1000...ummmm....Rings

Jewelry Discussion
19

[Big rant]

Wow. I am utterly flabbergasted at some of the…I can’t put this
any other way…blinkered responses I’m seeing here, and from people
whose work and whose intelligence I hold in high esteem. And I
thought I was a stick-in-the-mud when it comes to “conceptual”
jewelry…

I love the “500/1000 whatevers” books, and it surprises me that
anyone could get so flexed over their mere existence. As I see it,
the goal of “1000 Rings” is simply to give 1000 examples of how
contemporary jewelers have answered the question, “What is a ring?”
Clearly, there is going to be a huge range of responses to this
question; some will be traditional, some avant-garde, some serious,
and some silly. There’s nothing wrong with that. Search my posts in
the archives and you’ll find me kvetching about objects that are
only called rings because you can stick a finger in them, but I think
that, considering the goal of the book to represent the entire
spectrum of “ringness,” they had to be included.

It is shameful to say that all the rings in this book are worthless
pieces of schlock, or “landfill jewelry,” or whatever. Look at the
back cover, where there’s a ring in high-carat gold with cabochon
stones and beautiful granulation, all quite traditional (heck,
downright ancient). Check out the interlocking wedding set by Anneli
Tammik on page 54, the technically demanding and gorgeous Moebius
ring by Klaus Spies on page 59, or the mindblowing assemblage of
teeny gold components by Cathy Chotard on page 72…the list could
go on and on. These are not gimcrack; they’re innovative,
well-executed, beautiful rings that took a lot of time and skill to
create, and these artists deserve a hell of a lot better than to
have their work dismissed as trash.

If you want a book with more textual content, say a book that
describes different techniques used in making rings, there are plenty
of those. That’s not the purpose of the Lark books. I return to them
again and again to get me unstuck when I find myself short on ideas,
and I’ve probably been just as inspired by some of the “WTF” rings as
by the “Wow, that’s gorgeous” rings.

People come up with different ideas. Don’t fight it. Enjoy it.

[End of big rant. For now.]

Jessee Smith
www.silverspotstudio.com
Cincinnati, OH

20

The reason I really like 1000 Rings is because of its diversity, and
because there are some REALLY BEAUTIFUL rings in it!

Every time I flip through the book, which is how I like to read this
one, I discover something new and provocative. I find beautiful
jewelry, clever solutions, new spins on old ideas and lots to think
about. Of course, some are more appealing to me than others. And
while there are items I do not particularly like at all, there are
many more that speak to me in some way.

Here are a few of my favorites:

Helfried Kodre on page 157 - for its graceful drama
Etsuko Sonobe on page 164 - for compartmentalism
Christopher C. Darway on page 166 - form meets function
Fernando DeLaye Villalever on page 175 - recycling meets geometry
Kim Buck on page 208 - surprise and simple beauty
Manuel Vilhena on page 212 - for drama and surprise
Abrasha on page 221 - for its precision aesthetic

Just to name a few…

What about you?
Which ones do you like?
Why?

Alan

Revere Academy of Jewelry Arts, Inc.
760 Market Street, Suite 900
San Francisco, California 94102 USA
tel: 415-391-4179
fax: 415-391-7570

21 
The reason I really like 1000 Rings is because of its diversity,
and because there are some REALLY BEAUTIFUL rings in it!

I’ll happily second that. Whatever I may think of some of the
entries in it the simple truth is that I’ve opened that book at least
100 times and I’m no where close to being finished with it yet. Like
Alan, every time I look I learn and that’s makes this book, and the
500 Broaches which I bought because I found 1000 Rings so worthwhile,
well worth the few dollars I paid for them.

As I read the replies to the original question coming in I see a
very good answer to that question: look at the debate it, and of
course the contents of the book, spark. Look at the thoughtful and
varied contributions it elicits from our fellow readers. Imagine how
many similar discussions have taken place around the world because of
this book. How often does that happen, never mind from something that
costs less than a good bicycle tire? If I was anyone associated with
that project, editor or contributor, I’d be pretty chuffed. Love the
individual items or not the book is obviously a job well done.

As to apologizing for being critical of some of those individual
contributions I’m a whole lot less enthusiastic. Back in my
university days I had a photography prof who used to say something
like “if you love it or hate it, it’s good art. It’s when you don’t
feel anything that it has failed.” Ok, it doesn’t sound quite like
quite the uniquely piercing insight that it did 25 years ago but I
think the point is still a worthy one.

