I would definitely take it as a compliment.
Alma
There seems to be indignation that artists' statements exist at all.
Just grabbed Andyās quote. Brian Alberic and also Beth wrote some
thoughtful things this morning. I think thereās more than what might
be percieved as an argument on this topic, myself. Yes, the
proverbial artistās statement that we are all talking about is the
product of University jewelry. I donāt have indignation, I just
donāt care, by the way. There are times when there is illumination,
of course. 90% of them are pure crap, and thus we have the attitudes
portrayed on this thread. We all know of which this is spoken, no
doubt Andy, too.
Michaelangeloās David. Seeing it in a book, youāll likely think itās
a nice statue, which it is. We spent almost an hour looking at it
from all angles in stunned silence, a couple of years ago. I would
say no less than that it may very well be the greatest work of art
on Earth. We didnāt talk, we hardly spoke at all. Someone might say,
āLook how he did THAT!ā, but thatās about it. Yes, itās
Michaelangelo, which none of us here are - certainly I am not.
Thereās just nothing to say - itās about human existence and pride
and victory and defeat and soul and youth and beauty and joy and
sadness, all in one huge rush of experience. THATās the point. There
are dozens of books in the bookstore - we bought one. Way over in the
corner is a plaque. It says something like: David, Michaelangelo.
My two cents. Did Rembrant, Picasso, Van Gogh etc have an artist
statement? I donāt think soooo! This thread makes me think I should
get rid of the āAbout The Artistā statement on my site and just say:
If it speaks to you āBuy It before someone else doesā. All the shops
and galleries want a statement. It doesnāt change the work. Itās all
about the work. There, I said it and I feel better, now back to my
studio for some fun.
Richard Langbert, in sunny Hobe sound, Fl.
rlangbert.com
The problem with that position is that it assumes that the viewer is an educated viewer, conversant with visual art "language", and able to grasp the meaning that exists. The reality is that many, if not most, people are NOT actually educated viewers, do NOT have a familiarity with visual art "language", and need help "getting" the meaning.
So I will show my āignoranceā I MIGHT agree with the above
statements if I was looking at a painting or sculptureā¦but I
find this difficult to agree with if Iām looking at a pendant,
necklace, bracelet, pair of earrings or rings. Why should I have to
āgetā the meaning of a necklace I want to wear? If it is made of
metal and not designed to be worn I wouldnāt call it jewelry, but
sculpture and then the statement MIGHT be needed.
I shouldnāt have writtenā¦personally I think this poor horse has
been kicked down the road far too longā¦and should be allowed to
rest. There are obviously very strong feelings on either side of
this issue and NEITHER side is going to change their mindā¦each can
rightfully or wrongfully call each other elitist or misguided, but
it isnāt going to change how anyone thinks or feels in the matter
and if not already done so, feelings will certainly get hurt.
Mrs. Terry Binnion
James Binnion Metal Arts, LLC
John,
I guess it never occurred to you that this (Orchid) is the world. Some of us are actual long-time professional people, and veterans of thousands of galleries, museums, shows, and various miscellany. Maybe we know smoke when we see it.
I can understand someone getting jaded by reading artist statements
that are redundant and add nothing to the viewers experience.
If someone did work based on what could be seen by a microscope but
not by the unaided eye, do you think you would know what you were
looking at without an explanation via the artist statement, and do
you feel that being exposed to the knowledge of what you are looking
at by an artists statement would enhance or detract from your
experience?
I made an abstract pin and wore it to a social event. A man asked me
if it was a dolphin. I asked him if he liked dolphins and he said
yes, and I said yes it is a dolphin. If he had asked me what inspired
me to design the piece the way I did, the answer would have been
very different.
Richard Hart G.G.
Denver, Co.
Hi Beth,
I think that there are layers of experience to be had when
considering a piece of artworkāor any object. It is not crucial to
me, that all layers be accessed by a viewer-the whole onion peeled.
The same can be said for āmeaningā.
