Larissa Blokhuis is doing some wild stuff with glass. My favourite thing she says is that contrary to popular (amateur) belief, glass does not behave in random ways. The artist can very palpably be in control of the material. A dedicated glass artist for over 5 years now, Blokhuis has taken the earth and rendered it in this series with varying levels of abstraction. While the sculptures may not precisely resem­ble the bushes, flames, smoke, ani­mals, buds, jel­ly­fish, branches, water and other frag­ments of Mama Nature that inspired them, the glass func­tions as an apt medium to depict the tone or feel­ing of the forms. It’s a stroll through a sort of futuristic forest. The sculptures are sometimes bulbous, strange, but they seem familiar and organic the way earthy matter does.

Larissa Blokhuis and Christine, a preparateur at Leigh Square
Larissa Blokhuis and Christine, a preparateur at Leigh Square.

Sad Mag: You work with glass in some truly unique ways. How did you come to feel like glass was primarily the medium for you?

Larissa Blokuis: When I was entering the BFA program at Alberta College of Art and Design (ACAD), I decided to take glass because it was so unique. I didn’t think there would be many other opportunities to learn glassblowing. I knew that if I decided to use other materials after graduating, I would have more varied opportunities to develop skills related to those mediums.

Glassblowing is a skill that takes a lot of practice. You can learn quite a bit from watching, and from discussing with other glassblowers, but ultimately it comes down to hours spent working in the studio. A pet peeve of mine is when inexperienced glassblowers say that the glass behaves in a ‘random’ way. When you spend enough hours working with glass, you realise that glass is a consistent material, and what changes is the attention of the artist or craftsperson. When you reach the point of feeling like you understand the material, it’s hard to turn your back because it takes years to get there. I have recently enjoyed experimenting with new materials, but glass makes each piece come alive. Blown glass is a rare element in sculptural work, and I feel it sets me apart.

SM: There are lots of forms in your work that resemble nature and do well balancing a combination of  hard and soft materials. How would you describe the intention of your practice at this moment in time? How have you seen it progress since you began?

LB: When I first began blowing glass professionally, I was working in a studio that was very different from the one I’d learned in. The glass was a different brand, and the peculiarities of the heat and working time were something to get used to. So my intention was centred around trying to re-learn things I had felt I had already learned before I graduated. I wanted to be good enough to work efficiently, and I was very focused on glassblowing. In those first years I was a bit lost, regurgitating ideas I had in school and trying to figure out how to take art ideas and make sellable objects.

In 2011, I took a 3-week intensive glassblowing class at Pilchuck [Glass School], and it completely changed my way of working. It’s so strange to think now that I needed to be reminded that I am an artist who blows glass, not a glassblower. The difference is that as an artist who blows glass, I give myself permission to work in any medium. Before the 2011 class, I was too focused on glass, wanting everything I made to be pure glass, that it caused stagnation in my creative process.

Although the class I took was glass-centred, I think what really helped me was being out of my familiar surroundings, and immersed in a community of artists. While in art school I was in a happy art bubble, and when I graduated I was out on my own. When stagnation occurs it can be difficult to asses the situation and figure out what needs to change.

The intention of my practice now is to create work that excites me. Since the 2011 class, I have developed new concepts, separate from the ones I used in art school. I feel that I have found my adult voice as an artist in the last few years.

SM: Are there any glass or mixed-media artists in particular that you would say have influenced your work?

LB: In terms of technical possibilities, I have been influenced by artists around me, artists who I have worked with, TA-ed [teacher’s assistant] for, and assisted. Each artist usually has a specialty and a particular way of working. Although I don’t incorporate every technique I see, working with many other artists helps me build on my understanding of what is possible.

Themes of my work are influenced by a desire to learn about the world. I watch documentaries, read articles, and do research before or while developing my visual concepts.

Nature is one of Larissa's inspirations.
Nature is one of Larissa’s inspirations.

SM: How does the experience of teaching effect your personal practice, if at all?

LB: Teaching has made me realize how much I do without thinking. As well, performing a task and explaining that task are two separate skills. Teaching has made me think more technically about why I do certain steps, because I will have to explain what I am doing and why.

One of my teachers at ACAD told me that subtle movements are what make a good glassblower. When I am working as a TA, I have to focus on the subtle movements of the teacher to replicate them for the students, and I have learned from each teacher I’ve TA-ed for.

In terms of the work I’m interested in creating, teaching hasn’t had much influence because concept development hasn’t been part of the directive for any class I’ve taught or TA-ed.

SM: Would you say that the classes you offer are more oriented around technique or concept? Tell us a little about that approach.

