Interview with Jennifer Steinkamp

Rochelle Steiner: Your work is not just about the projected, abstract image, but also about its placement within space. Today, at the Museum, you did a lot of measuring of out galleries. Is that where your process begins?

Jennifer Steinkamp: It depends on the space. Sometimes the work will have something to do with the history of the site, or some kind of architectural detail. I usually pick up on something existing in the space. However, because Wonderland will be very constructed, I think this piece will be different. I may actually create the space in which the video appears. Lately I seem to be adding to the architecture of the exhibition space.

RS: This seems like an important shift, from playing off of existing architecture and maneuvering within it, to building the whole environment. How did that come about?

JS: I became more aware of what I'm doing with space and what it means to work with space. Gradually, I have come to understand differences between real and virtual space. But the possibility to build gives me more options for my work.

RS: By building a space in which to situate your work are you also trying to situate the viewer in a certain way?

JS: Definitely. I'm very interested in the viewer's experience. What I'm trying to do is similar to the goals of structuralist cinema, except I think I'm taking certain aspects further. Traditionally cinema takes you in and the viewer is passive. But structuralist filmmakers were trying to make viewers aware of themselves as they were watching films. They were interested in a more active participation. I think I do that as well, but I put more emphasis on the space.

RS: Are you trying to predict or achieve a specific response from your viewers?

JS: I definitely want you to become part of the work. You play an important role. As you realize your participation, you also understand that you have experienced a shift in perception. The work can alter your mental state. That is the ideal response I would like from a viewer. Recently it has been intriguing to work with interactivity. This brings up another level of consideration about the role of the viewers and their responses to my work. For example, I can set trigger points so that the image changes--or even slows down and stops--when viewers pass a certain point in the room.

RS: Can you describe how you actually make your pieces?

JS: That varies, too. I'll measure the space and input the dimensions into my computer so I have an exact three-dimensional model in virtual reality. Then I use the computer to calculate and compensate for projection distortions.

RS: At that point do you have an image in mind, or you working on the space alone.

JS: No, at that point there isn't an image. I usually have a direction in mind--for example, I might know that the piece will be horizontal or vertical, or I might have a speed in mind. Sometimes there's a new software effect that I would like to try. For example there's a software that simulates physical phenomena or nature. These tools can create lifelike motion. The motion in the work is very important; when it succeeds, the whole space becomes anthropomorphized in some way.

RS: Light is also an important element in your work, isn't it?

JS: Projected video is light. It has a quality of its own, and it's continually shifting. I tend to notice light more than the average person.

RS: Are you trying to make the space feel like it's in motion? Often the room starts to feel like it's shifting or breathing.

JS: Yes. I like the optical illusions that occur because of persistence of vision, or the way we resolve images in the brain. I am fascinated by those kinds of effects and the way they make you feel. I recently discovered a great one by accident while working on my piece for the Henry Art Gallery: the image is supposed to drip down, but my equipment accidentally froze and the still images appeared to drip upwards. It was bizarre. I thought it was great. I'm definitely going to use it. Many ideas occur through serendipity, and then I edit the result into the piece.

RS: I think your work reminds us that we are constantly in motion. We tend to forget that the world is not static. The motion in your work reminds me that everything else around me is moving.

JS: That's a nice thought. It's true, even down to the molecular level the world is moving and so are we. But we are only aware of it in an unconscious way. We are constantly seeing it, but we have to filter it out or we'd be seasick all the time.

RS: I've heard that a few of your pieces have made some viewers feel seasick.

JS: I think that's so great.

RS: Did you know that would happen?

JS: Yes. With Untitled at FOOD HOUSE I discovered that you can make people physically seasick with light, which is nonmaterial. It was just wonderful to find that out.

RS: Were you working to simulate breathing?

JS: I timed it to feel that way. That is one of many devices I use to involve the viewer. It's sort of like the scene in 2001 when the computer named Hal is about to kill Dave and you hear Dave breathing for the longest time. That's such a great scene--really scary--and you become Dave.

