Should I cancel my SNAG membership?

I expect I'll be talking to the current SNAG president when I get
home. I plan on bringing up both this thread, as well as my
conversation with Asa with her when we talk. If anything comes of
it, 

Brian, I see no point in SNAG bashing, but I think it’s useful to
say that it probably won’t do any good. Metalsmith has always been a
magazine about two dimensional university jewelry. Somebody who is
big onit posted a long list of links here on Orchid to smiths they
thought were wonderful, and they were all two dimensional university
jewelry. I looked this morning at the freebie issue online and it
was, well, two dimensional university jewelry. That’s a fine thing
for those who are into that. Then there’s the rest of us… The
point being missed, that will likely always BE missed, is that the
world of jewelry is just so much bigger than that. Jo-Ann wants me
to say that this is me, and my opinion - John

I agree with Richard Hopkins that wearable must be the watchword for
jewellery. What’s the point of - let’s say a ring - if it ties three
fingers together thus hampering the wearer’s dexterity; or worse, is
about four inches tall and will catch/snag (pardon the pun) on
everything, and cause injury to anyone or anything unfortunate
enough to be nearby?

Having said that, I believe any art/craft does need a few designers
and makers who will push the boundaries to the absurd and/or
ridiculous: it can sometimes serve to advance the art or fine craft.
Then it can be pulled back by the less high-falutin’ to something
utterly beautiful and gorgeous but sensible and practical to wear.
And there’ll always be someone (with more money than taste? Though
who’s to define “taste”?) who will purchase the outr in order to be
seen to be “keeping up with trends”.

I guess it all boils down to personal taste - but give me beautiful,
graceful though practical jewellery every time! And I want to make a
living doing what I do - not too fussed if the “art world” doesn’t
catch on!

Janet

I have to agree with the thoughts of these post on this thread. I
used to be a member og SNAG when it was first started but dropped
out after a number of years owning my own jewelry store. I also got
very disappointed in the higher learning institutions in the US who
taught Jewelry. After hiring a number of graduates from universities
(names withheld) who expected high wages because they had a degree.
And knew how to make a tea pot!!! I have never had a custom order
for a tea pot. but none of them knew how to repair a ring. pave’
most only knew the word…

I finally stopped hiring graduate students in favor of teaching my
own staffhow to do the work that is needed in the world today.
Professors in most part have a steady income from their jobs and
like to persue things that are of interest to them and not much
interest in the things that are of use in the real world of retail
work…

I may be wrong but I think that about 1% of the people who make Art
Jewelry actually make a living out of it. I also think that about
80% of those who inter this trade as a craftsman/ jewelry designer/
repairman make a living out of their craft.

If I were president of the world I would make it a requirement to
first teach students to know how to do repairs and stone setting
before I would let anyone move into art jewelry. First give the
person a education how to make aliving then teach them how to play
and expand their minds into art…

I have to admit today I do more art jewelry today but that is due to
my age and the fact I now do not need to survive on what I make
anymore. Now after 40 years I can sit and play… :wink:

Wow, Andy, et al,

Whole other discussion thread isn’t that (and haven’t we beaten that
subject to death many times on this forum?).

As with SNAG and Metalsmith, whatever we call ourselves,
individually that is, is our name, right? If what we call ourselves
is inaccurate or confusing to others, that is our problem and it can
be a huge problem for an organization. But, we can call ourselves
(and our organizations) anything we want. So, if we want to name
ourselves jewelers, artists, artisans, bench jewelers, studio
jewelers, metal smiths, metal workers, forgers, goldsmiths, art
jewelers, and on and on and on, there is no one who can prohibit us
from doing so. And it doesn’t matter what others may think we are.
we are who we think we are! Of course, if that alienates whole
groups of our community, that’s a very big problem.

