The Ganoksin Project -  Jewelry Manufacturing Methods and Techniques - Since 1996

Come and join your fellow jewelers on Facebook

If you believe in what we're doing, you can help!
Orchid Message Archives
RE: [Orchid] LJ, Metalsmith, and other magazines
-> Navigate by Topic: [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
-> Navigate by Date: [Message Prev] [Message Next]
-> Locate this message on the Date Tree or Thread Tree

George Fox Tuesday, November 04, 1997
========[ Invite a Friend -  ]========

    hi douglas, you're input on this thread has certainly livened
    things up. her e are further comments and opinions:

>        Yes, exposed joints and the like my form part of the piece,
>     but I would maintain that these are far from shoddy
>     craftspersonship, and part of an artists repertoire of skills
>     and tools.  

    we agree. i didn't mean otherwise.

>        I think that perfect is different from flawless; a scuffed
>     patinated surface with discoloured bits may be perfect for the
>     ring I hold in front of me; it probably won't work for most
>     wedding bands.

    yes, certainly flawless is different than perfect. i don't want
    to insinuate any meaning into you're comments that aren't meant,
    but what i meant by this comment 'i aspire to' doesn't imply,
    nor do i believe that i achieve flawless or perfect. i can
    acheive perfect in the sense that you are discussing it, but i
    believe  flawless and perfect can only truly be acheived by
    nature and spirit.

>        See, personally I find Bruce Metcalf's work boring and
>     somwehat trite; I also believe that he attempts to make far too
>     much of the supposed art/craft split, among other things.

    respectfully, i don't agree with your opinion, bruce metcalf has
    solid original concepts which he expresses very well through his
    work and his writing from what i've observed in ms. for me he is
    readable and understandable consistently. whatever he chooses to
    discuss, computer design, quality of work, etc.,  is usually
    clear about what he thinks and opines. this is a lot more than i
    can say of some artists statements. i,m not saying i agree with
    all that he says, but his language is colloquial.

>        Now the question of the existence of the soul is not
>     exclusivly theistic, I don't think. It is the thinker that
>     makes us aware of the thinking. Watching is misleading, as it
>     implies externality. We are all there is ( as far as soul/god
>     stuff goes) and that is more than enough for me. I find that
>     life is magical in and of itself, without the need to look for
>     outside causeation of salvation.

    wonderful that this works for you! if you feel a need for
    salvation, there is nothing wrong for finding salvation within
    ones ownself.  the key words you may have missed are, '*inside*
    of us that is watching', this doesn't have any implication of 
    externality. it can not be external if it is inside of us.  you
    are corrrect, that the soul is not exclusively theistic, because
    our own selves and actions are involved in it, but even the soul
    concept wouldn't exist without theism. thanks for the

best regards,

geo fox

Click to Visit

Bookmark and Share Printer View Printer View
Orchid Resources:


Donate! If you believe in what we're doing, you can help!