SL: We have your personal position? Or do you simply reflects what is happening in the world, trying to say about the problem?
Eugene Svyatskaya: Of course, we talk about these issues, but do not offer solutions. We do not judge and do not try to give answers to the questions we are more inclined to raise them, to bring people to a certain reality in our reflection.
LE: I think it is more correct position for the artist than the role of some edifying. Hardly anyone has the answers to all difficult questions. In general, the work covers many issues, there are many layers. It is always difficult to explain words component, which acts on the fascinating people, so they began to look at it. Main - This project is a single entity, a continuous history of art and culture, and is referring to the relations of civilizations existing in the world, countries of "first" and "third" worlds. This unrequited perspective, she and the political, social, and simultaneously, rather than something that is separate consumer society. That's one perspective, it's all together.
SL: And the solutions to these problems do you see?
ES: We definitely see it! But in our work that there is no work of Karl Marx.
SL: Maybe, just share your point of view?
ES: It is obvious that the world now is in a transitional stage on the threshold of new transformations. All of this feeling, we are not the only ones. Perhaps this is somehow reflected in work, feeling catastrophic. On the one hand, the desire of mankind to paradise, the dream of a paradise on earth and attempts to implement it, but they always utopian and tragic and disastrous. All this is present here.
LE: But this is both funny ...
ES: Yes, of course we see the absurdity, the futility of all these aspirations. It's a fee for pleasure. All of this is present in reality: the world has recently stayed in a rhetorical position relative to its prosperity and opportunity. Then suddenly the band starts, when all the other hand, is flying to the devil. I wanted to show the fragility of the boundary between complete happiness and catastrophe.
SL: What do you like and dislike in the contemporary art? What he lacks in your opinion?
LE: I think that first of all, lack of modern art. And now it is, in my opinion, the only area of culture, unlike literature, movies, etc., that really describes the present. On the other hand, say that it likes and dislikes - no ... probably impossible, because this very much. Now is not the time when there is any mainstream trend in art. It operates more Personalia artist who shows his view of the world, who then someone takes, someone does not accept.
SL: Can you articulate your creative credo? The purpose of your creativity?
L.E: We basically love to go on such issues, because the audience must understand and read the most different from that of visual range, which we create.
ES: In any case, we can say that doing what is interesting for ourselves, rather than short-term considerations.
SL: While many modern forms of art (installation, video art), there were a few decades ago, people were still divided into two groups: fans of classical art and modern. One simply can not cross the threshold of perception of modern art. How can we overcome this, in your view?
LE: I think that this is rapidly overcome. For example, in Russia 20 years ago this division was most pronounced, was simply an impenetrable wall, now there is nothing insurmountable. Any art in its time was modern. It is very well developed the exhibition, which exhibited, for example, Rubens, along with some contemporary artist, and the parallels are very clear. I think in the European culture of the opposition had never been there, but rather the legacy of some kind of Soviet stamps.
http://artgals.info/name/artists/aesf-15072010/