sketch for ESP transom

this is a thumbnail cartoon--not even a sketch really. Although it looks teensy here it is 57" wide and about that tall at the peak of the arch. I used tons of doodles from umpteen trillion meetings, lectures and phone calls. So much I previously thought useless has found new life here. Mostly in clown suits....... The theme is "The Battle of Carnival and Lent". I thought it fitting for a prison--the kind of battle inside everyone with impulse control issues. Let's think binary for sec, shall we? Apollo vs. Dionysus, angel vs. devil, chaos vs. control, Lennon vs. McCartney, vanilla vs. chocolate, night vs, day etc etc the yin yang of it all!!! The humanity!

God help you if don't click to enlarge it....

Here's Breughel's orig.

E.S.P.

Nah--I'm not psychic! That's stands for Eastern State Penitentiary!
Here's some teaser photos--but some of you may not know that I am posting very, very little of my progress here or on FB.
For info on how to follow the project at USArtists please follow this link to a post I did a little while back which has all the info.

Click on images for ginormous versions.

Here's the layering for you techies. That's R/cl lamberts with 1059 reusche and silverstain. The blue is who-knows-what...lambert's probably....and the pink is aurora on clear Saint Just...I had a huge SNIT when the layer for the body fell out of my hand (apparently the brain function which governs gripping is defective in me) and smashed to bits.... Here is an excellent resource for those trying times, so you aren't left speechless, gawd forbid.

Thinking Outside the Coffin

This is my keynote from the BeCon Conference...sadly without all the images as that would probably take the rest of my life.
It is similar, but not the same, as my talk last spring at the Art Alliance (reviewed here) and it also draws from a post on ending media prejudice from this blog...

Thinking Outside the Coffin

Let’s start with the obnoxious assumption that “Art” is a Higher Pursuit than “Craft”
In the high stakes world of Fine Art, Craft, as a field is, sometimes secretly, but often openly, reviled.

Click to show the rest of article

How many times have I heard critics, academics, curators, collectors, dealers and yes, even artists, for goodness sakes, publicly trotting out their unquestioned, and insufferable belief that Craft is lesser than and lower than “Art”? Too many.

“Craft” lacks the intellectual and philosophical panache of “Fine Art”—it can go as far as being seen as less intelligent—less important, and less serious–at best, a quaint and harmless pastime that results in free sweaters or maybe a job coopering at a reconstructed village. At worst, it is perceived to be retardaire and anachronistic. In this digital age, why go backwards? Art, by comparison, is seen as sophisticated, enlightening, profound, relevant and wise. Prices, respect and status follow suit. Once money enters the picture, there are more devious and capricious reasons those in power might want to protect these boundaries and defend their piece of the pie, surprise, surprise. Although it may appear as if “anything goes” in terms of what gets called art; the fact is that the Fine Arts must very narrowly define their practice in order to maintain their mystique, their market share and its stature as a revered activity. You can test this out by trying to get yourself a gallery show. You will find out pretty quick, that your art, probably isn’t their kind of art. So the definition of art, to some extent depends on it being the high end of something. Craft suffers the fallout .

This brings me to the odious, ignorant prejudice against certain materials and certain methods. When I have referred to myself as a craftsperson, people have assumed I have some problem with my self-esteem—on the contrary—I am very proud to identify as such. I was once uninvited from a speaking gig because the painting department head heard I worked in glass (she never even bothered to look at the work)! When I got the Guggenheim award, I went to the party. People asked me what I did—on more than one occasion, I watched them shrink in horror from me as if glass might be some horrid contagion. There are endless examples, I’m sure you all have stories.

Critics, academics, curators, collectors, dealers and ignorant artists: get a clue. Mediums are media and technique is simply a means to an end. They are the materials and processes that are in between the artist and the object being created...you know, the thing that really matters? This type of media prejudice is especially ridiculous in light of the fact that artists are free to work with anything, from diamonds (Damian Hirst) to feces (Chris Ofili)—so why anyone should disdain, say, ceramic is a real mystery. Why care if the substance is glass, ceramics, oil paint, paper, poop or bubble gum? Why is carving marble more artistic than carving wood? Is there a quality in oil paint that makes it inherently artistic, some quality of glass that makes it crafty?
Isn’t the entire point what’s being done with it? Isn’t the point the experience it confers on the audience or users? It is just as wrongheaded as assuming something is art because it is paint on canvas. As if that offered some kind of bulletproof protection against being lousy!

In a related theme, devoting oneself exclusively to a singular branch of material knowledge (i.e. being a “glass artist” or a “clay artist” etc) is seen to be case of idiocy, confused priorities or unhealthy obsession. This is different than the Fine Arts as it is currently the trend (and its only a trend!) to believe that the materials and techniques should serve the idea and not vice versa . This deliberate and willful elevation of material above all else comes seemingly at the expense of more profound content, although why that should be accepted as self-evident beats me. Why is a dialogue between the maker and their medium and process not ideal?

Another thing I hear a lot is “Craft and Art are the same or have merged”
First off—other than cold hard cash, champagne and limos, why on earth would we want to be the same as or to merge with Fine Arts? Have you seen the conditions of the Fine Arts these days? Fine Arts are in a crisis. Have you not noticed that the decades of modernist deprivation has starved the field of most of its claim to relevance? That the relentless “purification” has led to so much less materiality and aesthetic impact that it has essentially castrated itself? Removed it from its source of power? Why would we merge with them?
Is this what you want for our field???
And yet, how many times have I heard someone make this claim—that “craft” and “art” have merged or even more bizarre, “the same thing”? Given the attitudes described above, how so? It is ever more obvious that the two practices are worlds apart in terms of attitude, output and methodology. Whether this is a result of nature or culture is debatable, but regardless, this is how things are. In the Fine Arts the end justifies the means and in craft, the means justifies the end. Art for art’s sake is beholden to nothing and no one while craft, for better or worse is the polar opposite, it responds to and is responsible to all. An artist is someone whose work is informed almost entirely by ideas and a craftsperson is one whose work is informed largely by process, material or functionality.