The problem with the subject of this thread, is that names, SNAG and
Metalsmith, present an expectation that is unsatisfied. I think
that, in order to survive, SNAG has become something it did not
start out to become. it has absorbed a wider range of possibilities
(non-metal, sculpture, conceptual art, non-wearables, etc.) This
does increase the membership rolls, thereby increasing the revenues
(but not enough). Unfortunately, SNAG has been almost completely
unable to attract to membership a substantial number of the workin’
stiffs in our field: the bench jewelers, the studio jewelers, the
jewelers who are out there working the shows and selling to their
collectors. (I am an exception, and in a previous entry on this
thread, I tried to explain why SNAG and the conferences are
important to me.) Of course, I don’t have the statistics to support
this, just my observations, so, if someone out there in OrchidLand
or SNAGLand does, please chime in.

Over the years I’ve given a lot of thought to what would attract
more working studio jewelers. This past weekend I exhibited (and
sold) at a small show, and I took an unofficial survey of the other
jewelers there. none of those I spoke with are SNAG members. They
all said it was because SNAG, a jeweler’s organization, does not
represent them or their perspective(s) in any way whatsoever! If one
calculated the number of jewelers exhibiting in shows/fairs across
this country, it would be an enormous population (jewelers make up
about 1/4-1/3 of every show at which I exhibit). If SNAG wishes to
bring any of those jewelers into it’s fold, an economically wise
move, then attention must be made to offer them what they need. And
what do we/they need? Do working jewelers need an organization like
SNAG? How specifically? What would it take to make SNAG inclusive of
this branch of SNAG’s ‘family’? That’s really what is at the root of
this discussion, isn’t it. does SNAG really want to be inclusive
and, if not, why not?

If SNAG is to survive financially, and that has always been a
problem (as it is for most not-for-profits), and currently is even
more so, then the support of a group as large as the exhibiting and
selling jeweler and metalsmith is essential. Yes? And how to attract
this group? Many in this demographic are out there doing from 5-25
shows a year! Imagine what it takes to be able to maintain that kind
of schedule and still design and make work! How would SNAG be able
to entice any one of those jewelers to give up money for membership
fees, much less four days to come to a conference? Those SNAG
members who are teaching jewelers (who also make wonderful work)
mostly have no real comprehension of what it means to be out there
as working/selling jewelers, and both these groups of jewelry makers
are cousins, related by a love of making wearable objects. I’m going
to ask again. how can SNAG effect an enticement strong enough to
bring the working stiffs into the fold, because I believe that SNAG
cannot survive without them/us.

How? What can SNAG do?:

  1. Re-think Metalsmith to reflect a more diverse perspective.
    quality first. but diverse!

  2. Offer discounted membership fees to working jewelers (there must
    be a way to do this!). Working jewelers, do not, contrary to
    widespread misconceptions, have more discretionary funds than
    teaching jewelers. For the most part, we only have the money we make
    to pay for the mortgage, food, clothing, well. you know, the stuff
    of survival. We’re working our buns off making each penny to dollar.

  3. Offer some perks for attending conferences. Working jewelers must
    give up four days of work or a show, plus pay for travel. there are
    no expense accounts for them/us, ya know. And most of us are
    one-person studios.

  4. Offer workshops before and after conferences. more of them. more
    in-depth (I know, it means giving up more days). Find out what
    working jewelers NEED to learn.

  5. ASK THEM WHAT THEY NEED? ONE ON ONE! FACE TO FACE (PHONE TO
    PHONE). No emails or surveys. just talk!

More suggestions welcome,
Linda Kaye-Moses

Hi John,

How do you define “two dimensional university jewelry”?

I guess we need to define “wearable”. Does a large “guage” earring
–the big tubular style- qualify? You must have a very large hole in
your lobe and most people don’t have that. Yet the guage is not
uncommon.

What about a labret, worn in the lip, that totally stretches the
lower lip? It’s worn, at least, in South America among some native
peoples.

What are the parameters for wearability? Is it specific to culture?
How tall must a ring be to become unwearable? I would wager that a
tall tiffany style solitaire will do its fair share of catching and
snagging.

And what about “practical”? Where are the parameters for that?

Andy

Linda,

I can’t add anything to this; you have covered it all. Great post!

Best, MA

If you all weren’t referring to SNAG by name, I’d have no idea that
you’re talking about the same organization that I’m a member of. I
don’t recognize it & I certainly wouldn’t characterize it as “dying”,
considering how many people show up at the conferences.

