Ethics of Learning & Teaching

[leonid_Surpin]

If I am going to pay for a workshop, then I deserve to know ahead
of time what the limitations are on what I am going to be "allowed"
to do with what I have learned. That will absolutely be part of my
decision in whether to take the workshop or not! This is not to
say that I will necessarily ever teach a similar workshop - but
that I deserve to know up front if that is not permitted, so I may
decide for myself in advance whether that matters. 

I am really confused by this thread. I wonder if someone can give
some real life examples of a technique that is taught as a part of
the workshop, but nobody allowed to show it to others. I really
would like to know what it is ?

Leonid Surpin

StudioArete.com is for sale | HugeDomains

[gustavo_hoefs]

judging from the comments it seems that most are in agreement as they
tout thier behavior to be of excellent quality may i point out one
can be brimming over with class, only one problem that class can be
viewed by others to be all third class. my own personal view point or
observation is this there are too many" workshops "kind of like there
are too many "art shows " and there is money to be had and no
regulatory structure which makes it all freeforall grab at the
business. my previous point of respect for responsibility is made
obvious. here in the usa people expectantly assume that somthing
being sold is clean and safeand have forgotten to question ? what
they are purchasing. maybe that is the reason for for 16 million
pounds of beef wasted over e-coli ? or a nation wide scare over
salmonila because some one in another country washed the peppers with
swamp water stagnated with whatever !. conclusion ? we have the right
be dissapointed over feeling slighted or making mistakes, we do not
have the right to be indignant or feel cheated when nationaly in
the usa there is no regulatory structure to support the industry you
are participating in - goo

[John_Donivan]

If I am going to pay for a workshop, then I deserve to know ahead
of time what the limitations are on what I am going to be
"allowed" to do with what I have learned 

Just jerked the above from Beth’s very thoughtful post. Sometimes we
all need to just think a little bit. Chew on the quote for a minute
— Someone expects people to pay them to instruct something - and
then the payers are not allowed to use the knowlege? Cool - pay me
for a car, and I’ll just keep the car, too. Why on Earth would
anybody do that?

Keeping the distinction between technique and design in mind, I think
that this side of the issue is largely about people who don’t know a
lot about jewelry making. “There are no secrets, only unknown
things.” It’s extremely difficult for me to imagine a jewelry
technique that isn’t widely known in some circles or others. The fact
that somebody uses clay instead of wax to do some setup isn’t really
a big deal - either one will do the job, as no doubt will other
things. The more you know about jewelry, the smaller your head will
get, it’s the ones who don’t get out much that think it’s all “a
secret”. Lots of people know lots of stuff out there. If somebody
copyrights something they didn’t actually invent, that’s too bad, and
the legality must be dealt with. I will admit that I could be wrong,
but I’d go so far as to say that there is no such thing as a truly
original technique (as opposed to design) in today’s world. Look at
Castellani’s work from the mid 1800’s…Everything is there.

DonivanAndMaggiora

[Jeff_Demand1]

Because I’m not always nice and have a supply of monkey wrenches…
What about the ethics involved in using the knowledge gained in a
workshop on teaching workshops.

Paper hand outs and such are copyrighted, knowledge and ideas
aren’t. But it sure would be a bad day if one of your students had a
better basic grasp of techniques you haven’t at least 1/2 mastered.

It has been a long time since I taught a few very basic classes,
most students had 2 left thumbs but that other 2% were scary good.

Jeff
Demand Designs
Analog/Digital Modelling & Goldsmithing
http://www.gmavt.net/~jdemand

[John_Donivan]

I wrote something before, and I have a suspicion that some might get
uppity about it - the essence of it all, I think, is that many
people have a preoccupation with trees…

I understand that some less experienced may not be able to see the
forest, but let’s try - think of it as a goal if nothing else.

Technique. How things are done. When I file a ring shank to a
certain shape, I use techniques to get to that shape. The shape that
I get to is called “a design”. Technique is fundamental.

Wood, bone, shells, mother of pearl and ivory are worked with the
same techniques. They are cut with material-appropriate tools,
sanded and polished.

Soft glass (molten), liquid plastics, and clay are worked with
largely the same techniques - poured, shaped, molded, and polished
in material specific ways.

Hard glass, hard plastic (acrylic, etc.) and all lapidary are worked
in the same techniques, using material specific tools.