But no matter how much we may wish it otherwise, craft is seen as the lower. Now why is that? Darned bad luck? An unfortunate historical coincidence? A conspiracy by evil marketing overloads? Lets look at the historical reasons two words diverged and one became “lower” and the other, “higher”.
The terms “craft”, “applied arts” and “decorative arts” are relatively recent terms. In western culture, before the Renaissance, artists and artisans were more or less anonymous. Its not like “everyone was considered an artist back then”—on the contrary—more like “everyone was considered a craftsman”. So those who wish to elevate Craft aren’t trying to get something back but establish it for the first time.
When painting and sculpture became one of the Liberal Arts, the practitioners became academics, scholars and philosophers, if not brand names, rock stars and geniuses. They became exceptional and not the same as toilers and yeomen. They were valued for their brilliant ideas, and who manufactured them mattered less.

The next blow came with the Industrial Revolution, which necessitated a rethinking of craft owing to mechanization and mass production. This codified the institutional separations that arose in the 20th C, in part to the G.I. Bill and the idea of higher vocational training. There are still separate departments of Sculpture, Metals/Jewelry, Wood/Furniture and Glass, Industrial Design in art schools. Similarly museums have different curatorial departments that often break down on similar lines of applied versus fine art. There are also museums, magazines and collectors devoted exclusively to Craft or to Fine Art. Unless these institutions are dismantled, someone is claiming a pedagogical, if not categorical difference—however they may define it.

Lately we have suffered the end of nature and the death of God. Yikes—talk about nihilism! It is a great paradox that the more we dominate nature, the more we revere “the primitive”, and nowhere is this more evident than in than arts. As if somehow crudeness, awkwardness and ineptitude were somehow more authentic than cultivation and finesse. Having almost annihilated all of nature, yeah it would be a great idea to try to honor it for a change. Ironically, it ends up being OK to make baldly fecal art as long as you can claim to be some kind of shaman! But, of course, god forbid you should desire to transform clay into something other than a excretal gray blob. That would be artificial, concealing, not ‘true to nature”; as over processed as a TV dinner.

But before I go any further, I want to say that not all separations and hierarchies are bad. Not even ones in the art world—not even ones that delegate one sector of making to be extra special and elite and another to be crap. When navigating this world one must take into account the difference between something that represents a pinnacle of human expressive accomplishment and something mundane. We can’t level all objects into a vast all-inclusive category of “art”, “craft” or even “human production” wherein the Sistine Chapel ceiling would be the equivalent of a Dixie cup. Saying craft is the same as art blends a lot of different intents and objects into an indistinguishable mush. To do so is to generalize to the point of meaninglessness. It is truly a case of apples and oranges. There are things made to be treasured and things made to be trashed, things made to contain spirits and things made to contain spirit and sometimes there are things made to contain spirits that also contain spirit!
And elevating a spork to the equivalent of a silver spoon to avoid being racist, classist or any other “ist” is insulting to the intelligence in addition to depriving people of their autonomy to dream and aspire. There is a problem in that dispatching with hierarchies affects one’s ability to enjoy life. How can we recognize good without acknowledging the bad? Yeah, its unfair, but isn’t it worth it so we can actively pursue the good and avoid the bad? To pretend all objects are the same in order to "level the playing field” is to ensure that everyone loses the game. Someone of a paranoid nature might find this the basis of a conspiracy to anesthetize the masses into an army of obedient consumer zombies. We love Wal-Mart!
The fact is, we need to set aside some term for our highest; most exalted, sacrosanct expressions—even if we can’t agree on them. Like “beauty”, and “love”, “Art” is one of those abstractions that can only be defined subjectively, if at all. But, as the paragon of aesthetic experiences it is no less real for lack of defining—as witnessed in clichés like: “I don’t know what art is, but I know it when I see it”. We need to look up to something, to feel awe. But that the notion should be predicated on media or technique or even form (like “vessels”) is completely ludicrous.

So what’s the deal? What is the relationship of art to craft?
A quote attributed to Louis Pasteur (which he never said but should have) is “There’s no difference between applied science and pure science, just good science and bad science.” Just change “science” to “art” and you get the drift. So, if we must dispatch with stuff, can it just be the crap in any medium instead of, oh, say the whole category known as “Craft” or “Glass art”?
It seems that the best way to conceptualize this morass is as follows: In the field of human creative, artistic endeavors we have a range of activities and a range of results from those activities. From highly the highly inventive and original to the most repeated of historical and traditional forms and methods. From the most banal to the most exquisite and unique. From the most refined to the most crude. From the highly individual expressions to the most collective. From things engineered for display, decoration, to the most exaltedly spiritual and contemplative to the pragmatically useful. Sometimes these things overlap and sometimes they hover at the poles. None of these give any indication of how far up or down on the art scale they might be.

Material, technique and form are neutral. All are born with the equal potential to be that super special thing we call art—despite material, technique or associated tradition. All have the potential to scale the heights and or, conversely to bomb and become trash. Sometimes the maker’s intent actually impacts what they make—as in, sometimes a self-professed artist actually succeeds in making art. But it’s by no means a foregone conclusion—despite all the self-identified artists out there! Yes—a cup can be “as good as” a painting—a claim made ever easier by painting growing ever more vapid and awful. Some craft is art, no doubt about it; but not all; not even a lot. So yes, in terms of potential, art and craft are the same even if the institutions don’t recognize it.; as Louis Pasteur,famously didn't actually say (but, damn, I sure wish he had!): "There's no such thing as pure science versus applied science--only good science and bad science.