So far, I think the only real point that’s been made is that there’s
a lot of people on this list that don’t like conceptual art jewelery.
Which is fine- not everyone does (even in SNAG or the academic world,
believe it or not. I hated the piece on the cover of the 2008 EiP
that someone else mentioned. I kept wondering how the poor girl
trapped inside that giant condom could possibly breathe). However, I
think another major point has been very obviously missed, which is
that there’s more to metalsmithing than just jewelry. There’s also
functional hollow ware, flatware, small-scale and large-scale
sculpture, blacksmithing. etc., etc, etc.

That’s one a of the things that drew me to working with metal in the
first place-- you can take it in all kinds of directions from fine
art to fine craft from insane one-of-a-kind pieces to production work
& traditional fine jewelery and it’s all still metals. That’s
awesome. I had to laugh when someone in this thread commented that
academic metalsmiths don’t follow the steps of traditional
apprentices, especially not European ones.

I laughed because the first academic art metals programs actually
were modeled on traditional European methods, just not the ones in
jewelry shops. They were modeled after functional hollow ware
production-- raising vessels, forging flatware, etc. That’s one
reason why there’s so little gold work and gem-setting in academic
programs (the other being that most college students can’t afford to
buy gold. Nowdays, they can’t afford to buy silver, either.) If
you’re looking specifically for fine jewelry in a magazine titled
"Metalsmith" whose stated mission is to promote “jewelry and
metalsmithing” (emphasis added), you might be looking at the wrong
magazine. It really sounds more like you want Metalsmith to be the
MJSA Journal, which begs the question, why? Why not just get MJSA? If
you’re looking for technical stuff, that’s in the SNAG newsletter,
which has gone all-electronic these days, & those articles can all be
found on the SNAG website. The most recent was on swaging by Borris
Bally, & talks about using a forging technique in jewelery to connect
pin stems to metals that can’t be soldered/welded/etc. (primarily
aluminum).

So, looking through a recent Metalsmith I happen to have lying
around (this years Spring edition- the others are at my studio),
we’ve got the usual 4 main articles-- one on a German metalsmith who
makes some wearable jewelery & a lot of functional hollowware using a
unique casting process, a sculptor who builds mechanized sculptures
with all manner of gears and movements, another on jewelers who make
jewelry for rock stars (including Wayne Werner, who taught workshops
on goldwork & gem setting that I took a few years back & is
definitely not an academic but a successful independent jeweler),
and (yet another) article on William Harper, who I will totally grant
is the poster boy for pretentious art jewelers, but an art jeweler
who makes a lot of beautiful and wearable jewelry. So, 1
conceptualist out of 4. Not exactly an overwhelming percentage.

Given all of this, I’m kinda wondering why exactly you think SNAG
should be catering to fine jewelers 24/7? Particularly when so many
of you seem vested in insulting and belittling the work of the people
already involved in the organization?

Out of curiosity, do you also lament the fact that painting &
drawing students aren’t taught to paint houses? Or that engineering
students aren’t taught to fix appliances? Because you keep comparing
apples to oranges in the sense that you’ve confused a university
education with a job-training program and they aren’t the same thing.
There are trade schools that teach bench jewelery work- Revere
Academy, Bennett Street School, etc. That’s what they’re designed to
do & they do it well. University art programs have entirely different
educational goals, although both of the universities I’ve been at had
no problem encouraging students to do a semester as an intern at a
local jewelery shop so they could learn the benchwork side of the
metals realm & a number of students did just that.

Yes, we can make teapots-- metalsmiths traditionally have made
teapots & a whole host of other tableware. It takes a lot of skill to
make a teapot- just as much skill as it takes to repair a ring. Just
because something is out of your own range of experience doesn’t mean
it isn’t valuable- just different. You don’t need teapot-guy; someone
else may have people bringing in their grandmother’s silver tea sets
for repair & teapot guy is exactly who they need. And yes, people can
& do make a living doing art. Some also teach, some have day jobs
while they build up their customer base but nobody is surviving on
grants any more & haven’t been since the conservative culture wars of
the 80’s --if they ever were in the first place, which is doubtful.

