Ceramic in a sense is the quintessential material of things. It's like the mother of all materials.

Liste Noire: In your latest show last year at Rowland Contemporary, Chicago, you actually designed "products" for every day use that resemble the furniture of a possible hybrid-molecular-home. Did you have in mind that particular space (gallery) when you started to produce the works? How do you work usually? Does context (the exhibition place) plays a major role in the outcome of the artworks?
 
Anders Ruhwald: Yes, certainly. The space is very important. Over the last few years the spaces in which I’ve shown have become the starting point - the problem to solve, so to speak. The space is a constant in my process that I work with and against. At times I reuse or remake work for other exhibitions and then show it in a very different way, which then changes the perception of the individual work. The individual pieces remain the same but the relation to other works and the space they inhabit changes our perception of the work itself. I like the ambiguity that objects have; they are resistant to fixed interpretation.
 vezi tot articolul
LN: At a first glance, you wouldn’t say your works are made of natural, traditional materials such as stoneware due to their futuristic-contemporary approach. It seems to me you love ceramic. Why? Why not plastic?
 
AR: For me it feels natural. Ceramic in a sense is the quintessential material of things. It's like the mother of all materials. I like the fact that it is so basic and versatile. You can make ceramic look like a lot of other materials and I like the confusion that this creates. Ceramic is excellent for plates, cups and saucers. Then you start making tables and chairs out of it and that seems rather illogical, which is a good thing. I am very much interested in the idea of objects, the role they play in our lives and our understanding of them- ceramic seems to be a good fit to that discourse.Besides, I think well when I work with ceramics.
 
LN: Your sculptures hint at the home-furniture logic, though dismiss the function/form law of design. Your works are "unfinished" or "gone wrong" products from an industrial mass-market production perspective. How is the design process going on? What is the percentage of chance/surprise in the design process of your sculptures?
 
AR: It really depends – most of the times I know exactly what I’m looking for before I give form to it. But sometimes this happens not to work at all, once the piece is made. I discard it or try to find another solution. Sometimes I realize quite early in the process and then continue working but in a different direction. Sometimes this turns out to be quite interesting, but often it is really bad. Bad in the bad way, that is. I like bad, but it has to be good. I like playing against this notion of the mass market product and try to achieve objects that seem to fit into this category, but don’t manage it very well. I often work with a notion of a sparse interior where the work establishes a certain sense of immediate logic for the exhibition. Something of the feeling you have when walking into one of these faux living room set-ups in a furniture store where you initially think everything makes sense, but at closer examination it falls apart. The radio is a cardboard box, the books are of stryrofoam and the natural light from the windows is fluorescent.
 
LN: I'm happy that you brought into discussion the fake objects in a furniture showroom. I adore fake books, those cardboard boxes that pretend to be books. It's about form and content expectations. I remember the sculptures you showed at Interim (2004) that were made out of ceramic combined with balloons. How far can ceramic go when it comes to combining different materials?
 
AR: I guess that all depends on what you want it to do. There are certainly quite a few things ceramics can’t do – it’s more logical to use another material to convey the idea. For the balloon pieces I wanted a confusion of materiality - I had been developing glazes that resemble plastic - and wanted people to engage with the work through touch. You didn’t quite know what was ceramic and what was balloon- it needed to be touched to be understood- there was no other way of identifying the nature of it.
 
LN: I found about your works searching on the Danish crafts website. Do you feel that your works have a sort of “danishness” in them? How much did being born in Denmark affect your works?
 
AR: Yes absolutely, in too many ways to mention, but I think the work shows that.
 
LN: Who are the people you admire and why?
 
AR: Again, too many to mention. Right now I’m very interested in Friedrick Kiesler and his thoughts on co-relation.
 
LN: Would you collaborate with a furniture company designing functional products?
 
AR: Yes, if they are open to my ideas. I’ve never had any ambition to do straight-up product design.
 
LN: You mention the possibility of the public directly engaging with your sculptures, touching them. Since we were kids we’ve been told it was forbidden to touch the art pieces, do you encourage that and why?
 
AR: It is a constant negotiation that I have with the work. Therefore the answer is yes, no and perhaps. My work and the thoughts I have around it is not a static thing and I investigate the relation to use, touch, engagement and a variety of other concerns through the various objects that I make. For me, the potential engagement with my pieces- as opposed to a purely aesthetical experience- makes the experience be a continuation of the relation we have to the categories of objects around us in the everyday.
 
LN: I have an obsession with pedestals and their ambivalent role, functional and esthetic. What's the role of the pedestal? And if works weren’t subjected to gravity, would we still need pedestals?
 
