“Everything I do is the result of an ephemeral computational process” explains the Italian multimedia visual artist, Davide Quayola to METAL, but his pieces are here to stay. Melding traditional and contemporary materials, his notable marble sculptures made with programmed robotic arms that drill into the stone recall the work of miners and geologists out of the picture in his art film Fighters that is a culmination of 10 years of research.
It displays homoerotic fighting men and plays with the idea of the unfinished, since his number one reference for this piece is Michelangelo’s Captives, a series that was intentionally left incomplete “to represent this eternal struggle of human beings to free themselves from their material trappings” as the online guide to The Accademia Gallery Museum in Florence explains. Perhaps this stretches to technology too, since it is equally entrapped in the physical realm. We might want to be someone else or something immaterial but ultimately we cannot. The video tells this story with a documentary-style approach.
Fighters, released in May-time and shared on Nowness, explores the balance between human and technological. It is set in Carrara, “the historical marble quarries where most of western art came from” as the artist puts it, adding an emphasis on sculpture as primary. Fighters makes heavy references to Italian art history and visualises the ever-presence of machinery in modern production.
Another more recent display of his elegantly programmed ballet of machine bodies in motion chipping at marble was Davide Quayola’s collaboration with Bulgari two months ago in Shanghai titled Sculpture Factory: Serpenti. It was the grand finale completing last year’s show where the artist exhibited a similar work in Milan, also for Bulgari. Davide Quayola clearly is highly engaged in process and making as art, tying his own definition of art to toil and individuality.
In the conversation below Davide makes the interesting statement on authorship, “I am not sure we really want to move in a world where machines make art for us to contemplate.” Suggesting authors must remain human. As someone who strongly collaborates with technology he holds tight to his sense of provenance. Davide underlines his work “is different from whatever anyone can create in 2 minutes [on Midjourney] writing a couple of prompts.” His informed and human touch has seen him exhibit at V&A Museum in London, Palais de Tokyo in Paris and SeMA in Seoul. Davide Quayola imparts knowledge on the state of the art world and reiterates the famous quote credited to Joanna Maciejewska “I’d rather live in a world where robots do our dishes”.
You've been experimenting with the idea that machines can make art for a while now. How do you feel now the secret is out?
I have been making sculptures via robotic means for more than 10 years, so the secret has been out already for a while. With this video project however I focused on the poetics surrounding my sculpture research, which is the first time that is exposed so clearly to a wider audience.
I am starting to become more interested in narrating the processes behind my work, so hopefully there will be more of these hybrid video pieces in the future.
I am starting to become more interested in narrating the processes behind my work, so hopefully there will be more of these hybrid video pieces in the future.
Now that anyone can make AI art with tools like MidJourney, where does that leave the artists who have been doing this for years?
With these new AI conversations there seems to be a strange misconception that creating a visually-pleasing image is making art. I believe that in order to create a consistently coherent and personal body of work it’s a very long journey and can take many years of research and experimentation.
Technology is a crucial component in my practice, however I never get too excited too quickly about new technologies. I like to take my time to get intimate with a specific process and find ways to make that process very personal, unique and in dialogue with my overall research. This is what ultimately produces work that is different from whatever anyone can create in 2 minutes writing a couple of prompts.
Another important thought for me is related to the actual physical conditions in which my work is experienced. Of course, everything I do is the result of an ephemeral computational process, however the work always materialises itself as a physical experience, from a marble sculpture to a video installation.
Ultimately I believe that creating objects of contemplation is a very different thing than creating tiny images for a mobile phone, and that [creating objects] is not as easy as creating images for a mobile phone.
Technology is a crucial component in my practice, however I never get too excited too quickly about new technologies. I like to take my time to get intimate with a specific process and find ways to make that process very personal, unique and in dialogue with my overall research. This is what ultimately produces work that is different from whatever anyone can create in 2 minutes writing a couple of prompts.
Another important thought for me is related to the actual physical conditions in which my work is experienced. Of course, everything I do is the result of an ephemeral computational process, however the work always materialises itself as a physical experience, from a marble sculpture to a video installation.
Ultimately I believe that creating objects of contemplation is a very different thing than creating tiny images for a mobile phone, and that [creating objects] is not as easy as creating images for a mobile phone.
Do you think we're moving to a place where everyone is an artist in the same way that YouTube or TikTok has enabled everyone to be a filmmaker?
It depends a bit on what we consider art, and more specifically what we consider good art. In general, I am a bit sceptical of simply spending two minutes prompting an AI model that you have no idea how it works and claiming the result to be your personal artwork. I am not sure we really want to move in a world where machines make art for us to contemplate. As someone else said (of whom I don’t remember the name), “I’d rather live in a world where robots do our dishes and laundry so I can focus on my art, rather than the opposite”.
