Hamed Maiye, Artist
Were Time & Memory important concepts to address in collaboration with another artist?
HM: My general practice for the past 2 years has started with using memory as a base to explore myself, and what this has led to, is a wider investigation of art making and different aspects of personal identity. Within this investigation, it’s veered off into many other avenues including imagination, shapeshifting, symbolism etc. My general approach towards these things has been figuring out ways to make these concepts that we have learnt to be fixed, into malleable materials for art and image making; but also, to find ways to explore self within this. I think time very much fits into this investigation. Viewing time as something which isn’t fixed or linear, and finding its intersections with some of the other things I’ve been exploring.
How did producing works for a joint exhibition inform your approach?
HM: This approach has been interesting and very fruitful. The conversations between Emily and I have been fertile ground to create ideas from, and I think this has very much fed into the work itself. Especially our material approaches for creating the work.
What is your interpretation of muse versus influence? How does that differentiation impact your practice?
HM: Emily perfectly states that “the muse is not just a person.” Expanding on this, we spoke about different relational approaches towards time - including the biological aspect of time. What does it mean to embody the DNA of all your previous ancestors? This was a prevalent question in my mind during the lead up to the exhibition. I thought about what it would mean to try and tap back into some of these histories, the muse not being just a singular but a plural approach.
Using this as a departure point allows us to tap more into communal consciousness - which is something I’m quite interested in within my practice.
Emily Moore, Artist
What is your muse?
EM: Every artist is different and finds inspiration from different sources. Some may work from internal sources whereas others may be more interested in external, such as current affairs or responses to physical or visual stimuli.
I personally don’t think it matters. I can work and be inspired by lots of different sources, including, for this exhibition. My ancestral lineage was my source of inspiration. I did a whole series of portraits in 2019 that positioned myself as the Muse.
Two of the largest works in this presentation incorporate crochet. Being an interdisciplinary artist, how was the use of alternative materials, as opposed to painting for example, useful in your interpretation of Time?
EM: I am a painter, I feel my approach to making and problem solving within my practice stems from an understanding of the language and history of painting. The crochet works are very painterly and employ the use of mark making that are associated with abstract painting.
There is something about the physicality and labour of painting that is often unspoken outside of the painting community. Painting asks the Artist to push the constraints of their physical strength, which is something that I do through traditional oil to canvas, but also through the use and exploration of different materials.
The crochet works really expand upon the notion of physical labour because each piece is hand made. For me this asks the viewer to slow down the understanding of time and their relationship to push and pull of mark making. The crochet pieces feel very immediate and present even through the titles reference a time before.