However, this does all of nothing to address the deeper issue. Why is there so much CRAFT ANXIETY? And what can and should we do about it? How did history come to see Craft as doomed to be the worser of two polarities? Why does work that emphasizes technique, utilizes certain materials and takes on traditional form earn less money and engender less respect? It seems so arbitrary and weird. Why not, say, more respect?? There are several main reasons, which are rather intertwined. The physical utility of craft objects, the physical materiality of them and the physical hand skills needed to make them are all in disrepute.
There are money and class issues, the sense that craft is obsolete, body dysmorphia, the fallout from the Fine Art’s identity crisis and, naturally, the entropy that prevents anything from changing course mid-stream.

Body Dysmorphia
Let’s start with body dysmorphia because I think, as a culture, we suffer from a nefarious ambivalence towards our bodies.
We are often uncomfortable with the intimacy of close-up encounters. We have entire codes of behavior devoted to when touching is appropriate and when it’s not.
There are times we prefer to keep an emotional, if not physical distance from that which we value. It’s no coincidence that art is literally untouchable, that which we touch, we taint.
And if you only love someone only for his or her body, well then, you are a sleaze!

We can traverse our feelings about objects from head to toe or, as it were, from sacred to profane. We place abstractions like beauty, love and truth far above fleshy, carnal or coarse material. There’s matter and what really matters, after all! Everyday objects are lower than people (and art)—so its OK to touch them, abuse them, exploit them. Our bodies act as a metaphorical hierarchy-- the mind is not only higher symbolically, but conveniently located nearer the heavens and at a significant distance above the feet, which must contact the dirt of the earth. The head is also far enough from our privates to imagine them as having a (somewhat mischievous) will of their own. Consuming and processing food and its attendant waste, sex and other basic survival needs remind us that our bodies are messy and make embarrassing, uncontrollable and noises, smells, fluids and demands. Most of the stuff that is in us we ardently hope stays in there and the rest we are anxious to flush away (with the notable exception of babies). Even worse? Bodies die and rot.
Craft items are frequently defined as those of a utilitarian nature, having to do with bodily function. Reflecting their usage, the forms craft objects take are often a reminder of our physicality—they are body-like—as in vessels. Clothing, and furniture have arms and legs (but no heads!).
Plenty of people just want to wish our nasty corporeality away and the associated devices and objects are similarly subject to our loathing. Handwork and technique are a little too easily separated from “The Life of the Mind”. Its not crafts fault we are scared and humiliated by our bodies—and it’s no surprise that is scapegoated.

Another fallout from its close association with bodies is that Craft is subject to a fear of idolatry. Perhaps we worship truth, love, beauty and maybe even God, but usually not cups and plates. This is the difference between false idols and “real gods”. One is just a thing...to imbue it with extra power is perverted, superstitious and ludicrous. Material objects can seem fetishistic, easily commodifiable and thus all about consumption and unhealthy appetites. Objects also get old and worn...just like we do, and ohmigosh, there’s another unpleasant reminder of our mortality! And then what? Toss it so you can get a shiny new one! Fill up the landfills with more junk . Rightly, we associate our materialistic tendencies with greed, waste and environmental devastation. Concepts don’t have that problem. They are exalted and ethereal and make us look immortal and morally righteous.


Money, Class, Labor and Skill Issues
As if bodies and their abundant issues aren’t enough, there’s more to worry about! Let’s start with the easy one, money and value. Craft suffers from the same problem anything that is produced in multiples does in the arts. Rare and inaccessible generally equals more valuable. People pay more for what’s extraordinary and hard to come by. Craft objects tend to be small, used by hand and used by everybody in everyday life. Therefore, they are also going to be necessarily more common, available and accessible. Owing to their frequent use and, often mindless interaction, they rarely seem extraordinary. Never mind how one’s life might be improved by not taking every little moment for granted (as the Japanese glorify with their tea ceremony and their aesthetic of wabi-sabi.)

Perhaps more damning is the fact that it’s not too far a leap of the imagination from throwing pots to the manual labor of mucking the stalls. Many people dislike physical labor. The ruling class doesn’t get sweaty or get their hands dirty, end of story. Labor and material reminds us a little too much of.... slavery...either in the standard sense of horrific exploitation of others or in the sense of slavish devotion—unhealthy obsession (as I mentioned with regard to dedicating one’s self to one medium). There is a big issue of service. Art answers to no one—but craft is often about utility and thus is bound to us, serving our needs. And that makes us superior, no? Cups serve us, not the other way around—as evidenced in names like a tea service.
As I said earlier, the Fine Arts, since the advent of Modernism, take for granted the notion that the materials and techniques should serve the idea and not vice versa. Again, the idea of service, with the idea as the ultimate master over the rest of creative production. For this reason, skill and technique are as unpopular as material. The idea of skill has been more or less entirely eradicated from Fine Arts education (a good reason to keep craft and fine art separate in our schools). Why bother working up a sweat developing skills when it’s perfectly acceptable, encouraged even, to just purchase stuff and display it? Why bother wasting time practicing one’s “craft” when it’s perfectly acceptable, encouraged even to make work that’s considered “raw and direct”
or when its perfectly acceptable, encouraged even to get assistants to do that part for you?
Because of all this, the status gap between craft and art is a class issue.
Those who strive to be ranked amongst the “Haves” value art as its exclusivity and one-of-a kindness confirms a unique, hard-to-attain position in life and conversely, they dislike Craft as it reminds them of common folk and toiling servants.
As if that wasn’t bad enough—the “Have Nots” are disinclined to value skill and virtuosity, as it is unfair and undemocratic! Virtuosity is primarily available to the privileged, those who have endless time to practice, the money to get a fancy education or the random lucky prodigy. Extreme abilities with no philosophy substantiating them are merely the performances of show-offs or a fatuous demonstration of outmoded values, mechanically executed by meaty automatons, exhibitionistic blowhards or perhaps, on a good day, autistics. Why buy into this when we are inundated with acceptably perfect clone items made much more cheaply by actual machines on a daily basis?

