Martin Boyce: Urban Legend

When did you first hear you were nominated for the Turner Prize, and was it entirely unexpected – was there any sense that it was your turn, considering the other Scottish artists who have been nominated in recent years?

I don’t think it helps to think on those terms, I always figured if it comes your way, it comes. Having perceived ideas of a pecking order isn’t useful. It comes down to four people sitting in a room and making a list of four artists.

What show were you nominated for – will you be showing the same work at the Baltic?

I was nominated for a show from May 2010 at Eva Presenhuber gallery in Zurich. I won’t be showing any of the same work but some pieces will be related. In Zurich I showed two sculptures based on library tables and concrete wall panels with steel letters spelling out phrases. For the Turner prize exhibition I will show a recent library table work, a concrete panel and some other works.

With context playing a central role in your practice, how will you be responding to the nature of the Turner Prize show and the Baltic?

I often respond to gallery spaces when I make exhibitions. In the case of the Baltic there was the option of removing a wall to expose some pillars in the space. I decided to do this and have made a new ceiling work that responds to these architectural features.

Do you feel that the work will be at all compromised by its new context, which is not its intended context – or are you simply not that prescriptive about the work and perhaps see the different context as a new challenge?

Even when I make a work with a specific space in mind I have to know that it can also be shown in another situation and with other works. Sometimes new configurations of existing work can produce surprising results. The sculptures often have a peculiar energy of their own and you can’t always predict what will happen when you put them in a room together. This is the exciting part of making exhibitions.

With your use of concrete and your evoking urban playgrounds, how importantly does the built up area figure in your work, and has living in Glasgow been central to your choice of materials?

The urban environment is pretty universal although I like seeing the different nuances as I travel. A lot of what feeds into the work are the glimpses of city landscapes you see from train and car windows, these mental snapshots of wastegrounds and parks and bits of buildings.

Your work often references design and design history, with some works, arguably, crossing into design proper. Do you hold such defined categories, or do you see the differences between art and design as being malleable, or even imaginary?

This question has come up so many times over the years. A year or so ago I was on a panel at a symposium in Zurich on this topic and nobody nailed it. Of course it shouldn’t be nailed. I can’t think of many places in the world where you could wake up and open your eyes and not be looking at something designed. To try and define art or design is to limit the possibilities of both. The way I see it, I’m an artist, I make art. At the end of the day practical design involves a response to a client. Art is about freedom. Ultimately they are very different things.

You are of a generation of Scotland-based artists who moved away from the traditional art object, drawing inspiration from architecture, design and film. Can you describe how that came about, and was the [Glasgow School of Art] Environmental Art department as fundamental to this shift as is often implied?

I think the work of Glasgow-based artists is entirely in keeping with developments in art internationally. This is because we were and are part of an international conversation and community. My generation was always about getting out there and spreading the word about artists in Glasgow and about getting people from outside the city to come and meet the artist here. I can only assume that still happens and that’s why Glasgow continues to be a good place to base yourself as an artist. There are definitely key moments and key people in the recent history and the Environmental Art department played an important part in this. For me at Art School it was all about people, I just went where the interesting people were, the ones that stood out to me, and they were all in Environmental Art. It never made sense to me to be a ‘painter’ or a ‘sculptor’, the Environmental Art department meant you could experiment with painting, video, performance, sculpture, installation, whatever the work required. So it produced artists.

Why do you think Glasgow keeps producing such internationally renowned artists? And why do the press and other commentators find it quite so anomalous?

I don’t know. It was always so clear to me that I was surrounded by brilliant people and artists. I never doubted it for a minute and still don’t. I’m just lucky to be part of it all.