I for one don’t believe there’s anything at all wrong with looking
at something and saying “WTF?!? Look at that piece of rubbish! How
dare they?”. As with so much modern art that may be exactly what the
artist intended, more or less and in one way or another, and insofar
as that goes they’d clearly done a good job.

As to whether you, me, or anyone else would actually pay money for
said object is probably missing the point by a pretty wide margin
but denying ourselves the right to be critical is detrimental to
everyone, artist and observer alike. To love, cherish and adore
everything equally is just as destructive in the end as it is to
hate, loath and despise everything equally. Real life is a meandering
journey back and forth between those two extremes and that’s a large
part of what makes it, and this book, so damned interesting!

Cheers,
Trevor F.
in The City of Light
Visit TouchMetal.com at http://www.touchmetal.com

22

So I was just about to retire, to sleep per chance to dream, and
something came into my awareness from reading the posts about the
books, 500 or 1000 whatevers. And I thought “What if we as human
beings could see what was represented in these publications as the
diversity of our creativity, that we observe, but let go of judgement
and criticism and have a recognition of space that we share where
creativity resides.” “What if we celerbrate the creativity and the
ability of others to express themselves in ways that we do not
understand, as we sometimes do not understand our own motive for what
we create (which sometimes might be challenged by our own friends,
families, ect.).”

And now, a word from our sponsor…Molecular Inc., subsidiary of
Blinding Light Corp.

Richard Hart

23 
What if we as human beings could see what was represented in these
publications as the diversity of our creativity, that we observe,
but let go of judgement and criticism and have a recognition of
space that we share where creativity resides." "What if we
celerbrate the creativity and the ability of others to express
themselves in ways that we do not understand, as we sometimes do
not understand our own motive for what we create (which sometimes
might be challenged by our own friends, families, ect.).

This is all well and good, but as human beings it is natural for us
to each have our own personal likes and dislikes. If we did not, all
jewelry would look the same and there would be no variation at all.
One should not be berated for having a different opinion than someone
else,. True diversity is I have my opinion and you have yours. What
is landfill jewelry to me is not to you and vice versa.

24

Hello, Richard,

I don’t deny the fact that there are some fine rings in the book.
But 1000 fine rings ? Maybe 100. Most remind of me of those high
school art projects we used to do. IMHO.

Brian

25

Before this goes much further, I urge all re-read posts of two years
ago about the SNAG Exhibition in Print. The row went on for weeks and
weeks. Art jewelers and luxury jewelers said some very unpleasant
things to each other (not all, but some, and some of those were
especially hurtful).

Marya

26

“1000 Rings” was our most recent acquisition in this series. We
started with “500 Brooches” early last year, got “500 Bracelets” at
Christmas as a gift to ourselves and very recently ordered and
received “1000” from our local, independent purveyor of books. Why:
because we like eye-candy and these books are full of it… eye-candy
that is.

If I wanted to purchase an academic treatise on the creation and
manufacture of said objects I’m sure we could find them somewhere at
some astronomical price tag and I know for a fact that I would not
enjoy that near as much as I do grabbing one these 500/1000 books and
just browsing for a moment and getting my mind stretched.

Exercise for the brain is a good thing too.

Cheers,
and now for something completely different… jewelry
Cynthia & David Ryder
http://www.mboot.net

27 
True diversity is I have my opinion and you have yours. What is
landfill jewelry to me is not to you and vice versa.

We are not our likes and dislikes, as we change over time, so do our
likes and dislikes. I am sorry you missed the point…it was not
about diversity, it was about creativity, and the ability to
recognize that which we share rather than that which separates us
and alienates.

It seems it is so much a part of the fabric of the society we are
apart of, as in the ability of the youth of our culture to know
specifically what is wrong with them rather what right. We are from
a culture of judgment and criticism.

My “opinion” from my observation is that our youth have quite
sophisticated knowledge and opinions, but sometimes it makes me
laugh as they do not have experience or life skills. They just
regurgitate info that comes from advertising or what they heard
someone say. The more expensive it is, the better it is in their
eyes. They want a Ferrari, not a Mercedes or BMW, although they have
not driven any of them.

When we see an image we react to, is it the content in the image, or
in our perception, or possibly where we are in our life experience,
as our ability to relate can change as our life experience changes
us. There are things I did not relate to or understand when I was
younger, that these things when I experience now have a different
meaning or context.

