[Jewelry making - Article 00554] - Re: [Orchid] Metalsmith's Exhibition in Print

[andy cooperman]

========[ Invite a Friend - http://www.ganoksin.com/invite.htm  ]========

>          you could be making pieces that are made of Styrofoam and
>     duct tape, there are some incredible examples of this genre work,
>     but you can still separate the better  done ,better thought out
>     /and meant pieces 

    I agree, that it is not the use OF the material but HOW it is used
    that is important. While I  do work, for the most part, in metal, I
    will gladly incorporate other materials into a piece  when there is a
    reason to.  In my mind, however, that material or its application
    needs to fulfill certain criteria as regards durability and
    craftsmanship.  There is no excuse for shoddy craftsmanship and I
    agree that, at times, the polarized side of the field often
    represented in Metalsmith is so hungry for concept, content and what
    has become informally known as "Smart Jewelry" that it overlooks how
    well these qualities are expressed and physically manifested.  This
    is also a problem with some galleries which are also so hungry for
    fresh , new work and materials that they will accept that which is
    poorly made and engineered.  (They further compound this problem by
    failing to educate their clients as to the differences between the
    well made and the shoddily made, and as to why price points may
    widely vary between the two....) 

    Still, it seems that part of the problem may be the need to define
    jewelry as an object made primarily out of metal.  The history of
    jewelry is full of examples of alternative materials, combinations of
    base and precious metals and the embracing of new "high tech"
    materials.  (Consider that aluminum --when it was high tech--was once
    combined with high carat gold in some extraordinary  and at the time
    expensive pieces, or that objects as fragile and ephemeral as
    butterfly wings were placed in rings.) 

    That being said, terms like "wearability" and "durability" and
    "value" are difficult to pin down. Several people have pointed out
    how "unwearable" some of these rings appear to be.  Certainly many of
    the pieces represented in the book aren't suitable for daily wear,
    but is an opal or tanzanite ring really either?  Maybe you can't wear
    a glove over some of these rings but can you slip one over a large
    cocktail ring or tall tiffany setting? How many times must a ring,
    brooch or neckpiece be worn to qualify as wearable. If the answer
    were every day I would have to take exception. Certainly some people
    wish to wear a ring every day, but should that be a requirement for
    all? Many of these rings can be seen as ritual objects made not to
    simply adorn but to affect those who put it on; to change the way
    they move or consider their hand , where they cast their eyes or to
    engender discourse. 

    I think  the fashion metaphor is a good one.  Think also of the
    automotive industry where "concept cars" are trotted out to great
    fanfare at the shows. These cars rarely enter production, but they
    are still developed.  Would this industry invest in the costs of
    design , developement  and protoyping if they didn't see concrete
    value in it (advertising aside).  Some of the ideas manifested in
    these concept cars make their way into production.  The look and
    direction of automotive design evolves, in part, due to the pushing
    of the envelope.  Why shouldn't our field do the same? 

    What is exactly weak about    "the weak ART and experimental works
    that get status of well done art by being presented in  Metalsmith."?
     What is quantifiably bad about that work?  Are finishes poor, 
    connections tenuous? Is there slop in the quality of a line?  I think
    that if we are to dismiss or simply define some work as weak or as
    "bad art" then we must describe just why the fatal flaws are. 
    Otherwise the argument comes across as bitter, petty and generated by
    fear: an argument that may in fact be valid is lost in vague rhetoric
    and overused, lazy and imprecise terms such as "bad art" and "artsy
    fartsy" 

    Respectfully,  Andy Cooperman
    coopermanjewelry.com or andycooperman.com.

    Why are people so dismissive of and--dare I say-- threatened by
    conceptual But the anger and frustration that I have sensed in recent
    posts appears to run quite deeply

____________________________________________________________________
T h e   O r c h i d   L i s t
Open Electronic Forum for Jewelry Manufacturing Methods and Procedures
____________________________________________________________________
Orchid FAQ:
~ http://www.ganoksin.com/orchid/faq.htm
Orchid Archives:
~ http://www.ganoksin.com/orchid/archive
Orchid Galleries:
~ http://www.ganoksin.com/orchid/gallery.htm
Invite a Friend:
~ http://www.ganoksin.com/invite.htm
____________________________________________________________________
Tips From The Jeweler's Bench - Article Archive
~ http://www.ganoksin.com/borisat/tip_sear.htm
The Jeweler's Selected Bibliography List
~ http://www.ganoksin.com/jewelry-books
Buy Orchid Jewelry:
~ http://www.ganoksin.com/shop
____________________________________________________________________
-Unsubscribe:
-Email: orchid-request AT ganoksin.com Body=unsubscribe subject=blank
____________________________________________________________________