Super/Natural

 Greetings fellow humans!

Here is a video to experience the dome via video:

 

If you wish to read and learn about the dome, there is a brief essay at the bottom of this post.

Here are a bunch of photos (mostly) by Dom Episcopo

“Super/Natural” is a stained glass environment representing a “three-tiered cosmos”.

 

In 2023, I became an artist in residence at the Penn Center for Neuroaesthetics.  This project is the result of attending their lab meetings over the course of a year and a half and is the time it took to complete the dome.

 

The dome is 8 feet high at its tallest and 5’6” in diameter.  The windows were designed and fabricated by me. The dome architecture was designed by me in collaboration with carpenter Patrick Murray who contributed his architectural background and engineering skill.

 

Thank you to Dr Anjan Chatterjee and Penn Center forNeuroaesthetics (PCfN), Claire Oliver Gallery, Patrick Murray, Konstantin Sievaplesov (studio assistant), Richard Prigg, and Glenn Carter. 

 

I would like to express my immense gratitude to my parents, Moselio and Barbara Schaechter. My father, who served as the chairman of Microbiology at Tufts University for 23 years, awakened in me a love of science—especially through his collection of antique mushroom books, with their fantastic illustrations. My mother, former director of the League School of Boston (now the League School of Autism), nurtured my curiosity about the human mind from an early age through books and conversations. Thank you, Mom and Dad, for your inspiration and support.

 

 

One of the research themes at Penn Center for Neuroaesthetics is “the built environment and wellness”.  It was there that I learned of

biophilicdesign. Biophilic principles are often used in hospitals and office buildings to create “refresh rooms” and non-secular chapels—places to lower stress and encourage feelings of serenity and peace.  It comes as no surprise that reconnecting with nature is healing.  Like many urban people, I myself have very rarely experienced wild spaces. I don’t own a car, and I have been city-bound most of my life. Super/Natural is a response to that condition.

 

Without delving too deeply into mysticism, it seems biophilic design offers an opportunity to reconcile human consciousness with the environment. It challenges the perceived divide between mind and body, person vs nature, as well as the mental distinction between "interior vs. exterior" or "self vs. not-self”, revealing it as a perceptual illusion. While this distinction has practical heuristic value, it also fosters loneliness and isolation.  I suspect this disconnection enables social and ecological harm. My goal was to create something that “heals” this divide.

 

By situating the viewer at the center of a three-tiered cosmos, Super/Natural invites contemplation of both inner space—how we experience environments neurologically and psychologically—and outer space—how we extend ourselves into our surroundings. I aimed to inspire reflection on our interdependence with all life on Earth, encouraging an internalized sense of connection akin to viewing the "blue marble," from within rather than from the far-off perspective of outer space.  We are ultimately connected to, not just observing nature.

 

Although I am not religious, I chose a chapel as a direct reference to spiritual architecture that uses art for reflection, awe, and transcendence. As a stained glass artist, I am acutely aware that my work is exhibited in lightboxes, not in churches and temples as is traditional. Thus, I have thought for years that I would like to make a “personal shrine” for a single viewer.  This goes against the convention of thinking in the monumental terms suggested by cathedrals as well as many contemporary art venues. Western culture tends to revere the huge and sublime while undervaluing the small, intimate, and inscendent. This preference for grandeur creates physical and psychological distance between the viewer and the stained glass. I sought to collapse that separation. Moreover, stained glass in churches and public spaces is almost always designed for a collective audience. In the age of mass media, there’s a temptation to assume that reaching the largest number of people is inherently better. Super/Natural challenges that notion by offering a semi-private experience.

 

The imagery in Super/Natural references nature, but it is entirely derived from my imagination. It is intended to evoke the sense of nature as understood by a human mind—similar to the natural history images that influenced my childhood. They are, ultimately, about invoking nature more than depicting it. At PCfN, I learned that creativity is often tested using the 'Alternative Uses Test,' in which subjects are asked to generate as many uses as possible for a common object—like a brick—within a limited time. The test is scored across four dimensions (fluency, originality, flexibility and elaboration).   The flower and bird imagery in the dome was a challenge to my imagination.  How many flowers, birds and bugs could I invent before my inspiration ran dry? What would this say about the potential for the inventive capacity of drawing? I hope I have discovered that imagination is potentially infinite!

