MASS MoCA interview for the upcoming “Becoming Animal” art exhibition.

Nato Thompson:  As an artist who participates politically in multiple facets (author, street activist, propaganda producer), how do you see the question of animals fitting in?

Nicolas Lampert: Animals are part of every dialogue no matter what medium one works in. Everything is interconnected, a notion that is apparent in the natural world but is largely ignored in an industrialized mindset. It is startling how the subject of animals has largely been ignored although their presence surrounds us whether wild, domesticated, utilized for labor, clothing or food.  We cannot survive without animals. Addressing issues of animals and the natural world is paramount not just for artists, but for everyone. In all too many cases, the concern for animals is left to scientists, environmentalists, and farmers, which further compartmentalizes the issue, leaving the responsibility up to the “specialists”. Yet there are no true specialists on this issue and no dialogue on animals can be complete without also looking at the larger systemic issues of hierarchical structures, consumerism and corporate control that reigns over the issue. For an artist, the issue of animals is all encompassing and perhaps through visual work, an artist can encourage more discussion on the subject. ‘Animals” is also a very broad term that applies to us. Humans are animals, albeit one that can be extraordinary selfish and shortsighted.

As the name implies, in your Machine Animal collages you combine a piece of machinery with an animal or insect. This hybridization can lead to an unsteady feeling as these worlds that are supposedly distinct suddenly collide. How do you feel about this synthesis?

Uneasy. The collages are a warning sign and meant to provoke critical thought. The juxtaposition of the two supposed separate entities allows the viewer to come to their own conclusions on both animals and machines, alone and when they merge. Loosely, the collages speak of a world engulfed in its own technology. An uncertain future where genetic engineering, robotics and science have run amok. The collages speak of extinction, metamorphosis and the definition of progress. Should progress be measured by profits and asserting dominance over nature or could progress be measured by living in relative balance with the environment and creating minimal disruption to the cycles of the natural world? In some cases, certain machine-animal collages are terrifying and appear as a blueprint for a future militaristic design. Locust Tank is a harrowing image that speaks not only of a technology devoid of a human element (a soldier) but of a mindset to conquer. At the same time, I have noticed children react to Locust Tank with wonder and astonishment similar to viewing images of dinosaurs. What does one make of this? Is the interest in the tank, the insect or both? 

At times your work almost has a nihilistic feeling to it as though there is simply no controlling the forces of technology and capital that are acting upon culture (particularly that of the U.S.) As you indicated, Locust Tank lends a sense of a swarming fatalism.  

Looking at world politics and the state of the environment it would be difficult not to be alarmed. To ignore these problems or to accept them as beyond our capacity to fix would be irresponsible. I think we can control the forces of technology and capital but the time to act is now. Locust Tank is metaphoric of industrialism and capital rolling over the planet, but it does not mean that it can’t be derailed. We are seeing a large-scale rebellion in the Southern hemisphere against the ideas of the World Bank, the IMF, and the WTO. History has taught us that people’s movements are both unexpected and very successful.  The grass roots idea of protecting and sustaining local economies is growing. In the U.S., eco-building and Community Supported Agriculture is slowing gaining momentum. In any case, a viable alternative needs to be presented to people before they will consider a change. Indigenous communities throughout the world provide a working alternative to mass consumption and industrialization. There are many positive signs one can find, but they exist by-and-large outside the radar of the mass media.

Nato Thompson: It could be a fun exercise to compare your Meatscapes to the history of landscape painting, but at the same time, somewhat silly. What would you say are the influences on your work?

The comparison to the history of landscape painting is an interesting point and it is definitely an influence. Collage though has been a larger influence and it has significant differences from painting. The medium has a long history of being not only a subversive tool but a humorous one as well. The Dada movement, which emerged in response to WWI, viewed landscape painting with distain. They felt that this type of approach was adopting a passive stance, merely copying the world and not trying to change it. Metaphorically, the arranging and re-ordering of images suggests discontent and a need to become active. The Meatscapes are meant to be absurd but there is a serious side to them as well. The collages, which act more as staged photographs, are meant to ask questions about the larger implications of being disconnected from our food source. The people in the images are purposely disengaged and nonchalant by the massive piles of meat, which echoes the general lack of understanding of the environmental impact of the large-scale industrial production of meat. I also like to think of these images as “monuments to meat”, which brings up a host of questions of the role of a monument.

It’s interesting that monuments can act as sculptural reminders, a physical antidote for cultural amnesia whether this implies the meat industry, a war memorial or a town mayor. A monument works in civic space and is designed to produce social norms/codes as a form of public memory. How do you see your work and what methods do you use in producing a public/social memory? 

Monuments remind us of past events. A facet of the machine-animal collage series is that they are difficult to date to a specific time period. At times, an image may seem contemporary or it could equally appear as a relic from the early 1900’s, a Dada-like collage or a lost manual for an invention. The confusion in time periods allows us to look at history as events and ideas that often repeat themselves. The names and dates change, but the impulses that drives human behavior often remains fairly constant. With this in mind, I try to focus my art on the larger, more systemic issues. I rarely address current events or a politician because those types of individuals are often interchangeable. Monument, as you mentioned, work in the public sphere and I feel it is important for artists to consider their audience and who it is they are trying to reach. I try to devote equal time placing images and objects in the street as I do in the gallery. The work can take on a different meaning in the streets, but in any case it registers as a social message, reaches a broad audience and acts as a counter balance to the barrage of advertisements.

What does becoming animal mean to you?

Since much of my work is about animals becoming machines, perhaps equal thought should be placed on the ramifications of that scenario. In modern life, we have distanced ourselves from animals and the environment to the point where it is an afterthought. “Becoming animal” is bridging this gap and placing these concerns at the forefront of our priorities.

Nato Thompson interviewed Nicolas Lampert in December, 2004