Each ring represents something about each person that created each
ring. What is the relationship between what our opinion of the piece
is to the experience of the person who made it? The person who made
it is reduced to our opinion as limited as we are in our perception.

IMHO
Richard Hart

28 
This is all well and good, but as human beings it is natural for
us to each have our own personal likes and dislikes.

It is certainly true that we all have opinions and should express
them. Criticism is important in the craft and art worlds and can be
invaluable to any one who makes their living with their hands and
minds.

What I think that people, myself included, were responding to in
questioning the negative responses to the Ring book was the
dismissive and somewhat bitter tone that some of these negative posts
have taken. This same tone has appeared before on Orchid in some
posts concerning Art, Artist’s statements, Exhibition in Print,
Metalsmith and SNAG.

Again, all opinions are valuable. It would be helpful, perhaps, if
when expressing dislike for a publication or a maker’s work that
specific reasons be stated to support such criticism. It seems to me
somehow lazy and small minded to dismiss work as simply “land fill
jewelry”.

Respectfully,
Andy Cooperman

29 
Wow, where did this thread go??

My implying that we are a totally different audience (within Orchid)
was not a mistake, Orchid is open to the public. Lack of wording on
my part, rushed response. But I do think the majority of Orchidians
are makers and not a majority of consumers. Still, the book appeals
to everyone - it is on my coffee table - but the readers (here
anyway) see what their looking for or what they understand. Every
time I open it my mind is seeking something new whether it be cold
connections to just plain discovery, but right now I’m in a technical
frame of mind. In that sense it’s new browsing every time; it can’t
all be absorbed in one sitting. My 8 y/o loves the label rings and
hates page 115. She thinks the pets look trapped so doesn’t open that
page (TG). And about those fuzzy rings. Bravo to that artist! Isn’t
that the point? To be the ring that sticks in my mind after glancing
at 1000?

By human nature, I’m most awestruck by the things I haven’t done or
cannot do; like sing an aria or break a marathon tape without
bursting in from the side and getting arrested. I absolutely love
anything that makes me pause and ask, “How’d they do that?” or
anything that shows a sign of being handmade, handforged. I suprised
myself last week at being so excited to find a street sweeper
bristle, holding a world of potential in my hand.

The pages in this book that I’m awestruck by aRe: 68, 72, 124, 153,
185, 207, I could go on…and the next train of thought will bring
about a new list of pages. What I got most out of this book?
Permission.

Jaye

BTW, Giotto di Bondone won his first commission by painting a simple
red dot. Look see where that confidence took him.

30

Is there anyone who has seen 1000 rings that would critique their
work in relationship to what is portrayed in 1000 rings? Compare
craftsmanship, design, concept? Where are you pushing the envelope
with your work?

When you see the images, is there one ring that makes you jealous?
Any that make you feel like you should put away your torch?

Would it not be interesting if we could see the work of those who
have criticized the book?

I am thinking it would be really interesting. Maybe this forum could
evolve to posting pictures and inviting crriticism. Anyone brave
enough? We do this inadverdantly by posting in the gallery, but I am
talking about inviting feedback.

There are people of vision, and people who copy or imitate. Do you
know truthfully which you are?

I am much better at giving criticism than taking it. I have a few
posts on this forum that prove that.

Part of the validity for me being critical is for me to be as
objective as I can about how what I do relates in comparision to
what I am criticising. where do I need to be, feel, hear, see to
understand where I am?

la la la la la, cha cha cha

Richard Hart

31

I bought a copy quite a while back, and I’m glad I did.

To know what a ring is requires very little effort to learn. To learn
what a ring can be, now there’s a leap, hence “1000 Rings”. My
exposure to coursework in 2D and 3D design, by the wonderful N.A.U.
faculty, gave me the tools to appreciate the non-representational.

A colleague once voiced his sneer at a piece in a magazine. The
piece featured a large triangular slab of opalescent material
surrounded by 3 different all rounds (probably a half
pearl, a brilliant-cut emerald, and a cab garnet).

Here was my avenue. I told him that the disparate round stones, by
virtue of their roundness, contributed to a unified whole, as did
the arc of gold backing the slab. The triangular opalescent slab
created the necessary visual tension to “make you look” yet was
balanced by all the surrounding round elements.

Pretty good for a well-read redneck, huh?

