You have graduated from Mimar Sinan University Faculty of Fine Arts Painting Department. It was said that academic education was framed with some pattern, had boundaries, and was a structure, which was not allowing change a lot, especially up until 90s'. When you think about the work you are doing now, how was the situation in your time? Could you have graduated with these works?

I wouldn't have graduated; no. I can't argue with the quality of the education they were giving. It was a very quality education; we gained very strong anatomy knowledge. Today, in which school can you work with a professional model or learn non-contemporary art history in every discipline that is to say the art history before 1950 and its course in a comparative way? It is a very precious knowledge deposition. The only missing part was the knowledge on after 1950s was not introduced. Yet, the situation changes; it changes compulsorily. The doors, especially the digital doors, were once opened and art has started to become a settled culture due to the biennials and art investments.

Were the relationships over artist-gallery etc. spoken in the school? Yet, there are lessons around this subject matter not in many schools...

There so many numbers of galleries and our teachers were working in those galleries. Since the number of art buyers was little, we couldn't even talk about the pie or the slice. There was a slice that you could have seen the other side when you look at it. Therefore there was a situation as such: 'You get informed of art; graduate as well, but you are not artist anyway'. There were supporting teachers as well, but they didn't believe in anyway. I mean they didn't believe the art was going to become widespread. The only way was to become an academic; to earn a living from your own art was out of question, thus they didn't see such a future for us either.

Despite all their good intention, it is necessary to think and question this: The necessity of the academies. John Berger explains this very well in his book Art and Revolution: he says that the academies starts from the point of standardization, developing national politics and to from a sort of definable art. The academies maybe need to get out of their existing structure at some point. The only thing maybe a person needs, is an area that will help him/her to move, technical and conceptual consultancy and rules and expectations that will allow him/her not to abuse that space. Academies, the places teaching art in the future should maybe be these places. 

So, how do you comment on the dynamism since 2009? Galleries, which opened and closed, young artists, critics... 

This is more like rising, visible wave and it is on its breaking point at this moment.  We will see the effect when it is spread. It has two sides: Advantage and a great deal of disadvantage. 

Unfortunately, there have been so many speculative pufferies due to seeing art as mere investment tool. There have been many big mistakes in the name of both artist, investor, who is investing through being a collector as well as its terms in the future. Suddenly rising the prices of an artists or artist to be, who hasn't build his/her life in this sense yet; and then some people investing on this person not through choice or tracking, but based on recommendation; selling the same piece for double the price after two months; and more pufferies and more pufferies. There have been so many lost names; investments since after reaching to a certain point, the continuity of that artist, contribution to his/her power to create were ignored. On the other hand Turkey needs new collectors, who can turn this into a saving and culture, as well as this becoming a saving and culture issue. Otherwise there is nothing like the one who doesn't know shouldn't buy; the one who doesn't know shouldn't come.  Being a collector is also something sentimental. On top of all, one gradually develops. One reaches to a maturity level, where one senses, perceives as one looks, meets, sees. It is an experience in the name of everybody. 

Of course we shouldn't skip this either: this is also a process of nobility. This is the issue that should be recognised. There is no meaning to have the money in your pocket any more. These money owners should be collectors in order to have different work relationships, have international business communication in a higher lever and to express themselves in a different category.  As a matter of fact this is how it happened in the history. We shouldn't be surprised that it is happening like this in Turkey. Art is very fluid channel in this respect. The only point that I am upset about is that the investment done to art is not done for the other channels - that is to say critic, broadcast- that is supporting art. Artist is a three-legged stance with buyer, spectator and critic. I think art publications are limited; there exist no really proper interviews rather than narrative or good critics or else constructive, questioning contents. At the moment everything that is being done, is being applauded; because there is a supporter, institution etc. for everything. I think the real perception is not unveiled in this respect since nobody wants to offend each other.

For instance, the artists used to criticise each other in 80s and 90s and this was perceived as a constructive state. Now the artists protect themselves by keeping them as individuals and alone. The attitude seems like 'let nobody reach me; I am fine as it is' rather than evaluating according to the nature of the critic. The artist is the most delicate stone within this structure. He/she is obliged to carry on his/her production. From the moment when they start to question the intention of what is presented in this sense, the artist becomes introvert and doesn't accept any criticism from outside. We surely can't identify this as the artist's state. This originates from the loneliness appeared under the concept of individualization in today's society. Aside from the fact that there exists no interdisciplinary communication, this is the period, in which everybody is closed themselves up in their own atelier and earn their living through art if they managed to figure a way out, rather than the old days when art was being discussed in cafés, streets. A lot of talented people are do-lean model, creating in their own atelier in a manner of 'I am cross with you' and not showing this to anyone.

When we say 90s, the initiatives in that period come to my mind. There was a 216, which you were also in it by the end of 2000. I don't think it continues.

It doesn't continue at the moment. 216 was an idea and production area existed in between 2007-2009 in Kadıköy. It emerged entirely from the problem, which we just mentioned. Everybody is closed in their own atelier; nobody is giving critic to each other; no communication... First we did atelier visits: everybody did their constructive critics about each other's work in proper manner. We got deeply involved in the process of Hasanpaşa Gazhane process. We took our part beside the Gazhane Environmentalist Volunteers within Gazhane's process during 2010 İstanbul Cultural Capital of Europe. That place was going to be a culture and art centre, yet it was pale in comparison due to a very serious income rush. We made a memory book for the place: approximately 30-35 artists made works on canvas upon space-memory and then we set them all up and turned into a notebook. We still keep those notebooks. Then we made another city-memory work on Fashion - we made huge notebook. 