The reality is that many, if not most, people are NOT actually educated viewers, do NOT have a familiarity with visual art "language", and need help "getting" the meaning.
But all viewers bring there own language to the table. The artistās
intended content, intent or meaning of a piece is one thing. But a
viewer may leave the work with an entirely different understanding of
it. Which is great. In the equation of making work there is a
constant variable (nice oxymoron, huh?) which is the viewer. The
artistās statement, if it is indeed specific to the piece, can offer
another specific viewpoint. If the statement is more about the
artistās experience, philosophy or process then that is simply
another piece of
However, as we move into the semester, work they originally did not get or like, suddenly they do get and like because they are beginning to develop the language to "get" the work.
This is true, I think. And the more people can begin to appreciate
what they are looking atāeven if they donāt like it in the endāthe
better it is for us as makers and even sellers (if thatās your goal).
But Iām not sure if I would limit āgetting the workā to understanding
the specific intent (if there is one) of the maker. The viewersā
experience of the work, I think, can be as valid.
There is a whole world out there that NEED and appreciate a GOOD artist statement that helps them access and understand what they are looking at. Not BS - they don't need that nor will it help - but a genuine explanation of what the artist was attempting to do and why. That, to me, is what a good artist statement should be.
I would add to the above that a good statement can offer insight
that is not necessarily about the specific intent of the artist or
maker.
Take care, Andy
From a consumer point of view (I bought jewelry long before I married my husband and still do) whether it is jewelry, a photograph, a painting or another type of artwork, an artist statement doesn't sway me to buy a piece....I either like the piece or I don't. It speaks to me or it doesn't.
A big DITTO from me. Thanks Terry, for your well-written
contribution. AND now Iām done with this thread. Judy in Kansas, who
can wordsmith with the best of them.
Hi Brian,
I think that your way of running a critique was a good one. I agree
that during school, speechifying about your work can be a clever
dodge and in the end prove a disservice to your education. But
things are different when you are in school and what once may have
been a dodge is not always so for the practicing artist and maker.
Where I have a problem with all this disdain for artistsā statements
is the expressed notion that a statement is somehow āneeded.ā Perhaps
I am being misunderstood or perhaps I have not explained myself well
(although I think that I have), but my position on this topic has
never been about āneedā or the necessity of a statement to the
success of the work. I understand that exhibition and sales venues
often ask for statements but I have always seen that as a way to
provide an adjunct to the general experience of the work and as a
manifestation of curiosity about the artist and what they make rather
than some sort of litmus test.
I have said over and over that a good statement can add another
dimension to the work and that it can serve as a useful tool for the
artist to gain insight into what they are making or have made. Please
take note that I used the word ācanā and not ādoesā or āmustā as I
always have in this discussion.
I am not a product of academia in that I hold a BA rather than a BFA
or MFA. I enjoy writing and thinking about what I do visually and
then trying to express that in words (switching modalities) has been
a useful tool for me. And I believe that it can be for others as
well. (Notice my use of ācanā.) It is certainly not for everyone and
I havenāt suggested at any time that everyone should write about
their work. But when people take a mocking tone and declare artistsā
statements as BS I have to wonder why there is a need to condemn for
all that something doesnāt work for a particular individual.
Please understand that I am not bristling at the subject or any
disagreement with my opinion. It is simply strange to me why so many
assume a mocking and disdainful tone when expressing a difference of
opinion.
I agree that the purpose of a crit is to offer different and perhaps
more experienced points of view. And I agree that if your aim as a
maker is to communicate an idea than you should understand how others
are perceiving your efforts without benefit of written or spoken
explanations. But again, I feel that there is something to be gained
by reading a statement alongside the work.
