An Interview with

Ni Xuemin

Ripple Verse Gallery (RVG): How has Surrealism influenced your creative thinking and mode of expression? How have you developed your own visual language and narrative based on this tradition?

NXM: Before my postgraduate studies, my creative perspective was always focused on realism. During my first year of MA, through reading and the influence of my mentor, I became very interested in the concepts of ‘viewing’ and ‘gazing’, which gradually led me to explore space and the relationship between "inside and outside" in my works. This is also related to personal preference—I am not particularly fond of wildly fantastical absurdity; I prefer a restrained approach to expressing inner emotions.

RVG: It appears your works often do not directly depict human figures, but instead suggest their presence through architectural and interior elements. How do you view this ‘negative space’ approach to representing people?

NXM: For me, the ‘absence’ and ‘presence’ of human figures add warmth to the painting. By replacing figures with everyday objects, the viewer is not led to make immediate emotional judgments based on facial expressions, actions, or behaviours. I hope to approach my work from a rational perspective—analysing the relationships between objects and subjects—to uncover the deeper meanings beneath the surface.

RVG: It appears a tension between ‘isolation and connection’ in your works, often through scenes that exist between fantasy and reality, reinforced by architectural elements like doors, windows, and arches. How do you interpret this tension? Do these architectural elements carry symbolic meaning in your creations? Are they simply spatial structures, or do they embody psychological or philosophical metaphors?

NXM: In my work, I often use ‘visual nesting’ to hint at the perpetual tension between reality and illusion. Elements such as doors, windows, and curtains create spatial paradoxes and existential dilemmas. When people believe they have reached their "reality" through these spatial relationships, it may only be a higher level of illusion. The subject within the space serves as the necessary illusion that sustains the entire cognitive system. This self-referential dilemma is precisely a deep critique of rational cognition in contemporary art.

RVG: Some of your works depict a dissolution of boundaries between interior and exterior spaces. Is this a reflection on the increasingly blurred boundaries between humans and technology in contemporary society, or an exploration of symbolic self-boundaries?

NXM: The dissolution of boundaries is ultimately about deconstructing and reconstructing spatial relationships. When the distinction between inside and outside disappears, it becomes a cognitive barrier, revealing the fragility of the rationally constructed cognitive system.

RVG: In these explorations, have you encountered certain boundaries—things that are difficult to articulate or visualise? How do you deal with such boundaries?

NXM: Yes, quite often. Not all emotions or meanings can be depicted through imagery. In fact, I find these indescribable things to be the most fascinating. The key is to pause and feel them—after reflection, they naturally emerge in my creations in some form.

RVG: You mentioned experiencing a creative contradiction—wanting to express ideas clearly but also fearing being too easily understood. Has this contradiction driven your artistic process? How do you maintain the tension between "readable" and "unreadable" elements in your work? (Or how do you balance metaphor and direct expression? Do you use specific visual or conceptual strategies to ensure your work is neither too explicit nor too obscure?)

NXM: This contradiction will always exist in my creative process because I cannot tolerate my work being immediately deciphered. I hope for it to have lasting impact—to make people stop, enter the work, and search for an exit. In my creations, I use juxtaposed imagery, disrupting conventional order to generate an unfamiliar, indescribable yet profound experience.

RVG: You say you aim to express ‘the essence of humanity’ rather than ‘surface relationships’. How do you define human essence in your work? What is the distinction between essence and surface? How do you reveal this essence visually or conceptually while avoiding superficiality?

NXM: I explore human essence versus appearance through object relationships. People instinctively seek truth and resist deception, yet this very desire can blind them, preventing them from seeing the bigger picture. Truth is always a relative concept.

RVG: You mentioned that your work is influenced by real-world events. Can you provide an example of how specific events have shaped your artistic process?

NXM: The pandemic had a profound impact on me—it completely changed my creative mindset and working methods. It made me realise that art needs to communicate something, to speak through images. For example, in my work Symbiosis, I depicted a curled-up human figure among tree branches alongside bats, attempting to convey certain ideas. That was my first piece after shifting my artistic approach—it was relatively direct in its expression.

RVG: Do you prefer an approach that actively engages with reality—injecting personal emotions, thoughts, and social critique into your work—or one that maintains distance for self-examination and introspection (detaching from reality to observe oneself and explore internal themes through symbolism, metaphor, or abstraction)?

NXM: Usually the latter, self-reflection followed by synthesis.

RVG: Does the alternation between self-engagement and detachment influence your artistic language? Is this a deliberate choice or something that emerges naturally during the creative process?

NXM: It seems to happen naturally after accumulating enough experience.

RVG: You mentioned enjoying placing familiar elements in ‘wrong’ contexts to create puzzles, using unexpected perspectives and natural elements. What is the motivation behind this approach? What emotions or concepts do you hope to convey through these misplacements and visual contradictions? Is this approach linked to your personal experiences or understanding of reality?

NXM: This is one of my creative habits—I start by subverting habitual perceptions. The goal is to guide the viewer into completing this "game" with me. If an artwork perfectly aligns with reality, then what reason is there to keep exploring it? There must be a sense of unfamiliarity—something "wrong"—to stir curiosity.

RVG: How do you view audience interpretation? Do you prefer viewers to actively interpret your work or simply immerse themselves in it? Should their experience be intuitive, or does it require specific knowledge or psychological preparation?

NXM: I believe an artwork is only complete with audience participation. From the beginning of my creative process, I consider audience expectations. Under my guidance, they navigate the narrative space freely, without needing any prior preparation—always ready to respond to a mysterious call.

RVG: Do you see your work as having a form of social intervention? Do you hope your art influences how audiences perceive reality?

NXM: Yes, that is my goal. Whether it succeeds depends on the viewer.

RVG: The Xicun Art District seems to have significantly influenced your artistic practice. How has this new environment, including the reed fields and alkaline soil that initially made you hesitant, impacted your recent work?

NXM: When I first arrived, the shift from an idyllic southern town to a landscape of reed fields and alkaline soil felt absurd and unsettling. Over time, the site unearthed something raw within me, a sensation distinct from my experience in the south. I’m excited to see how this "wildness" unfolds in my art.

RVG: From the formation of your personal style in 2021 to now (2025), what has changed in your creative concepts and artistic style? What has remained the same, and why?

NXM: These changes have felt natural, like a gradual progression. For example, my works now contain less narrative complexity—back in 2022–2023, I enjoyed embedding multiple layers of conceptual puzzles. But by 2024, my works became more organic. The forms and colours have also evolved over time.

RVG: Can you talk about the contemporary relevance in your artistic practice and how it reflects your unique situational experience?

NXM: I think the term "contemporary relevance" itself is highly ambiguous because we now live in an era of cultural plurality. The contemporary nature of a work simply comes down to the artist’s sincere and effective expression. I believe the essence of my work lies in combining familiar objects with socially significant elements to provoke thought. These combinations might seem normal at first glance, but upon closer inspection, something always feels "off." Of course, these seemingly random pairings are actually based on experience and personal interests.

From my perspective, my work is honest and deeply personal—this is what gives it contemporary relevance. I was born and raised in this era, and I am constantly shaped by its currents. Every image that appears in my paintings is inevitably influenced by this time and space.

March 2025