Jewelry as expression beyond wealth and status

Jewelry Discussion
21

Hi Gabriel:

Jivan Astfalk has published and lectured widely about semiotics as
a lens to view jewelry through. I wonder if this is who Brian was
talking about?

No, I was having flashbacks to slogging through Derrida, Foucault,
and the rest of the French school. My hope is that they make more
sense in French than they do in translation. That, and gradschool
arguments with devotees of the French school who – I suspect –
didn’t entirely grasp the concepts. Talk about tempest in a teacup.
Makes me really glad to be done.

I haven’t been paying any attention to the subject for the past 10-15
years or so. This Astfalk person sounds interesting, if a bit opaque.
I’ll dig into her when I get a chance.

Regards,
Brian.

22 
Look into semiotics and material culture, but beware that the
semioticians in particular are a precious little bunch

I guess I’d heard the word “semiotics” but I didn’t know what it
meant - good ol’ Wikipedia. I especially liked this quote from
SaussuRe:

“Since it does not yet exist, one cannot say for certain that it
will exist. But it has a right to exist, a place ready for it in
advance.” Waiting for Godot, I suppose… ;

23 
to see a critic holding forth about the hidden meanings behind one
of my pieces. Totally wrong, of course, but just try to convince
her of that.

Brian’s story about a blowhard is right on. I thought of another good
example, too - of course there’s are a great many. “Citizen Kane” is
the quest for the meaning of the word, “Rosebud”, which is Kane’s
last word on his deathbed. Along the way it’s more than just that.
And it’s not criticism, it’s an earnest search for the meaning of his
last word. "It must be of great importance, else why would he make it
his last breath? Of course, in the end we (but not the movie
characters - it’s lost to them for ever) discover it’s simply a fond
remembrance of a childhood toy and times past. Ooooolllllllldddd
movie, so I assume nobody minds hearing the ending. Sure, the toy is
a symbol of innocence lost and yada-yada-yada, all of which is
obvious. It’s not the keyword to unlock the secrets of the lost
temple hidden under the house.

People defy convention and categorization- many do it willfully and
actively. Just because a black cat crossed your path and you broke
your leg looking at it doesn’t mean it’s bad luck for the world. It’s
not to suggest that intellegent study of how people work is bad or
doomed. You just have to have your head on straight to begin with, or
you’ll get lost in what is actually yourself.

24

Brian,

My point as relates to the symbology of jewelry, is simply to
beware of complicated theories. The more complex and intricate the
theory, the less probable it becomes.

A worthy warning.

The practical reasons behind my inquiry are the simple fact that I
must justify that jewelry does indeed act as personal expression, a
statement of an inner quality that is placed into the outside realm
for communicative purposes, much like the recent theories of emotion
being about external communication.

My work functions within this framework as does a good cross section
of recent work within the jewelry field, I think.

Finding a ‘proper’ academic source for a reference has become quite
difficult.

I am realizing that to be able to reference visual concepts speaking
socially functions more than theorectical postulations! But the
theories prove my ‘critical thinking’ ability. But as the previous
sentence demonstrates: You can critically think your way out of the
theories!

I do thank everyone for their points of view. Each sends me in a
different direction and this is good. I have my center but is it the
sun or the earth? So I am open to all new directions.

Rae

25

I completely agree with Brian Meek - critics, art books, etc, should
be taken with a large dose of salt! I have an MFA - in the US this
is the equivalent of a PhD in studio art.

What does this really mean, other than that I am considered
qualified to teach at the college/university level? It means I can BS
with the best of them!

The biggest thing I learned in my MFA studies at Cranbrook Academy
of Art and at USC-Columbia, was that it was all about the talk, not
the walk. Its a game - you have to know the game, and decide how/if
you want to play the game. Quite an eye opener for one who was purely
interested in the process of creating!

I’ll never forget my first review of work (done at the end of each
semester at USC), when my husband and I, at the time VERY poor, had
hoarded money and gone to a frame-it-yourself shop (at the time I
was into printmaking and papermaking), and carefully matted and
framed all my pieces for the review. The professors came into my
studio, and proceeded to spend the entire review debating between
themselves whether my work should or should not have been presented
framed. Period. Absolutely NO discussion of the actual work at ALL!
Just blew me away.