So, what’s important and distinct about Craft that we should bother preserving it?
One thing about the so-called “low” technology of hand made craft is that it represents a huge body of knowledge. Shouldn’t the default position on any branch of knowledge be “keep it, don’t dump it”? Not all valuable knowledge is exclusively verbal, last I looked. The knowledge of craft is a vast area that involves intimate kinesthetic understanding of the physical body and its needs and desires. It includes an intimate knowledge of materials and how to construct with them. It includes a deep understanding of tool use, how materials respond to touch, and how our bodies move and respond to the objects they interact with. Craft knowledge is the exclusive nexus between bodies and using, making and enjoying things. Dispatch with that at your own risk!
We might, also, want to acknowledge the transitory nature of societies. They tend to collapse. It helps to have people versed in how to make stuff. If one could elect to NOT lose a body of knowledge, why would one arrogantly declare one obsolete and dispatch with it? Can we afford to outsource this?

There is a lot of truth in the "quality of life" defense of preserving Craft. I can see how easy it would be to assume a cynical or a so-called “practical” stance but regardless of how nostalgic and sentimental it all seems, craft’s virtue bears further attention. To put it very simply, most evils in the world, on both a personal and a mass scale, are ultimately caused by fear, and anger. And what do we fear ultimately? What makes us really frustrated, enraged and terrified? That we might be nothing, that our lives might be meaningless. Well, surrounding oneself with industrially manufactured clone trash items is hardly going to make one feel like an individual, let alone a cherished one.

It’s true that handmade objects do have more character than mass-produced ones! Yes, to use a handmade object is to be in communion with the maker of the object! And yes, yes, yes, unique objects enrich our lives more than soulless, machine made ones!! All it takes is simple sensitivity, awareness and an open mind. We have been brainwashed into craving the slick uniformity of mass production. These goods don’t age well—the patina of use and abuse looks odd, dirty or messy and if it isn’t “new” anymore, hey, why not go buy a sparkly fresh one and support our financial economy! But at what cost to everything else? Are we really prepared to suffer the consequences of preferring brand new at the cost of treasuring things being held dear for a lifetime?

Finally: people have hands. They enjoy using them. Until our hands mutate from digital to “digital”—meaning from fingers into mouse-clicking flippers, a certain proportion of the population is going to be eager to employ their hands in activities like knitting, wood work, playing with clay etc. The desire to be a craftsperson has not disappeared in synch with our technology. So what to do with all these burgeoning craftspeople? Interventions? “Deprogramming”? Lobotomies? Labor camps?

Fine Art and the Dialectical Other-- Craft is the Collateral Damage of Art’s Identity Crisis
So craft suffers from being too close to the body and too far from the head and from being a nagging reminder of servitude and too natural in some circumstances and not natural enough others. This enables Fine Arts to swoop in and occupy the top spot, near the head and away from the ditch.
Ergo, much of Craft’s identity crisis is actually watershed from the massive predicament Fine arts has found itself in. In a way, Fine Craft represents a huge threat to Fine Art’s elite status as the sole provider of aesthetic nourishment.

Art is a funny, funny thing. You think you have worries trying to figure out what “craft” is? Try defining “Art”. The term “Art” is utterly fugitive. Of course, Art doesn’t have to define itself and as long as art cannot be defined, then its shadow—all the stuff that isn’t art but is kind of like it, is just as doomed to being indefinable.

For the most part and we continue to reap what was sown when Fine Arts disassociated itself from practical (and religious) purpose. The course was set in place during the Renaissance. “Art for Art’s Sake” has always contained the seeds of its own destruction (or at least, radical transmutation). Modernism saw a call for new extremes of originality, overthrowing the previous avant-garde or even a need (however secret) for novelty that left the idea of traditional form in the dust. In its eagerness to reject the past, contemporary Fine Art has thrown out the baby with the bathwater so frequently that the army of discarded babies is threatening a zombie-style take over.
Fine Arts claim no responsibility to be anything to anybody and whatever it is; it often comes with an astronomical price tag. They have become increasingly inaccessible and rarified, both intellectually and materially. By ever tightening its focus, Art has treed itself at the very top of a pyramid and it has almost defined itself out of its own practice. (The bone has become a space station...) Meaning, that in the name of “purity” or perhaps, “critical theory” Fine Art washed its hands of technique, aesthetics, skill, narrative, figuration, material and even objecthood and substance. As Art grew ever more dependent on the ideas rather than the object itself, it was inevitable that at some point the object might just...vaporize.... POOF!

Conclusion
That which we term Fine Art is in danger of launching itself into an entire new field—that of cultural critique, or maybe philosophy. By claiming exclusivity, whatever that means this week, there’s obviously going to be a lot of exclusion going on. Assuming people still have senses, bodies and a physical existence... the craving for beauty and the need for actual objects is a gaping vacuum that will necessarily be filled by something. And we will need to find a new word to describe actual aesthetic objects.... perhaps the word Craft might find itself willing to loan its fine name?
(Boy, will MAD be mad then!)

