Metalsmith EIP, Another Disaster? and other tall tales from the Orchid Forums

On August 15, noted metalsmith James Binnion (famous for his mokume gane) posted an extremely critical review of the 2008 Metalsmith Exhibition in Print (above 1st) on Ganoskin's Orchid forum. Here is the link: http://www.ganoksin.com/orchid/archive/200808/msg00715.htm. The result of which was 59 respondent posts at last count. I wouldn't say it is quite like the Imogene posts after SNAG 2008, but it has been an extremely interesting conversation that has highlighted the plight of Joe Jeweler caught in the rip tide of SNAG's schizophrenic mission and membership.

The following is my post on the Orchid forum, which I felt compelled to share as part of this dialogue:

58 Posts in this thread. Respectable indeed.

I found my way here through a link that someone had posted to by blog, www.conceptualmetalsmithing.com. Though it may or may not hold sway here, on my blog I employ cold rational critical thinking to wade through issues relating to the field of metalsmithing. I have frequently bashed academia for their short comings (as in this performance http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mB4AHZ8iAV4). And I have also written on the difficulty in limiting the scope of metalsmithing to exclusive definitions (http://www.conceptualmetalsmithing.com/2008/06/on-thematic-metalsmithing.html).

There are a few things that I wanted to say after faithfully reading all 58 posts. So here we go:

1. Get involved

As a general rule, it is much easier to throw mud, than it is to clean up. There has been, what I feel, is an inordinate amount of mud thrown at SNAG and at Metalsmith. It is very easy to post here about what SNAG is doing wrong, but very few people posting here seem to be interested in changing those things that they don't like. SNAG is a member run organization, so if you think it misrepresents you or you would like to see change, then you have the option run for office and legislate those changes yourself, or to contact the officers of the organization to express your dissatisfaction. For your convenience I have included a few of them here:

President: Kris Patzloff - kap12@humboldt.edu
Presdident Elect: Harlan Butt - butt@unt.edu
Executive Director: Dana Singer - dsinger@snagmetalsmith.org
(note:both president and president elect are academics by their .edu addresses)

It is truly the mark of a lazy and apathetic person to criticize without participating. It is this mentality that has brought our country to its current political state of affairs, one in which the government can act with impunity, and without the fear of accountability to its citizens. Don't be that guy.

Further, Metalsmith frequently publishes letters from readers. If you are dissatisfied with the content of the magazine you should email the editor, Suzanne Ramljak - editor@snagmetalsmith.org. There is also an editorial advisory board which is composed of Sharon Church (Professor at University of the Arts - Philadelphia), Kim Cridler (Assistant Professor at University of Wisconsin - Madison), Ursula Neuman (curator at the Museum of Arts and Design), Mija Riedel (writer and photographer), and Sandra Zilke (SNAG Board Member/ Liaison). These people, the editor, and the contributors are responsible for the content of the magazine, not SNAG as an organization. If you have a problem address it to the proper place. All of their names are on page 3 of every issue.

FYI a one year subscription to Jewelry Artist is $30, one year of Metalsmith is $34. How do you figure you are getting ripped off? American Craft is $40! For $45 more dollars you become a member of SNAG at $79, which pays for itself in a reduced conference fee, that is if you go to the conference.

Additionally, Metalsmith will shortly be undergoing a facelift, courtesy of Pentagram, a New York graphic design firm which specializes in print design. After talking directly with Suzanne Ramljak this past week I have confirmed that they are doing the work at a substantial loss to their business because they like the project. They are able to do this because of the cooperative structure of the company, in which each designer selects their own projects, and is responsible for their own earnings. That means that Pentagram, of one of the most prestigious print design firms, not in the country, but in the world, believes enough in Metalsmith to have less money in their pockets at the end of the day. I have to say...when it comes to print, it will be Pentagram's and not Ganoskin Forum, whose word I will be trusting as to what constitutes a good magazine. But you decide for yourself.

2. Exhibition in Print itself

EiP is an Exhibition in Print. Hold on now... That means that it is first an foremost an exhibition. Each year it is either juried or curated according to the vision of the juror/ curator. This year's guest curators were Rachelle Thiewes (Professor at the University of Texas - El Paso) and Kate Bonansinga (former art historian and current Gallery Director at the University of Texas - El Paso). How could you possibly be upset with Metalsmith for the vision of a curator? Would you go to a painting exhibit at a museum and expect technical content about how to paint? That is preposterous! You go to a class to learn how to paint, you go to an exhibition to view work. Please, I implore you, take the time to understand what it is you don't like and why, before you decide you hate it. Personally, I was not enthralled with this year's EiP. I felt it was very short. The curatorial theme of the 5 senses was interesting, but the work did not always coincide with the lofty intent of the theme. Ms. Bonansinga's introductory essay referenced metaphysics (philosophy) extensively, which probably alienated many readers needlessly. Also, there were a couple typos. Ooops! There were several pieces that I found outstanding (Damian O'Sullivan's Eye Patch (above 2nd), and Lin Cheung's Optimist and Pessimist (above 3rd)) while some other pieces really didn't do anything for me (Reka Lorincz's Ear Piece (above 4th) especially). But that is like almost any exhibition I have ever been to. If I saw this show in a gallery I would probably would have said it was good, even better than most jewelry shows I have seen. As someone who demands good titles, I found Equilibrium to be unhelpful in so far as it gave the reader very little insight into the work, though it was informative in an indirect, tongue and cheek sort of way.

