CH/MS ask STSTS. An abridged version of an e-mail conversation between Claudia Heinrich/Matthias Schamp (CH/MS) and Steffen Schlichter/Stef Stagel (STSTS). First published on the occasion of the 25th anniversary of STSTS in the 2019 publication "rack1-2019 book."

CH/MS: As artists, you both take a decidedly independent stance. Both Stef Stagel and Steffen Schlichter have a veritable body of work to show for themselves and are present at exhibitions, art fairs, and in collections. This naturally raises the question of how their collaborative work relates to their individual creative output: is it more a kind of overlap between two kindred spirits? Or is it an experiment in which two completely different artistic positions merge to create a new power? Are there any blurred lines where one could say, for example, that this joint work now tends more toward Schlichter's style or Stagel's? Or are the boundaries always very clear—both for you and for the viewer?

STSTS: You certainly have to/can judge different phases or works differently. A fundamental interest in working together was that we arrived at different results than we would have alone. In addition, we had a good basis for this because our main interests in terms of content were not so far apart. This was certainly helped by the fact that the collaboration was—or let's say largely—harmonious, more in the sense of mutual interplay and a resulting enhancement than a fusion. Elements from each of our respective works that are recognizable to viewers familiar with our individual work have always been incorporated. The projections with slide projectors and slide carousels, as well as the use of grid structures and chalk-based surfaces, could be seen as Stagel's components, while Schlichter's "ingredients" consist of adhesive foils, industrial materials, and heavy-duty shelves.

There are few pure ststs materials or techniques, such as the adhesive tape printed with a construction grid motif ("basics lll"), which would not be found in Steffen's work, despite his use of a wide variety of commercially available adhesive tapes. Typical of STSTS is the combination of materials and techniques that, through joint conception and/or processing, take on a form that would not appear in the individual positions. Sometimes it is also themes and tasks, such as art-in-architecture or public art projects, which would not be an option for us individually, but which take shape in collaborations. Finally, there are very clear groups of works by STSTS: the "hausgemachte platten" (homemade plates), the "basics," the graphics, and of course the "rack"-installations. For both of us, it is always very clear whether a work is a Stagel, Schlichter, or STSTS piece, and this is also documented in the catalog of works. We are not bothered by the fact that this may cause some "fuzziness" for the viewer.

The symbiotic relationship is certainly most evident in our ststs photo archive, which we draw on again and again for our work. There, it is almost impossible to recognize a specific signature. Since we often swap cameras back and forth, sometimes in the same situation, we occasionally or after a certain amount of time no longer know who ultimately took the picture. It's a wonderful experience to stand in front of or inside a successful work and just look at the whole thing. It doesn't matter at all whether you can still trace who contributed which idea, which component, or which approach in detail to the respective work or installation.

CH/MS: In your respective independent artistic works, you both show a tendency not to simply "tick off" the works you have created as final, but to leave them in flux. That is, you reuse them as building blocks for further works or installative contexts. Or you embed them in serial structures, like links in a chain. In doing so, you transfer the individual works into states of greater complexity, at least temporarily. Often, after an exhibition, these connections are dissolved and the works are separated again and treated as self-contained units. But this tendency toward ever greater complexity is striking. Could one perhaps say that STSTS as a project is itself an experiment in gaining complexity?

STSTS: Yes, you could see it that way.

CH/MS: The work of ststs is not standing still, but has undergone a development over the past 25 years. This development certainly did not take place in a linear and continuous manner. And it probably did not proceed in a single direction either. If we remember correctly, the [installation] "Backnanger heimatraum" [in 1994] was largely a narrative work. The story it told was fictional and, above all, enigmatic. But it was still a story. and the flag "Raumgestaltung Stagel/Schlichter" (Stagel/Schlichter interior design), under which you sailed for a while, also evokes different ideas than the more permutative "STSTS." How would you characterize this development in broad strokes? What drove you back then? What is it today? Or have the fundamental impulses remained the same and the changes are mainly due to the choice of means?