So, having finally figured out “the game”, I never framed another
piece, and made sure I had plenty of BS ready. Got my degree with
flying colors. And proceeded to go out and create, and not worry
about the BS again - unless, of course, I’m in a situation where I
need it - in which case that degree in BSing comes in handy !

Beth Wicker in SC where is it spring, but still entirely too cold at
night - still in the 30’s and 40’s, boo-hiss!

Three Cats and a Dog Design Studio

http://bethwicker.ganoksin.com/blogs/

26

As a maker of body jewelry, I can safely say “Yes!” to your
question. Anything that makes an individual stand out as owning
something unique to them is adornment, and there is a whole section
of the pierced subculture that really values hand crafted one of a
kind pieces.

LJ

27

HI Rae:

Just remember to periodically try to rephrase whatever theory you’re
reading or having into plain English.

One of three things will happen:

(A) you’ll describe your theory in w ords that a non-specialist can
understand. (which is good) or…

(B) You’ll discover that the theory cannot be reframed into non-
specialist terms, which should make you very suspicious. Or…

© You’ll discover that the theory can be rephrased into normal
English, and it’s gibberish.

Whichever way, the exercise of trying to rephrase the theory will
force you to become intimately familiar with it.

There are times when one writes with specialist terms, on the
assumption that the audience will know them, and because it saves a
lot of explanatory buildup, and this is OK. It should always be
possible to do the explanatory writing however, and the theory
should survive with its internal logic intact.

Specialist terms are just shortcuts. Their use or disuse shouldn’t
change the internal logic of a valid theory. If the theory relies on
linguistic flourishes rather than logic, there’s a problem.
Linguistic opacity is not a substitute for valid logic, nor does it
constitute a valid proof. I’m sure you know the old saw about ‘if
you can’t blind them with brilliance, baffle them with BS…’.
Brilliant writing tends to be very clear and concise. The denser and
more impenetrable the language, the more you must suspect that the
author is trying to hide something.

Have fun,
Brian.

28

Jewelry can also have an important role in commemorating significant
life events, even beyond wedding or class rings. Customers often tell
me stories of the events my jewelry will commemorate, and they are
often events significant only to the persons involved.

Most of the jewelry I make or sometimes buy for myself has
significance to me beyond wealth and status. Rings that commemorate
the births of my children; a tiny cone cast in gold, from a tree from
the cemetery where my husband’s ancestors are buried; rings and
pendants that celebrate the changes of the seasons. I wear talismans,
rather than random jewelry.

Janet Kofoed
http://users.rcn.com/kkofoed

29 
simple fact that I must justify that jewelry does indeed act as
personal expression, a statement of an inner quality that is placed
into the outside realm for communicative purposes, much like the
recent theories of emotion being about external communication.

Well, Rae, I think you’ve fallen into the trap that somehow some
jewelry is different from other jewelry. That’s simply not true. It’s
most important to understand that the value of gold comes from it’s
malleability, it’s rarity, and it’s beauty. The use of gold as both
adornment and currency begins with adornment - the currency part
came after. It became “valuable” because of it’s desirability - it
didn’t begin as draping oneself with wealth. That situation has
evolved and changed over the centuries, and now there is an
inescapable aspect of money associated with precious things, of
course. The reason there is goldsmithing - heritage wise - is NOT
because it’s expensive, it’s because it’s the best material for the
job, generally. The buying public has it’s own take on it, which
varies from person to person, but we as goldsmiths work gold because
it’s a pleasure to work, much more so. To us it’s only about money
when it comes time to sell it.

Two caveats in the same vein as this thread has gone: There was a
best selling book called “Passages” that purported to lay out the
phases of life. People raved about it so much that I read it. It
certainly didn’t lay out the phases of my life… It layed out the
generic life of white middle to upper-middle class white-collar
suburbanites, yes. It had nothing whatever to do with how a Chinese
person, much less an Amazon basin person, lives and learns. Some
people just need to get out more.