3. A name change for SNAG?

I have advocated a name change for SNAG since the idea first reached my ears. SNAG Board member Sandra Zilke had a forum on the SNAG website for several months allowing people to express their opinion about a name change. Most posts reflected the membership's desire to hold onto tradition and to our association with goldsmithing, though it is clear the scope of the organization has made our name painfully inaccurate. Most SNAG members have their identity as makers invested in the traditions, materials, and skill sets of the goldsmith, the metalsmith, and the jeweler. However, I believe a new name for SNAG that would include the word metalsmith (not the limited definition expressed on this forum, but an inclusive and open ended definition) would serve the organization well. I look forward to seeing if in the future, artists, sculptors, jewelers, vessel makers, academics, gallerists, writers, curators, collectors, hobbyists, etc. could unite under such a controversial label as "metalsmith."

4. Academic Jewelers and Art School Skills Sets

If I can explain the reason for such extensive academic involvement in SNAG in a word it would be tenure. As the foremost professional organization for Contemporary Studio Jewelry and Metalsmithing academics are obliged to get involved to advance their academic careers. There are three "pillars" of academia, those being teaching, scholarship, and service. Most often service beyond the institution, to the professor's field of expertise, is an implicit expectation by their promotion and tenure committee. When an Assistant Professor applies for tenure, they better have some professional service on their record to bolster their application if they hope to get tenure. Therefore, SNAG is teaming with academics. There it is plain and simple. SNAG has roughly 3,000 members, and studio Jewelers make up the largest percentage. I don't have the numbers unfortunately. While this arrangement does not serve the membership exceedingly well, it explains why academics run the organization; they are compelled to volunteer so they can survive professionally.

In regards to academics, not needing to be commercially responsible or viable, I would add that most academics do take some income from their work. There are many galleries that make boat loads of money from both studio jewelers and academics. Have you ever been to SOFA? (Sculptural Objects and Functional Art)

Speaking to the claim that art schools do not prepare students for the commercial environment, I was educated at a University Art School. After school I went on to work at a boutique jewelry store where custom work and repairs often accounted for 50% or more of gross sales. In four years, I worked my way from the sales floor to the bench, and eventually to assistant manager. My college education gave me adequate fabrication and bench skills to perform my job doing all manner of basic and advanced repairs. My major weakness was stone setting, which in 3 months time was remedied under the tutelage of the goldsmith/owner. He was extremely happy with my skill level and design ability. One major advantage that my art school education brought to the store was my forming experience. My ability to work with hollowware and fabricate large silver pieces brought in many commissions during my tenure at the store, as we were the only jewelry store in town who that could execute complex or large scale silver repairs and commissions.

To say that an Art School metals education will not serve a student in the commercial jewelry sector is a fallacy. Before undertaking any course of study one should research the program, the faculty, and the curriculum. Certainly some schools prepare students better than others. I value the liberal arts education that was required with my BFA, but that may not be relevant or even advisable for every potential jewelry student.

5. SNAG Asking for Money

I also feel compelled to elaborate on the comments made about SNAG asking for money. The truth is that SNAG did send letters to all of its members asking for donations to help keep the organization afloat. The reason SNAG is in financial trouble is because they hired a 3rd party consulting company to manage their subscriptions of Metalsmith earlier this decade. The company did a horrible job, which resulted in many years of free Metalsmith for many members, and the loss of 10's of thousands of dollars. This is certainly not the fault of the members of SNAG, but it necessitated the appeal for donations. To their credit, SNAG has since consolidated their offices, cut its annual budget dramatically, and brought subscription management in house. They are using membership fees wisely fo' sho'. The SNAG board now pays for all of its expenses including travel to their own meetings cross country. I proudly donated $30, about the price of a 1 year subscription.

6. Dear Mr. James Binnion:

Thank you for your thoughtful post that has sparked this lively conversation. As a member of SNAG it is important that you express your opinions, because without decent, I honestly believe that academics would over run SNAG. Perhaps we are on the verge of that. Perhaps it is you that should be leading the charge for reform. I am not sure if limiting our organization to a specific and traditional definitions of metalsmithing is the correct course, but a cacophony of forceful opinions that diverge from our current trajectory is surely the way forward. In the future, this type of open criticism would be most effective when coupled with direct contact to the people most suited to correct your complaints.

To all I say keep an open mind and think for yourself. For a while there it sounded like lemmings. lol. If you weren't smart and independent, you probably wouldn't be in business still, perhaps many of you aren't or never were. I am posting this letter and a link to the orchid thread on my blog. Stop by anytime, and comment. www.conceptualmetalsmithing.com

Best,
-Gabriel Craig
End Orchid post.

If you are at all interested, I encourage more posting on Orchid, or in my comments, or both!
So it goes without saying (even though I am saying it), as always comments are welcome.

-Gabriel

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