Sharon,
artist, metalsmith, chaos magnet

Andy Cooperman,

I may not agree with you about SNAG, but I do want to tell you how
much I appreciate the wonderful articles you have contributed to
"Art Jewelry." They are so very informative, and cover so many of
the things I never learnedwhen taking college jewelry classes where
the emphasis was on conceptual jewelry. True I did learn design, and
to think creatively, but essentials were neglected. We never made
"rings," we made “finger structures.” Lost wax casting consisted of
us casting found objects- such as -flower pods twigs, etc., and then
assembling them into necklaces. All very fine and good, but we never
touched on correct layout when carving a ring, so most of mine were
lopsided.

Flexshafts were maintained for us, and we were not taught how to
keep it oiled and in good condition.

In other words the practical aspects were neglected.

What is so valuable for me about the articles that you have
contributed to"Art Jewelry," Is that you have introduced me to so
many things I was unaware of. For example I never knew about
separating disks, but after readingyour article got some, and am
just delighted and have been using them to cut sprues from my
castings. What an improvement of my hacking away with a saw.

But my favorite article is the one on burs. What a treasure trove of
I am only now learning how to flush set stones, and you
have takenall the mystery out of burs.

Thank you Andy, for taking time to write these articles. Alma

I'm going to ask again. how can SNAG effect an enticement strong
enough to bring the working stiffs into the fold, because I believe
that SNAG cannot survive without them/us. How? What can SNAG do?: 1.
Re-think Metalsmith to reflect a more diverse perspective. quality
first. but diverse!" 

Not long ago, I designed and created a necklace, just because.
Didn’t care how long it took, or how much money it would cost. Just
followed where my muse went. After over 40 years of working very
hard at the bench commercially always doing higher end stuff pretty
much as a hired gun, I entered the piece into an international
design competition in the unlimited expense category. I really
didn’t think I had a chance, because I only used one stone, a 20+
carat lemon citrine. NO diamonds, etc. well to my surprise, I won
the 2011 Designer of the Year top prize!

Speaking directly to your puzzled questions above, I reached out to
SNAG/Metalsmith, and offered them the great pic(s), and the
opportunity to present an interesting story of a “commercial”
goldsmith crossing the line into the designer/studio artist realm,
and winning. There’s many perspectives the story can offer, both to
encourage more “commercial” jerwelers explore their creativity, and
for the art jewellers to ponder better the commercial side of
jewelry life (and what they know).

The article would breakdown the steps the whole project too, which
I’m sure would help some folks with lesser skills to push their
envelope, so-to-speak.

All this… for free. as a give back to help some others.

I was told by a person not in charge, that whoever was in charge at
SNAG, “now has me on her radar”…and that was that… Nada.

Apparently, I don’t belong in the usual Snag/Metalsmity profile
criteria for an article. Even though the judges who chose my effort
from all others were Alan Revere, Todd Reed, and Merle White.

Frankly, I rather see articles in depth at SNAG/Metalsmith, because
everyone could benefit one way or another. Or, perhaps a great
article written by Jo Haemer about her most interesting time helping
put together the huge Portlandia Statue, as a jeweler volunteer
helping another metals artist in dire straights. That, I’m sure,
would be a fantastic story/article, and would help the realm of
jewelers everywhere envision something materials related to what
they usually do(in miniature), but absolutely enormous for the mind
to wrap itself around…

But no…SNAG/Metalsmith would rather cater to their ongoing
advertising of (ahem) schools and such,…just like you say
LindaKaye-Moses.

One would think that with all those conferences over the many
years, the folks at SNAG/Metalsmith would have figured something out
by now that answers the questions you pose, instead of showcasing
someone’s work that looks like a piece of pounded metal with jumpr
rings and wire, or irregular stick-like forms with feathers and such
glued on.

Marko

I would wager that a tall tiffany style solitaire will do its fair
share of catching and snagging. 

As much as I did not want to get involved in this topic, you have
drugged me in.

You would lose you wager! You have no idea to what kind of testing
high jewellery is subjected to before it goes to a client. You have
no idea what kind of consideration go into high jewellery design
before it is approved for production. Do not judge by the standards
of SNAG. The two are not even in the same galaxy.