RS: You have included sound in a number of your pieces. How did these collaborations come about?

JS: I'll make a simulation of the  space and figure out the motion and imagery, and then I'll talk to the composer. I've talked to Andrew Bucksbarg about collaborating for Wonderland. The composer usually responds to the image and I leave that concepts of the sound to him.

RS: What are you trying to achieve with the sound element?

JS: I think it adds another spatial representation. Sound can change the dimension of a space; for example a square room can become circular as the sound travels across speakers. Sound cues the visuals, it anticipates when things will happen. It creates a mood by adding to the emotional level and guides you towards a way of thinking about the piece. For example if you have really soft music, you're going to have a different impression of the piece than if you hear something that's hardcore.

RS: You have mentioned before that you create a place in between real, virtual, and illusionistic space. Can you elaborate on those relationships ?

JS: My work is inspired by the tools and ideology of Virtual Reality. I investigate out experiential relationship to architectural space, real and imagined, as it is experienced through time. Virtual or representational space is combined with real space, and the two transform each other: real space is dematerialized through animation, while the virtual space of 3-D animation is corporealized through architecture, creating a sort of dreamlike experiential space, or altered state.

RS: There has been a lot of discussion about your work in terms of abstract painting, and you have been included in shows with painters. Is this an influence on you, and a relationship you'd like to promote?

JS: My influences come from all over. Abstract painting is an obvious reading, I am inspired by the conceptual and formal aspects of abstract painting, but there are also links to Structuralist film, Light and Space artists, architecture, music, and performance.

RS: Are you interested in the perceptual aspects of Light and Space environments?

JS: Those artists have had a huge influence on me in terms of the way they they consider the space, and how they take control of the light in their fabricated, almost architectural environments. There is certainly a link, but artists like James Turrell are more spiritually inclined than I am. Once there were people chanting in one of my pieces—that was very strange! I guess they were inspired by the light. But that's certainly not the point for me. 

RS: It seems that your work is moving beyond the art or video art context into popular culture and commercial projects. How do you feel about operating in these two worlds?

JS: I was on the Sci-Fi channel, which generated some attention to my work, and there was the U2 tour, and now the Staples Center, which is a new sports complex in Los Angeles. I've been approached about sets for theatre and dance. I'm continually considering my boundaries. I see my practice as experiment.

RS: I find it very interesting that the software -- the tool -- are influencing your imagery as well as helping you make it.

JS: It's not that different from the way technology has changed more traditional media, like sculpture. Without certain tools, Richard Serra couldn't make those huge ellipses. Artists are always limited by what color paints are available. But I don't feel limited at all: we've barely tapped into what can be done with the types of technology and software I'm using.

RS: Where do you think technology might be taking us in terms of art?

JS: Well, one fairly obvious point is that as computers become faster we will be able to make more imagery in real time, and so art will become more responsive or behavioral. And then there are the developments in Virtual Reality. We don't know exactly what that will develop into yet, which is how people felt about video 35 years ago. Anybody who is a pioneer doesn't necessarily know what they've got. Actually, I think in the 21st century art will become more genetic or biological, I will be out of the loop.

RS: Have you seen the goggles that project images onto their own lenses so you're looking directly into what appears to be a screen, but is only the size of lenses? I saw a lot of artists working with these new gadgets in Japan.

JS: I refuse to have people wear goggles, although it's tempting because the image really changes dramatically. But I don't want people to wear an apparatus when they look at my work. I'm very strict about that. I don't like having to wear the 3D glasses to experience some of Mariko Mori's work. But if we get to a point where we can project 3-D without the glasses, that would interest me.

It's a lot of work to keep up with all the changes and advancements in technology. I do a lot of research, but at the same time, that's not the point of my work. I am really intrigued by advances in technology, but only in light of creating and transforming spaces and experiences.

Originally published in Rochelle Steiner, Wonderland. © Saint Louis Art Museum, 2000. All rights reserved, courtesy Saint Louis Art Museum.