Art has abdicated the throne! Art is dead, long live Crafts! But, for goodness sakes, let’s not become them! Viva le difference!!!
Let’s not fill the void at the expense of what makes Craft unique. Never, ever believe that skill is anything less then the measure of the miraculous feats that our hands, our HUMAN HANDS, inextricably attached to our brains, are capable of. Never, ever believe that materials are lesser than the mind of who is employing them...

Never doubt, for a single instant, that to passionately dedicate oneself to a vein of material knowledge is one of the very best ways to find levels of inspiration and avenues of creativity that are unavailable to those who flit about on the surface. Never doubt this leads to enlightenment! Never change this to suit the times as it is a timeless fact (until we evolve) that if anything, monomanical devotion is one of the surest paths to discovery, originality, and deep spiritual truths. And god help us if those are out of fashion.

There’s more at stake here than words, kudos and money—entire domains of knowledge stand at risk for being lost. The imperative of teaching craft and preserving craft knowledge at any sort of rigorous level is seriously threatened. In many cases craft is being absorbed into the fine arts—with many craftspeople cheering this on. But do you really think the things we value are staying similar enough to painting and sculpture that those technologies will be preserved in fine art departments, collegiate and curatorial? Deskill all you want; all it only means is more outsourcing. Not to mention the loss of a precious body of knowledge that is irreplaceable, priceless and a profound expression of our identity and potential.

Never doubt that Craft, the dogged pursuit of material and technical when allied with expression, emotion, and of course, intellect are a primary instance of healing the pernicious mind body split that ultimately denies all unity; in life and in metaphor.
We have a bi-polar world view in which bodies, sensual and earthy; manual labor, from brutal toiling to fine motor skill; and physical material, from precious to despicable are suspicious, dangerous and somehow at odds with ideas, spirit and inspiration. Fine Arts, as a western cultural institution largely supports that view. But in Craft these are all false dichotomies. Never underestimate what it means to have a deep connection to and a deep understanding of the material world!! We are, ourselves.... material! Craft, as it honors the carnal, the sensible, the sensual, the perceptible, the palpable stands uniquely poised to bring art back to a place of fusion...back to where materials and concepts can cohere, not collapse, where technique and analysis can be a dialectic, not a fight and back to the mysterious spot in our body where spirit meets matter. You know—they used to say it was in the pineal gland...(its still up for grabs!).... Ultimately the task of being alive is to integrate ourselves; to become as fully alive and as fully human as we can be—body and mind. As long as we see them as separate, we are doomed—to disrespect ourselves, our planet and everything on it and in it. Only when we stop hating ourselves will Craft be accorded the respect that is its due. You want to hate a work just because its glass? Go ahead—I DARE YOU!

Can we say mind and body come together in CRAFT? Yes we can. Never apologize for being a craftsperson. Never.

Nudes that are dudes.

Click on them to enlarge, if you are a size queen.

By the way, they are all graphite on 18" x 12" paper.

Bon Appetit!

from the Renwick show

Brief interview here!!

Renwick Invitational

History in the Making: Renwick Craft Invitational 2011

1st floor, Renwick Gallery,
March 25, 2011 – July 31, 2011 1661 Pennsylvania Avenue N.W. (at 17th Street)
Washington, D.C. 20006
Museum Information (recorded): (202) 633-7970
Smithsonian Information: (202) 633-1000

featuring ME, Ubaldo Vitali, silversmith, Cliff Lee, ceramist, and Matthias Pliessnig, furniture.



Upstairs in the Grand Salon is a show of paintings on loan from the American Museum. This is me in front of a painting of Vinnie Ream. I am descended from the Ream family.

Eastern State Penitentiary Project

Hey listen up!

If you are interested in following along with the Eastern State Penitentiary project, you can do so by signing up at United States Artists.
The project is already funded, however one can still sign on to be a follower. This is where updates and images will be posted, not on this blog or on my Facebook page.

The very first window was installed today and there's a link to a private photo album at USA Artists. Here is a teaser photo to provide the proper incentive:
That's installer and artist Bryan Willette doing all the work!

Art Phag Hag

This here's a short video for your viewing pleasure (or pain):


It was made by Marc Brodzik (Woodshop Films and Scrapple TV) and I am speaking to my friend Eric McDade, (who also did a vid for Woodshop).

The video co-stars, Rain, the cat!

Blurred Horizons

Hey Peoples!
I am lecturing next week at:

Philadelphia Art Alliance

251 South Eighteenth Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103

Telephone: 215-545-4302 Fax: 215-545-0767 www.philartalliance.org

Here's part of their press release for your edification:

The Commonwealth:

PAA’s flagship lecture series examining the state of the modern craft and design movement

March 10, 2011 – 7:00 PM

Speaker: Judith Schaechter, Award-winning stained glass artist and educator

Topic: Blurred Horizons: Fine Art vs. Craft

PHILADELPHIA, PA –The Philadelphia Art Alliance is pleased to announce the second lecture in our Spring 2011 schedule for our newest program stream, The Commonwealth! Continuing with PAA’s new mission of the advancement and appreciation of contemporary craft and design, The Commonwealth will explore the current issues pertaining to the modern craft and design movement, through panel discussions and lectures by artists, academics and curators from the notable craft specific institutions in the city and the larger Northeast Corridor. This series is the product of collaborations between PAA and nationally featured artist/educator Doug Bucci, who is serving as Program Curator.

It is $5 and you can buy tix online here!