Leonid Surpin

Andy essentially said what I’ve been thinking about this thread. Who
defines “wearable”? Anybody seen the latest fashion designers’
women’s shoes? They sure look unwearable to me. How the heck can
anybody walk in those things?

To my way of thinking, if it physically fits on any single human
being’s finger or fingers, it is a wearable ring. If it fits on a
wrist, it’s a wearable bracelet. So what if it’s four inches tall and
it can’t be worn by most people 24 -7? That alone makes it unwearable
conceptual jewelry and not worthy of publication?

Metalsmith has a right, if not an obligation to publish a periodical
that appeals to their core membership. Some of the posts in this
thread seem to suggest that SNAG is screwing up by appealing to a
small minority of conceptual art metalsmiths and leaving the vast
majority of us “working stiffs” out of the loop. Well, maybe they
are. But it reminds me of a suggestion made recently to our local NPR
classical radio station. If you start playing classic rock, you’ll
get a larger audience and consequently a larger block of people to
hit up for donations.

That continual drive to appeal and cater to the middle percentile of
the bell curve, the idea that everything must be oriented to benefit
the most people possible is driving much of our culture (maybe even
our society) right into the abyss of history. I hope neither SNAG nor
NPR listens to such drivel. Uniformity and sameness stinks.

I’m not a member of either SNAG or MJSA and not likely to become
one, so I don’t have a dog in this fight. I just like to think such
things out to their logical conclusions. I would add that if SNAG
started looking more like MJSA, unless they secured significant
discounts from tool and metals companies for their membership, I
still wouldn’t bother. Such a change in direction would likely cause
their core to flee as well.

I get all the nuts and bolts of working metal and making jewelry
I’ll ever need every day right here on Orchid. I do get a kick out of
looking at Metalsmith every now and then though. It truly is
mind-boggling how creative people can be.

Long live the driving force that is conceptual art jewelry! I’m
thankful that not everyone who creates jewelry is tethered to the
need to feed a family.

Dave Phelps

Hi John, (et al)

Brian, I see no point in SNAG bashing, but I think it's useful to
say that it probably won't do any good. Metalsmith has always been
a magazine about two dimensional university jewelry. 

I spent the best part of an hour and a half on the phone with Renee
Zettle-Sterling (the new SNAG president) this afternoon.

To be honest, the situation as she outlined it is pretty dire, but I
can say two things with certainty:

(A) she (and by extension, the rest of the board) know Metalsmith is
a big problem, and

(B) We came up with a couple of ideas that should go a long way to
illustrating their willingness to change. The October issue is
already at the printers, but the later ones may reflect those
changes. With any luck, there will soon be technical stuff back in
Metalsmith. I certainly hope so, but the two of us scheming of an
afternoon does not a magazine make. There’s more to it than simply
saying “make it so”.

I can say that she certainly seemed to listen to (and engage with)
our concerns as I outlined them, and was very passionate about
finding a way to keep SNAG alive. (I’d mentioned this thread to her
via email, and it turns out that she’s printed it out so as to make
notes on it.)

I went into the conversation more than willing to say “nice talking
to you, but I have to go” if she’d turned out to be another
pretentious neo-post-retro cubist. The fact that I willingly spent a
good chunk of an afternoon on the phone, trying to help her find a
way out should indicate my impression of her. She passed my BS test.

Now, what they (the board, and SNAG as an organization) need is
help. They’re going to ask for money. Give, or not, as you feel
justified.

What they need more are your ideas, talents and forbearance. There
have been some remarkably bad decisions over the years. That is
clear, and recognized. Recriminations now won’t do anything but sink
the ship for sure. Put that to the side, and give the best of
yourself to the question of how SNAG as an organization needs to
change to survive, and what those changes should look like.

There’s no official mechanism for such a forum, but since I’m the
idiot who opened my mouth, if you send them to me directly, I’ll see
that they get through to her. Use “SNAG” in the subject line. Let me
know if you want me to make yours anonymous.