Frankly, I have read statements that ruined the work for me. But I
also have read many that have given me insight into what the artists
thinks, their experiences, etc. There is an artist who makes
wonderful small sculptural pieces (I know that some on this list know
her personally) that have a definite narrative. She selects her
imagery (which is specific and recognizable) carefully and is loose
enough in making the work that there is plenty of room for people to
draw there own conclusions. Yet there is a specific narrative going
on and, if the viewer is curious as to what that is, they can learn
that from the statement. The work is strong enough to exist on its
own visual terms but the added -should you choose to
access itāis gravy.
As I'm sure you've noticed, the jewelry/metals field definitely attracts two distinct types of folks. The ones who enjoy working with the metal itself, and the folks who're out to decorate the body.
I am puzzled by the above statement. These two things donāt go
together?
This whole conversation reminds me of the PMC thread from years
past. Some condemned PMC as simply not metalsmithing while others
considered it the end all and be all. There were a few sane voices,
though, who saw it as simply part of the toolbox: It wasnāt BS and it
wasnāt the answer to all problems. It was good for some but not for
others. Why canāt this be the same? It really IS a matter of mutual
respect. Using terms like BS doesnāt, in my opinion, foster that.
That being said, I really enjoy this sort of conversation. It gets
the juices flowing.
Take care, Andy
Hi Richard,
Let me say that I donāt consider my work a failure if someone
doesnāt āget itā. The forms, surfaces and structures that I am drawn
to and then use in my work are fairly universal in that I think that
we all see them around us. I am looking for a more visceral response
to my work or,even better, a visceral understanding of it. I often
write to understand why that response is happening; to tease apart
what is going when people respond and (more important) why I am drawn
to these things in the first place. This writing most often stays in
my notebookāer computer.
That being said, I feel that it is valuable to offer what I
understand to be the underpinnings of my work in the form of a
statement.
One thing that I have come to realize about statements is that
different statements can be crafted for different situations. As some
have pointed out statements can be written as a way to advertise, to
boost the appeal of an object by offering insight and inviting the
viewer in through a different door. Statements can be written for
exhibitions. They can be general or specific. Technical or
philosophical. They can be good or bad.
I always try to be as honest as I can at the time that I am writing.
And hereās another thing: All work does not come from the same
place. Some work may use the medium as a way to express an idea: It
may be thematic, narrative, expressive, political, observational.
Some work is simply about the material. Some work is just about
making (although I think that there is something deeper in that).
Some work is designed to simply sell. All valid, I think. But not all
would benefit from the same kind of statement or any at all.
In the context of this thread where some have stated that a visual, sculptural or 3 dimensional piece piece should exist on its own merits, that its "meaning should be accessible without benefit of written words.... has my work failed?
I posed the question because I, Like Beth, feel that it is the crux
of the discussion.
So my question would be, if an artist has an intention, does it compromise the experience of the person who is viewing the work to know how or why the work was created?
Great question. Surely sometimes it does. But not always.
Take care,
Andy
I interviewed a long-time student of mine last week on my
blogtalkradio show. Her name is Patti Crandall, and she has a
background in Art History. About 10 yrs. ago, when Pattiās kids had
grown up and moved out, she needed a creative outlet for herself. She
had always loved jewelry, both wearing it and buying it. She started
taking private classes with me, and I taught her the basics of how to
carve wax models, as well as selling her many of the tools she needed
to carve waxes at home. Along with her weekly classes, Patti spent
many hours at home carving wax, sometimes 8 to 10 hrs. a day, for a
few years, and she got really good at it. Never interested in the
casting or finishing aspects of producing her own original cast
jewelry designs, she sent out her wax models to a production house
which does all her casting, mold making, polishing, and stone
setting. They have done a beautiful job for her, over the years.
Patti buys her stones from all over the world, wholesale, on Ebay,
and claims sheās never received a bad stone.
For the past few years, Patti has had a gallery in Sonoma, CA.
selling her work, and she is working hard to keep the gallery in
enough of her work, it is selling so well. She now even has
collectors buying her jewelry. Patti says sheās never had to write an
artistās statement, and neither she nor her gallery even has a
website! As for her āstudioā, she carves all her waxes sitting in a
recliner in her TV room with her 2 small dogs.