Hey: I have been writing on this subject for a while now...or should I say ranting and raving? Will I really discuss "blurring the lines"? Hmmm.....maybe yes, maybe no....I was kind of hoping to offer some clarity, actually...but that might be too much to hope for. I was thinking of trying to blurt the whole thing out in one breath....but its 7 pages so far...call the paramedics!

I do promise to discuss toilet bowls. I do use the phrase "dialectical other". Consider yourself warned!

Here's a pretty picture to entertain you. I think it explains pretty much everything....

click

here! Ten Words and One Shot.

Eastern State

Many of you know I am working this year on a series of windows for Eastern State Penitentiary here in Philadelphia.
I have made the decision not to post updates (or at least not very many and not too many pictures) on this blog because I felt it was a conflict of interest. Let me explain: I was given the opportunity, outside of E.S.P. to raise funds. This was done through a new initiative by United States Artists.
I was successful in raising all the funds I was asking for!!!! And I am immensely grateful to the donors and to USA Artists. Now, their website has a blog feature (called "Updates") so donors and followers get privileged info via the site. I don't think it would be fair to them to post here as well, since that was a special perk of being a member of the site.
HOWEVER: one need not have donated to be a "follower".
If you are interested in reading my updates on this project and seeing images of the work in progress please go here and sign up as a "follower" of my project. At the top right of the page is a "sign up" button. Let me know if this doesn't allow you to follow my project as I am a bit uncertain how this works.

If I use part of a piece as a demo I will post on this blog, however as this seems the appropriate venue for that type of post.
Just to prove I mean what I say, above is a head for window #2 and below is the layers used to create the colors.

French antique blue on clear #11 (only because I can't get Lambert's light enough!!!!), An old sheet of Desag gold pink on clear (same reason its not Lamberts--which I far would prefer to be using!) and LAMBERT'S red/ cl B. Stencil black and silver stain.

this is just a test

Something I'm diddling around with in Photoshop. It is a full figure from the drawing below. Probably these wide eyed little girls have had more than their meme-day...but I can't seem to lose interest! Perhaps someone should stage an intervention. (Note to the overly literal: that was a joke.)
For goodness sakes, click on it to see it big!! All those pixels...just for yooooou!

More info than you asked for

Here is my skeddy for the next year or so as it stands today......

MARCH:
Exhibition: “History in the Making: Renwick Craft Invitational 2011”

1st floor, Renwick Gallery of the Smithsonian Institution
March 25, 2011 – July 31, 2011
“History in the Making: Renwick Craft Invitational 2011 presents the work of ceramic artist Cliff Lee, furnituremaker Matthias Pliessnig, glass artist Judith Schaechter and silversmith Ubaldo Vitali. These four extraordinary artists create works of superior craftsmanship that address the classic craft notion of function without sacrificing a contemporary aesthetic.”


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Lecture: Thursday, March 10th – 7:00 PM
THE COMMONWEALTH:
Speaker: Judith Schaechter
Topic: Blurred Horizons: Fine Art vs. Craft

Admission $5 Buy Tickets Online!
“The Philadelphia Art Alliance is pleased to present the next installment in our new flagship lecture series, The Commonwealth. On Thursday, March 10th, PAA will host Philadelphia artist and educator Judith Schaechter for a lecture entitled “Blurred Horizons: Fine Art vs. Craft”. Ms. Schaechter, a distinguished artist who has received multiple fellowships from prestigious foundations such as The National Endowment for the Arts, PEW Trust and Pennsylvania Council on the Arts, will speak about the inspiration for her modern stained glass work and examine the trajectory of craftspeople who have sought to position themselves as fine artists over the last half-century.”

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

APRIL:

Lecture:“Creativity: Surviving Challenges”
The Professional Institute for Educators
Continuing Studies | The University of the Arts
215.717.6431

“Artist Judith Schaechter will show some examples of her own intricate, narrative glasswork and will talk about approaches to creative thinking – both as an artist in studio practice and as a teacher guiding students in developing their craft and concepts.

How can new creative ideas be cultivated? The creative process is weird, elusive and ultimately unknowable. Sometimes ideas occur suddenly, sometimes they linger and sometimes there is the dreaded “block.” How can teachers in the arts help students to embrace and better understand that creativity and perseverance are essential, yet difficult? How can art teachers help students value the process of exploration to find multiple possibilities?

Schaechter has considered these questions, influenced by the Multiple Intelligences research of Howard Gardner, to explore the challenges that artists face. She developed a quiz to guide her students in the exploration and discussion of their own creativity in practice---looking at inspiration, work habits, motivation, beliefs and audience.”

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Late April/early May:
Visiting artist in residence at Australia National University in Canberra Australia. Glass Department.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

JUNE:
BeCON Conference
Bullseye Glass, Portland Oregon
I am delivering the keynote address and also teaching a one day workshop June 20th.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

OCTOBER:
Exhibition:
“Cute & Creepy” (group exhibition)
October 7 (opening date) – November 20, 2011
Florida State University Museum of Fine Arts

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

MARCH 2012:
Exhibition:
Installation of 10-15 windows at Eastern State Penitentiary!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! First major showing in Philly since 1999-ish!!!!!!!
Link to art installation program at ESP


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Upcoming (no date)
My work will be featured on skateboards by MakerUSA! I guess I should stop telling those durned kids to quit skateboarding in front of my house....
“Maker collective exists as a place where the reverence for the handmade is at the core of our mission, where an authentic life is one where inspiration and insight inform the hands and work of the artistic soul.”


As always.....my work is exclusively represented by Claire Oliver Gallery
513 West 26th Street, New York, NY 10001 / Tel: 212.929.5949 / Info@ClaireOliver.com

Say good by to Germ Books

Hey peeps who like Germ books!! Friends and fans of the fantastic David E. Williams!!