And Brian’s example the other day is a good example of The
Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, which comes from physics but
everybody should know it. It simply says that when we study
something, we change it - therefore we never study the thing, we
study the thing under study. Simplistically, a chimp in a cage is
not a chimp, it’s a chimp in a cage. I would put that in human terms
with something I’ve had to say in my life: “I’m not what you think I
am, I am what I am.” If you want to know what I’m about, ask me. So
many people need to imprint the world with themselves, as Brian’s
critic did. Everyone needs to be aware that their point of view is
only that - a sweeping study of the nature of jewelry will fail
without that understanding. Have you asked a rich person how they
feel about their jewelry? How can any study mean anything without
doing that? Don’t you (whoever you are) actually know that your own
assumptions are only that?

Is it really “wealth and status”, or is that just you? Sometimes it’s
one, sometimes it’s the other, it’s just important to know the
difference.

30

Thank you, John.

Don't you (whoever you are) actually know that your own assumptions
are only that? Is it really "wealth and status", or is that just
you? Sometimes it's one, sometimes it's the other, it's just
important to know the difference.

Yes, I am making an assumption based on what I want my work to do
and what I believe jewelry is all about: expression. But as I said I
must justify this and I just keep coming up with studio jewelry being
about this antithesis of wealth and status and how it is a cloud
over our heads we as artists need to dispel and blah, blah.

Jewelry is a vehicle for whatever you indeed want to express. That
is my point. Opposing wealth and status seems to be the craft
movement party line, however, and I want to know the why’s and how’s
of that to move forward. (I have my theories but to find those craft
theorist who want to grapple with what jewelry is NOW are hard to
find so it must be gleaned through craft ideals.)

Your posts are thought provoking and I can say I don’t disagree with
any of your assertions.

People do what people have always done, we just rearrange the
context in which we do it. I’m researching the context, as it were.

I am also not doing a sweeping survey or even a thesis, just a
defense-of-theories as I put forth on the subject which always
includes a bit of where I believe the changes in context relevant to
my work happened. It just happens to coincide with the whole craft
movement which had an agenda that may not be an issue within the
field any longer.

Rae

31 
Jewelry can also have an important role in commemorating
significant life events

I want to bring something up that’s more generic, but most important
to understand - I’d say this applies to the “techniques vs design”
thread somewhat, too. That is that anyone (and I mean anyone) is
doing anything new.

Think about it…

There is a concept in antiques and artifacts that could be called
the “200 year rule”, which I just made up - the title, that is.

Let’s go back to the 14th century up to the renaissance. It’s
estimated that the population of the world was around 450 million
people, give or take. So - every one of those people had a spoon, a
bowl, and a cup. (or culturally whatever - utensils). They also wore
shoes, belts, shirts, hats, on and on. So, where are all those
spoons? Where are the lamps, the cooking pots, the candle holders,
the tools? Not a few, but millions of them? By and large, they are
gone. The 200 year rule (which is not a rule) says that the things of
life - the antiques business - last around 200 years and beyond that
point they get exponentially more rare. The things that survive
longer are the special things that get saved, archived, put in
churches, museums, libraries, manor houses and even the shoebox on
the top shelf of the closet. The rest of it rots, corrodes, breaks,
burnsfalls out of favor or for what ever reason gets destroyed or
thrown away, more and more as the years go by.

The other thing that largely survives is gold - “The Noble Metal”.
The ONLY metal, historically, that is unaffected by the elements.
Today there are a few others…

I can tell you from personal experience that the useful lifespan of
a gold ring that is actually worn daily is no more than about 50
years - silver not half that. My father (and others I’ve known
since) wore his school ring daily until it became dangerous to wear
because it was so thin - plus it was an indecipherable lump with an
abraded red thing in the middle.

What this means is that when you look at a jewelry book and see the
fabulous, regal things from antiquity, it’s easy to think that THAT
WAS JEWELRY.

Yes, it was, but it wasn’t all of it. Like the spoons, the iron,
bronze and silver rings, necklaces, bracelets, buckles, etc. are
simply gone -returned to the source, recylcled - who knows… The
just didn’t - and still won’t - last through the centuries…

There has always been, since antiquity, craftsman who make royal
jewelry, craftsmen who make higher-end jewelry, craftsmen who make
working class jewelry and craftsmen who make humble jewelry for the
great unwashed. Necklaces with beach rocks strung on a leather
thong, seeds - millions and millions and millions of pieces. 99% of
it is lost, recycled or buried. Don’t let the books fool you into
the thinking only the Pharoahs wore adornments - that’s just the
stuff that survived.