AR: To me the pedestal is a barrier, it is the grand gesture that shuts off the audience and tells us: Please look but don’t touch. I like to play with the notion of the pedestal. Nevertheless too often I find that it closes down certain aspects of the work by putting the visual before touch.
 
LN: What is glaze for ceramic? In the world of ceramics, glaze seems to have a special role, being a language on its own. How do you perceive glaze as a language tool in your works?
 
AR: For me glaze is a skin - a way of conceiving a different sense of materiality. It is essential to ceramics and often the layer that brings it from nature to culture. The feel of the glaze is as important as the colour, the two depend on each other. The materiality of the glaze changes the way we understand colour. I like glazes that look like something else than glaze- glazes that destabilize the traditional notion of ceramics.

 Mirror (Ornamented), glazed earthenware, mirrored, vinyl and tassel, 2008. Mirror (candle), glazed earthenware, vinyl and candle, 2008

 "One is never so close to change when life seems unbearable even in the smallest and most everyday things" Rowlandcontemporary, Chicago, 2008, Installation view

 Installation view

 Untitled #9(from the functional series), glazed earthenware and brass, 2008

 Interior #9, glazed earthenware, brass hook and tassel, 2008

 Interior #8, glazed earthenware and tassel, 2008

 Interior #5, glazed earthenware, 70x31x32, 2006. Prop, glazed earthenware, vinyl, painted steel tube, 56x91x80, 2006

 Social piece of furniture #5, glazed earthenware, 99x29x24, 2006 Shelve/lamp, glazed earthenware, cord, bulb, plug, 7x35x34, 2006 Beginning/ ending, glazed earthenware, 89x38x43, 2006 (collection of the Danish Arts Council)

 Untitled#7 (from the functional series), glazed earthenware, 104x47x34, 2006 Untitled#8 (from the functional series), glazed earthenware, 92x11x4.5, 2006

 "If all man’s products were well designed, joy and harmony would emerge eternally triumphant" Drud & Køppe Gallery, Copenhagen, 2007, Installation view

 Social piece of furniture #6, Earthenware, painted wood and rubber-cap, 122x59x23, 2007

 Stilt #3, Earthenware, painted copper piping, and rubber-caps, 50 x 81 x 63.5, 2007 Stilt #4, Earthenware, painted copper piping, and rubber-caps, 49 x 84 x 63, 2007 Ornament is fine, Earthenware, plastic, metal, cord, plug, socket, black-light bulb and

 Mirror, Earthenware and Perspex, 43 x 61 x 10, 2007 Interior #7, Earthenware, 21x 25 x20, 2007

 Prototype Teenage, Earthenware and balloon, 72x73x54 In the Collection of the National Arts Council, Denmark

 Piece of furniture, Earthenware and balloons, 97x60x45 Interior 2, Earthenware and polystyrene, 54x60x46 Interior 1, Earthenware and polystyrene, 60x49x37 Interior 3, Earthenware and perspex, 74x62x54 Alterego, Earthenware and drainpipe, 52x60x58 In the C

 Formal piece of furniture, Earthenware and balloon, 103x46x41

  Social Piece of Furniture, Earthenware, 65x49x71 Untitled #4 (from the functional series), Earthenware, 43x44x47 Collection of The Swedish National Museum

 Untitled, Earthenware and mdf, 276x67x11

 Untitled, Earthenware, 28x53x32 and 15x21x22

 Untitled #2 (from the functional series), Earthenware, 12x49x19

 Thing about a Thing #2, Earthenware, 12x53x56

 Untitled, Earthenware, 39x29x24

 Untitled (for Keith Murray), Earthenware, 16x50x14

 Form og Funktion Galleri Inger Molin, Stockholm, Sweden 2007, Installation view

 Stilt #1, Earthenware, Steel piping, Rubber-caps, Paint, 122x103x78, 2006

 Stilt #2, Earthenware, Steel piping, Rubber-caps, Paint, 122x103x78, 2006

 Form & Function #1, Earthenware, Perspex, Steel piping, Rubber-Caps and Paint, 82x115x62, 2006

 You are here- this is it, Earthenware, Steel pipes, Rubber-caps, and Paint, 49x47x61, 2006

 Piece of Furniture#3, Earthenware, Iron tubes, Plywood, and screws 120x120x81

 Step, Earthenware, 27x92x21

 The UP monster, Earthenware, 72x51x63

 Social Piece of Funiture #4 33x130x27 cm

 Social Piece of Funiture #4 (detail)

 Ulterior 18x9x10 cm

 Oil and Gold 29x29x150 (frontal view)

 Oil and Gold 29x29x150 (Back view)

 You and It #2 50x125x50 cm

 You and It #2 (detail)