Now we're coming to the end of the AI hype, where do you see the most innovative collaborations between artists and technologists happening?
The development of technology is always guided with some sort of cycle of hype. This hype is for me very distracting and misleading, so I usually look forward to that moment when the hype cools down and we start focusing on the actual value and quality of whatever is made with a technology, rather than getting excited by the tech itself.
I always try not to jump on the latest tech too quickly, but rather spend a long time mastering something. It’s only after years of experimentation that I can see interesting things emerging.
Personally, I am very fascinated by the new advancement in robotics and the blurring boundaries between physical and digital processes.
I always try not to jump on the latest tech too quickly, but rather spend a long time mastering something. It’s only after years of experimentation that I can see interesting things emerging.
Personally, I am very fascinated by the new advancement in robotics and the blurring boundaries between physical and digital processes.
Can you tell me about your latest film and your reasoning behind it?
About a year ago I started a process to carefully document everything that is happening behind the production of my works. I started doing this just for documentation purposes with the idea of creating an archive. In this process I’ve fallen in love with the contrast between the various parts of the production and started to contemplate the idea of creating a short film. At this point Max got in touch about his new project and I thought this could be the right opportunity to develop this idea.
The film is about the tensions and equilibrium between man, nature, art and technology. Partly shot in Carrara, the historical marble quarries where most of western art came from, the film takes inspiration from Michelangelo’s Captives (1510-1530), a series of never-completed sculptures which became emblematic of their expressiveness embedded in the exposed sculptural process.
This film is essentially about the algorithmic genesis of my latest marble sculpture and the expressiveness embedded in the exposed sculptural process.
Like the original Captives, also my works are left unfinished, with the intent to document the aesthetics of the process itself, which becomes the true subject of both the film and the actual sculpture.
The film is about the tensions and equilibrium between man, nature, art and technology. Partly shot in Carrara, the historical marble quarries where most of western art came from, the film takes inspiration from Michelangelo’s Captives (1510-1530), a series of never-completed sculptures which became emblematic of their expressiveness embedded in the exposed sculptural process.
This film is essentially about the algorithmic genesis of my latest marble sculpture and the expressiveness embedded in the exposed sculptural process.
Like the original Captives, also my works are left unfinished, with the intent to document the aesthetics of the process itself, which becomes the true subject of both the film and the actual sculpture.
Reflecting on your artistic journey over the past five years, what significant changes have you noticed in the work you have been producing?
Certainly there are many things that have changed in the last five years, including the fact that I moved my studio back to Rome after almost 20 years in London. Beside the many fast-paced things that constantly surround the studio, there are also many things that evolve very very slowly. For me it’s always nice to measure the results of a specific research in a long timeframe.
Where do you think your work is going next? Are there specific themes or technologies that you are eager to experiment with in the near future?
I am starting to experiment with textiles and new algorithmic processes related to robotic knitting. I am interested in the contrast between this almost primordial tradition and completely new aesthetics. These experiments are leading to very interesting directions, however I don't want to say too much just yet.
I am also continuing to explore the traditions of landscape painting and planning new expeditions to gather data from various landscapes.
I am also continuing to explore the traditions of landscape painting and planning new expeditions to gather data from various landscapes.
In your creative process, you integrate modern digital tools with more classical artistic techniques, creating works that look like renaissance sculptures out of polystyrene for example. Why do you favour this kind of work rather than something that looks like it comes from the future?
My work is about the tensions between past, present and future. Although the sculpture in Fighters reminds us of a classical paradigm, the true focus of the work is in the new gestural expressiveness of the process. The geometry left surrounding the figure belongs to the algorithmic, aesthetic languages that are very much ultra-contemporary.
So, I would say that the work has several layers to it, and its soul is in the relationships between these layers.
So, I would say that the work has several layers to it, and its soul is in the relationships between these layers.
As AI becomes more prevalent in art creation, what do you believe its role should be? AI as a tool is interesting, as are ideas around augmented intelligence, but aren’t they just a step on the way to fully autonomous artistic production?
I think there is a broader question here, which is “in what world do we want to live in?”. As I mentioned in the quote above, I think I would prefer a world where my dishes and laundry are automated.
I am personally interested in the relationships between man and machines, not so much in full automation, especially for the production of things that are made for humans.
I am personally interested in the relationships between man and machines, not so much in full automation, especially for the production of things that are made for humans.
In this new paradigm how do you think the role of human artists will change? Do you think we will all have to go back to making work by hand?
It might indeed happen that we lose interest in things made by machines alone, and go back to things that are ultimately made by humans. This does not mean making things by hand, simply using technology in a way that is not so standardised.