Regards,
Brian Meek

After watching the editors of Metalsmith Magazine make fools out of
themselves back in 1992, I lost much respect for Metalsmith and
SNAG. I found Metalsmith magazine long on fluff and very skimpy on
substance, and Ialways found myself hungery for more after reading
each issue. I won’t spend the money to subscribe to Metalsmith, but
working for a school in MA allows me to get free copies at no cost.
I regret to say it hasn’t change much over the last 20 odd years.
It’s distressing to the pure metalsmiths like me to see so much
academic work in mixed media, and primarily catering to the
academics.

Granted, I was a product of academic, having degrees from RISD and
UMD in Metals, but I’m moved on and become more “practical”. I have
to makea living off my jewelry/metalsmithing, otherwise, I have to
get a “real” job, being bored out of my mind. My original goal was
to become a professor, but 11 years with one college disillisioned
me to the point that being an independent teacher was best for me.
Now that I find myselfinvoluntary working for the same darn college
I thought I left behind, thanks to a merger, I’m still keeping my
"independent" streak.

SNAG either had to change, or pay homage to the pure metalsmiths
that toil away, instead of the academics with their mixed media
work. Mixed media is more prominent now, and having sat in many a
metals jury for the League of NH Craftsmen, we don’t get too many
pure metalsmiths anymore. Jewelers are using all kinds of materials
and it gets challenging these days to figure out where they fit in,
according to Standards guidelines. I’ve sat in juries that required
three different media jurors just to evaluate the work. I’m guessing
SNAG is in a similar position.

Joy

ps - I’ve been told I’ve a tough metals juror, and yet, I feel I
could be tougher. However, as an educator, I try to give
constructive criticism, not “hate the damn work, toss it out of the
window” as I seen at RISD.

Sharon,

many of us have been reading /belonged to SNAG more years than many
on Orchid have been involved in metalsmithing and can speak to the
change in the org. that most people that have only involved a couple
of years at most do not have any knowledge of ! Feathers or paper or
even dyed felt that may be bedazzled and is glued together don’t make
or equal goldsmithing any way one looks at it- that is my point.
plain and simple…

An organization that puts a person in a giant condom and on the
cover - of a magazine called Metalsmith - doesn’t have jack to do
with metalsmithing, much less goldsmithing- No One can sway my mind
on that Latex is not gold! No one can persuade me it is or has a
thing to do with fabrication of or new directions in the fabrication
or milling or designing with gold, or any precious metals or even
base metals. How is adorning (if you can call it that) a body with a
latex sleeve considered or construed as Metalsmithing.??

Consequentially an organization that exalts what I call
trash-whatever the country of origin- doesn’t deserve my membership
dollars- particularly when I can buy the magazine -should it contain
something of interest - off the stand but which has become rare in
the past 4-5 years .I do tend to cite a certain group of
"entrepreneurial" types as the root of the problem in the
organisation. They think inclusion and diversification is a tool to
grow the membership, hence monetary gain as a source of sustenance
for the continuation of the organisation as opposed to attracting
metalsmiths-exclusively and making the publication relevant to the
arts and sciences and craft involved in working metals to produce
jewellery, sculpture, or other articles of metal or adornment in
metal is pushed to the proverbial back burner… Equally they gain
exposure in the trade as being a member of what is supposedly a
goldsmithing organisation- that is where I have a major issue with
their premise and association with the Society of N. A. Goldmiths:
If you aren’t a goldsmith but are willing to work for the
organisation do you then become a goldsmith - with the prestige that
title, profession and association has everywhere else in the world-
by association? I think not, though it seems with this organisation
it does. I question that validity.

Latex, I think it is a poor choice of what should be at the
forefront of an exclusive organisation of GOLDSMITHS! I am all for
comprehensive groups of artisans when its appropriate. However, when
N. America does not have an organization that serves goldsmiths and
metalsmiths exclusively, it is a step backwards in evolution of the
art and science.

It shouldn’t be a marketing platform, and is not the arena for
promoting small independent businesses. I am a consultant to small
businesses on an international level, if anyone should buy into the
direction of SNAg it should be me- clearly I don’t think it is
appropriate. One person’s opinion is never going to change an
organisation, particularly one that is propagated by people involved
more in entrepreneurship than they are goldsmiths or even
metalsmiths, though some are or were jewelers.

