. I would also include what I considered to be cultural indicators—things that might refer to an album or a part of a face, like a mask, for instance. Ultimately, they were super generic; I thought that I was making art, but that wasn’t the case at all. It was more like I was mimicking art, rather than really inventing something. A little later on, I began to think about my mark-making and realised that drawing was something that really generated my work and thinking. Rail: Were there any particular turning points that helped you to recognize this? Mehretu: One of the first projects I was given, by Michael Young, one of my most important teachers, required me to strip everything down for a moment and make just one mark on a piece of paper; a good sized piece of 26
Art
paper. I made hundreds and hundreds of them. They evolved on my wall like an enormous lexicon of my thinking. I then began making drawings of the marks in miniature. I realized that, for me, the marks took on particular notions of behaviour. I began to think of them as characters; the marks possessed social agency in their own right. I started to investigate my marks as social agents in space, charting terrain, creating cities and cosmologies. I learned something very profound and fundamental from this way of working—how to access that creative and inventive place within myself through drawing, which I likened to disembodied thinking. I was led by instinct, intuition. Learning this really shifted and changed everything for me as an artist, like finding the break. It opened up a way for me to create work. Rail: Your early paintings were constructed by layering drawings that you had made, one on top of the other, which you would then trace onto the canvas. This led to comparisons with cartographical documents. Was the urban landscape, which has gone on to permeate so much of your work, already beginning to inform your thinking at this stage? Mehretu: Yes, I had already begun to think of my small drawings as aerial maps of cities. I drew with ink and technical drafting pens onto thin layers of smooth, transparent acrylic that I applied on the canvas. As I layered them, and as they multiplied, I thought of them almost as small civilizations. They looked like maps to me. There was this tectonic quality that came into being, as you could see through several layers of drawing. I then began mapping the paintings, and then drawing those maps into the layers of paint—into the space of the paintings. Rail: So your process of working was leading to these leaps in productivity, both in terms of how your work looked and what it encouraged you to think about. Mehretu: Completely; how maps have functioned in the world; how maps have served particular narratives of power and loss; meta structures versus the place of the individual. It opened up so much for me conceptually. And even materially, the tools I was working with at the beginning, in terms of their technical nature, were tools for map-making and architectural drawing. It all had to conceptually make sense to me somehow—that was important. I don’t work that way at all anymore, but at that point I had to strip everything down to its bare minimum. I needed to create within these conceptual and material limits in order to find and build a language for myself, for my work. Rail: When discussing your paintings from this earlier period, you have referred to them as “story maps of no location,” implying that they are imagined places. Over the last decade you have made references to very specific locations, whether that be a building or a city or an architectural site. These places have not just acted as source materials for a work, in a potentially inconsequential sense, but have entirely shaped its development.