 

Imagination is often thought of as frivolous or a waste of time. But what could be more amazing than the extension of consciousness beyond what feels possible, beyond reality?  It is my belief that expressing one’s authentic imagination is the most important, radical thing we can do as conscious beings.  It is my belief the mind can conjure feelings of awe independent of external experience (and substances) and hopefully the dome will prove to be an example of that.

 

One final historical link that bears mentioning is that the botanical prints that inspired the work were often created by women as this was a permissible art form for them in the 17^th Century. No wonder they are so amazing looking—all that artistic energy had to be funneled into this one constricting art mode!

 

The composition is based on the cross-cultural theme of a "three tiered cosmos".  The ten panels at eye level represent the "Earthly Domain". These panels consist of images of plants and insects in a profusion of exuberant life.  Below are ten panels of wallpaper representing the "Under World".  The imagery includes roots, unhatched larva, buried bones, mycelium and other motifs of underground.  The "Heavens", the geodesic dome itself, contains 45 triangular panels.  This area depicts a murmuration of colorful birds and stars.  Underfoot is a carpet of my design depicting a whirlpool, mirroring the spiral of birds above.

 

Techniques

I use a material called "Flash Glass”.  Flash glass is a type of hand-blown glass with a paper-thin veneer of intense color on a base layer of lighter color.  One reason there is a lot of color in each section of my pictures is that the flash glass is layered, typically two pieces deep, red on clear and blue on clear with the addition of black enamel and silverstain.

 

I cut the glass using a steel wheel cutter and a grozing or running pliers.  The next step is sandblasting, a process by which one can remove the colored layer, to get patterns and tones.  After sandblasting, I engrave finer details using rotary tools and create smooth tonal shifts in color with diamond hand files.

When the engraving is done, I add black enamel which fires onto glass permanently. I also use silverstain (which is yellow). I used a fuchsia transparent enamel in places as well.  This is all the paint I use--all the other color is the flash glass itself.  The use of red and blue glass, combined with small amounts of black, yellow, and pink enamel, produces a full-color spectrum within a single section of glass, eliminating the need for a cut line.

The wallpaper originated from two high-resolution images of previous stained glass windows I created based on pencil sketches. These images were manipulated with Photoshop software to combine them with stained glass-like transparency.

__

 

Here are the “Cliff Notes” supplied by Chatgpt:

 

Summary of Key Themes

1. Biophilic design and reconnection with nature
2. Healing psychological and social divides and creating connections
3. Interior vs. exterior space and dissolving boundaries
4. Imagination as a force for creativity and transformation
5. Resistance to monumentalism in favor of intimacy
6. The symbolic structure of the three-tiered cosmos
7. Technical mastery of stained glass craft
8. Art as a site for awe, reflection, and transcendence

 

These themes are interconnected, reinforcing the overarching goal of Super/Natural to invite viewers into a deeply personal, immersive experience that explores the connections between self, nature, and imagination.

 

 

I Despise the Sound of Breaking Glass

 So, this happened.

I shipped a piece to Europe and it arrived smashed.  I'll bet you want a forensic analysis of what I did wrong!  Well, I had a crate made and it was a good crate (wooden box packed inside a bigger wooden box).  Maybe it could have been a little bigger to accommodate more rigid foam--but I didn't think so at the time since I have received much undamaged sheet glass from Europe packed in a whole lot less.  

I shipped it using a big international shipper--not an art shipper.  Maybe not the best idea, but affordable. Again, that's how I have received sheet glass. Always unbroken, and sheet glass is much more at risk than a stained glass window which is made up of much smaller  pieces.