Come out and say goodbye on Monday with me! (for the record--I am NOT "co-hosting" this event--I will be there, that's all)

So sad to see this fantastic "institution" close its doors....

THE END OF GERM

A night in tribute to David E. Williams and the closing of Fishtown's legendary GERM books/gallery

Monday Jan 24 - 9pm FREE

with tributes from Radio Eris, Jon Canady, David Talento, Red Masque, the Nikola Tesla Inventors Club and more LIVE

National Mechanics

22 S. 3rd St. btween Chestnut and Market

All the Noose that's fit to print

Sorry for the lack of posting....may I plead holiday distractions?
Here's what's going on at Studio House of Rats:

1. new print "Feral Child" 60" wide....woot woot!



2. Sculpture (currently in plasticine, to be cast in glass by Steve Easton). Hey--sculpture is fun! Who knew????





3. I am writing a book. Title suggestions welcome...this is going to be five essays.

"Beauty-Inspiration-Creativity"--this incorporates the beauty essays from this blog--rewritten for the ten thousandth time. I swear...this time nailed it. yeah right!

"Craft in the Age of Digital Technology"--craft...what is it distinct from fine arts and design, why should anyone care, etc.

"This is Not a Pipe" on the notion "authenticity"--originally for a symposium at Camden Rutgers but posted here too.

"Treasure and Torture" --art and politics. Ugh. I hate politics. This was written originally to present to my UArts students in conjunction with a project they were assigned. They were tasked with responding to the "Tesoros" exhibition at the Philly PMA, an exhibition of post-colonial South American art and artifacts.

"Light, Divine and Otherwise"--stained glass and light.

So enough about me...how do you think I look?

A Call to End Media Prejudice in the Arts

I know...its not quite got the same urgency as Civil Rights or Equal Rights.... but still...

How many times have I heard critics, academics, curators, collectors, dealers and yes.... even artists, for God’s sakes, publically trotting out their ignorant and insufferable belief that working in certain media is somehow lesser than another.

SHAME ON YOU!!!!!

Critics, academics, curators, collectors and dealers: get a clue. Mediums are media. They mediate. They are the thing that’s in between the artist and the work of art...you know, the thing that really matters? Why care if the substance is glass, ceramics, oil paint, paper, poop or bubble gum? Isn’t the entire point what’s being done with it?

I have heard that glass is a ghetto. That craft is a ghetto. I was once uninvited from a speaking gig because the painting department head heard I worked in glass (she never even bothered to look at the work)!

Is it a ghetto? Well, if we insist on making it one, I suppose so.

Here is the issue that this prejudice is based on, as I understand it: “Craft is based on technique and materials rather than intellect”. OK, so I have to ask: and that’s bad and wrong why exactly? Wait—I’ll pretend to be one of these people and answer that myself:

1. Body dysmorphia: In setting up Art versus Craft as a dichotomy of mind versus body, or brawn versus brain, the body is going to be the loser because its seen as stupid, and often disgusting. Bodies are messy and make embarrassing demands. Then they die.

2. False Idol Worship: In setting up Art versus Craft as a dichotomy of materials versus concepts the material will lose because its, well...materialistic. Material seems fetishistic; overly commodifiable and it reminds us we are greedy and using up our natural resources. Concepts don’t have that problem. They are lofty and ethereal and make us look immortal and morally righteous.

2A. More False Idol Worship: In committing one’s work to a singular branch of material knowledge (i.e. being a “glass artist” or a “clay artist” etc) one is deliberately and willfully elevating material above all else at the expense of more profound content. It is a form of misguided monomania because it is believed that the materials should fit the idea and not vice versa.

3. Class Issues: In setting up Art versus Craft as a dichotomy between process and technique versus analysis and discourse, process and technique will lose because virtuosity is seen as showing off and as a performance rather than a philosophy... Skill and labor remind us a little too much of.... slavery...either in the standard sense of horrific exploitation of others or in the sense of slavish devotion—unhealthy obsession.

4. For Artists Only: there’s more money and clout in being called an artist than a craftsperson or “glass artist” or “oven mitt maker” or whatever. See above for the reasons why.

But........what's going on here?..............is this stuff true? NO!!!!!!!!...........wait for it......!!!...........These are all false dichotomies. Duh. We need to unify mind/body not banish them from one another. We need material and concept to cohere, not collapse. We need technique and analysis to be a dialectic, not a fight.

Marriage, peeps, not divorce. Stop gnawing your arms off trying to get away from what scares you cuz it ain’t going away!!!!! Deskill ALL YOU WANT; all it means is more outsourcing. Not to mention the loss of a BODY of knowledge that is irreplaceable and priceless.

A special word to artists working in craft media who insist on supporting these prejudices. THAT’S BAD!!!!!!!!!! STOP IT!!!!!! Have some effing pride for goodness sakes!

Militant Ornametnalists, unite! And don’t cow to these harmful and ignorant beliefs. Stand up for the gloriousness of your chosen profession and be happy and secure in the knowledge that devotion to materials and process are just as righteous a path to enlightenment as anything else. Just because monomaniacal devotion is out of fashion doesn’t mean you should apologize—if anything monomaniacal devotion is one of the surest paths to discovery, originality, and deep spiritual truths. And god help us if those are out of fashion.

As Louis Pasteur once famously said*: “There’s no such thing as applied science and pure science, just good science and bad science” So, if we must dispatch with stuff, can it just be the crap in any medium instead of, oh, say the whole category known as “Craft” or “Glass art”?