Dan Woodard, IJS

32

Jaye,

What I got most out of this book? Permission.

Awesome statement. I love the way you put that!

I too own this book and every time I open it I see something new and
exciting, even if it’s the same page I looked at this morning. Pieces
that I didn’t like last week, I totally dig today. It’s a crazy book.
It tells us all that the sky’s the limit- whether or not you like
every ring in the book, it doesn’t matter. Does everyone like
Picasso? Does everyone like every single thing he’s ever done? And
nobody tells us we have to. Art is subjective.

I see jewelry all the time that I know I should like, but I don’t.
It doesn’t mean I think they are garbage, it’s just not my style. It
doesn’t mean I can’t appreciate the style, technique, talent,
imagination or sheer wackiness.

Could you imagine if everyone made jewelry that we all liked? Yuck.
How boring life would be. Gosh, could you imagine if you liked every
single piece you made?

-Amery (God, I love this forum!)

33

I find this book really interesting. I keep looking at the pictures
again again and again. I always discover something new that I didn’t
notice before. I like the fact that there is no text with the pieces
but just the description and how it was made.

I find normal and human that all of us don’t like every single ring
in this book. It means that they did a good job, they are showing a
wide range. It is impossible to make a book with 1,000 rings and to
have everyone to like every single one of them. In a matter of fact
even if they had done the same book with only 100 rings or 10 rings
the problem would have been the same I studied contemporary Jewelry
in Europe so I completely understand what some of the Designers are
trying to do and to show. Sometime showing just one ring of each
Artist doesn’t work, but when you see a complete serie of ring from
the same Artist it makes sense. Jewelry doesn’t have to be precious
metal and genuine stones we all know that. A metro ticket and a
paper clip could make a great piece of jewelry, if done right.

Jewelry is Art. So like Art some will like it and some will not.
When I look at a Picasso or a Kandinski I am not sure I get it, but
I still have emotions and feeling…That’s what count. Even if I
feel disgusted or shocked, at least this piece made me feel
something.

I have the 1000 ring book and the 500 bracelets. I am planning on
buying the one about the brooches.

David Kopp

34

I spent 30 minutes looking at the 1000 rings book last week with a
friend, also a goldsmith and jewelry designer. We both found it very
engaging. We had an insightful discussion of which pieces we liked
and why and how they affected us. 30 minutes was only enough time to
see a very small slice of the whole pie.

I saw beautiful work which was very effective from a design
standpoint, work which was skillfully executed, work which was
imaginative, creative, playful, insightful, work which was well made,
work which was thought provoking. I also saw some work which didn’t
resonate with my preferences but that is just a personal issue,
easily resolved by the turn of a page.

There is truly something for everyone here, or should be. If anyone
looks through it and can’t find anything which excites or stimulates
or provokes them then I would have to wonder “why not?”

It is all a matter of perspective; some folks choose to see what
they like, some folks choose to see what they dislike. Personally I
feel the former is more productive.

Michael David Sturlin
www.michaeldavidsturlin.com

35

I have to agree with Andy Cooperman and with his appraisal of
criticism. It is a very valuable part of the creative process but
only helpful when it is specifically addresses aspects of the work
that need attention.

I thoroughly enjoy the 500 / 1000 book series as eye-candy, and they
have done a lot to promote the alternative jewelry market. But my
concern with the genre is, will these books now codify what
"art-jewelry" is supposed to be?

I saw a few too many
plain-band-with-a-stick-and-something-plopped-on-top-of-the-stick
kind of rings in the 1000 Ring book. At least 5 by different artists.
Certainly, 5 out of 1000 is a small percentage, but… Is the jurist
for the book trying to tell us that this form of ring treatment is
the quintessential “art-jewelry” ring?

So all any future jewelry student who wants to be taken seriously as
an “art-jeweler” needs to do is take a plain band, solder a wire to
it, then plop something on top of the wire?

Should that be a project for Art Jewelry magazine? If so, who wants
to write it? ;~}

Nanz Aalund
Associate Editor / Art Jewelry magazine
21027 Crossroads Circle / Waukesha WI 53187-1612
262.796.8776 ext.228

36 
When you see the images, is there one ring that makes you jealous?
Any that make you feel like you should put away your torch?

Good question, Richard. There are many, many rings in that book that
make me jealous. Far from feeling like I should put away my torch,
those are the ones that motivate me to work hardest.

