The mighty computer
With needle and thread, Reichek has been stitching her way through history and art history. The computer she credits with helping her find quotations–about communication, translation, men and women, etc.–that she then pairs with imagery.
She loves the way the Internet and the computer can come up with connections and samples that more conventional searches would not find. It’s the new thinking, as far as Reichek is concerned. (And we who are of a certain age are certainly grateful for how it has expanded our memories.)
Words and images
It’s the juxtapositions of the imagery with the words and the material that point up the questionable underlying assumptions in the imagery and in the words. “It’s in the interstices between the appropriation of an image and an appropriation of a text that the meaning is. They come from different times and different media. Web knowledge and the way knowledge comes up these days is a whole new way of thinking. Every medium carries its own meaning.”
Her love of the computer and what it can do has now brought her to another tool. She mentioned she just bought a digitized home sewing machine and is struggling up a mountainous learning curve. “My studio looks like a sweatshop,” she said. “I have so many machines, I’ve started giving them names.”
Language and translation
She has stitched her way through macho-centric quotes from Samuel Morse (who painted as well as invented) to the Bible to filmmaker David Cronenberg. She has also stitched her way through symbols of language and communication, which is the underlying theme in all of her work (right, Reichek’s sheer curtain with Morse’s first telegraphed message in both the original Morse Code and our alphabet).
Often, when appropriating a painting or other imagery, she uses a computer to break the image down into pixels, each pixel a stitch, a single color. Sometimes she does the translation by hand. Appropriation of a different kind
Reichek explained in response to a question from Rosenwald-Wolf Gallery Director Sid Sachs that her own work is different from that of other appropriation artists like Richard Pettibone,Elaine Sturtevant and Sherrie Levine. Reichek said the others were about ownership, capitalism and duplication, and not about feminism or history. “My work has to do with philosophy.” And Reichek’s sources are more wide-ranging than just art–they are cinematic and post-modern, she said (right, Pettibone’s “Andy Warhol, ‘Campbell’s Soup Can [Pepper Pot]” oil on three attached canvases, 10 3/8 x 6 3/8 inches).
Which brought Reichek back to her choice of embroidery. She said she admired it for its conflation of high and low culture.
“Who writes the history gets the memory,” she observed. And by putting historic memory into a computer, that history gets rewritten. And she thinks the computer searches, with their algorithms and surprising finds, are doing the rewriting. And then she’s translating it into embroidery to write her found version into art history.
About teaching
Of her teacher Reinhart at Yale, Reichek said she learned “scrupulosity” from him–that every thing you put on the canvas matters. “If a teacher teaches you anything, it’s about how to think,” she said. But she also observed that his practice of picking favorite students was not good teaching. “If you were struggling with something he wasn’t interested in, he didn’t have time for you.”