Can’t we all just get along?

*Actually, supposedly he didn’t really say this. Too bad, cuz it’s an awesome quote.

demoliciousness

Its been a while!
I don't want anyone to stop chatting up this blog's more arcane topics because its rockin' my world...
but here's a demo in case you are jonesing for one.

This is what this piece currently looks like on the light table. Her arms aren't done yet, that's why they are blue and not purple.

She is comprised of two layers. On the left is St. Just Blue on Clear #11. Very pale. Never underestimate how much color pale tones are in stained glass. The red is Lambert's R/cl 1001b.
About that red layer: people get freaked out about sandblasting "too much". The glass is pricey, yes, but you are paying for the layers, not the color. Sometimes you just have to be brave and sandblast like a maniac. Trust me on this.

This is the sketch (which I colorized in photoshop just for amuse myself.)

Here are some of the stages of the work: on the top left she's been sandblasted as a silhouette and I made some magic marker indications. I have done a little work with the flex shaft--but mostly I am starting to file the tones into the figure. The top middle shows a bit further along the process and the top right shows all the highlights filed into it.
The bottom row is the two firings I did of the painting. As always I use stencil black vitreous paint. I did only the two firings.

The whole bod.

This is a close up of the two layers together. She's purple now because I wiped some transparent red oil paint on her. I want to emphasize that its a teensy tinsy amount...and it has this huge effect of the color. This isn't lightfast. DON'T put oil paint on a window intended to receive UV light (that's THE SUN). This is not a technique that is appropriate for work installed in architecture.


OK--this is important so listen up!!!!!! I don't know how I want these windows to look like finished. I prefer to find out as I go. One of the things that's most important is trying things out in layers. So here are four pictures with sample layers taken from my "Bulk Failure" boxes to see what looks interesting--I'm just messing with colors and patterns here. This is crucial and one can learn a TON doing this. Don't assume you know what a layer is going to look like ahead of time. You don't! Its really amazing what happens and its a lot of fun, to boot.

It will eventually inspire the rest of the piece. Right now, I don't know who she is or why she's wearing a fishnet bodystocking that makes her look like a cheese hanging in the Italian Market. As soon as she's happy with her outer layer, I am certain she'll let me know!

Deep Thoughts

I was reading this blog by an old friend of my family’s. I was fascinated by this particular post in which he discusses the mind/brain problem. Now, I am very interested in anything pertaining to the mind/body because I would say that therein lies the dilemma, the drama, the delight of ART but I’ll get to that in a minute.

It would seem that culture has encouraged a widening of the mind/body gap that has the chasm getting bigger and bigger, like two tectonic plates determined to form continents that will be settled eventually by warring tribes. I have my theories why. To reduce them to a single sentence? I would say we despise our bodies because they DIE—best to focus on the soul which we can’t usually observe rot so we can pretend its eternal. The Industrial Revolution didn’t help with the mind/body split problem as it reinforced the idea of physical labor being the realm of the poor, the uneducated and unfortunate and entirely a separate thing from those who were rich and schooled and could live an intellectual existence and a leisurely life thinking deep thoughts. I hate that. Especially as a craftsperson. Of course, I work with my hands and I can see clearly its not just the head that is intelligent and that hand skills are a vast body of knowledge—and one our culture undervalues to the point where we are in danger of losing it altogether. Let’s see where that gets us shall we? Outsourcing, anyone? Its gonna be a bitch if society collapses or the bombs drop.

Mechanization certainly enabled us to imagine our thoughts as being entirely divorced from our senses and our physical existence. Everyone knows their soul doesn’t look nasty like a spleen. It looks like this. Or, I guess, like this! (Perhaps they could rename it the “Penile Gland”?)

OK, bear with me here—I will try to relate these concepts at some point!

Because I am evil, I asked my students at NYAA to define art. Not in the personal sense, but the universal. Cuz I’m just nutty that way, I assume commonalities—that all peoples have always made artistic stuff and I wanted the students to think about some sort of baseline definition.

I then gave a power point about the definition I came up with... which I have since decided was a bit overly wordy and I have simplified it. Before I poison you with my definition however, I shall insert an absorbing graphic so you can come to your own conclusions without the influence of my own incredibly persuasive mumbo jumbo.

OK—done? Please add it to the comments!

My universal, all encompassing definition of ART is thus: the marriage of form and content.

I have also asked my students at times, to define creativity. I define it, not as “an original idea” but as creating relationships between disparate ideas. Now if Art is the marriage of form and content its sort of the ultimate union of two incompatible ideas.

Think about language: that’s putting ideas into forms too—no wonder most of my students answered the art definition as some variation on the idea of communication. I actually think that art’s communicative power is sort of a side affect and that we have verbal cognition for a reason!! Art is no replacement. It’s more like telepathy than talking. And its very personal, one to one communication—it’s not preaching (lest it become propaganda)

So, to marry physical form to mental content sounds easy. Hahahahahahaha! Joke’s on you. Artists know that it’s damned near impossible to do in any original way or with any finesse—you non-artists try it sometime! Get back to me with pictures, please.

But my point here is that the artist is re-enacting the greatest creative connection in the universe. That of spirit to matter—content to form. Perhaps it’s why religious people can see artistic creation as being in competition with God-the-Creator. To actually, successfully turn the intellectual, the emotional, and the inspirational into a physical THING is pretty miraculous.

The aware (sometimes even enlightened) human soul is packaged in this gloppy, wrinkly object... Where do they actually connect? Where does the soul begin and the brain end? I’m guessing in that synaptic leap. If it’s something scannable then maybe someday we can diagnose artists!

It’s enough to make you religious....