SNAG's Metalsmith and non-metal objects

Jewelry Discussion
21

Here’s my take on this issue. We seem to be flogging a dead horse.
This was debated to the nth degree last year. If you like SNAG, join,
get the Metalsmith magazine, read it and enjoy the boat it floats. If
you don’t like it, don’t subscribe, don’t read it. Find what is a
good fit for you, relax and enjoy, be it Metalsmith magazine, Art
Jewelry, Bead and Button, Jewelry Artist, or what have you. It’s not
like hashing and re-hashing this out on Orchid is going to change any
opinions.

Linda Lankford

22

Andy,

And, I am glad you have chosen to speak up.

It serves no positive purpose to bash one of our own. I disappoint
myself at times, so how can I hold a publication meaning to broaden
my horizons to such rigid standards.

I was one of the Lapidary community, when Lapidary Journal dared to
introduce another phase into the Lapidary arena. I read, heard, saw
the indignant reactions, and the exodus of a certain few, who felt
the magazine had personally defiled them by, horrors, “Beads.” They
proudly announced to all, the cancellation of their subscription. End
result for those who continued to subscribe a far leaner publication,
far fewer ads to select products from. Certainly not a positive for
anyone.

I would hate to see this history repeat, just because some
sensitivities feel betrayed. Isn’t it time to step back and to not
spread the seeds of discontent? What is to be gained by a
publication losing advertisers, subscribers? Is that what these
cyclical critical diatribes have as the base intent? Do we really
want to lose this publication? Are there enough metal purists to
support a single focus publication? Are there enough single focus
advertisers?

Again, for me, I certainly have been among those saying that I would
never use a synthetic anything, as colored gemstones lab or man made
began to hit the market. Oh no, not me, never. It was not my wish
for “real” that made any impression, it was my absolute unyielding
stand.

Yesterday I suggested to a man who had made an engagement ring and
was searching the internet, as well as local dealers for an
impossible, for now, dream, that he consider a “temporary” stone,
fully disclosing to his fiancee, that once able, it will be replaced
with the real thing. He looked at me with such thanks, he had not
dared to think about it on his own, yet “the Diamond” with his
available funds would be very included and of a poor color.

I know how easy it is to stand on a position, but is the end result
what we really want?

Not sure I am explaining myself well, but this is getting to be
repetitive, mean spirited, and certainly non-productive for the
community at large.

Terrie

23 
shouldn't the name "Orchid" be changed as well? Aren't there people
who are signing who are under the impression that this is a group
of exotic plant devotees?

Perhaps they expected exotic plants, but they never put out money in
the process. Huge difference.

24

Hi all,

In re-reading my comment about ‘don’t like the name, come up with
something better’, it may have come off as more testy than I
intended. I didn’t actually intend it to be testy at all, but we all
know how email sometimes screws up how things ‘sound’.

What I actually meant was more along the lines of “yeah. The name’s
not a perfect fit. Never was, probably never will be. Moving right
along…”

I actually wrote a blog post about it the last time this came
around, about a year ago. (After last years EIP) It’s my analysis of
why Metalsmith (the magazine) manages to cheese off so many hammer
wielding metalsmiths.

You can read it here:
http://alberic.ganoksin.com/blogs/2008/10/09/whats-a-metalsmith/

By way of perspective, I’ve periodically let my membership/
subscription lapse because I didn’t find the magazine’s content
particularly interesting. The first time was in about 1989. This is
hardly a new issue.

Regards,
Brian Meek.

25

I remember the last discussion about Metalsmith Magazine and someone
said if you want to change things volunteer.

Well I decided to volunteer for SNAG and I’m very excited about the
project I’m working on for them.

Not everything SNAG/Metalsmith produces works perfectly for me, but
the magazine inspires me, their newsletters always provide gallery
info and competitions I can enter my work in, and I just came across
their Professional Guidelines and I was blown away. There is really
good info that they provide and compile that I could never find on
my own.

Thinking positively,
Valerie Heck

26 
I was one of the Lapidary community, when Lapidary Journal dared
to introduce another phase into the Lapidary arena. I read, heard,
saw the indignant reactions, and the exodus of a certain few, who
felt the magazine had personally defiled them by, horrors, "Beads."
They proudly announced to all, the cancellation of their
subscription. End result for those who continued to subscribe a far
leaner publication, far fewer ads to select products from.
Certainly not a positive for anyone.