Iām telling part of Pattiās story here to illustrate that not all
successful metalsmiths follow a traditional training path, have a
well equipped studio, or even do the metalwork themselves.
Pattiās hour long interview can be heard by downloading the archived
interview at Metalsmith BenchTalk on BlogTalkRadio with Patti Crandall 09/15 by whaleystudios | Art
Our ābig tentā of metalsmiths on Orchid includes many creative
people, their various methods of production, and many different ways
of being successful. Sometimes someone comes along to change our
notions of what it requires to produce and market original jewelry.
Jay Whaley
I have a book in my library "Faceting for Amateurs". The authors write that the difference between an amateur and a professional is that a professional turns his time into money, and an amateur into perfection.
Donāt forget to add that professionals donāt show any work that
isnāt ready for prime time.
j
J Collier Metalsmith
Did Rembrant, Picasso, Van Gogh etc have an artist statement? I don't think soooo!
Actually, thatās a good question. At the time, they were not āold
mastersā, they were working artists selling their work and looking
for commissions. (And not always successful.) Are you sure they
didnāt have the likes of artist statements?
Al Balmer
Pine City, NY
Nabokov is an author of literature. I would take it as a compliment
I guess the thought that I am compared to the Nabokov never occurred
to me. In data processing community there is a saying that the most
one can hope for is to live up to oneās resume. In the same spirit, I
hope that I can live up to this compliment.
Leonid Surpin
I do not understand why a piece of work should stand on its own to be considered a serious art work, and an artist statement would cause a conflict in how someone relates to the work.
A funny story comes to mind. It happened several years ago, so my
apologies if I muddy up some details.
Museum of Modern Art, London. Some big time artist, his name escapes
me at the moment, exhibiting his masterpiece appraised at several
million dollars. The masterpiece is a garbage bag stuffed with all
kind of things. Somehow it captured the imagination of the art
community and the masterpiece is a talk of the town. The exhibition
closes for that particular day and nobody can sleep, trembling in
anticipation for it to reopen. Next day comes and everybody is in
shock. The masterpiece is gone, and investigation into crime of the
century begins.
To make the long story short, a cleaning lady in her naivete,
assumed that the masterpiece was just another garbage bag, not much
different from the ones that she disposed of in her career and
simply threw it out. If only there had been and artist statement,
this disaster could have been prevented.
Leonid Surpin
Actually, that's a good question. At the time, they were not "old masters", they were working artists selling their work and looking for commissions. (And not always successful.) Are you sure they didn't have the likes of artist statements?
I dont know but I doubt it, possibly Picasso. I believe the artist
statement is a more modern invention.
James Binnion
James Binnion Metal Arts
Hi Terry,
but I find this difficult to agree with if I'm looking at a pendant, necklace, bracelet, pair of earrings or rings. Why should I have to "get" the meaning of a necklace I want to wear?
I think that maybe now we are veering into āwhat jewelry isā and
āwhat jewelry isnātā territory.
I am totally up for that conversation but it will be rocky terrain.
Take care,
Andy
The more I know about an artist the more I am interested in their
art. I can find interest in their work if I know more about them
even if their work did not grab me to begin with. This happens to me
in music, film, sculpture, paintings, architecture, and even in
science. The more I know about someone the more interested I am in
what they do. What motivates them is interesting to me. Pomposity in
any form is boring but I even liked watching William F. Buckleyās
show just to see what he would come up with. Besides, the eliteās
money is green too.
Sam Patania
Nobody here has said anything about fear, only you. And "anti-elitist" is some curious artspeak. What does that mean, exactly? It's all about substance, you see. Somebody either has it or they don't, there's no place to hide.
Really, John, where do you get this stuff? Any disagreement, no
matter how calmly delivered is now āart-speakā?