We are just the latest - don’t confuse style with culture. In 50
years, our time will have a label, too - Art Deco, Art Nouveau,
??? It’s family.

32 
Opposing wealth and status seems to be the craft movement party
line, however, and I want to know the why's and how's of that to
move forward.

Please excuse a naive question from a commercial jeweler with no
academic art training at all…

if as you say, the craft movement opposes wealth and status…what
do these people do…GIVE their stuff away for free? As soon as you
seek payment for your piece, haven’t you already corrupted your anti
commercial stance? Doesn’t that make that stance suspect? I’ll say
it…fraudulent?

And if someone buys/wears a piece that alleges an anti-status
statement…ummm, isn’t THAT a display of status, that of being
anti-status, and the inference that the wearer is somehow more
enlightened(elitist) or something?

I’m sorry, I don’t see how you can have it both ways.

Or are there certain limits to what is acceptable wealth and status?
Who decides? Who made him king?

Again, ‘you’ is not you, its generic.

33 
Opposing wealth and status seems to be the craft movement party
line, however

It’s not pounding away at it, it’s that it gets deeper and deeper -
I, for one, find it a pretty interesting topic, too.

So, Rae, you need to distinguish what facet of jewelry is being
talked about. Is it the attitudes of the worker making the product,
or the attitudes of society towards the product? Those are two
entirely different things.

What you call “craft” jewelry I generally call university jewelry - I
find the term “art jewelry” pretty offensive, that is (again) unless
Lalique was n’t making art. “Craft jewelry” has no heritage to speak
of - that is the craft jewelry of which you speak: The “movement”
that began with the arts and crafts period in which artists decided
to break away from traditional goldsmithing and reinvent the wheel.
Since that movement is doing nothing that hasn’t been done over the
centuries, it’s more attitude than substance. One can either make
silver rings, as in the 12th century, or one can make silver rings
with a political statement attached - the rings are the same.

Look at the work of James Miller - his work is in the Orchid gallery.
Look past the actual work and you’ll see the history and heritage of
goldsmithing there. When you work in the sorts of shops that he has,
you meet people who bring that heritage with them - “In my country we
have always done it THIS way…” That’s not over the years, it’s
centuries old.

It has been said that jewelry making is the real oldest
profession…Heritage.

34 
Opposing wealth and status seems to be the craft movement party
line, however, and I want to know the why's and how's of that to
move forward.

Actually it’s (or it begins as) a way of rationalizing being poor.
Students can’t afford gold, people who have marginal skills aren’t
going to sell much gold in the competitive marketplace. Everybody in
the business knows this (You didn’t think we, like, bought it?) So
instead of just making budget jewelry (nothing wrong with that), it
becomes a Cause. It’s just not that complicated - I can’t tell you
how many people have told me, “I never liked diamonds before, but
now that I’m working I decided I want some…”

Understand that anybody can sit at a bench with an attitude: This
ring represents the triumph of the proletariat or some such. In 20
years, it’s just a ring, just like any other ring. I know a woman
who only makes “sustainable” jewelry - certified gold, certified “no
slave labor”, etc. Fine and dandy, but 10 years from now no one will
know… It’s just PR, nothing more. It’s all jewelry.

35 
Or are there certain limits to what is acceptable wealth and
status? Who decides? Who made him king?

Let’s see if we can get this straight, once and for all.

I’m a clothing designer. I’m a Nartist. My veddy, veddy special
clothing is made from recycled flower sacks, draped with nettle
branches (I only have $50, and the nettles are in the garden). You,
you mere commercial cloth hack, who works with silk and ACTUALLY
SHOWS HIS WORK ON A RUNWAY IN PARIS - my God, the pain, the
humiliation of it all - what can you (a mere professional clothing
designer) know of ART - yes I say it again and again ART ART ART. I
live it, I breath it. Can’t you see my work has swoops, it has
swirls - how dare you engage in refined, tailored, skilled, trained
design? (that I cannot grasp) Oh the pain, oh the the travesty… I
sew my seams by hand, using a carpet needle (because I don’t know how
to use a sewing machine…) How dare you use a lock-stitch when I
can’t? How can you know the joys of living in your parent’s basement,
slaving away, making ART while the masses cry out for more, more
more (well, maybe a hundred bucks a month) - showing in the
boutique (in the oh so arty alley) from my studio (in the
garage) Wait, I feel another swoopcoming on - more exaggeration - it
must swoop or it won’t be ART. Black. We need black. Everything black
(I feel a song in there…) oh, the pain, oh the aaannngggssstttt.