Then we started to empty inside 216. It was a period, when each one of us got into different periods in their career. As we all said at the very start: There shouldn't be any perception such as 'Bring whatever work in the atelier and make an exhibition. Let us produce for the content' Then, we realized that everybody is in a different situation at that point and we said we should abolish 216 without ruining it. We all see each other by the way. We still have things to talk about, things that make us excited a bit, but 216 fell due in that period.

You had a working period with Haluk Akçe. How was it?

Haluk is still in my life both as a friend and a mentor. Haluk is a kind of person, who can make the sharp critic with good intentions, which we just mentioned.  I am so lucky to be next to him in this sense. Because right from the very beginning, he has seen me as a friend, artist rather than an assistant or a student.  It is rather a very quality approach for a person in his level of career. Meeting Haluk was one of the strong turning points of my life. The period we worked together was the period that I progressed both in the name of artistic build up and life. It was completely a different point of view. Because, Haluk you know... If he gets into one person's life, something definitely changes.  The most important things he thought me were to believe in what I do and to stand strong.

You use different mediums such as cut-out, oil painting, video. Do you have a dream realm in your exhibitions? In what kind of process does the ideas develop?

The route is very complicated. It comes how it wishes to come. Sometimes, something I see in a hardware store terrorizes me and I run home. The description of a character or the energy the character has in a book I am reading triggers me in other times. My hand usually never stops. I scribble like an exercise; like I wash my face. I am one of those who think by drawing. Sometimes I get stuck to a sentence. For instance, I am wondering 'endurance of the furniture' concept, which got stuck to mind recently, will come up to. 

The story goes like this: In Ahmet Hamdi Tanpınar's story called Summer Rain, where a woman takes a shelter in a home. There the dialogue in between the man and the woman goes like this:

-    'It is obvious that your wife is not home'
-    'How did you understand?'
-    'There is no endurance in the furniture. There exits no docility in the furniture of a home when there is woman.'

This was something I felt so much for. Now I am wondering what this is going to turn into. 

Just like this, I can't really figure out where I get fed. I live. I think the things I meet in life, the things I can see interfere into this structure. It moves something in me; it makes me turn my head around and see something. As long as it keeps my enthusiasm high, grabs my attention, it pokes something inside me; I keep on going towards it. Hence, I can have a lot of starting points for many things...

I read something in somewhere that goes like  'Why everything about art has to touch the current affairs?'. A person doesn't need to refer to current affairs or concepts in your work. What is the relationship with the current affairs in your art?

Yes, there is nothing to do with the current affairs in my work. Frankly current affairs do not feed me. I am looking for something more timeless; because, current is -as the name implies- current. Thus, I can't internalize the current's existence or the importance of its existence; I can't fit it into its place. Because, the thing that exists in that shape today, is a structure build by the existing political system and tomorrow it will change in a different scale. What I mean is that my creative energy doesn't have any correspondence there. I get angry, furious yes; but there are a lot of things that push me to act in this way, yet I choose to act in a different area. This is all because of interfering this into an artistic production is frankly something that I don't do. To tell the truth, I am doing what I can do. It doesn't feel sincere... The production that comes out when I feel myself complete represents me. The rest doesn't. That daily reality doesn't really have a place in my own production structure since I get fed from the positive contrary to the negatively fed general genre.  I have a potential I have to protect. That potential has life juice and that juice is the best part of being human. We meet with this so few in the daily life. If I am going to form my production from that point, this would be my choice. On the other hand, a person is free to do so however he/she believes is expressing him/herself. Negativity doesn't really have any contribution in my understanding of life. It totally pacifies, immobilize and I do believe in people so much. The name of my last exhibition and the whole variety of it was 'It is Safe With Me Until You Return (Sen Gelinceye Kadar Bende Saklı)' was all on the most precious side of being the person I believe in. Gezi happened right after. What can I say.

Do you have turning point periods, events in your artistic process?

These words of Ulus Baker have quite an importance for me: "You can find your reality closer to other people's dreams. Life is an imprisonment like this and how will we get out of it? Why shouldn't the life be a 'happening', a unique creative process?"

These words do have a big influence on me during my transition period from academic to my unique process. It is really something like this. The biggest trap that an artist falls into is the acclaim. Because there are people whom like and dislike your work. Especially if you are an artist who makes very different works or leaping instead of getting deep into an approach or get lost in that approach, like me...  your work is sometimes liked and sometimes doesn't. Your ears are always open and you are always stretching to something different. Your morale falls and rises. Then you realize some people are picking at you and you have become some other people's dream. That is why I am not forming any connection neither with the productions, nor with the people who are thinking about it: it is to listen to my inner voice; come to a state to hear my inner voice.

​For instance, the Gezi period is important for me. To be more precise, what Gezi coincides; because I have been producing non-stop in an intense pace for 4,5 years; thinking non-stop about production. Tachycardiac mental states... By the end of this second exhibition, I felt that I have to stop when I saw the work of the exhibition on the wall. I need to start something else. Exhibition was something I have completed. Gezi happened right after it. There the world has changed; a possibility of a different perception emerged. I quit most of my daily habits during that period. It happened by itself. Frankly, I didn't neither think about painting, nor I wished to do it or thought about it. I wasn't even uncomfortable about this. I used to feel uncomfortable, anxious in this kind of situation. I didn't feel. It was an account of my concious, but it has changed now. Now I have to produce just because I feel to do so. 

Is there any new projects, expositions, exhibitions in the future?