Upon analyzing the damage to the crate and the window, we (Myself, and experts Rick Prigg and Glenn Carter) determined the crate had fallen over and remained horizontal while traveling.  This accounted for the smashing, which was due to shock and then the clam-shelling which is what happens when the broken pieces rub against each other repeatedly.  Horizontal is always bad for stained glass and the labeling on the crate didn't result in anyone righting the crate.  (Solution: next time, add plywood wings to the bottom of the crate so it can only ride upright.  This is what the person who shipped it back to me did.)

"Isola" in all its unbroken glory

I wanted to restore the window because I feel it is one of my best ever.

Broken pieces marked with an "X".  However, the large piece under her feet is also broken but I didn't know that until later as the breaks are so clean.

I was able to claim $ for the repair from the shipping company. Yay me.  I was very surprised, actually, as I had been told entire skyscrapers in Omaha are dedicated to offices of people who's sole job it is to deny claims.  They were very nice, actually.

Here are some pictures of the first step of restoration, which is to remove the broken pieces by unsoldering them.  This is NOT easy or simple. In fact, I wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy.  A loathsome process! It took hours and hours to remove them because it must be done very slowly and carefully to prevent further damage.  It takes two people. Two ridiculously patient people. The person you see here is Rick Prigg who is truly an expert (as well as one of my best friends!). He runs Sycamore Studio and Gallery 26 in Lansdowne and if you need  stained glass windows, newly designed or damaged ones repaired, I highly recommend him!

Below are some pictures of the de-soldering process.  Stay tuned for more posts regarding the restoration of this piece!!

Uncrating the piece

The pieces had been stabilized for return shipping with very sticky plastic sheets which needed to be removed first.

Beginning to unsolder (damn, its messy!)

 

Isola unsoldered.

 

Removed broken pieces.  The figure, the water and the sky will be totally remade.

Top: broken pieces Bottom: Broken pieces pushed together.  Since the break is so clean and the section so difficult to reproduce, this section will get hxtal-ed back together.  Hxtal is a glass glue--stronger than glass, actually.  When its complete the naked eye will not be able to detect any cracks.

Biophilic Dome Project

 Hello Gentle Readers:

I am making the largest project of my life and I really, really wanna share it with you! Wheeee!

First two panels complete

I am an artist in residence at the Penn Center for Neuroaesthetics (PCfN).  What is neuroaesthetics you say? You can read some definitions here and check out the lab at Penn here.  I am really, really enjoying my experiences there and I can say with full confidence my mind is blown.  Down to matters more prosaic. As an AIR I need to do a project and I decided my project would be to build a dome based on biophilic design.  Biophilic design is this.

WHY THIS PROJECT? My goals (possibly lofty), intentions etc--

1. To create a space inspired by biophilic principles (but not based on them!) that encourages a "spiritual experience" that (maybe) centers one's consciousness at the center of ("the") universe (Doesn't ALL art do that, really?) In other words, to attempt a "unification" of scientific and spiritual "truth".
   
2. To create a space that encourages reflecting on the 'blue marble" from the inside. (Hopefully reflecting on climate change, habitat destruction and the interdependence of all life on earth)
   
3. To underscore the primacy of imagination and to call attention to the futility of objectivity in a good way! :)
4. To honor the history of architectural and ecclesiastical stained glass (specifically creating an intimate environment in which to view a stained glass piece)
5. to make my largest project ever (and possibly one of my last if my arthritis is RA or gets a lot worse)
6. To prove I can do this
   



Detail of panel 2




Another detail of panel 2

That was my elevator pitch.  Here it is in a little more detail going backwards towards the most important stuff:

 

6 and 5 The me stuff:  As Cormac McCarthy once said:"I'm not interested in writing short stories. Anything that doesn't take years of your life and drive you to suicide hardly seems worth doing."  'Nuff said.

