There are few inanimate objects capable of transcending cultures, demographics, and geographies. Fewer still are those capable of being utilitarian yet eliciting an emotional response at the same time. Undeniably polarizing, the car and our relationship to it ranges dramatically. How it is embedded into society is well-documented through countless magazines, forums, movies, EPA emission standards, and daily experiences. The automobile is a nostalgic platform but is just as easily reconfigured into object of a speculative future.
Garagisme, a magazine started in 2012 by art director and photographer Gilles Uzan (Now working in collaboration with creative director Yego Moravia), places its emphasis on the in-between, positioning itself in proximity to, but never directly about, the automobile itself. The space that it inhabits rejects a time or place in favor of a cultural periphery. He describes the magazine as “not being about cars but our relationship to them.”
Now on its sixth issue Garagisme VI approaches the complexities of capitalism through the lens of its nearly thirty contributors and their associated marks, artifacts, futures, and stories. In the following interview, I talk to Uzan about his complex relationship to cars, starting the magazine, and inspiration for the latest issue.
Jas Stefanski (JS)
I read in a past interview that you do not own a car. Can you talk about how you developed a relationship with cars or car culture?
Gilles Uzan (GU)
At the time of that interview I was living in Paris where I didn’t need a car: it’s really expensive to own one there (among other reasons). As a kid and teenager I would often travel to the United States, which helped develop my interest in car culture. I was too young to understand the idea of “car culture,” but compared to Europe, there was so much more variety [than in the US]. There were no pick-up trucks in Paris, for example. No cool/cheap sports cars (Datsun, Corvette), and motorsport in the US was way more attractive from a child’s point of view (stadium trucks, NASCAR, monster trucks, etc.).
JS
What was the impetus to start Garagisme? I feel like it brings together multiple worlds: both high and low culture, approaching [cars] as fetishized objects, but critical of them as well.
GU
When I started the magazine I was still living in Paris, where you have a more complex relationship to cars. I grew up thinking of cars as a hobby, like watching racing and buying car magazines. At the same time, cars in Paris made the city horrible in that they caused pollution and noise, added stress because of traffic, etc. I had this love/hate relationship with cars for most of my life; I was fascinated by the culture but at the same time very critical of it.
I was taking photos of weird cars I saw on the street, I had a Tumblr at the time, and I was starting to think about how I could translate that into a print magazine. When you take photos of cars that you like, it becomes more about a fascination, something that there are already so many magazines about. I’m not just talking about car magazines but more about car culture or car lifestyle magazines. There are many magazines that have beautiful or interesting photos, and I didn’t think that what I was doing was really adding anything.
So that’s why I wanted to distance the magazine from the object [of the car] and instead focus on our relationship to cars. I was interested in the social phenomenon, be it political, sociological, environmental, etc.
JS
Your latest issue (6), titled “Aspirational Fantasy,” focuses on capitalism. How did you decide on that theme?
GU
We thought it would be a broad enough theme for contributors to come up with ideas. I also wanted to focus on the absurdity, the idea that cars don’t have a very good reason to exist, with the exception of making a lot of money for a very few. In a city, for example, cars don’t make any sense; they’re too heavy, too complicated, too expensive, and too dangerous. I’m sure we could find better ways to get around a city than by car. However, in many US cities there aren’t many alternatives, so you have to drive a car.
For this issue we wanted to avoid the obvious by exploring more abstract modes of storytelling. In addition, we were also interested in finding a more perverse tone in which to represent the idea of capitalism and cars. It was almost about challenging the theme, trying not to say things that have been previously said. In the end, it became more about having fun with the theme; I guess that’s what I meant by more perverse.
JS
Can you talk about your editorial approach?
GU
It has evolved a lot. We try to commission work more often. Though recently we’ve had some really interesting propositions from people who send us their work. Sometimes it’s an idea or it’s already produced, so we don’t have one single approach, though we do try to have most of the content made specifically for the issue. This was not always the case. With earlier issues we would start with existing bodies of work or make an edit from a series of photos. We have many different approaches and we’re pretty open.
Sometimes we have a fully developed idea and we commission a photographer (who adds their ideas to it). Or the exact opposite, we give carte blanche to someone to do whatever they want. There’s not one single approach to commissioning work.
JS
Do you think that’s why you’re able to maintain such a holistic approach to the car culture?
GU
If there’s a strategy, it’s more about challenging the previous issue in how we communicate an idea. Either you have one story about cars, like I said before, more as a social phenomenon—so not the car itself; the car is never the subject—or it’s about visual experimentation, where the car in a sense becomes the talent. It’s more about the experimentation than the car. While we always say it’s not about the car, it’s not a car magazine, we really want to challenge the way we photograph a car, challenge the previous issue. That’s why we only publish annually. It gives us more time to rethink the entire magazine.
JS
What I find fascinating about the magazine is that you’re able to use the subject as a means of accessing both the past and the present. What do you think makes the subject so polarizing?
GU
One example is the notion that cars were built and sold at first for the very rich, and the impact on society was pretty minimal (besides people driving over people and getting away with it!). Fordism made car ownership possible for almost anyone. We can see today that it was not a good idea: even a city built for cars like Los Angeles cannot sustain that much traffic. Cars for every citizen just doesn’t work, and it negatively impacts our health (both mental and physical), our environment, real estate, etc.
JS
Can you talk about the role or influence of fashion?
GU
We don’t want to promote products, and it’s not about fashion itself. I don’t want people to think we are promoting the clothing. I come from fashion but I don’t have any interest incorporating fashion [into the magazine].
JS
The tone of the magazine definitely feels like it’s of that world, but like you said, its absent of that at the same time.
GU
We do use some clothes but, again, in a perverse way. For this issue we did that, and in the previous one as well, but it is never really about fashion or objects that you can buy. We really want to avoid that, especially if we do not have any advertising. So no free promotions for fashion designers.
JS
Did you watch F1 this weekend?
GU
I stopped watching Formula 1 when Senna died. I was a heartbroken kid; it was 1994, and after that I never watched again. I like Formula 1 in terms of the object, like the chassis, the parts, and the engine. In regards to the racing itself, I don’t have the patience anymore.
Get Walker Reader in your inbox. Sign up to receive first word about our original videos, commissioned essays, curatorial perspectives, and artist interviews.
)