Transparency: The Key to Communication

Many recent posts, while tackling important issues (to me at least) in metalsmithing and craft theory, have wandered exceedingly far away from what I originally intended to do with this blog, which was to write about conceptualism in metalsmithing. And while I am very happy with my recent posts I wanted to finally tackle a subject that really is about conceptualism in relation to metalsmithing.

Introduction

One of the tenants of any conceptual work is its ability to address, highlight, or otherwise communicate a concept. That seems like a no brainer right? Conceptual work has a concept. It follows then that the success of any conceptual work is based on its ability to successfully communicate its desired content. When applying this to jewelry (or any other functional work for that matter) we are faced with a quandary.

Transparency, for our purposes, is the ability of a medium to disappear so the viewer can focus solely on the content presented or depicted in the work. There is an inherent aptitude for transparency in different media, and unfortunately for jewelers, media which are representational and do not have applied function are able to become transparent more easily. I am talking quite abstractly here, so I feel a few case studies will illustrate just how transparency works.

In Painting

Fig. 1

From almost the beginning of painting, and certainly since the renaissance to the mid 19th century, painting as a medium was representational. The painter would attempt to capture life on their canvas. Take Reubens' Samson and Delilah (fig. 1). This is a transparent painting. When we look at it we immediately relate to the action taking place on the picture plane. We relate to the people, and if we were living in the 17th century (when this was painted), we would almost certainly recognize the biblical and allegorical references. It is very easy for the artist to deliver content or even to communicate through this representational mode. We do not however, stop to consider, at least at first, that we are looking at a painting.We look through the medium, as if it is transparent.

Fig. 2

To contrast this, look at figure 2. This is a John Baldessari painting entitled What is Painting from 1966-68. In this painting the artist forces us to confront the medium through his use of language, as well as the meaning of the language itself. Perhaps the entire purpose of this painting is to draw attention to the fact that it is a painting. This work is not transparent, though it is very self-aware. Baldessari makes it impossible for the viewer to see past the canvas. He was a rebel, and after such a long tradition of painting being about image making, aesthetics, composition, trompe l'oeil, etc., Baldessari essentially renders the painting an object rather than an image.

In Photography

Fig. 3

Transparency exists in other two dimensional media as well. In figure 3 we see the Dorothea Lange photograph, Shack. In this image we see a family on the porch of what we assume is their dwelling, a shack. Something that is true with both the Reubens and the Lange, is that the titles refer to the subjects of the images reinforcing the importance of the image. The purpose of Shack is undoubtedly to draw attention to the residents and their plight. Again a transparent photograph. The medium does not even begin to enter into our thinking as we look at this photograph.

Mel Bochner's photograph from his Measurement Series (fig. 4) is subtlely not transparent. At first we are confronted with the image of a ficus in front of a grid of measurements. What is not immediately apparent in this internet reproduction is scale. Originally the photograph was not printed to scale with the measurements on it. Inevitably the viewer realizes this glaring inaccuracy and is forced to confront the truth, that photographs are lies! They are depictions of reality, not reality itself. In that moment of realization the subject of the photograph is not important. Mel never cared about a ficus. He cared about the photograph becoming self-aware and the medium figuring prominently in the viewer's experience of this piece.

Fig. 4

In Sculpture

To illustrate that transparency is not unique to 2 dimensional works, the fifth image is a 2nd century equestrian statue of Marcus Aurelius (fig. 5).

Fig. 5

While it could be argued that medium figures more prominently in this work than the previous 2 dimensional works shown, the representational and minutely detailed sculpture gives every indication of attempting to give the emperor immortality. We see him in all his regalia. We are clearly not meant to linger on the material from which he is created, but to celebrate the man. A transparent sculpture almost as old as christianity.

