Was ‘pop art’ a term used by yourself or colleagues or was there a different terminology that referred to a new figurative movement in the 1960s and early 1970s?
Pop art and conceptualism.
Did you ever consider yourself (now or in the past) a pop artist?
I accepted it.
Did your work engage with the current events in the 1960s and early 1970s?
I carried Consumer Art at a demonstration against Ann Bryant [Anita Bryant] in New York in 1977. I documented that.
How did you choose the subject matter for your work included in The World Goes Pop?
It is relevant to my practice, especially to my photographs from the end of 1960 when I started to practice ‘permanent registration’. Art is in the process of becoming in every instant of reality: to the individual every fact, every second is fleeting and unique. That is why l record common and trivial events like eating, sleeping, copulation, resting, speaking etc. Moreover, each activity of a man, being a component of his reality, is absolutely equal in evoking mental reaction in a man who watches the notation. That is why l can transform a registration of one activity into another one.
Where did you get your imagery from (what, if any, sources did you use)?
Transforming banal actions and their socio-cultural ambiguity.
Were you aware of pop art in other parts of the world?
Was commercial art an influence on your work or the way in which it was made?
For sure, as a new type of art aesthetic.
Was there a feeling at the time that you were doing something important and new, making a change…?
Yes definitely, because it was the creation of a new object and new art.
Was there an audience for the work at the time – and if so what was their reaction to it?
I believe so, it caused consternation and interest.
Looking back at these works, what do you think about them now?
I think that their deeper meaning and artistic importance is continually rediscovered anew. Especially by young people, the next generation who have been educated in a different context of reality.