My interview with artists Vanessa German and Ayanah Moor was intended to start a dialogue through which we examine the complex relationships among institutions, artists and communities.

Historically, institutions tend to be influenced by their wealthy and educated donors. As a result, institutions judge artists by the standards of the establishment, however, the artists often take it upon themselves to challenge these standards in their work.

German creates sculptures called power figures, an art form that has its roots in the Congo. In these sculptures she incorporates found objects and precious materials, including jewellery, photographs and derogatory African-American memorabilia. Her work raises issues about African-American history, white privilege and the role of women in society in a compelling yet provocative manner.

Moor works across a variety of media – mainly print. She explores racial, gender and sexual identity inspired by contemporary popular culture. Moor reinterprets conventional American social practices in her artwork allowing the audience to draw new meanings.

Kilolo Luckett (KL): Please tell me a few things about yourself, where you’re from and the training you received as an artist?

Vanessa German (VG): I grew up in Los Angeles (LA) and am the child of a fibre artist. I’m a sculptor and performer. I make power figures that are inspired by a kind of African tribal power figure from the Congo. When I was a child in LA, my mother would often leave us at museums before they would open and come pick us up after they closed. I was intrigued by these power figures but nobody ever told me anything about them. I responded to them emotionally, based on what I saw with my own eyes. I make a contemporary version of the power figure that I endow with certain powers. I make objects because I want them to do something. Part of what they do comes into me, and through me, as an artist when I’m actually in the process of making them. Literally, some of my material comes from the ground, the earth, the Pittsburgh community that I live in; a neighbourhood called Homewood. I source a lot of material both tangibly and intangibly from the community that I live in; from my neighbours and kids in my neighbourhood. My neighbourhood inspires a lot of the intention that goes into the figures that I create.

Ayanah Moor (AM): I was born and grew up in Norfolk, Virginia. I studied painting and printing in undergraduate school and then chose to focus on printmaking and print media in graduate school. My interest in print relates to some of my philosophy around ideas of audience. Historically, print has been a medium about communication and sending messages or images to masses of people, as opposed to a single individual. And that history always intrigued me because it has a political sensibility; that something is available for many eyes to see or consume. I often describe myself as a generalist, rather than a specialist, in terms of my approach to media. I use a range of tools, from performance to different types of print media: silkscreen, lithography and intaglio. I’ve also worked in video, painting and drawing. Sometimes my work is collaborative. In terms of audience and community, I’m very intrigued by the way artists can participate in, and create, community in terms of their work.

KL: Can you tell me a couple things that you are involved in, both commissioned and community work?

VG: I’ve been commissioned to do different kinds of work for different communities. Boston College commissioned me to write a spokenword poem for their Center for Corporate Responsibility where I performed for the heads of Fortune 500 companies. So that’s one kind of community. I was in the first artist-in-residence programme that The Andy Warhol Museum did in Homewood with another artist named Tina Williams Brewer.

I work with the youth in my community in a different way. The studio ceiling in my basement is low, so I tend to build sculptures and create art on my front porch. I live at the intersection where there are a lot of buses and activity. From creating art on my front porch, people would ask me what I was doing. Organically, my front yard and porch became a safe place where children and their parents would come and create things. So that’s something that has not been commissioned by anything or anyone other than the necessity of, and opportunity that, the environment and people brought forth.

KL: You’ve talked about your role as an artist, and in the different communities that you work. I’d like to talk a little about institutions. They constitute a key role in cultural identity played by photography, video art and film in contemporary society. Institutions are seen as instruments to observe and interpret the changes in today’s communities. Do challenging issues emerge out of these community programmes?

AM: There are definitely challenges that emerge. Sometimes I like to invite an artist to work with me to share resources that I have because of my affiliation with an institution that the artist may not have. Not only am I an artist who uses different tools, I’m a teaching artist, a professor. So that becomes, by default, one kind of audience that I engage because the type of university that I work in is a research university. The students see you as an example because you are in your field thriving. There are certain privileges and benefits of being part of that institution. There are certainly challenges from being part of that institution, too, but what it might allow me to do is share those resources with someone who doesn’t have the same benefits.

There are definitely other challenges you know: the politics of different institutions. But in terms of community and audience, those are dynamics I’m interested in. It’s kind of bending the politics of an institution and using it to your advantage or for other artists who might not have access to those types of resources.

VG: I think life is inherently challenging. I’m a teaching artist also. I’ve had project-fatigue working with institutions doing things in schools. One of the challenges is that they are unable to do what they say they want to do and aren’t really sure what they want to do or the best way to do it. I have not felt well equipped with resources on some teaching-artist projects in schools. I’ve been a teaching artist in my neighbourhood and have seen schools drop art programmes and not finish them. I live in a neighbourhood with all my students and we developed school and neighbourhood relationships. It was always the cool thing for a group of kids to see me on the street and be able to say, ‘that’s my Ms. Vanessa’ and the other kids would want to know me too and read my poem. It became this thing where they had me at school but also knew me on the street too.