Metalsmith should not be dedicated to general artists, designers in
any media and metalsmiths- but metalsmiths and goldsmiths and
independent jewellers Otherwise call it what it is.". Emerging
Trends in Craft in America" .If an organisation calls itself the
Society of North American Goldsmiths- i want to rely on that
Goldsmiths and related professions is who it should serve. Why then
is it pandering to North American Artists North American Designers,
and lastly, Metalsmiths? There are organisations for comprehensive
groups and I feel quite strongly that SNAG should be an exclusive
group. I don’t feel it is an appropriate direction for ANY
Goldsmithing organisation to take, and if so it is not metalsmithing
much less goldsmithing centric. American Craft magazine already
serves that mix of genres as do a few other magazines .

Goldsmithing is Goldsmithing is Goldsmithing. why is there any
question on that point ?Perhaps I just fail to understand why people
can argue that a society supposedly of goldsmiths, should not be
composed of goldsmiths nor focused on articles relevant to
goldsmiths. When someone can explain that to me perhaps I will join
!!!

Dave Phelps, Alberic, R. E., Joy, Sharon, and all contributors,

I wanted to abstain from this conversation, (I don’t want to even
attempt to define art or jewelry or wearable lol) but I think I may
be able to be of some assistance. As a metalsmith primarily in
things outside of jewelry myself, I have always enjoyed Metalsmith
magazine. Then again, I am not a member of SNAG and I started
reading Metalsmith as a BFA student in a jewelry class.

My girlfriend is a Jewelry + Metalsmithing MFA student at RISD, and
there, just like it was in our undergrad program, Metalsmith is a
need-to-read publication. I don’t think there is a lot of debate
regarding how important this publication is to the Art Jewelry
community, students and artists alike. But if Metalsmith magazine
lacks the technical you desire, maybe changing the
magazine isn’t the answer. Maybe you should try another publication.

I can’t speak to how well SNAG relates to its membership, or what
benefits there are to being a member, or even how much correlation
there is between SNAG’s identity and that of Metalsmith magazine.
What I do know is that changing Metalsmith to address more technical
would devastate a huge percentage of its readers, while
still probably failing to satisfy those who want predominantly
technical info. I also know that SNAG supports education, students,
artists, and jewelry. And while not everyone on this forum may agree
with me, I believe that the progressive and artistic nature of
Metalsmith is absolutely essential to the overall well-being of the
industry, and should be supported and left unchanged.

Enter MJSA. For over 110 years MJSA has been serving the industry,
and MJSA Journal and MJSA Custom Jeweler address most if not all of
the specific issues I have seen posted on this topic. Whether it be
hands on techniques, tools, equipment, materials, legislation,
trends or spanning from cutting edge to archaic, MJSA is
ALL things jewelry making.

A very peaceful solution for many of those here may be to try
another membership/publication, hopefully in addition to SNAG, to
support the industry top to bottom, while simultaneously covering
the spectrum with a whopping 2 magazines instead of 1.

Tyler Palsrok
MJSA

Alma,

You are very welcome!!! Thanks so much for taking the time to
write.

Take care,
Andy

I must say I love SNAG and the fact that Metalsmith Magazine it puts
a bug up so many of our asses is proof that they are doing what needs
done. The question must be asked " what is wearable" if you have any
interest in art what so ever. Art is not confined to what most of us
in the trade or designer/craftsmen have to deal with daily. Most of
us know that anyone coming out of a 4 year institution is not
prepared to get a job as a bench jeweler but most people coming out
of any school will need to learn a whole new set of skills to hold
down any job. This world is big enough to house art and trade and any
combination there of. Maybe some of the artists who are on the list
should talk about how boring trade magazines are and how uninspired
many of the designs found in them are, not to mention the
photography, uuugghhhhh. If I have to read the sales stats in a
trade magazine I rather sweep the floor or flip through Metalsmith.
And yet the floor needs sweeping and the sales stats need compiling
and reading if I want to make a living and to get out of my little
world Metalsmith needs flipping through.

