Sorry I've been away from my keyboard for so long. I have been working on some projects that I hope to share with you all soon, but not just yet.
So in the mean time....
Authorship in the Digital Age
In prognosticating the impact of technology on the future of jewelry, and in art even more generally, I frequently ponder the influence of open source technology. Information sharing via the Internet is rapidly changing the face of authorship as we know it. Collaborative and multiple authorship are fast become the norm in many fields where coveted individual research and ideas had once been the norm. Spurred on by web 2.0 platforms, (such as wetpaint,wikispaces, wikipedia, and delicious) which encourage this type of collaborative authorship, it is only a matter of time before our cultural perception of authorship, ownership, and intellectual property are unequivocally changed forever. I need barely mention the file sharing phenomena of napster, bit torrent, etc., and how they have changed the emphasis and approach to how music is sold. As a consequence, many recording artists have now begun to release albums for free on the internet, or music downloading that is pay as you wish. I view all of these as symptoms of a large cultural shift in our perception of intellectual property.
As we increasingly consume media online - which is usually free, but sometimes fee based (thanks Netflix) - I believe there is an increasing sense of entitlement from the consumer. Of course the consumer does not own the content, but because of the increased amount of information, media, and content available to anyone with an internet connection we all assume and expect to get more for free, at least online. I think that this is the very thing cultural anthropologist Michael Wesch alludes to in his above video The Machine is Us/ing Us.
The Changing Face of Technology in Metalsmithing
So clearly something is changing out there, generally, in terms of authorship and intellectual property, but what does it mean for metalsmithing? To start, I think it may be time to abandon the long held contention that technology in metalsmithing means only 3D modeling (CAD) and rapid prototyping (CAM). Though they have long been hailed as the tools that will change the face of metalsmithing - and to some extent they have - the impact of information sharing, websites, online communities, blogs, and listservs has far outstripped them. Some great examples of the impact of this type of technology are the ganoksin forums, metalsmithing how-to videos on youtube and the tips section of the etsy metals blog.
At this point, I do have to qualify that all of these examples of online information sharing simply describe the nature of our shifting perceptions of how we obtain information and do not necessarily come to bear directly on either authorship or intellectual property. However, I have been thinking for a while now about the newly coined term "prosumer" jewelry which does directly reflect some of these views.
Prosumer Jewelry
In the most recent issue of Metalsmith magazine editor Suzanne Ramljak shared her view of a new paradigm in studio jewelry production, "Prosumer" Jewelry. I find prosumer jewelry an interesting concept even if the term could be misinterpreted quite easily. When I hear the term prosumer, I generally think of a class of electronics in between general consumer products and professional equipment. Perhaps the digital SLR camera, or some of the higher end the HD camcorders would be familiar examples. In any event, prosumer in the Ramljak's article is more accurately a truncated version of producer (pro) and the truncated root of consumer (sumer). I guess we are left to understand the word as producer-consumer. Well, now that the entomology of the word is resolved, I think that clears the way to delve a little bit deeper into "prosumer" jewelry.
What we are talking about is essentially a kit that contains pieces the consumer is intended to assemble. This type of product doesn't usually excite me as I can make things myself, without the aid of a kit. But, when it was framed in terms of a conceptual project, one in which a set of instructions or a predetermined system governs the construction or execution of a project, I began to take notice. I think a case could made that this type of jewelry is based on a traditionally conceptual Sol LeWittesqe foundation, that is, the system dictates the form of the art object. In this case the assembly instructions stand as the system. Though I want to heartily back this jewelry as conceptual, it is a bit problematic. Its kind of like saying building a Lego star ship or putting together your new Ikea table is a conceptual project. Perhaps the resultant object must be art for the project to be conceptual. Obviously it is a bit tricky when we are conditioned as metalsmiths to regurgitate the party line, "Metalsmithing is Art." These kits are mass produced, even if it is on a small scale (they are not one-of-a-kind), and the results do have a somewhat predetermined made-from-a-kit look about them. Perhaps the intent of the designer is the criteria we should use, but I certainly cannot speak for any of the makers of these kits as to their intention. Even Anni Albers' jewelry made from found objects (subsequently made into jewelry studio kits) doesn't seem like it springs from a conceptual impetus.
The art credentials of these objects are suspect at best, but being a mass produced/ DIY art object is not really what interests me. Coming back to the metalsmithing party line, it is often the maker of the object who is charged with authorship. Whether actual or virtual, the maker is central to the identity of metalsmithing. In prosumer jewelry, the maker is the consumer, and the system creator is a designer only. This departure from the single entity designer-maker is extremely significant.
Since the industrial revolution the need to make jewelry by hand has been virtually eliminated. The uniqueness of the handmade object has figured prominently in the rationale for the continued creation of handmade jewelry. Now that the physical making has become part of the bravado of contemporary craft and jewelry, prosumer jewelry is vacating the throne of the maker. Prosumer jewelry empowers the consumer because they not only participate in the creation of the piece, but also they share ownership in the creation. This is also extremely significant. One of the main tenets of the craftsperson, being the physical maker, is now shared, creating multiple authorship in prosumer jewelry.
