When we have a look at your atelier, the first thing that strikes us inevitably is your toys. I think this is something to do with your motivation in your artistic production.

This is also something to do with my childhood. I have been playing, drawing, doing since I was two and a half. Playing with toys, scrambling, creating possibilities is something that has been going on since then.  As you know, our childhood was a period with less opportunities. We had to dream with whatever we had in our hands and fictionalize over them and we had to be more creative. This creativity encouraged us quite a bit. Those little parts of toys in my works that you can see today; they strike quite a bit especially my first works in 2007.  The impulse to connect them is the the reflection of that state in our childhood.

It is true: you have three toys and you make ten toys out of those three.

Exactly. We grew up like this. We are coming from a period like that and this had so much effect.

Science and art - if you look into their roots, it is actually the continuation of the game.

I believe these two unite. Even though people think that these are separate, they will eventually get connected. In fact, this is what we see when you look at Leonardo in Renaissance That giant leap at that time is so ordinary for us now and since quite a bit time has passed over it, this reality pops up sometimes. But these are all one and into each other.  We see the same thing, when we look at the new media art.

The connection is maybe in the childhood. At the end of the day you continue your curiosity.

I didn't have chance to express this in my other interviews; but I will tell you about it. In fact the root of the production comes from whatever you see when you are child. For instance there is an air plane at least in one of my ten works; because my father was a soldier and I grew up in Turkish Air force. Thus, one of my five works is a military work. Power, force, masculinity, states of opposite forces, dictators, leaders... How can not be? We live in such an environment anyway and I come from the source of this thing. But there has always been a contradiction in it. My father, for instance, is a very big  contradiction: you wouldn't tell that he is soldier; he is like Santa. This contradiction is reflected on my works quite a lot and as black humour. I like to take this out. It is like after Batman pushed Joker on the wall and put a gun on his face, the writing "Bang"  pops out. I like to take that 'bang' flag out.

Yes, irony is quite an effective way of expression when it is done good.

We usually avoid irony. Maybe it is because, it is not done properly. They can't fit serious tests. There is something wrong about it  I am not doing a textual art and surely a series text can be written for a work of art. But we have seen so many times that it has been tried to get work of art from a text. We have seen the ones, which were forced upon.

You are going to insist on Derrida and structuralism. 

Yes; why should I finish a work with a Deleuze. Art is not going to get away from those surely; it is going to get stronger with these. But I find it hard to understand texts, which only based on these, extremely personal histories: i find them all ridiculous.  I think people suffer there. People don't know you; they don't know your past and you have to put an extra effort to explain yourself for them to have a relationship with the work of art. And this doesn't exist. It doesn't work then.

I have spoken about the same thing with Kerimcan Güleryüz. I used to be a BA student then. He asked me about my criteria of a work of art. It was at the time when the text was in the center. I answered as 'sincerity I guess'; now you know what this is and I don't need to explain this to you. He said to me to be careful; 'sincerity is a concept that is abused quite a lot.' As you said, this is the trauma of whatever you lived in whenever you lived; that is all ok, but what is the theme of this work?

Yes that is exactly what I am saying.

Anyway, let's talk about irony a little bit.

Irony is a necessary thing. It should be seen as something that makes you laugh first and then make you think about it. It is more of an opposite angle - a 'twist'. The result of looking from an opposite angle without using humour can only be humorous.

Being humorous can also hurt.

Exactly; but it is also humour.

For instance, one of your first works "Servis (Service)".

Yes, service was something that was describing my military service. I have made a military service, where I couldn't find the answer to  'What is the point of my existence here?' We were watering saplings under a rainy weather. There is not logic in this surely; but it is something to do where allegiance can reach to. What is called illogical in military is actually he logic of military. It is not that logical in itself. This logic is very ironic and also artistic. I am trying not skip these points; this critical point of view; because awareness on these is actually a formula. You can make variations using this formula. As a matter of fact its feeling is a formula. If you apply the maths of this feeling you can reveal various results. The result of this maths is very interesting. The expectation of an artist from his/her art work, the expectations of the audience or the sincerity rate that comes out as a result is never times two or four. You can find four really hard in art. If you have found four thousand, then you are lucky and you can die with this; but you are always in minus level. It is very important for the artist to get the real satisfaction - in other words you should never be so pleased with anything. An artist, who is very pleased, is an artist, who is very guilty. That artist is making a trick somewhere. What you re doing is not something that reaches to a result; but should provide opportunities for the next one.