STSTS: Perhaps the "backnanger heimatraum" could be described as playful rather than narrative. Our concept was based on the quasi-idealized image provided by the city of Backnang and combined this with the reality of what we found. The coat of arms, city skyline, and city archives were appropriated and deconstructed, and also formally transformed using various artistic techniques. Found objects in the form of photos or small objects were added and the whole thing was finally transformed into an overall situation. To complete this staging, it seemed inappropriate (and the only possible option) to indicate the joint authorship by naming it. This led to Raumgestaltung Stagel/Schlichter, a small service company of a different kind.

In contrast, "Albenflora" for Mara and Karl-Heinz Mauermann was narrative, as the starting point here was already permeated by many different narrative levels. We selected photographs from the Mauermann family photo albums and altered them with quotations that had nothing to do with the original historical or family context, thereby making them more universal and, yes, more enigmatic. Formally, we returned to the presentation format of plant identification labels in order to integrate the work into the Mauermann family garden and thus directly into the place where the events (formerly) took place.

But back to the second part of your question: the development from Raumgestaltung Stagel/Schlichter's to ststs is certainly very important, as it allowed us to avoid confusion about authorship while also communicating our joint authorship more clearly to the outside world. In this sense, the labeling worked well.

However, the basic impulse to work situationally for spaces or places and to redefine the appropriate means for each case has not changed at all—from the Turmschulhaus in Backnang back then to the Frey-Raum in Stuttgart most recently, two works that are obviously far apart. In the meantime, we have simply tried out more, both in terms of forms of research and documentation as well as formal realization. Only the weighting of the forms of work has shifted somewhat: while originally everything was related to the in-situ situation and only very sparingly interspersed with "hausgemachte platten," there are now more autonomous works in the continuation of the series, alongside prints and works that use different techniques and materials and were created in response to various requests. One of these was the representation of ststs by Gaelerie Reinhold Maas Im Handelund in the art market and at art fairs. However, we have always seen the gallery contact as a kind of situational commission, which we hope we were able to illustrate in the work rack 2-2016 shop.

CH/MS: What also interests us is that you two are not only connected in your joint artistic work as ststs, but also as a couple in your private lives. There are a couple of constellations in which this starting point is directly reflected in the context of artistic reflection. For example, in the work of Anna and Bernhard Blume. It's different with you. Nevertheless, it surely plays a role that you don't just get together from time to time for a work project, but are so closely connected overall. How do you see it yourselves?

STSTS: Well, it's certainly true that we couldn't or wouldn't want to reflect on the typical couple constellation... and perhaps, with all the closeness, it is precisely the indispensable counterpoint of art that keeps the debate alive, stimulates it, and renews it.

CH/MS: We have to follow up on that! Just how complicated collaboration can be is evident from the two of us and our debates—when two people try to come up with an interview question together... so: how do you do it, how do you make it work—art and everyday life, everyday life and art? And on a practical level: do you develop ideas for your projects at the coffee table or on family trips?

STSTS: There are two questions here: the fundamental question of "art and everyday life" and the question of the nature of collective work in this field of tension. Regarding the first question, it should be noted that we have our studio, warehouse, and apartment in one house, with the studio space being the center that you automatically pass through all the time. This can be taken directly as an image of the permanent interlocking of living and working areas (of course, this only works because we have banned the olfactory from our production, in the spirit of Duchamp).

The ideas and their forms take shape at the writing desk or coffee table as well as in the studio. But even more often, they emerge when we are out and about—whether on foot or on longer car trips. Especially with ststs's typical site-specific projects, we repeatedly circle around the respective situation in conversations until the various aspects that interest us fit together to form a concept and, ideally, a structure emerges in which the authorship of the combined individual elements becomes blurred—even for us.

CH/MS: Finally, we'd like to take a look into the future: 25 years of STSTS [2019]– that naturally raises the question of what's next. Are there any concrete plans? visions? a project that's particularly important to you and that you absolutely want to realize?

STSTS: what we're still missing is our joint three-person exhibition 1 + 1 = 3 (Stagel, Schlichter, and STSTS). Our next very concrete plan is to leave for Japan for a three-week stay. That will at least enrich our photo archive and probably have other effects as well. We'll see. Speaking of photo archives: that's another topic that's waiting to be developed further...