The one thing I don’t understand is the thought polarization on line
forums breed.

Sam Patania, Tucson

And on a lighter note…

Leonid, please.

How many jewelry stores across the world make a good chunk of their
monthly profit by fixing torn up Tiffany solitaire mounts? They snag
on EVERY bloody thing. They will sneak across a room under their
own power to snag a prong on a particularly fetching sweater. Don’t
even talk to me about unsnarling solitaires thrown in a case with
micro gage chain necklaces. I realize all of your clients always use
French fitted custom cases, and would never commit such a travesty,
but the rest of us have to cope with the real world.

The artist in me hates them: they’re the ultimate example of “slap a
rock on a band” with absolutely no thought to integrating the
setting to the design. On the other hand, the mercenary in me loves
them: fixing them has kept more than one jewelry store afloat.

Sigh.
Brian

I lost much respect for Metalsmith and SNAG. I found Metalsmith
magazine long on fluff and very skimpy on substance, and Ialways
found myself hungery for more after reading each issue. I
won'tspend the money to subscribe to Metalsmith 

This is actually pointed more towards Brian’s request for input, but
the quote above is pretty representative. First I’ll say that I’ve
never been a SNAG member and likely never will be, not because I
don’t like it but because I’m just not a “joiner”. A great magazine
would hit the spot, though, which Metalsmith never was but at least
it used to be pretty OK. Oh, and to the other thread- I had a piece
reviewed in it once, long ago. Didn’t mean much to me then or now.
This seems so clear and obvious but it’s also clear that somebody
doesn’t see the obvious over there.

Metalsmith is putting on a show and it just needs to decide what
show it wants to stage. It needsto decide on a direction and take
it. That direction will directly determine who buys and reads the
magazine. For the last several years or maybe even ten years it has
behaved in a haze of confusion. Maybe that’s because it’s run by
volunteers - maybe they are paid but I doubt they are professional
publishers, as is often the case. Maybe it’s because it’s run by
committee, which is never a good idea. I DO have a problem with a
latex-wrapped human under the title of "Metal"smith, but the bigger
problem I have is that it’s merely trite and more than a little
obvious. Whoever chose that, not just to be included but for the
precious cover space is muchtoo easily amused.

Metalsmith can be whatever it wants to be. I’m with David Phelps - I
like to see lots of things that qualify as jewelry, even vaguely.
The question is, is it going to turn itself into a magazine that
targets that tiny audience who thrive on such things, or is it going
to look for a wider audience and print conceptual things now and
then. Since they seem to be in financial straits, the second option
is more attractive, I would think. Some of the postings here on
Orchid have been black and white - well, if you don’t like
conceptual art then you want it to be MJSA or (shudder…) JCK.
Alan Revere either published or was part of a nice book (which I
don’t find on Amazon) that profiled several “real” jewelers doing
wonderful work without the sheet metal but with high design. I don’t
see why Metalsmith couldn’t do more of that sort of thing - there
are thousands of jewelry designers who don’t qualify for publication
because they aren’t arty or part of the clique, which goes back to
target audience.

Another thing I’ll mention, is that the magazine has always been
trendy, to it’s detriment. It profiles people who are advanced in
their own lives but not especially advanced in a world of
goldsmithing that includes Buccellati, Van Cleef and Garrard’s.
Plastic jewelry? Fine, why not, but that doesn’tmake gold evil, nor
does it mean that the publication has to jump on a minor bandwagon.
Alternative materials, in the big, real world of jewelry, are
alternative - gold and silver have always been the norm and always
willbe. Again, sure, “Look what they are doing with old celluloid
film or billiard balls”, but that’s only one article. It’s
dangerous, I think, tolose sight of real-world jewelry makers of all
sorts who would like to seesomething that touches and inspires THEM.

As RER said this morning- if they want to go conceptual art, then
disband SNAG or spin it off, rename Metalsmith to “Jewelry Professor
Quaterly” and everything will be hunkydory. It’s all about focus.
Putting a latex clad body under the title of Metalsmith is unfocused
by definition.