Metals are all worked in the same ways - sawing, drawing, rolling,
punching, filing, bending - they are just worked in material
specific ways.

And that’s just about it. Wood, glass, clay and metal are all
prehistoric, and though the methods have been refined over the
centuries and the tooling has improved it’s pretty much all been
done before by the Chinese or the Etruscans or the Egyptians or the
Mayans.

Granulation is chemical welding, Mokume is marble cake, and it’s
made by punching, grinding and rolling. Once you get it clear in
your mind that there are only a dozen processes - pouring, molding,
grinding, bending, punching, chiseling and what have you, everything
becomes clear and life gets a lot easier.

If a person wants to say, “Well look at Michael Good and all the
good stuff he’s done”, well that’s fine, he’s just hammering metal -
ask an English silversmith how to make a teapot spout… He’s
doing it his way, and yes it’s very interesting stuff, but what he’s
doing gets into design, ultimately. Technique is how a hammer and a
stake interact with each other. What is done with that is design.

The point being that there is truly nothing new under the sun.
Modern and contemporary design have brought us to a place that has
fresh things to see - people are making jewelry and items that are
fine and wonderful. But don’t ever imagine that there’s any real
technique that’s new. The fact that you like to put masking tape on
jump rings is cool, but people have been making jump rings by one
method or another for 15,0000 years or whatever and got by. Your way
is better for you, my way is better for me, let’s not argue about
it, K? I’ve made around 75,000,0000 jump rings, myself, it don’t
matter…

So. You are pouring plastic into wonderful and unique shapes. The
Egyptians did that with glass, and the Chinese did that with
porcelain. You’re casting wonderful things in metal - the Romans
perfected that, you might say “Thank You…” You’re carving gem
stones into fabulous, unique shapes - Idar Oberstein is famous, but
you could thank the Egyptians and even the Mayans for figuring that
out for you. Wood, ivory, bone? Well, you can’t even say who all
that comes from, it’s so old. Bending and pounding metal? Look no
further than the Scythians - they knew everything, long, long ago.

I’ve heard it said that teenage girls think that if they haven’t
felt it, it doesn’t exist. Jewelry is largely like that. “I’ve
discovered a new technique!!!” Well, no. You discovered it, but it
isn’t new, it’s just new to you. Techcnique is as old as time.
Design - what people do with technique - is something else entirely.

http://www.donivanandmaggiora.com

[John_Donivan]

"Honey, I didn't know you were selling your work here!" I wasn't
but somebody was. EXACT copy from one of my books, technique,
design, even finishing! 

Sounds like Lisa should go into publishing in a bigger way…

I’ll say first of all that another topic could be started about what
a “It’s MINE, ALL MINE!!!” attitude in art means in a society, but
that’s for somebody else to do… There’s a point where it’s
normal, and then there’s more than that.

Really, though - I’m not a lawyer, and don’t pretend to be. This is
actually a question in a prose style, and I might be wrong, but it’s
my understanding of things. Feel free to correct me or elaborate if
you can.

When you make a piece of art, you automatically have a copyright on
the design. I won’t go into originality now - it’s not the point.
When you write a book, that is a work of art, and it is copyrighted.
WHAT is copyrighted in the book is text and pictures - you can’t
reprint the text or the pictures. The pieces IN the pictures IN the
book are not copyrighted by right of being in the book, only the
book itself is - the stuff on the paper, the ink.

A lawyer told me in an unrelated conversation just the other day
that there is no such thing as theft in law. It is actually called
“intent to deprive”, which I bring up because much of law is about
intent. When you borrow a friend’s car meaning to return it, you
might be a lousy friend but you’re not a thief. When you decide to
just keep on going in the car, then your intent has turned you into
one. That’s my lawyer friend’s example.

So, I bought a set of plans for a storage shed - came out beautiful,
once I actually built it. They had a copyright statement -
“Reproduction of these plans for resale is prohibited…”, yes.
But I don’t have to pay a royalty on my shed, because I bought the
plans, which gives me the right to build it - the intent of the
plans is to give me the to build a shed.

So, when you put together a book that says, “Here’s how you do this,
here’s how you do that” aren’t you selling plans? Didn’t you publish
the book with the intent of having readers use the for
their own purposes? And isn’t that fact that those purposes might
include direct 100% copying out of your control?

