Published in August 1996 issue of Prospect Magazine
What are the roots of 20th century art and how should artists relate to the past? Can our response to art transcend our own culture? Antony Gormley, Britain’s foremost sculptor and a recent winner of the Turner prize, discusses the purpose of art and much else, with Ernst Gombrich, the great art historian
Antony Gormley: You ought to know that it was reading your book The Story of Art at school that inspired my interest in art.
Ernst Gombrich: Really!
AG: It made the whole possibility not only of studying art but also of becoming an artist a reality.
EG: That’s very flattering and very surprising.
AG: I thought we might talk about the relationship of contemporary art to art history generally: what is necessary to retain and what we can discard.
EG: I would like to start with Field (see right). I’m interested in the psychology of perception; if a face emerges from a shape you are bound to see an expression. The Swiss inventor of the comic strip, Rodolphe T?er, says that one can acquire the fundamentals of practical physiognomy without ever actually having studied the face, head or human contours, but just through scribbling eyes, ears, and nose. Even a recluse, if he’s observant and persevering, could soon acquire all he needs to know about physiognomy to produce expressive faces. I have called this T?er’s law: the discovery that expressiveness does not depend on observation or skill but on self-observation.
AG: For me the extraordinary thing about the genesis of form of the individual figures in Field is that it isn’t about visual appearances at all. What I’ve encouraged people to do is to treat the clay almost as an extension of their own bodies. It’s about taking a ball of clay and using the space between the hands as a kind of mould out of which the form arises.
EG: Anyone who has ever played with clay has experienced this elemental form. It has played a crucial role in 20th century art. Picasso did it from morning to night,…