Fig. 6

Figure 6 shows Erwin Wurm's House Attack (2006). I am not quite sure what the medium is here, but I don't think that that matters really. In this piece two things are immediately apparent: 1. This is a sculpture 2. A house has fallen and become lodged into the side of the museum. So I guess the medium here is architecture... Either way there is little more to the piece than that humorous confrontation of public and private buildings. Certainly there is nothing to see through.

In Jewelry

In the above comparisons the first figure of each pairing was a relatively early example of transparency in the history of that particular medium. In photography, painting, and sculpture artists reacted against the historically transparent media in order to create self-aware conceptual works. The thing about jewelry is that it has never been transparent. When we look at jewelry, we don't see through it to look at the content it contains, we look at it directly. We look at its objectness, we look at its craftsmanship, we covet it, we are seduced by AN OBJECT. If we attempt to communicate or infuse content into our jewelry for the sake of the viewer/wearer we are often thwarted because of the inherent preciousness and objectness of the medium. Further, it will take quite some undoing in order to retrain jewelry viewers to see more than just the jewel.

So here is that quandary I was talking about before; given that

1. jewelry is a medium that is conditioned not to communicate

AND

2. historically, conceptual artists have reacted against transparency in order to create self-aware conceptual works

THEN

What path should the conceptual metalsmith follow? Wow. Tough one. I'll try. Let's take it home.

Strategies for Conceptual Metalsmithing

The first thing to do is to try and ram that square peg into that round hole. The good news is that there are many trailblazers out there. People have made communicative jewelry, its not quite an oxymoron. I have to say though, that most jewelry that attempts to highlight more than its own objecthood fails at doing so. Most successful

communicative jewelry employs one of two strategies:

1. It is representational, utilizing traditional 2 or 3 dimensional strategies (such as Jessica Calderwood's Mother's Little Helper brooch (fig. 7). However, I would consider this piece more narrative than conceptual)

Fig. 7

OR

2. It uses the semiotic reading of its own materiality as the content. For instance using found materials or detritus to comment on recycling, or gold to comment on gold mining.

Fig. 8

A good example of this strategy is Jan Yager's American Collar II (fig. 8), in which she uses discarded drug paraphernalia to comment on inner city drug use.

While I struggle in my own work to find effective ways to make conceptual jewelry, I am happy to share two additional strategies that are not so battle tested.

1. Self-awareness is one of the defining characteristics in the conceptual works above (figs. 2,4 & 6). Taking this into account, I made a series of self-referential rings. In The Narcissist Series (fig. 9) a two dimensional drawing of the ring is set into the ring, referencing the form itself.

Fig. 9

Certainly this is not the only way to draw attention to the medium itself. However, it does effectively draw attention to the objectness of the jewelry rather than becoming a static object exclusively.

2. Supplemental devices that contextualize jewelry are also an effective way to communicate.

Fig. 10

I like this strategy myself, but here I find an ally in Robert Baines whose bracelet Java-la-Grande (fig. 10), from 2004-05, is supplemented by his lectures which could be construed as historical fiction. With extensive technical research Baines contextualizes the piece in relation to "known technology of the era." Further, Baines is not completely honest as he interjects contemporary objects into otherwise faithful historical recreations, all the while concealing the small (but obvious) inaccuracies. "Robert Baines Builds Fictious Jewellery." Baines' blending of actual advanced historical research with his studio practice allows for an ambiguous strategy unique to this academic maker. Though his activities reinforce each other, that is certainly not a requisite to the employ of a supplemental contextual device.

In Conclusion

Since jewelry is not transparent it makes communication of content difficult. Some historic conceptual strategies do not accurately translate to jewelry. Canonic conceptual artists attempted to make work that thwarted transparency, making the work self-aware, while also highlighting the medium and rendering it an object. Because jewelers work in a medium that is not transparent to begin with we are forced to embrace our unique status and develop new and hybrid strategies in the pursuit of conceptual jewelry and conceptual metalsmithing.

Comments are most welcome, I am still wading through this one.

-Gabriel