This is where my concept of law falls down, frankly. The book is
copyrighted, and your actual pieces are copyrighted, just not
through the book copyright, and how all that interweaves with each
other and where the chips fall is something I don’t know. I will say
that I don’t think publishing a how-to book and then complaining
when people use it to how-to is very meaningfull.

But I’m also sympathetic to Lisa’s situation - this isn’t about her,
just where the law lies.

DonivanAndMaggiora

[Jeff_Demand1]

Leonid,

I am really confused by this thread. I wonder if someone can give
some real life examples of a technique that is taught as a part of
the workshop, but nobody allowed to show it to others. I really
would like to know what it is ? 

If anyone told you of a real life example they would have to kill
you

Jeff

[David_Phelps]

You cannot define the ethics of others, you can only define your
own. You cannot control the actions of others, you can control only
your own. If you don’t want someone else to teach what you teach,
either don’t teach it, teach it in a manner or setting that no one
else can, or make students sign something saying they won’t pass on
what they have learned or use it to compete with you, accepting the
fact that some may not honor their agreement with you. If you don’t
want anyone else to make a living using or teaching a particular
technique that you call your own, seems to me that the last thing in
the world you should do is to share how it is done.

As Jamie pointed out, it also seems to me that being a teacher and
at the same time trying to sell jewelry that you show others how to
make are somewhat - to very - conflicting interests, especially if
you have a tendency to want to guard your designs and techniques. If
you are going to be hurt or angry if a student becomes a competitor
by selling or teaching what you showed them how to make, why on earth
would you put yourself in that situation by charging people to show
them how you do things?

My mother-in-law owned a very successful ceramic studio and gave
lessons on a particular brush stroke technique, among many other
things. She often (like every night, she’s 85 and lives with us)
tells of a student that showed up at the 1965 Asbury Park show
selling exactly the same things she learned to make and paint by
taking several classes from my M-I-L, and selling a lot! And then she
had the chutzpah to sign up for a class on porcelain lace draping!!!
To this day I don’t understand what the problem was. My response is
always “You gave good classes and sold her good knowledge, she wanted
more. She paid you to teach her how to throw, pour, fire and paint,
what did you expect her to do with that knowledge? She should just be
happy knowing how you did it? She should just make ashtrays for
Christmas presents? I love ya Ma, but be real! Isn’t that the best
compliment you could ever get? That she was successful with what you
taught her and she wanted you to teach her more?”

If you want to be a teacher, be a teacher, and be happy when your
students have mastered and successfully use the techniques you have
shared with them. That is the goal of teaching, is it not? If you
want to be an artist and use those techniques to make a living, by
all means, be an artist. But if you are going to be an
artist/teacher, don’t expect your students not to use what you share
with them in whatever manner fits within their ethical standards,
especially if you charge them for that Not all students
pay the instructor just so they can know what the teacher knows just
for the sake of knowing. Some may actually want to use it for
something profitable and may even use it in a manner that the
instructor may not like. Seems like one of the costs of teaching to
me.

In the minds of many people, what they pay for becomes their own, to
do with what they want. Including knowledge. I wonder how well a book
would sell if it contained a statement along the lines of “This book
is for l purposes only. You can’t use the in
this book to actually make anything that looks like anything in this
book”.

My two cents.

Dave

[jennifer_friedman]

I teach jewelry design and I ask my students what they think they
are going to learn and what do they want to learn. I process that
and teach them the techniques that take them where they
want to go. If a student has a grandious idea that is greater than
their ability I take them one step at a time and give them a
technique they can learn and build upon. Baby steps to learn and get
the techniques correct.

I tell them their are shortcuts, but I don’t and won’t teach them to
a beginning student. You have to know how to correct mistakes with a
file and sandpaper before you get into a flex shaft. I know others
disagree with me, but having had students jump right into the
flexible shaft and not know how to correct their errors via a file
and sandpaper they have had extreme anxiety over the unknown and
then wanted to know why they weren’t taught.

As an instructor of jewelry design and enamelling my students will
make mistakes and I expect them to, it is the best way to learn. I
also tell them never to sell their first pieces, use them as a point
of reference for how far you’ve come.

My experience has been that I am willing to show my work to my
students, because if I don’t they won’t know what their potential
could be. I teach design elements that I use, but I want them to
create their own pieces and with my expertise I will help them get
there.

