In his work Chilean-born, New York-based artist Alfredo Jaar explores the relationship between the “First” and the “Third Worlds”. How the two are materially interdependent and the former implicated in maintaining the power dynamics of the relationship, and how this translates into visual representations of the “Third World” by the “First”. To mark a major retrospective of Jaar’s work taking place in Milan, and to celebrate an artist who prolifically continues to engage his audience with the wider world, proposing possible new models of reality, Europa interviewed Jaar during a recent visit of his to London. Eva Oddo: What do you think of the European Union and how do you see its future? Alfredo Jaar: I have always seen the EU as a potential model that has never been fully realized. It is a utopia that became a quasi-reality. I have always felt the potential was enormous, as a model of community. In fact the EU is the largest donor of humanitarian assistance in the world. Some significant progress has been made in certain areas, for example regarding the common currency, the euro, it has been interesting to see how we finally have a counterweight to the US dollar and its hegemony. But when you realize that the EU generates more than 30% share of the world’s gross domestic product, you ask yourself why is it such a minor, ridiculous influence in world affairs? The incapacity of the EU to articulate and promote a common foreign policy, to have a voice in world affairs of a certain weight is truly frustrating. The EU has never fulfilled its responsibilities according to its relative geopolitical weight in the world This is really a domain that the Americans dominate fully, and until now no one has been able to challenge them. The world would be in such a different state if the EU had a voice. On the other hand, it is undeniable that we have freedom of movement of people, goods, services and capital but at the same time, how many doors have been closed? Visit Italy to look at how the immigration issue is being played out, or ask an African businessman trying to penetrate the EU market and you will hear a catalogue of frustrations. EO: Moving on to the artist: do you think the artist has any responsibilities? AJ: Absolutely. Artists are human beings, and every human being has responsibilities. Artists are an integral part of society, and within society we are very privileged because artists have been blessed with time and resources to think, to speculate, to dream about different worlds, better worlds. This privilege comes with a responsibility, to respond to what surrounds us, and to suggest models of thinking about society and about the world, and that’s what the best art does. The best works of art take you to places you have never been – I’m referring to mental places -places where we create new models of thinking, and new possible ways of seeing the world. And that’s a tremendous responsibility. EO: While I’ve read your art described as ‘political’ art, I think I’ve read that you describe it as ‘moral’, or ‘morally-engaged’ art. AJ: No, I do not accept any of these labels. All art is political. It is impossible to do anything in this world that does not have a political reading. It is impossible to make a gesture that does not at the same time incorporate aesthetics and ethics. I always quote Jean-Luc Godard, a filmmaker that I admire, when I am asked this question, when he said that “it may be true that one has to choose between ethics and aesthetics, but it is no less true that, whichever one chooses, one will always find the other at the end of the road.” This is the reality that we face as artists and as cultural producers: we are always confronted with the issue of ethics and aesthetics at the same time, and they have to be incorporated not only in the way we do things, but also in the final articulation of our ideas in the works. When art does not do this, it is just decoration, it is part of another world, the world of decoration and design, which has other, different objectives. You have decoration on one side, and you have art on the other side, and art for me has always been about critical thinking. But that doesn’t mean we must leave out poetry. Poetry is an essential element of art. We could even say that there is no art without poetry, and there is no art without politics. EO: Do you think art has changed the world, and if so how? And in the future do you see art changing the world, and how? AJ: Well, can you imagine a world without art? In the answer to this question you will find the answer to your question. What would the world be without art, without culture? As Nietzsche said, “Life without music would be a mistake.” And you could paraphrase him and say: Life without art would be a mistake. Just take a look at around us, look around the city, look around the world – what would it be if there was no art and culture around us? Art and culture are essential elements of contemporary life, of life. Life is unthinkable without it. Art does greatly change the world, and as an artist I have always said, even with the risk of sounding naïve, that I want to change the world. I became an artist because I was unhappy with the state of the world, I am unhappy with the way it is now, and I want to change it. Now, I change it one person at a time – it is a very slow process, it’s a very modest change, but we can touch people, we can inform them, and we can move them to action. In that sense I am Gramscian. Gramsci was an extraordinary intellectual of the 20th century, and an inspiration. He really believed in culture’s capacity to affect change, and it is difficult, sometimes it seems futile, but culture and art have definitely changed the world, and as the world becomes even more complex and difficult, the more art’s potentiality will be realized, culture’s potentiality can be realized. The spaces of art and culture are the last remaining spaces of freedom. EO: And how do you see the state of the contemporary art world? AJ: The world of contemporary art has an image problem, which is of course ironic. The image circulated by the media with vicious vulgarity and spectacle, and it is a circus image of a few so-called art stars and a lot of money. Honestly, this has