Louise Bourgeois By Robert Ayers ARTINFO Published: July 28, 2006
NEW YORK— Louise Bourgeois (b. 1911) is one of the most celebrated sculptors of the 20th century; her highly symbolic, sexually charged works—deeply autobiographical and largely inspired by her emotionally fraught relationship with her parents as a child—are included in the permanent collections of most of the world’s major museums. Bourgeois first came to the United States in the late 1930s, after an intensive art education in France, which included studying under Fernand Léger. Ever since her arrival in New York, she has pursued her own unique and characteristic art, in which she is able to breathe a rich, living presence into both abstract and more representational forms.
For decades after her arrival, she was more or less ignored by many of her male counterparts. But since the 1970s, she has exercised a more and more influential (and inspirational) presence on the New York and global art scene. Today, she falls on most serious Top 10 lists of our greatest living artists.
Louise, can we start by thinking back to your first experiences in this country? When you first arrived here, you were a mature artist with a lot of experience of the Paris art scene. What were your first impressions of art in New York?
I had completed my art studies in Paris, but I was far from a mature artist when I arrived in New York in 1938. I was a runaway girl who escaped by marrying an American art historian [Robert Goldwater]. Had I remained in Paris, I’m not sure I would have even been an artist. In New York City, you would soon have the European exile artists, who were older and more established, some of whom I had known in Paris, and the New York School of the Abstract Expressionists.
I’ve read that you said that you married an American because he was a “puritan.” Do you think that there are still such differences between European and American attitudes to sexuality?
Today the Europeans seem more enlightened when it comes to attitudes of sexuality. Given this current administration’s policies, America has become even more conservative, ignorant and intolerant.
Many accounts of your work talk about how you were influenced by the European surrealists. Were you not a European surrealist yourself?
I was not influenced by the European surrealists. I was a generation younger so I reacted against them.
And what in particular was it that you reacted against?
I did not like their attitudes towards women. The surrealists were interested in literary things, in illustration, dreams and games. I’ve always aligned my work with the existentialists.
What would you say to the suggestion that one of the constants in your work—whatever its appearances—is the human presence? Or even the sexual human presence?
My work has always been a recording of my emotions. It’s not a concept that I’m after, but an emotion that I want to keep or destroy. All of my sculptures have the sense of vulnerability and fragility. Sexuality is one theme tied to those two states of being.
Do you approach sculpture intended for public settings differently to work that will be seen in more private circumstances?
There is no difference. When I’m working on a sculpture, I don’t think of any audience. Of course, there are other issues that must be dealt with when the work is placed in a public setting, but those issues are mostly practical and come much later after the work is already conceived.
I adore that photograph of you taken by Robert Mapplethorpe, where you’re carrying a huge phallic sculpture and you have that wonderful mischievous smile on your face. How important is a sense of humor to your work?
There is humor in the work, but it is mostly black humor. I brought my sculpture to the Mapplethorpe photo session. It gave me a sense of security. I’ve always felt that my sculpture was more “me” than my physical presence.
What kind of a kinship did you feel with him?
Mapplethorpe’s best photographs, consciously and unconsciously, express what he desired and, hence, what he thought was beautiful; and I respected him for that. His photographs were a provocation and I liked that.
So, finally Louise, after so long a career, what would you say has given you greatest satisfaction in your work?
I’m very grateful to have been able to exorcise my demons through making art.
And what has been your greatest frustration?
Communication is very difficult, and I am still working at it.
Louise Bourgeois
New York, NY
New York
North America