If I were to teach my students how to make a piece I made then I
can’t be upset if they want to copy it.

jennifer friedman
http://www.jenniferfriedmanstudio.com
enamelist, jewelry artisan, hollow ware,
ceremonial silver, and restoration
Ventura, CA

[Lisa_Van_Herik]

Whether you write a how-to book or teach a workshop you’ll hopefully
do it with the open intent of passing along good knowledge for your
student/readers use. Obviously, that’s why you’re in the "how-to"
world to begin with and if not, I agree, you shouldn’t do it… As an
author, I’ve been surprised at my unexpected success and delighted
to either see or hear of my student’s progress…it’s been by far
the greater part of the experience for me. It’s also been a
completely surprising experience and that’s my whole point…if
you put it out there, whether that’s via a how-to route or showing
exhibit pieces or selling your own line of jewelry, it’s too often
perceived as fair game. If there are any boundaries left out there,
they’re so blurred these days that none of us can or should expect
any rights regarding our work. That’s the reality and it’s certainly
not limited just to this industry.

Now most how-to books have a little statement in the beginning of
the book that explains to folks that they can only use the book’s
to make things for themselves but they can’t use the
for their own commercial gain. Well, you’ve just gotta
be realistic about that…folks are looking to extend their
knowlege and then use it as they want, absolutely true. But if I’d
known 10 years ago that people would create their own businesses from
my little books, you could have blown me over with a feather. That
never occured to me, never in a million years and I suppose that was
naive on my part. Frankly, I was just hoping enough people would buy
the book to cover the expenses. Would knowing that now prevent me
from writing more books? Of course not and I’d definately be more
savvy.

In any event, it’s probably best to bring this discussion back to one
of ethics and leave the legalities out of it since the law is
essentially irrelevant in this industry. One of the first things I
learned at a seminar about designing jewelry for a living was that
protecting your own copyrights would likely mean spending a lot of
your time in court. So you do your work and move on. But, geez,
guys, where does that leave us these days? Hopefully, with eyes wide
open and ethics working on our side.

[Helen_Hill]

I am really confused by this thread. I wonder if someone can give
some real life examples of a technique that is taught as a part of
the workshop, but nobody allowed to show it to others. I really
would like to know what it is ? 

I would imagine a technique such as the making of the crown or
coronet settings your boss used to make, which he took to his grave.
That may be a technique you wish might have been shared and which
would have saved you years of experimenting?

Helen
UK

[John_Donivan]

To this day I don't understand what the problem was. My response is
always "You gave good classes and sold her good knowledge, she
wanted more. She paid you to teach her how to throw, pour, fire and
paint, what did you expect her to do with that knowledge? She
should just be happy knowing how you did it? She should just make
ashtrays for Christmas presents? I love ya Ma, but be real! Isn't
that the best compliment you could ever get? That she was
successful with what you taught her and she wanted you to teach her
more?" 

I had in mind to write something more on this topic, but I’m not sure
that anybody could put the essence of this thread any better than
David did in this post…

[andy_c]

It seems that we are talking about at least two different aspects
here: Duplicating in one’s own work designs and techniques that have
been acquired in a workshop and teaching (or writing about) a
technique that one has newly acquired in a workshop.

The latter is how I believe this thread began. One question that
comes to mind then is a matter of payment or fee. Take stone setting.

Someone gave an example of their desire to advance their knowledge
of stone setting so that she may offer more advanced techniques in
their classes by taking an advanced stone setting class with Blaine
Lewis. I can’t imagine an argument that could be made against a
student applying the principles of what they learned in one of Mr.
Lewis’s classes to their own work. That’s really the point of his
classes. (I don’t believe that he teaches design in his stone setting
classes, in any case.)

But I can see an argument that can be raised against taking this
class and then proceeding to teach such a class one’s self. Forgive
me for speaking for Mr. Lewis here, but I imagine that at least part
of his income is derived from teaching these classes and selling the
accompanying DVD’s, etc. I am sure (again, forgive me Mr. Lewis) that
he delights in seeing the “light bulbs” pop on over his students’
heads as they begin to grok the and I’m as certain that
he smiles at the knowledge that his students are directly applying
what they have learned from him at their benches daily. I am not so
sure, however, how he would feel about someone teaching what he has
taught, the way he has taught it, to provide or augment their own
income.

I would not be comfortable with this. Directly using what you have
learned in a workshop or class to yourself teach a workshop or class
FOR WHICH YOU ARE BEING PAID is, in my eyes, problematic. It is,
perhaps, less so when one is offering some of these learned
techniques in the context of a larger curriculum. But to offer a
specific class or to use a proprietary project from someone else’s
class to generate income does not sit well wit me.