nothing to do with the world of contemporary art. The world of contemporary art is not monolithic; it is a network of systems. In one of these systems you have thousands of artists looking for meaning in life, in society, working with communities, trying to creatively expand their horizons. In another system you will find thinkers and intellectuals and dreamers discussing issues that affect society and the world, and producing papers and documents and publications and participating in lectures and debates, and expanding models of thinking. Contemporary art is film, theatre, music, poetry, dance, visual arts, which makes you think, makes you cry, makes you feel, and makes you act in the world. Where is that image of contemporary art in the media today? It just doesn’t exist. The media makes a spectacle out of it, and it is quite sad. EO: Do you think part of the artist’s role is public intervention? For visual artists, for example, it is not staying within the confines of the exhibition space, but going out onto the street? AJ: Personally I have felt the need to get out, and that is why I have divided my work in three main areas; only one third of my time is spent working in the so-called art world, in museums, galleries and foundations. Because this art world is so insular, I have tried to reach out to a larger audience, and that is why I have created more than fifty public interventions around the world, outside of the confines of the art world. In these projects I work with different communities, removed from the art world, and I confront myself to real life problems, from real life people, and these confrontations, these exercises in reality, keep me real, keep me grounded, and inform my practice as an artist within the art world. The third part of what I do is teaching. I direct seminars and workshops around the world where I exchange ideas with the younger generations, I share my experiences and I learn from their own experiences, and their own dreams. I would say that teaching is probably the most political of all three. But they are all three very important, and all these practices inform me as a professional and as a human being and make me complete. EO: Have you seen the recent Cildo Meireles exhibition (at the Tate Modern, in London, until January 11th, 2009)? I recently read a quote of his, which said: “In some way you become political when you don’t have a chance to be poetic. I think human beings would much prefer to be poetic.” Would you like to comment on this? AJ: Yes, I have seen the exhibition. Cildo has managed to look at the world poetically, and to create poetic assemblages, poetic environments, poetic installations and poetic objects. And they all have a political content – it is unavoidable – but the poetry of his constructions is overwhelming, and joyful. In contrast, I feel that my works have tilted more towards the political. Of course, they have a poetic element, always, but in that difficult balance between the poetical and the political, my works have been more political, I think. It has been more difficult for me, I am afraid, to contain my rage. And so, in the works, for example, dealing with the Rwandan genocide I could not contain my rage, and so the political overwhelms the poetical. Cildo has been able to contain himself, or perhaps has confronted situations of less urgency than mine, and has been able to create explosions of poetry. It is an admirable exhibition from an admirable artist. EO: Given the result of the most recent US presidential elections how do you view your 1989 work The Fire Next Time? AJ: When I created that piece, I was living in New York and I felt race relations in the city were incredibly fragile, and it was a way for me to express that, and to express my shock, and sadness about the state of race relations in the country. When I moved to the United States in 1982 I expected to find a racially harmonious country where the civil rights movement had accomplished everything that was supposed to be accomplished, but I was shocked to discover that the reality was different. Almost 20 years later we have come a very long way. The results of the US election are an extraordinary sign of progress on that level, but a lot more needs to be done. What you see at the political level is not happening at the street level, and definitely not happening in wealth distribution, access to capital, access to education. But I think it is an extraordinary event that has the potential to change the United States – it has already changed it – it has the potential to change it greatly, from inside, and its image in the world, its relationship to the rest of the world. EO: What is your impression of the direction of contemporary politics? AJ: I am always amazed at the simultaneous presence of contradictory winds in the world. On one hand you have what just happened in the United States, with its extraordinary potential, in a progressive direction, and then you have the phenomenon of Berlusconi in a country like Italy, where you can actually observe some fascist winds all over the country, and you wonder: how is that possible? How, why do societies, communities, move to the left or to the right simultaneously? What is it in human nature that make us behave in so contradictory ways, and if you look at Europe you will see some fascist spots on the map, and some progressive spots on the map, and they struggle against each other. And we, as citizens, are confronted with these realities, and we have to decide our path, and we will decide our path based on the education we have received, on the influence of our parents, on the influence of the milieu in which we live and grow, and on our personal convictions. But I am always amazed at this, all these possible paths, contradictions that we face in our daily lives, and that is why I always quote Emile Cioran, a Romanian poet and writer that I admire deeply, who wrote about his normal state of mind, as always being “simultaneously happy and unhappy, exalted and depressed, overcome by both pleasure and despair in the most contradictory harmonies”, that is how I feel today, when I look at the world, when I read the papers, and I am always hoping that the balance will shift one day towards social justice.