 

4. Architecture: As a stained glass artist, I am constantly being taken to task by my colleagues in the field for not working in architectural space (my work is exhibited in lightboxes) and thus, I have always had in the back of my mind thoughts like “what is the ideal viewing space for my work?” and have thought for years to make a “personal shrine” for a single viewer.  This goes against the convention of thinking in monumental architectural terms.  Many wish to make imposingly scaled projects, which presume the viewer will be at quite a far distance from the stained glass itself.  That distance registers both physically and psychologically and I want to collapse that distance.  In addition, stained glass in churches and public spaces is almost always designed for an audience of several or more people at once. It is not a private experience, which the dome will be.  In the modernist age, there has been a disparaging of the small, the intimate and the domestic in favor of the grand and the sublime.  In the age of mass media, it is tempting to assume that reaching the largest number of people at once is somehow optimal. My project is, in some ways, intended to challenge that assumption. (Never mind this dome will actually be the largest project I have ever undertaken!  It will still be relatively tiny by architectural stained glass standards).  Because I am interested in how art, in particular visual art, acts on a single person at a time, I am interested specifically in creating an intimate environment. 

Proposal sketch

Actual dome in progress

 

 

3.Imagination:  I have this proto-theory that imagination is the most important, radical thing we can do as conscious beings. Think about it?  How would you define "imagination" anyway? How is it different or the same as "creativity"? Imagination has been condemned as fantasy and a solipsistic waste of time. But is it fair to marginalize imagination and not take it seriously?  Spoiler alert: NO.  For one thing: our entire understanding of anything is predicated on making sense of our senses and we must do that by encoding things in our heads somehow. If you want to know more read this book.  Go on, I double dare you!

I need to write and think more on this topic but enough for now or this blog post will never happen.  Suffice it to say, the imagery in this dome is being generated by all my doodles at PCfN and I am on a mission to redesign nature all myself. You know, in case we kill it all?  Someday we will need nature designers to make all our fake plants and animals.

Detail of panel 1

Another detail of panel 1

 

As for objectivity I dare you to read this. I am obsessed with natural history illustration.  Here's a factoid: women of the hilariously misnamed "Enlightenment" were permitted to be botanical illustrators.  Can you imagine funneling ALL your urgent artsy creativity into that?  That must explain Maria Sibylla Merian (another MSM link here) and Barbara Dietzsch's genius.  But that's not all!  Ernst Haeckel and John James Audubon also are big influences.  Yes, I know Audubon is evil, but have you seen one of his prints in the flesh?  They move me almost to tears.  And they prove my point that every artwork is the encoding of a human soul first and foremost and a repsonse to the external world secondly.  And I want my dome to hearken to that paradox as well.

 

2. Blue marble:  In addition to being inspired by the work of PCfN, it is my hope that the piece creates a venue for contemplation—of both inner space, how we experience spaces neurologically and psychologically as well as outer space, how we extend ourselves into our surroundings.  For me, this would include an environmental message.

The earth is our home, and it can be a welcoming home and perhaps if we thought of it as such, we might be less inclined to sit by while we destroy it.

 

1. Yeah, you got that right: its kinda supposed to be a sacred space inspired by science: Spirituality is not typically the realm of science (and from my personal experience, it is absolutely taboo in academia in general unless one is in a Religious Studies program). As such, I am assuming biophilic spaces are studied from a practical and material point of view. But I think, without getting too mystical about it, biophilic spaces offer an opportunity to reconcile a human consciousness with an environmental context. They can demonstrate that what appears to be a mind/body split, or a mental classification of interior vs exterior (self vs “not-self”) is a perceptual illusion and while it may have an important practical heuristic function, it also ensures a sense of a sense of loneliness and enables eco disasters, etc. Therefore, I conclude that if reuniting these seemingly separate things is not the essence of “spirituality” then nothing is.  I would say that from a neurological or psychological perspective, this has some value.

Ultimately, I see the project as a model of a three tiered cosmos, centering a single person inside a model of the “blue marble” that we humans inhabit externally—but perhaps experience as a bubble surrounding us.  At worst, we see ourselves as the center of the universe, but at best, we could say we are centered in the cosmos.

 

FINALLY! Stay tuned more to come.  What going in the dome itself?  BIRDIES.  That's what.