Why do you have those soldier figures on the shelf?

What do you think?

I understand.

Now we can get to another subject from here: Costume. Things, objects that we have with us or carry on us that are reveals our identity. The clothes we wear do have an object base existence and also have meaning that we give to them - the ones that give hints on your personality. They are made out of atoms; you carry them with you and make a whole. Military costumes, guns, indicators on this area of expertise attract my attention. I am person, who accept their existence quite a lot. There is being against and accepting it and also there is being against and not accepting it. I find it quite meaningless. That is why sword, that is samurais, that is why the Second World War attract my attention. From here we can return to my paper works. They are going to come out the first time and you are the one, who see them first. Basically they are forms bend out of paper - my usual analysis. Sanitary napkins, cotton buds, tea strainers, the forms created from the composition that they form and the meanings I give to them. For instance here I am working on a noble woman figure: a body of a woman regarded with sanctity. A queen doesn't wear an ordinary dress. This is a form that I questioned over the examples in history.

Where do you keep all these materials?

I don't. They are thrown away after they turn into the form I need.

So how did you moved to this after oil painting? Because there is a very sharp transition.

There is yes. A very sudden transition. However, I always maintain the knowledge of painting. I accommodate the hints that you can say 'This man knows the painting', in composition and in construction. Only the instrument is different. As I said, as I have been dealing with three dimensional objects since my childhood being a man making toys, and since brush and paint became insufficient for the results I wanted to gain, I inclined to three dimensional objects. Taking the form as a sculpture; making use of it with its material; making different possibilities is my instinctual part, instead of painting different possibilities. The works involving the intensive of a painter as well as a sculpture. My real issue is the form- that was my problem all the time.

What do you say on being called as the Man Ray of the century?

They did say that; but you embarrassed when you hear something like that.

I am not your fan or anything and we talking as two artists. Art is discovery area and at the same time whatever discovered is meaningful. Think abut it: Are the last period works of Matisse worthy of anything when they are thought separate from their contexts? But he did a big discovery and this is the level he reached step by step. I think you also made a discovery.  You are really modest; that's ok; but you surely know that what you are doing is good; because you are satisfied.

Something  comes out inevitably when you do it with love and curiosity and when you push  the things you learnt, you imitated, you copied to the background.

Let us come back to you using the material. What kind of strategy do you follow on choosing the material? 

Like a martial artist.  Four people attacks you in a room; you don't have a weapon in your hand; you fold the newspaper that you have found over there and also with another another object you have found you start to attack. Think like this. This the essence of the work- just like a martial artist I see all the materials around me and using them allto my advantage. 

In digital environment?

I use computer and subsidiary programmes. It was less in the past; but now I am using all its blessings when I need to. 

How do you do your photographic shootings?

I take the photographs home sometimes with a camera or iPhone and even with a scanner that I modified...

How does your production process progress?

There is always a process situation. For example  I have taken so many pictures nowadays and collected essential materials exceedingly. Now it is time for application. But during the process a new material can also lead you.

Lastly, what are your criteria?

In fact what I am going to do emerges with knowing what I don't want to do. After  knowing what I don't want to do, it is easier to walk in the area of what I can do. I don't act in a conservative way on what I set my mind to - just to be able to see the other options. But there are two things that I am certainly determined not to do: one them is to be decorative. Even as a material or a feeling, I run away from it. Anything that is decorative shows me what I am not going to do. The second one is I am not doing anything that is me as the subject matter. Something experienced can surely be a subject matter; but I don't get into personal matters and I don't use my face or my body over a personal story as a material. It surely can be used; there are many examples of it. But I don't use it.

Do you use somebody else?

I don't use somebody else either. If I need a face I make it. 

It really was a pleasant interview Ansen; thank you on behalf of Artful Living. Hope to see you with your new series in April.