Take care, Andy

[John_Donivan]

You cannot define the ethics of others, you can only define your
own. You cannot control the actions of others, you can control
only your own. 

I said I wasn’t going to go further than David’s post, but this is
actually more about the bigger picture of ethics in the jewelry
business.

I am a part of a club - not a member, exactly. I became a part of
that club over many years of putting one brick on top of the next,
not just because I wanted to be a part. That’s not enough. Those
bricks could be called a really big word - Honor. The diamond and
jewelry business functions by honor, and there’s no other way that
it could function.

Being a part of that club means that I can walk into a variety of
places and walk out with 6 figures worth of goods on a signature. It
means that someone walked in a few years back with a million dollar
necklace and said, “They want the 3 carat drop changed to 5 carat”,
and just walked away. No paper, no contract, no escrow-surety
account set up, just “here ya go.” And some might think that the
next level up from me - diamond clubs and the like - are more
strict, but they actually are less strict. A handshake and a Mazel
Tov and you’re off with $3 million.

That’s how the jewelry business functions, and how it always has
functioned, is by honor. “I’m OK, you’re OK” let’s get on with it.
Again, that is earned - you can’t have it without the work. And that
also applies to design. Your design is your design, my design is my
design, we all know that, let’s get on with it. I will freely admit
that not everybody is quite so angelic about designs, but at least
we try, and we all know where the lines are. Plus we know who we are

• there are some few people here on Orchid who I know are a part of
  that, just from the words they say. I’d ship them a diamond just
  because and sleep nights.

The real point of all this is to say that there is such a world.
People may think that when they walk into my shop and demand to know
my policies and will I sign a paper that I won’t rip them off, that
they are being perfectly reasonable, and in fact they are. They are
also telling me that they are not a part of the jewelry club, and
thus I can’t trust them. That anybody has a right to demand that
classes or students or whatever can or can’t have rightful use to
intellectual property and blah, blah, blah are simply outside of the
loop.

It’s just that some of this thread has had comments like, so-and-so
demanded rights, put a page in your book that you can’t actually use
MY, MY, MY property - at least hints of it. There is a place in
jewelry where people have largely gotten over that. I know all of my
local competitors - we share things fairly freely, and we may not
all be pals but we are all cordial and lacking in suspicion and
intrigue. I’m OK, You’re OK…Honor. Family.

DonivanAndMaggiora

[bethwicker]

I have been pondering this some more, particularly after the post
about the wire beads book. As I drove across SC today (long day!), I
started thinking about other areas in which I purchase the
instructions to a “design” or “technique”, and what use I reasonably
expect to be able to put that to.

When I buy a cookbook I fully expect to cook the recipes
(instructions!) in the book. I assume that is, in fact, why the book
is published - for others to follwo the given instructions, and wind
up with what the book has told them how to make. Having made a cake
from a cookbook, I could, in fact, sell said cake and no one would
question this at all. As long as I don’t claim it as my "original"
recipe!

When I buy sewing patterns, the same goes. They are sold with the
expectation that the person purchasing the instructions, whether as
a pattern in an envelope, or in a book, or in a magazine, or online -
will then make the item show in the pattern. Again, once having make
the item, I am free to sell it or not as I choose.

Crafts books, art books - same thing. If I buy ANY book/magazine/
download with instructions it is with the full expectation that I
will then make something out of it - else why on earth would I buy
it??? Once I make it, what I do with it is entirely up to me. The
author has NO control over that, nor, in fact, do I feel they should.
If they want control that comes with the decision to NOT publicize,
in whatever way, how to make a thing.

Once I make it, I can then do what I want with it. If I did not want
to learn to make jewelry, why would I buy Joanna’s book, or Tim’s
book, or anyone else’s book? Just to look at?? And if I make it, I
can then truthfully say it is handmade by me, and sell it or give it
or throw it away - whatever I choose to do! To say, or expect,
otherwise is ridiculous!

Where I have the real problem is with someone copying something
exactly, and passing it off as their original creation. That just
plain stinks.

I tend to have the opposite problem - I start morphing a technique
into my own sometimes during a workshop, which can disconcert some
presenters - they expect everyone to follow the exact same path, and
I take off on my own… Because personally, I buy a book or take a
workshop to learn a technique, not a specific design. I AM an artist,
which means I have plenty of original designs scrambling around my
head trying to get out! I just need to acquire the techniques needed
to bring them to life.