LB: At this point, I have taught and TA-ed beginner/intermediate glassblowing mostly to hobbyists. My goal in learning to blow glass has always been to use glass as an artist, but glassblowing is a technique used by artists and craftspeople. The classes I have taught and TA-ed have mostly happened outside the context of any long-term course of study at art school, and have therefore had craft-focused curricula. I don’t find it useful to push concept on students who may not have the same motivations as me. I am always happy to discuss concept with students, but many are excited by the material and challenged with the heat and motor skills needed for glassblowing. Concepts are more easily pursued after skills are developed past the beginner/intermediate stage. I don’t want new students to feel discouraged by the gap in what they want to make vs. what they are capable of as beginners. I believe that anybody who can do the basic steps of glassblowing can develop their skills until they are masters, but it depends on the dedication of the student.

SM: What is the definition of the collaboration here with Cheryl Hamilton? What has it been like to work alongside each other on this exhibition?

LB: For several years I worked at New-Small and Sterling on Granville Island, which shares an interior wall with Cheryl’s studio, ie creative. When Cheryl and her studio partner first moved to Granville Island, she was mesmerised watching David New-Small blow glass. She decided to learn how to blow glass, and has worked at New-Small and Sterling’s studio developing her skills for about 10 years. We had casual interactions for a while, and when I needed help hosting workshops at New-Small’s, I asked her if she was interested. Since teaming up for the workshops, I have also started to learn some metalworking skills from Cheryl. She is a very accomplished metalworker, the only full-time TIG welder on Granville Island, and has been making public art sculptures with her studio partner for about 20 years.

We are each showing our work as individuals in “Growing Connections,” so our collaboration has had more to do with sharing skills and information. When I was accepted for this exhibition, I was also asked to select an artist to exhibit with. I knew Cheryl would be a good choice because she is a dedicated artist. She works hard and does what it takes to make things happen, while maintaining a generous spirit and a sense of humour.

SM: What can people expect to see at this particular exhibition?

LB: This is an opportunity for the public to see Cheryl’s 2D work. She has established herself as a sculptor, but her skills are diverse and she paints and draws as well. This work is very personal for her, and is not shown frequently. Her 2D work draws on internal organ forms, interpreted in stark black and white or wildly vivid colours, utilising her great cartooning abilities.

My work is part of a relatively recent exploration of using mixed media elements. I combine glass, ceramic, wool, polymer, concrete, wood, steel, and anything else I think will work to make forms which imitate parts of existing or extinct organisms. I re-organise those parts and add imagined elements to create new forms. Some bizarre-looking forms have evolved throughout the history of Earth, and so many new forms are possible.

Larissa Blokhuis is currently exhibiting in tandem with Cheryl Hamilton at Leigh Square Community Arts Village in Port Coquitlam. The show is called Growing Connections, an expression both of their comparable fascination with terrene forms as well as of the cross-over and knowledge-sharing between each of their individual practices. The gallery is open: Mon, Wed (10:00am to 6:30pm); Tue, Thurs (10:00am to 7:00pm);Friday (9:30am to 6:30pm); and Saturday (12:00pm to 4:00pm); closed on Sundays. Visit Larissa online here and Cheryl Hamilton here.

Mixing art with the past and present.

Phantoms in the Front Yard is an arts collective dedicated to the pursuance of figurative, representational forms. This is a unique intention today as contemporary artists flourish into new mediums, embracing abstraction, fragmentation, and concepts that live behind veils—or sometimes duvets.

Lots of people who aren’t interested in art tend to posit themselves as victim, expressing the naïve and arrogant ideals expressed in “my kid could do that”. There is a cultural aversion to artwork which does not obviate itself to the viewer straightforwardly.

While Phantoms in the Front Yard chooses to work with forms considered more traditional (figurative, representational paintings), they by no means slander the non-traditional forms and approaches that have largely come to define contemporary art today. They’ve simply worked to create their own place in it, hearkening to the potential in the ideals and approaches of times past. They attempt to breathe freshness into the recognizable figure, one that modernism deemed passé and left in its wake.

The group includes Jonathan Sutton, Jay Senetchko, Marcus Macleod, Michael Abraham, Jeremiah Birnbaum, Paul Morstad, in collaboration with curator Pennylane Shen. They just opened up a show at Leigh Square Community Arts Village called Phantoms, a sort-of retrospective which takes advantage of this large venue to reflect on their work as a collective in seven different shows over the past four and half years. Check it out before it closes on February 17th.

Sad Mag: What did it feel like to realize that your artistic expression was changing mediums, from theatre and performance to painting?

Jonathan Sutton: I was drawing and painting all along, and meanwhile acting was becoming less of a means than I had thought it was to express the things important to me. It had seemed an obvious way to enter into an imagined space was to perform in it. I find though, that more space exists for me in the solitary arena of my small studio, and with far fewer stops between ideas and their developed expression.

SM: How did the group come together?

