This discussion has revealed that the FTC doesn't understand the realities of jewelry/beadwork.'
If there has ever been a correct statement …
I recently changed my views on this discussion which has been going
on for many months.
I do not sell my jewelry in the U.S., so whatever the FTC says is
not a concern to me and I have no interests to defend in this
discussion. But for the sake of argument and logic, here I go.
The FTC can make all the rules it wants, but is it in fact of any
importance to know that a piece is handmade? Personally, I would say
no. What matters is that a piece is well made, that it is beautiful,
ingenious - the simplest things can be ingenious - striking,
touching, and so on. But handmade? What do you buy for that? An
unique piece? There is no way in the world to be sure about it. So,
what do you buy for it? You pay, I am sure, for many hours of manual
work. But does this actually make the piece better most of the time?
If the FTC is so concerned about the quality of work in this
industry - a very good point from Lisa Orlando: it is a contradiction
to speak about industry while making up rules which can only apply to
artisans and craftsmen or so it seems, because even that is not true
- why doesn’t this organization try to enforce decent rules about
carating? After all, most people do not have a gold tester. While
there are many honest and scrupulous jewelers, there are also
dishonest ones - why not try to concentrate on them? Why is it
permitted in the USA to solder a 18 K piece with 14 K solder? There
is no reason for this which concerns metalsmithing in se. >From
reading the posts on this forum, it is clear the rules of the FTC
are illogical and off-mark. Many examples have already been given by
others. Perhaps I can add one or two. We are so technologically
determined in our thinking that we somehow think that electricity is
found in nature in such a way that it can be used by us immediately
without further manipulation. The proof? Connect a lamp to the
electricity system and it will burn. The same fallacy applies to ‘raw
materials’: if I make a piece from sheet or wire - we also call this
‘from scratch’ -completely by hand, it is ‘handmade’. Why is this so?
Buy some casting grain and try to make it into sheet so that it can
be worked on without using a rolling mill - not that silver or gold
or whatever are ever found in nature in the form of casting grain,
but you see the point. It would take loads of work and the sheet
would never be like the sheet we can purchase or make ourselves by
rolling it out. By the grace of logic, what the FTC says here is that
gigantic ovens - high tech, I’m sure - and - industrial - rolling
mills are somehow not machines, which, as a consequence, opens the
door to the argument - not actually made by the FTC, I stick to my
point from months ago - that a casting machine on the other hand is a
machine, while, of course, then again all the machinery used to make
the alloy pure and so on are again not machines. Okay, this is
enough to lethally confuse Aristotle.
This point of departure, so to speak is completely arbitrary.
Basically, a rolling of whatever size consists of two perfectly
calibrated cylindric rollers of a hard material - steel. These
rollers can be adjusted so that the opening between them increases of
decreases. With the use of force - be it manual or electrical -
softer metals can be pressed through the mill making their ga.
smaller, pressing materials together - onlay, mokume - making
surfaces smooth - inlay, etc. A casting machine on the other hand,
consists in essence of a spring. This spring, when wind up, will
provide the energy to make the crucible and the flask spin in such a
way that the metal is thrown into the cavity - or otherwise the
vacuum will create enough force as to suck air away and to give a
push to the metal also, so that this form of casting is vacuum
assisted. While the FTC does not explicitly say that castings cannot
be considered handmade, this is certainly the impression it gives. We
have been here before and it doesn’t make any sense. This argument
can be refuted line by line.
I find that the FTC has an antiquated and parochial view on
metalsmithing: when you use a file, a saw and a hammer or two to make
a piece and nothing else, it’s handmade. But since your piece cannot
be divorced from the substance it is made off, this is not actually
correct. It would only be correct if you would take a train - a
wonderful machine btw - to a location where metals can be found and
if you would buy yourself a spade, dig up all you need and so on and
so on. I don’t think that this is splitting hairs. I think it is an
important point. I think that we are losing our time discussing
whether this or that bead has been bought commercially or made by
hand, or that this stone has been faceted by hand or not, this is
absolutely not fruitful in any way. What is essential is the quality
of the piece both in metalsmithing and aesthetical terms, and for the
rest it would help a lot if the public would understand that those
who promote their pieces as being handmade actually say: ‘it is as
much handmade as a casted piece, not more and not less and pay me a
lot of money for hours of work which I could have saved by buying a
component or have casted it myself and that is as well made as the
one you see here, if not - in certain cases - better’ - this last
part is, I think, true in the majority of cases. The solution:
instead of making up nonsensical rules, the FTC has to concentrate
upon the education of the public so that people can make up their own
minds as to what constitutes well-made and beautiful pieces. If I
make a piece with tubes that I purchased and which I have soldered to
my work and it is a good piece, then it is as a good piece - at least
the tubes are perfectly straight and it didn’t cost me two hours to
draw metal and so on.
Regards,
Will