This has certainly been an eye-opening thread!

People seem to be doing things it would never have occurred to me
they would do…

Beth in SC who is very glad that the folks who write books and give
workshops are willing to share their knowledge!

[Milt_Fischbein_Jewel]

Dave

If you want to be a teacher, be a teacher, and be happy when your
students have mastered and successfully use the techniques you
have shared with them. That is the goal of teaching, is it not? 

I could not have said it better myself. The whole purpose of
teaching is to pass your knowledge on to others. If students have
mastered the techniques you taught them well enough to teach it
themselves, then, as a teacher, you have really accomplished your
ultimate goal!

Regards
Milt

[King_Jamie]

Lisa,

Now most how-to books have a little statement in the beginning of
the book that explains to folks that they can only use the book's
to make things for themselves but they can't use the
for their own commercial gain. 

I was shocked to read that how-to books would try to restrict usage
to hobby-use only. I never heard of this. I have over 50 books in my
metalworking library, published from 1923 through 2007. I couldn’t
find such statements in ANY of them. However, it was interesting to
note that the earliest books restricted “reproducing the contents”
of the books. Later books added restrictions on “electronic
reproducing” and sometimes added disclaimers on safety matters. The
latest books restricted reproduction by any method “now known or to
be invented,” included broad disclaimers on safety and disclaimers to
all methods and techniques described in the book. It appears that
rather than trying to restrict how the knowledge can be used by the
reader, the authors (or maybe the publisher) is more interested in
being relieved from all liability.

The best that I found was in the book Metal Technic, Edited by Tim
McCreight, where the last sentence of the copyright reservations and
extensive disclaimers states, “Have a nice day.” Someone has a good
sense of humor.

Jamie

[leonid_Surpin]

I would imagine a technique such as the making of the crown or
coronet settings your boss used to make, which he took to his
grave. That may be a technique you wish might have been shared and
which would have saved you years of experimenting? 

I would agree with you 30 years ago, but now I think that it is
better that way. My coronets are different from his and it was not
intentional. It happened by itself. Some techniques cannot be taught,
but must be discovered over again. Coronet is one of such techniques.
There are several approaches possible and which one would be
successful for a particular individual depends on individual
abilities. What works for me may not work for you, and only
experimentation can reveal the “right” way.

But if I were to teach a workshop on coronet, I would insist than
any participant popularize the technique as wide as possible. It is
almost extinct now. And it is a real shame, because nothing enhances
a
stone as well as coronet.

Leonid Surpin

StudioArete.com is for sale | HugeDomains

[jbin1]

Andy,

I would not be comfortable with this. Directly using what you have
learned in a workshop or class to yourself teach a workshop or
class FOR WHICH YOU ARE BEING PAID is, in my eyes, problematic. It
is, perhaps, less so when one is offering some of these learned
techniques in the context of a larger curriculum. But to offer a
specific class or to use a proprietary project from someone else's
class to generate income does not sit well wit me. 

I completely agree. If one needs to attend a workshop to learn how
to preform a particular technique then how in the world can they then
turn around and present themselves as qualified to teach this same
technique? Now if they are to take that technique and use it and
develop their skills in it over a period of time and then develop
their own curriculum from the ground up that is a different story.
But that takes time and work, how much and how long that will depend
on the individual. The concept that the act of taking a workshop or
even a series of workshops qualifies one to then teach that subject
as a workshop is ludicrous.

I also agree that a teacher who is presenting a ongoing class in say
a community art center or similar venue could introduce techniques
learned in a recently attended workshop as icing on the cake.
However to take those techniques and focus a major amount of teaching
time on them would become questionable in my mind.

People come to a workshop or class expecting that the teacher
possesses skills and knowledge of a sufficiently advanced level to
qualify them to teach. Attending a workshop does not raise ones
skills or knowledge to that necessary level.

Jim

James Binnion
@James_Binnion
James Binnion Metal Arts

HOME

360-756-6550

[John_Donivan]

I also tell them never to sell their first pieces, use them as a
point of reference for how far you've come. 

I still have the first piece I ever made, almost 40 years ago. A
piece of nephrite jade in a silver ring made in my father’s garage
from reading books, using garage tools - slip joint pliers…

DonivanAndMaggiora