And where did you get the idea that I consider the members of Orchid
to be any one thing at all? I understand that you are an experienced
professional with some very clear ideas of what you consider art to
be and what you consider bunk. I have never made any judgments here
about another memberās work nor have I been disdainful of their
beliefs or opinions. I have never said that āart isā or āmust beā.
Because I donāt believe in such absolutes. Perhaps I am in the
minority on this.
What I have been responding to were the posts that expressed scorn
and contempt for something as innocuous as an artistās statement.
Something that I, personally, see value in. And even then I would
agree that there is some BS out thereā¦ But thatās not enough. It
seems that all artistsā statements must be BS in your world.
What you imagine I "should" see, what you want to see, yourself, is not what I see at all.
Iām also unclear as to how you felt that my statement about my piece
was somehow telling you what you āshouldā see. Perhaps that is the
real crux of this conversation. The idea of manipulation, that an
artistās statement is is somehow telling you what you should feel or
see. John, I just donāt see them that wayā¦
John I understand that you donāt consider artistsā statements to be
necessary or even valid. Again thatās fine. Why does the very idea
of them offend you so?
Perhaps if we could drop the terms āBSā and āCrapā we could continue
this conversation with a bit less heat.
I would have responded earlier but I just now found this in my junk
mail. Funny how things work outā¦
Take care,
Andy
Hi Andy,
Donāt have a whole lot of time for a reply today, waaay behind on an
order, waiting for supplies to arrive. Well, funny you should mention
PMCā¦
As Iām sure youāve noticed, the jewelry/metals field definitely
attracts two distinct types of folks. The ones who enjoy working
with the metal itself, and the folks whoāre out to decorate the
body.
I am puzzled by the above statement. These two things don't go together?
This whole conversation reminds me of the PMC thread from years past. Some condemned PMC as simply not metalsmithing while others considered it the end all and be all. There were a few sane voices, though, who saw it as simply part of the toolbox: It wasn't BS and it wasn't the answer to all problems. It was good for some but not for others. Why can't this be the same? It really IS a matter of mutual respect. Using terms like BS doesn't, in my opinion, foster that.
I wrote up a blog post a couple of years ago that summarizes my
notions about the two types of people who gravitate to the metals/
jewelry field. Funnily enough, it uses PMC as one of the examples.
You can read it here:
http://www.ganoksin.com/gnkurl/19x
Meanwhile, about writing in general, and statements in particularā¦
Iām not going to denigrate all writing, always. I sometimes write on
my own, just to work out, or crystalize my thoughts. Sometimes they
turn into blog posts, sometimes not. But there are times when the
discipline of writing forces me to organize my thoughts, and this is
useful.
On the other hand, most artists canāt write. Reflexively, I was
going to say that 99% of the statements Iāve read have been crap. On
sober reflection, Iād say that the ratio was closer to 80%, broken
down into about half of that 80% being pure spin, and the other half
being so poorly written as to be unintelligible.
Given that Orchid is a written medium, the relatively literate crowd
here is an anomaly in the wider art world. Artists arenāt trained to
write, and theyāre not trained in logic or rhetoric. Which means
that when they do sit down to write, if frequently goes poorly.
The disdain for all the āBSā comes (at least for me) from having
watched artists who I knew were just tossing out names and
concepts that they didnāt really grasp, confident in the fact that
none of their audience understood them either. Unfortunately for
them, I had read Kant and suffered myself through French Semiotics,
so I knew flatly that they were just name dropping. And yet, this was
met with applause as deep and profound philosophy. Does tend to make
one a bitā¦cynical about the whole thing.
Going back to my notions about the two sides of the field, the
metalsmiths (see blog post) would naturally tend to put less
emphasis on the talk, and more on the doing.
Must run, my stuff should be at the warehouse soon.
Regards,
Brian.
I interviewed a long-time student of mine last week on my blogtalkradio show. Her name is Patti Crandall, and she has a background in Art History.
Nicely said, Jay! Good story too. Iāll listen to the podcast today.
Andy