Nobody understands me, I’m so alone in my genius. (The book in the
library would show you everything, but that wouldn’t validate you,
now would it?)

Enough? Can we all get over ourselves, now? If jewelry is art, it’s
art. If jewelry is not art, it’s not art. It’s just a little pond so
people can pretend to be big fish, that’s all.

36

Oh John - thanks for the laugh!!! You are definitely needed by most
MFA programs to breath a bit of sanity into their angst!!! I love
it!

Actually, reminds me very much of my reactions to both MFA programs
I attended, although the one I graduated from (USC- Columbia, SC) was
less angst-ridden by far than Cranbrook Academy of Art (wonder they
didn’t all drown when it rained, their noses were so high in the
air!).

Still, the connection between MFA programs (read ART), and reality,
is tenuous at best.

One of my favorite things about graduating is NOT needing to do the
BS dance anymore - lovely.

Beth Wicker
Three Cats and a Dog Design Studio

http://bethwicker.ganoksin.com/blogs/

37 
Opposing wealth and status seems to be the craft movement party
line, however, and I want to know the why's and how's of thatto
move forward.

This sort of reminds me of someone I worked with who was into the
“skater” lifestyle (skateboarders). She was, and I’m sure still is,
a great person who was steeped in the skater philosophy. It was very
important to her, and particularly her friends, to be
nonconformist’s who worked hard to be seen as on the fringe of
society. They believed they were very different from the rest of
society and were proud of it. I would often tease her that they were
really just the same as everyone else. That they spent lots of money
of the right skater clothes and spent tons of time creating their
per sona’s and group identity. It reminded me of Areosmith’s Steven
Tyler saying that, “It’s expensive to look this cheap”, when he was
accepting a music award.

I think most people, probably all people, feel an impulse to justify
the choices they make or the situations they find themselves in.
Whatever jewelry you make you want to feel good about it and you
want other people to respect your work. If people feel like they are
not getting the respect they think they deserve (most) people will
feel like they should explain the reason why the person who is
withholding respect is wrong. It’s natural…and silly.

Mark

38 
Enough? Can we all get over ourselves, now? If jewelry is art,
it's art. If jewelry is not art, it's not art. It's just a little
pond so people can pretend to be big fish, that's all."

Another way to look at it is how we look for validation for what we
do and how we interpret what we do and make a connection to who we
are. If we feel supported from within we have an internal validation
for our value and worth. Manipulating materials gives satisfaction
but is not our identity. If one’s self worth is determined by what
we do, then we are successful or a failure depending on how a project
turns out. If one does not have a strong sense of self, one might
try to mentally categorize, analyze, compare what one does to look
for that validation externally. Sometimes a customer says “You are an
artist” and I could not care less about that. What I see myself as
is a funky human expressing my creativity as a form of therapy to
keep myself as sane as I can be. I have a good design sense and good
hand eye coordination and I can make my living this way and I am
blessed for this. That’s about it.

Richard Hart

39 
Nobody understands me, I'm so alone in my genius.

Thanks John. Funny, but I’ve known a few people who out-do your
clothing designer. I recall one metals MFA grad student who did in
fact get her MFA degree with work that, so far as I could tell,
amounted to marshmallows affixed to boards, and called sculpture. I’m
sure there was much deep intent and art talk and theory involved, and
the brain work involved may well have justified the degree. Well, no,
I’ll go further. It MUST have sufficiently justified the degree,
because the fine school, and highly respected faculty involved would
not have otherwise approved it. But for the less involved viewer,
seeing just the work, without the discussion behind it, it was
definitely a WTF experience…

I could give a few other such examples, as well as a few from
supposedly experienced and respected faculty artists (the one that
most sticks in my mind was the submission to a certain faculty show
from the head of the painting department that left everyone, other
faculty included, wondering just what was going on. The piece would
have been considered typical of some crude adolescent restroom
graffiti in any other context, both in subject, and technical skill.
I won’t go into more detail, but I’m guessing this example was more a
slap in the face of all that art talk and serious art attitude. It
just couldn’t have been intended as a serious example of fine
painting… It would be fair to say it didn’t increase my respect for
that painter much.