Also, the semiological implications of such a practice are staggering. In the current paradigm, the act of choosing is held to be part of creating an identity. You walk into a gallery, you choose a piece you like, you buy it, and then that unique piece stands for your uniqueness. In the prosumer paradigm, the participation of the consumer is not passive - I choose that one - but active, I made this. Prosumer jewelry is asking for the consumer and the viewer to become an active participant. It is not quite a regression to the pre-choosing identity paradigm, but a shared middleground between choosing and making. Again the responsibility for the object and what it represents resides in multiple entities.
In Conclusion
We may not be there yet, but certainly the face of intellectual property and authorship will change significantly in the years to come. Our obsession with being unique and individual is dangerous, if it means that we will be left behind by the people willing to participate in collective authorship. The desire to make new and unique work, different from everyone else, the desire to set ourselves and our work apart, is a symptom of our over-consumption. And just like global warming, we are going to have to square with it,one day, even if its not soon.
Comments welcome,
-Gabriel
The art credentials of these objects are suspect at best, but being a mass produced/ DIY art object is not really what interests me. Coming back to the metalsmithing party line, it is often the maker of the object who is charged with authorship. Whether actual or virtual, the maker is central to the identity of metalsmithing. In prosumer jewelry, the maker is the consumer, and the system creator is a designer only. This departure from the single entity designer-maker is extremely significant.
Since the industrial revolution the need to make jewelry by hand has been virtually eliminated. The uniqueness of the handmade object has figured prominently in the rationale for the continued creation of handmade jewelry. Now that the physical making has become part of the bravado of contemporary craft and jewelry, prosumer jewelry is vacating the throne of the maker. Prosumer jewelry empowers the consumer because they not only participate in the creation of the piece, but also they share ownership in the creation. This is also extremely significant. One of the main tenets of the craftsperson, being the physical maker, is now shared, creating multiple authorship in prosumer jewelry.
Also, the semiological implications of such a practice are staggering. In the current paradigm, the act of choosing is held to be part of creating an identity. You walk into a gallery, you choose a piece you like, you buy it, and then that unique piece stands for your uniqueness. In the prosumer paradigm, the participation of the consumer is not passive - I choose that one - but active, I made this. Prosumer jewelry is asking for the consumer and the viewer to become an active participant. It is not quite a regression to the pre-choosing identity paradigm, but a shared middleground between choosing and making. Again the responsibility for the object and what it represents resides in multiple entities.
In Conclusion
We may not be there yet, but certainly the face of intellectual property and authorship will change significantly in the years to come. Our obsession with being unique and individual is dangerous, if it means that we will be left behind by the people willing to participate in collective authorship. The desire to make new and unique work, different from everyone else, the desire to set ourselves and our work apart, is a symptom of our over-consumption. And just like global warming, we are going to have to square with it,one day, even if its not soon.
Comments welcome,
-Gabriel
Posts
5 comments:
A provocative post. Sometimes the 'prosumer' message can seem gimmicky, like the word itself. There needs to be a critical process of distinguishing genuine participation from fake versions of empowerment - 'you be the judge.'
My first instinct is to say that the maker of the components (the original idea) is creating a situation in which the consumer is engaged with the pieces. The experience is the work, created by the artist. There is value in this. In the ability to pull someones mind away from the outer world, albeit with a material object.
Then, what is the artistic worth of the design? What is unique and original about it that could bring special meaning to the time it takes away form the noise of the world, or is it just adding to it?
I love your blog.
I think you are conflating communal modes of authorship (for instance, wikis) with simply sharing things (for instance, using Napster).
Joanna,
While I agree that napster, a file sharing program, is indeed much different from a truly collaborative space, such as a wiki, I think they both describe a pervasive willingness to participate in an open community. While napster users did not create anything per se, I hope it is clear that napster was 1) a catalyst for change in our cultural perception of intellectual property in the arts, and 2) an example of how the internet is a platform for information sharing. In turn it is our access to information and our willingness to share it that will change intellectual property.
I hope that clears things up,
Best,
-G
This is by far not a new concept. In fact the very term conceptual art itself means exactly what you described here. Sol Lewitt who pretty much defined conceptual art has been making art for years where the artist just writes down the directions and the viewer executes them, thus making the art. The point was that the idea is cheif to making it.
here's an excerpt from wikipedia. its the first paragraph under the search term "conceptual art".
Conceptual art is art in which the concept(s) or idea(s) involved in the work take precedence over traditional aesthetic and material concerns. Many of the works, sometimes called installations, of the artist Sol LeWitt may be constructed by anyone simply by following a set of written instructions.[1] This method was fundamental to LeWitt's definition of Conceptual art, one of the first to appear in print:
“ In conceptual art the idea or concept is the most important aspect of the work. When an artist uses a conceptual form of art, it means that all of the planning and decisions are made beforehand and the execution is a perfunctory affair. The idea becomes a machine that makes the art. ”
—Sol LeWitt[2]
Post a Comment