Interview by Gabino Travassos

She's tbe ghost of Harcourt Annex, working long hours alone painting evocative pictures of naked women. Sbe ekes out enough to pay her rent, studio, supplies, and not much more. Her talent in figurative painting has earned her a scholarship to tbe New York Academy of Art two-year masters program, starting September 2000.
It's rare to meet an artist wbo works full-time as a painter. Since graduating from tbe U of A BFA program in '97 sbe's found her place in tbe arts, and seems to be exploiting tbe magic moments that happen between artist and model. Her models pose in erolic yet comfortable positions. They trigger Tessa's imagination. Her paintings evoke the traditional, with a timeless voyeuristic magnetism.
Gabino: If you work for someone else you work 40 hours a week. If you're self- employed...?
Tessa: You're always working. 80 hours a week, that's right. Especially if it's something you love. I don't think I make... I just make enough money to live, but it's not about the money. It's about producing something, or learning.

Wouldn't it be easier to be a receptionist and cut down...?
No way! Well, I lifeguarded for 11 years, and I just quit two weeks ago. That was a huge life change. I decided that this is what I want to do for the rest of my life, this is what I want to get good at and pursue at a masters level in New York. Ultimately I would like to be a university prof., as well as a working artist (when I grow up)... (laughs)

Why do so many artists teach?
It's a way of supporting your habit and a way of supporting the arts. I think for me teaching is about passing on my passion to other people. I love teaching children. They're brilliant. They give me so many ideas for my own art. They have no inhibitions. They're so free. They get so into it. It's like a little meditation for them at 7 and 8-years-old. They are happy happy. I hope to encourage this freedom throughout their lives so they never stop their creative energy from flowing.

Tell me about this show at Harcourt House. It's not typical of your portfolio.
The drawing show upstairs was just a "way off-the-wall" idea for me because I'm used to painting on big canvases, and because I've always considered myself a very poor drawer. Drawing has so many definitions. When you look at my paintings or sculptures it appears as though I can draw, but actually I think I'm faking it. I trick the viewer with my colour, light and texture. When it comes to actually using the simple drawing tools-pen, pencil, conte or charcoal, I feel useless. I have not perfected them, not that I've perfected painting. I hated drawing. I couldn't do it. So I forced myself to try a new thing. In the show, I use board, which is to me a painting support, and pen, which I can't erase. I couldn't be precious or particular. The drawings were immediate, spontaneous and natural. Each gesture took 3 or 4 minutes draw. It is really about capturing the essence of the models or their shadow on board. The show upstairs is about unfinished works, it illustrates the preliminary stages of all figurative art: establishing a relationship with the model and capturing her gesture. Simple drawings like these reveal a lot about an artist. I compare the show to putting my underpants on display on a wall. People want to see this? Everybody does it. and everybody does it differently. Everyone wears different pairs of underpants. So, that's what it is, a light, humorous, experimental show. Very visceral. However, it's more 'me' than a lot of other works that I do. It's my essence. I'll probably do that kind of gestural drawing all my life. And it's very nice to see it up on the wall. You wouldn't usually. It's a great forum.

Your portfolio, well, it's a lot of naked women.

You mean it's very sexually loaded. You can say it.

It brings up a whole ton of questions. like why?

There's so many reasons. I love the subject. Nakedness is a pretty loaded and human subject. When we look at the image of a naked figure, we unconsciously bring in so many associations, connotations and expectations. I love that. I'm also intrigued by the use of the female nude in art history. I'm interested in the fact that in the past art has been painted by men and for men, and the subject of paintings has almost always been women. There are works that belong to a part of the history of painting that are purely about titillation and objectifying women sexually.

These pieces of art are owned by men, therefore symbolically the women are owned by men. I want to paint similar imagery but from a female perspective. Another reason why I paint what I paint is because I am humored by human sexuality and the hypocrisy and taboos that go along with it in our culture. I would love to paint paintings that stir people, that stir them emotionally, sexually, every way. I want people to question their own morals, their own idea of how they think about and talk about their own sexuality. It just makes people be real.
Women respond well to my paintings. They look at them and they are aroused, but they feel comfortable. And, at the same time, obviously, men are. I want to sort of jolt the viewer make them think. 'Wow that woman in that painting is so child-like, and yet so sexual. what does that mean about me and my views on children and my views about sex?' I want to make people be real or truthful to themselves. I love the female body. I love the male body too. I'm doing a whole series of paintings coming up that include both. Men and women, men and men, women and women. I think we need to be more carefree, happy, and real and raw.

Do you think you may have these subtexts and questions you're asking the viewer, but they might get missed?
Oh, yeah. And I don't mind at all. I've sold some paintings that are more provocative than the ones you've seen, and I know they've gone to people who just don't get them, To them, they're pornographic pictures they're going to put on their wall. It doesn't bother me. People are going to come into their home and realize 'this is more loaded than you think'. And they're not just provocative in a sexual way, but also in an emotional way, an intellectual way. We're an "image culture". We're bombarded with images on the internet, magazines, movies, ads etc. and there are so many images of women's bodies. There's a part of me that wants to bring back the individual, the personality of the women who are in my paintings, to give them their power back. If you look at most of my paintings, these women know that they're being looked at, and they approve. Some are gazing back at you, and saying, 'Hey, here I am. You can or can't have me. You can or can't touch me. But you can look at me'. There's a definite strength in the models and of women in general. I don't push the sexual content of my paintings as much as I want to. And every model that I've worked with, they all want me to push it more. They're very encouraging. I wanted to do a whole series of vaginas, but in a very tasteful, artistic and beautiful way. I don't know how I would do it. That's the essence of female sexuality. Many many painters, from Rodin to Egon Schiele, emphasize that part of the female anatomy. All of the women I work with are saying, "sure, I'll pose for you for that". But 'I' can't do it yet. The relationships that I have with the models, tends to be a two way flow of energy, they obviously inspire me, but they often leave saying something like, "last time I modeled for you I felt like I was walking on a cloud". It's about female power, or human power, or something.

That sounds like a feminist statement.

Yeah, I guess it does... I'm eager to do the same thing with men. Going to New York will help me a lot- in being able to paint and know the male anatomy better. Unfortunately or fortunately, there's not such a huge social and historical bunch of baggage that goes along with the male figure. Although advertising is starting to catch on now. The new object of desire is the male nude. Look at all that Obsession for Men stuff. They're using the perfect male form, a very youthful male. I think there's a whole lot of new content for some hot figurative canvases.

They sound like time bombs you're putting in people's houses.
(laughs) First and foremost my art is about the formal qualities of the painting. It's about the way I lay the paint down. It's about the colours that I use and the compositions I create. I want to make a beautiful piece. I love all sorts of art, but me, I'm about making something that's uplifting. But I do want people to have a deeper experience. When they look carefully or read the title, I want them to see more than just a pretty picture. They are loaded. I don't want someone to look at my art and after a week think, 'I wish I'd never bought that painting' I want it to grow on them, and for them to see things in it they hadn't before, both physically, like in the paint, but also conceptually. You're right, I wouldn't say they're time bombs, they're little pleasure bombs.