JS: Jay Senetchko and Marcus Macleod initiated the idea and fairly soon there was a core group. We are also committed to working with other artists in both the short and long term.

SM: The group’s artist statement mentions, “Figurative art has become the phantom of the fine art world, haunting Modernism and Postmodernism with its ties to a classical tradition, refusing to be dismissed, ignored, or forgotten.” Can you speak a little more about the current status of the figurative and representational in contemporary art from your perspective?

"Representation will continually reinvent its own aesthetics because people and our surroundings are changing quickly enough..."

JM: It would be easier—for any of us in the group—to speak a lot more about that! Here goes a little …

We all have wide-ranging tastes and references, but a common thread is our respect for artists who reckon with history and traditions as they pave new directions in their own work and era. Jay Senetchko has written eloquently on the over-rating of originality as an end in itself, and we believe the more profound contributions are to be made by artists who distinguish their own voices within the larger dialogue of art history, and in doing so move the whole dialogue forward. It is counter to this process to accord any particular status to the figurative or representational per se—whether over-prioritizing these forms or shunning them. Our particular collective has gathered around an existing interest in figurative work and within this we have a very broad mandate, but this is not to say that we place it above other approaches in our appreciation of art in general. Our decision to embed the figure in our mandate is that there is much territory still to explore here—and create—and we are excited to share our discoveries. Now this position happens to have much counterpoint in contemporary trends that would dismiss the figure, or painting and drawing altogether. We didn’t decide to commit to figurative work to create a reaction to this line of thinking though; we were doing this work in any case and couldn’t find substance in trends that would place it outside contemporary art.

Representation will continually reinvent its own aesthetics because people and our surroundings are changing quickly enough—not to mention artistic media and technologies—that even straight journalistic depiction will continue to reflect novelty. Brian Boulton’s graphite portraits, to name one example, and a local one, reflect accuracy and fidelity of rendering, while looking arrestingly current and familiar by virtue of the very contemporary figures they examine.

SM: This idea is quite noticeably linked to the name of the collective. Can you tell us about the inspiration for the name? Why “the Front Yard”?

JS: We recognize these tendencies that would hold figurative representation, and traditional media associated with it, as phantoms in the art world. Even within this reading, which isn’t everyone’s, and certainly not ours—we’re interested in ushering such phantoms into full view.

SM: Part of your philosophy as a group is based on the idea that representational, figurative art is easier for people to find connection with because the elements are familiar and easily identifiable. However, lots of this kind of work also comes equipped with strong concepts and compositional complexity. How do you deal with the challenge to make people see as far as possible into the work?

JS: One aspect of the work in this collective that really impresses me is how often I see a balancing of immediate visual impact against dense underpinnings of suggestion, narrative, reference, concept, and philosophy. I’d say we find in figurative art an irrepressible history, and in the best cases, universality, without necessarily finding or seeking ease of connection. Aquinas held wholeness, harmony, and radiance to be requirements of beauty; these would strike a viewer as strongly upon the first impression as through prolonged scrutiny.  We work to weave complex and diverse thinking into one image whose first impression is complete and integrated. We admire the kind of conceptual and compositional complexity you mention, in all manner of art forms whether figurative or not; in fact another layer to our mandate is to incorporate non-representational influences in our own representations. The act of depicting one or more bodies is constantly invigorated by ever-new responses that non-figurative works invite, be they abstract expressionism, collage, photo-conceptualism, or anything else.

Phantoms collectively creates art.

SM: Since 2010, Phantoms in the Front Yard has been developing shows based on themes initiated by one of the members, which then prompts the creation of works by each of the others. There is also a lecture component, where you bring in an expert on the topic at hand. Why is dialogue important to you as a group?

JS: There is a beautiful solitude in creating and beholding a piece of art. We also want to include viewers, beyond this, in the spirit of dialogue and exchange that we invest in our processes as a collective. The development of each show starts and continues around our own conversations, research sharing, critiques of works as they progress, and general interaction, even while most of the time we spend on the pieces themselves is solitary. We want these parallel lines of private engagement and public interaction to run through the whole exhibition experience.

SM: What do you hope to achieve with this show?

JS: This particular grouping of pieces, in this space, with the artists, viewers, and interactions that create the exhibition will only come together in this way through this event. Our intention is to do the same thing a single work of art should do – create a lasting impression of a fleeting moment.

Phantoms is on now and runs until February 17th at Leigh Square Community Arts Village. Gallery hours are Mon, Wed 10:00am to 6:30pm; Tue, Thu 10:00am to 7:00pm; Friday 9:30am to 6:30pm; and Saturday 2:00pm to 4:00pm; Closed on Sundays. 1100-2253 Leigh Square (Behind City Hall) Port Coquitlam, BC, V3C 3B8. Call 604-927-8442 for more info. Please note the show is displayed in two adjacent buildings.