KL: In your work, how important is building relationships and engaging different kinds of community?

AM: I think the way that my work engages community may contrast to the way Vanessa works. I think there is tremendous value in both approaches. Community can be this term that is code for Black and Brown people or distressed and urban areas. Community and neighbourhoods are interesting terms. Community is always code. I’m thinking about audience maybe more than community, not just the semantics issue but just for clarity. Audience is important in my work. It has to do with who I make my work with and also how my work is seen. So, in terms of print, print shops historically have been spaces that have much more diverse audiences because lots of people have had access to them. What interests me is, again, what happens in those spaces. They tend to be less privileged spaces than museums and the audiences tend to be broader. Interacting in these kinds of spaces is a commentary on audience. Art centres and print shops, for me, begin to speak to audience in a way that I think you’re talking about community. I’m interested in ways in which artists can create community through their work. I use different strategies than Vanessa. I think those are different methods of engaging the public.

VG: When you said community, I think my neighbourhood.

KL: I think that’s what is so compelling about both of your practices?

VG: As a sculptor and performer, I do work for different kinds of audiences at different levels of intimacy.

AM: I think that is a valuable distinction. There are different ways that we use our gifts, talents and skills to be a part of community and to add to the culture of Pittsburgh and beyond.

KL: Do you think institutions should have engagement programmes for critical debate?

AM: It becomes interesting to call the bluff of institutions that sometimes declare this commitment to a particular kind of audience or debate. But when you get behind the surface of that language there is little integrity there.

VG: Do you think, sometimes, people don’t know how to do it.

AM: I think it is lazy not to do the work to find out. If you’re going to make statements and have a mission statement then you have a responsibility to do that or don’t make that statement. So ignorance should not be an excuse.

VG: Lately, I’ve seen where institutions have these get-togethers about the ‘how to’ behind their mission statement. They are going through the process of what they actually mean.

AM: I find value in having a group a people talk about language and meaning but that is different from an organization making claims about equality.

KL: With the lack of representation relating to race and cultural difference, do institutions understand these concerns? If not, should they?

AM: I think institutions have a responsibility to have a more diverse staff and leadership. Having more people at the table is definitely a benefit but it’s not a guarantee. Moving beyond tokenism is also important. Having a diverse body is always a benefit. Diversity is another code word for Black folks, colour, economic background, class, etc.

KL: Is a sense of location and permanence essential if community programmes are to develop as agents for social change?

VG: I think location is important. I think how mission is executed is also important. It goes back to who’s at the table creating and executing mission.

AM: The location of a particular institution speaks to a particular audience. Being an artist practising in your neighbourhood is super-valuable. It is as valuable as an institution. An artist working in a neighbourhood has value. I mean could it be seen as a form of institution? Maybe that’s the question. Should funding go to support that artist working in that neighbourhood in which everyone recognises the value of art? To me, that should have as much value and weight as an institution. Artists making work in their neighbourhood is super-important.

KL: The question of community is a big question and funders are obsessed with value for money. As an artist, how do you evaluate the relationship with the community?

AM: There’s a difference between what we value and what funders value. Funders often operate like corporations. They have a very corporate methodology for evaluating what’s important and valuable and how that value translates into how much funding you earn. A great question is whether or not there is impact because 300 people see your work or because one 14 years old listened to Vanessa perform a poem next to her sculpture and it changed her life. I might opt for the latter. Just because 300 people see it, the consumption of it is still unknown. Now would a funder agree with me? I doubt it because funders have a corporate mentality about how many eyes see it and that means impact. It’s important that institutions be self-critical about how they evaluate an artist’s work. Sometimes they should just write a check and trust, in my opinion. There are different ways to support an artist whether it’s space, money or other resources.

VG: I’ve found that if people don’t have money, they’ll share what they have and provide other kinds of support because they see value in what I do. They are moved by what they see happening. I find that this sense of ownership – who contributes – is exponentially more valuable. If funders wanted evidence of value, they’d be on the ground and would participate.

AM: I think that is so important because if you receive funding it just shows you were able to speak a certain language. There should be other ways to support artists doing this type of work. The corporate structure that they’re operating in does not permit that kind of support. If you really want to support this kind of work happening in the neighbourhood, you’d be self-critical. We need different models. The way that Vanessa is talking about neighbourhood is very important. The way the term community is used has so much baggage and is so weighted that the term neighbourhood begins to bring a different face to what it means to work in the public.

VG: When someone mentions community, I almost have a physical reaction.

AM: There’s been a lot of artwork around community, outreach and engagement. I really value it when you keep talking about neighbourhood. Neighbourhood has a different quality. It has a place; a place you live in. It speaks about neighbours. It resonates differently to me in terms of our interactions and what’s around us.