Cheers
Peter

40

I have gotten a few chuckles out of this thread, but I think that
there are some stereotypes at work here. One is that expressive
jewelry is for the poor and cheaper than traditional stones in gold
or platinum settings. This is not always the case. It might be true
if you compare the AAA diamonds to arts and crafts shows. But, that
is not a fair comparison.

There is a strata of people who just set stones in traditional
settings, just as there are different levels of artistic expression.
You can find people at flea markets selling plated rings with lab
created stones and CZs, with a guy at a makeshift bench. You can
find jewelery stores filled with mediocre stones with production
settings and bands. And, you can find stores that deal only with the
best designers or stores owned by some of the best jewelers using
AAA stones.

You can also find those artistic types making stuff at arts and
crafts fairs. There is also midgrade and up-and-coming artists
making things for local boutiques, non-profit galleries, tourist
stops. There are high end silversmiths, working at a level to where
they can charge more for their time and creativity than materials.
And, then there are artists who work in gold and diamonds that
create works that can blow works away that use the same materials to
do traditional work.

I am lucky enough to have a traditional jewelry store next door. He
sells a range of stones, but he deals mostly with diamonds. And, I
work almost exclusively with silver (a bit of gold, a bit of
copper). But, my work is all about the expression or the idea.

I’ve read in several threads where someone says that they are told
by a customer that they never liked diamonds until they start making
enough money to buy one. I don’t doubt that at all. In fact I think
that happens quite a bit. But, I also have heard some of my wealthy
customers tell me that they have always just had traditional rocks
in settings, until they have seen some gallery exhibit or bought
some book.

I see a range in my shop. I don’t think that artists are all anti
money or anti wealth. This is ridiculous. To be opposed to just
icons of wealth means that one is anti wealth. Maybe, some people
just prefer artistic vale over intrinsic value of the materials. I
can only speculate. But, in the art world, the collectors are not
poor, working class, anti wealth people. These are the likes of
Steve Martin, the Guggenheims, the Allen Bonds. Yes, there are
people who live in trailers who buy black velvet art, but for the
most part the collectors are people with lots of expendable cash.
Yes, they may wear Birkenstocks, but they aren’t cheap either :o)

I keep a record of time on each of my works, and while sometimes we
have this notion of artistic value as referring just to the “impact
of the work on the ‘ART’ world.” This is a stereotype as well.
Sometimes it refers to the time it took to design and create. My
time sheets help me to understand how much to charge for my artistic
time, and I think of this as my artistic value. It can take a lot
longer to work from an original sketch to produce a work with
forging, intricate carving, or layered piercing, than to take a
diamond, build a setting and set the stone. This can drive the price
up comparable to something more traditional with more expensive
materials.

yes, ultimately a jeweler who does take less time to produce more
expensive traditional work, may make more money than an artist who
produces less work than the bench jeweler. But, that is his or her
choice. I would be miserable as a bench jeweler. But, I am not going
to starve or allow my Jag to go without good tires :oD

It may be said that some movements in the arts and crafts circles
were motivated by whatever. But, that doesn’t mean that every
artisan subscribes some group policy. Just as not every skater punk
hates preppy kids. Maybe they just like the music and drugs better
with the group that dresses funny, LOL.

There doesn’t have to be this animosity between the different
aspects of adornment. Some rich people eat the best cuts of meat
with every meal, and some rich people eat sushi and tofu. You can
laugh at the art world all you want, I make giggle a bit as well,
but there is enough people in the world with differences in tastes
to make us all happy. Well, except the jewelers and artists who just
suck, LOL. (insert tongue in cheek here)

Yes, there are artists who do live in another reality, but that is
not every artist. It’s funny, the bench jeweler next door to me (and
good friend) drives a Harley and wears long hair, while I wear a tie
in the shop on most days. But, on cold days I am envious of his
house with indoor plumbing, he he.

Michael Johnson
http://cosmicfolklore.ganoksin.com/blogs/
http://cosmicfolklore.com