Yet another detail of panel 1

Yet another detail of panel 2

Facial Anomalies

One of the things they study at the Penn Center forNeuroasthetics where I am an artist in residence, is facial anomalies. These include the obvious, such as cleft palate but the spectrum continues into the more typical such as scars, or other so called “disfiguring” conditions that leave a face “distorted”.  All in quotes because the stakes are high.  Check these out.

 It is fair to say that we as humans assess each other’s and our own faces and if there is anything that deviates a little too far from what we expect, we notice.

Unfortunately, biases against facial anomalies do exist in society. People with facial anomalies may face prejudice, discrimination, or negative judgments based on their appearance. Yes—even by persons who claim they don’t. This bias can stem from societal beauty standards, cultural influences, lack of understanding, fear, or ignorance about these conditions.  This is what they study at PCfN. The good news is that the bias seems changeable.

Facial anomalies interest me personally for a few reasons.  One is from the POV of self-image.  How does it affect a person if they feel like a freak—even if they aren’t, say, in the case of body dysmorphia?  Second: a zillion times I have been asked about why I distort faces when I draw them.  What’s it all about????  I wish I knew.  All I can say is that it’s a very strong, irresistible compulsion.  Until they look like that, I am massively unsatisfied and will destroy or alter them until they do.  They are to me, extremely gorgeous.  To others, I can’t say.  But to me, they are right, and all other faces are not-right.

Another factor in this piece was relating facial anomalies to “glass anomalies”. What constitutes an assault on our assumptions about health, integrity and wholeness in glass and stained glass design itself?

One thing about being a stained glass artist is dealing with broken glass.  In fact, all glass is broken in that that’s how you get it to be the desired shape.  Intention matters, but only so much.  Basically, you break it into shape.  And of course, it breaks on its own sometimes. I have had many a call an email from someone really panicking because something has quote-unquote broken.  Not that it matters in the grand scheme of human affairs, but people are really biased against broken glass, as if there was something wrong with it!  But…not all breaks signify damaged goods and sometimes it just adds to the story and look of the piece in a positive way. However, usually its seen as disfiguring and a very bad thing indeed.  Suddenly its no longer perfect!! (as if it ever was!)

 

But of course, the breaks often add to the content in significant ways, actually improving it: Check out these cool historical examples: (AND THESE TOO!)

Take that, Rene Descartes!

Silence! Its golden.

Upside down peace sign on the pope, what could it mean?

Bisected cupid (a vast improvement)

Moustache

Most breaks in a window do not cause any issue with the structure.  Virtually ALL stained glass windows have breaks in them and plenty of them if the window is old.  The only time I worry is if they are prominent enough that they interfere with the design.  Like if they are right through the face.......I think you see where I am going with this!

In this piece, I wanted to address my own preciousness with the people I draw. I wanted to challenge the notion that breakage=damage. I wanted to see if I could intentionally break the faces right where it would matter.  Although, what I found was that in many cases, I couldn’t go through with it.  For one thing, in order to up the ante, I made sure the painting was some of my very best.  Much harder to make myself intentionally break it! 

It is said that ugliness, dirt, weeds etc are things that are perceived as being “out of place”, things that might be perfectly acceptable...somewhere else, thank you very much..... Breaks in glass fall into this category.

All this reminds me of how our aesthetic sense works: we are on the lookout for certain things.  We tend to have a preference for the “normal du jour”, we really like beauty (which could be said to be normal du jour that’s exaggerated in such a way that we are turned on rather than off) and we are destabilized by things that are anomalous. To put it really bluntly, we tend to find them un-attractive aka UGLY.   

And yes, I am more than familiar with the fact that some DO see them as attractive. I am one of them and that’s why I wanted to make the piece—to create an opportunity to reconsider that what upsets the apple cart is actually an opportunity to expand our definition of the beautiful.

 

Technical deets:

My windows was painted with Reusche stencil black enamel mixed with the awkwardly named "red for flesh".  I paint on a sandblasted surface.  Each roundel has about 4-5 firings at 1225F.