The best are the ones that make me say to myself, “I can do that,
but I haven’t yet. I need to get a move on…”

Maybe this forum could evolve to posting pictures and inviting
crriticism. Anyone brave enough?

I’m all for it! (Been meaning to send in pix for a gallery page, but
there’s that “get a move on…” thing again.) The idea takes me back
to the halcyon days of college, and the “crits” that were a feature
of many of my art classes, and even some of my writing classes. I
loved them. With a matur= e and intelligent group of students who were
“big enough” to take some constructive criticism, as well as praise,
the crits helped everyone grow. Don’t get me wrong; I love having my
work praised, but perhaps the most valuable comments are things like,
“This element is maybe a bit out of balance with the rest of the
composition,” “That bezel could use some tidying,” or even the
dreaded “Are you finished with that part yet?”

The down side to all that is that some folks don’t know the
difference between useful criticism and nitpicking or put-downs,
whether they’re on the giving or receiving end. I was surprised to
learn that at my alma mater, some art professors have stopped doing
crits because the students were taking them too seriously and getting
their feelings hurt - students were literally in tears over these
things! This has been attributed to the constant praise that was
heaped upon these kids in their formative years as educators tried
to boost self-esteem with copious and often meaningless rewards -
“Yay! You showed up for T-Ball practice! Here’s your trophy!” It was a
terrible thing to do to those kids, as they’re now as defenseless as
snails without shells.

All pedagogy aside, I wonder if such open criticism would work in
the context of this forum. I certainly think we should try it - I’ll
volunteer when I get my page up - but it’s going to be hard to avoid
hurt feelings and misunderstandings, especially without the
tone-of-voice and gestural elements present in a face-to-face
meeting.

la la la la la, cha cha cha

Shave and a haircut, my two bits,

Jessee Smith
www.silverspotstudio.com
CIncinnati, OH

37

Good morning Nanz.

I saw a few too many
plain-band-with-a-stick-and-something-plopped-on-top-of-the-stick
kind of rings in the 1000 Ring book. At least 5 by different
artists. Certainly, 5 out of 1000 is a small percentage, but... Is
the jurist for the book trying to tell us that this form of ring
treatment is the quintessential "art-jewelry" ring? So all any
future jewelry student who wants to be taken seriously as an
"art-jeweler" needs to do is take a plain band, solder a wire to
it, then plop something on top of the wire?

Your remarks sparked something for me. My following comments are a
personal observation.

plain-band-with-a-stick-and-something-plopped-on-top-of-the-stick
kind of rings

This reads like a formula to me, as well. However, the image that it
brought to my mind is the “classic” solitaire diamond ring.

My observation is that in our society this form of ring treatment
has been codified as the quintessential or perfect example of a ring.
Specifically, an “engagement” ring.

This is my personal take on the subject and reflects my own taste
and style. I recognize that there are many for whom the basic code or
formula “works” and I respect their right to that choice.

It is again my observation that this same code or formula is a
take-off point for many variations, flights of fancy and expressions
of a more artistic bent. This prospect is what makes my world go
round, lights my fire, keeps me hummin’ and is my personal raison
d’=EAtre. Viva la difference!

I have not seen the ring book yet but I expect that I will
eventually acquire the entire series.

Pam

  • in gorgeous springtime Arizona where the air is filled with the
    romantic scent of orange blossom and I take poetic license with
    recipes and jewelry design and…

I will soon be “plopping” my engagement diamond from 37 years ago
into a platinum head on one of a pair of mokume gane bands that my
husband and I will wear to commemorate those first years and to
celebrate those that remain.

Pam Chott
www.songofthephoenix.com

38 
Jewelry is Art. So like Art some will like it and some will not.
When I look at a Picasso or a Kandinski I am not sure I get it, but
I still have emotions and feeling...That's what count. Even if I
feel disgusted or shocked, at least this piece made me feel
something.

If you felt something, then you did “get it.” That’s exactly what an
artist does; they translate what is unsayable by most people. It’s
like a dream you may have had but could not put into words to
describe it. An artist seems to have the ability to connect the
otherside to this side and express it. To some that “dream” may seem
like a nightmare, but the bottom line is that

they made you feel something. Two books on Kandinsky (one of my
favorite artists) that may interest some of you who would like to
learn more are: ArtBook Kandinsky by DK publishing and Kandinsky by
Hajo Duchting (a Taschen publication who also has one on Salvidor
Dali)

Marta