Huh? I was one of the many (not few) who dropped my subscription,
though I made no public announcement. The reason was not any
“indignant reaction”, but simply that the magazine had changed
directions and did not fit my needs any more. There are lots of
magazines I’m not interested in. I feel no obligation to subscribe
to them.

The end result you speak of wasn’t due to the few who complained,
but the result of the decisions made by the magazine’s publishers.
They should be praised or blamed, not those who decided whether or
not to subscribe.

Al Balmer
Sun City, AZ

27

Not being an official artist or anything maybe I’m not qualified to
comment on that part of the issue but I am a professional goldsmith
and a gearhead…so I think I’d be annoyed if I picked up a copy of
Popular Hotrodding and found it full of articles on sailing.

I’ve got nothing against sailing but maybe I bought the mag to see
pictures of, I dunno, engines n stuff?

There’s a basic rule in business…serve your customer or they go
elsewhere. I don’t know SNAG’s reasoning but just judging by the
things said here, pro and con, I wouldn’t think its a publication
I’d be interested in.

28 
The reason was not any "indignant reaction", but simply that the
magazine had changed directions and did not fit my needs any more.

It seems so simple… It’s like in a gallery when you say, “I don’t
think it means anything” and the owner starts into, “But you don’t
understand…” What if I do understand and I just don’t think it
means anything?

Most gumball machines will dispense plastic rings, if you catch them
right…

A note of nostalgia - my guess is that many readers here are
speaking of the “new” Lapidary Journal, after they went glossy. The
“old” Lapidary Journal (50’s-60’s) was put out by hobbyists and Okies
and slab-lickers and had a real homespun, hand layout look and feel
to it. It was a little strange, but it was seriously cool at the same
time. Probably never was another magazine quite like it…

29 
A note of nostalgia - my guess is that many readers here are
speaking of the "new" Lapidary Journal, after they went glossy.
The "old" Lapidary Journal (50's-60's) was put out by hobbyists and
Okies and slab-lickers and had a real homespun, hand layout look
and feel to it. It was a little strange, but it was seriously cool
at the same time. Probably never was another magazine quite like
it...

Yes. By my count, there have been three phases. The original, the
glossy but still very much lapidary-oriented later one, and the
current one, which tries to cover a much broader field, but lost
most of it’s attraction for stonecutters. It does seem to be trying
to get a better balance now, and I may re-subscribe in the future.

Al Balmer
Sun City, AZ

30

Hi All,

Brian’s thoughtful blog post on “what is a metalsmith” got me
thinking.

Wielding a hammer-smithing-is for me an incredibly satisfying
activity, but my personal definition of “metalsmithing” has over the
years grown beyond torches, hammers and strict limits of material
and process. Everything seems like grist for the mill… Like many,
if not most, I try to strike a balance in my work between
concept/content, form and the traditions of jewelry regarding
function and durability. I have established a set of parameters
within which I tend to work (to my advantage and to my detriment)
and there is a list of requirements against which I vet new materials
and techniques. But these are parameters that I’ve established for
my work and not those that that I need to hold others to. Everyone
makes the decision on what they are comfortable with and, as long as
all parties are informed as to the realities of material selections
and capabilities, it’s all good. Some of the work that I see out
there excites me, some doesn’t. Some material and formal choices
would never be my own. And some of what got me going years ago just
doesn’t light me up anymore while ideas and materials that I may have
once dismissed hold a whole new allure. The most exciting work for
me, these days, comes out of the traditions of metalsmithing, growing
outward from and referring to them while stretching and reapplying
them to other materials and tools. This is a living tradition. People
approach jewelry and metalsmithing for a variety of reasons. For some
it is a hobby or diversion, for others an expensive obsession (maybe
an unrequited career path) and for a fortunate number a way to
support their families. So, in my opinion, there is no
one-size-fits-all set of rules governing the making and material
choices in the field (the exception, of course, being the arena of
ethics- another conversation).

The hackles on my neck begin to rise when people express their
opinions on what a jeweler or metalsmith is in a dogmatic fashion.
Statements that begin with (or express the belief) “jewelry is” or
"art is or is not" signal to me an intolerant and perhaps shallow
view of the field. I’m afraid that the problems that some posters are
having with SNAG or Metalsmith run quite a bit deeper than the name
of the organization. I believe that some posters are angry and feel
attacked and judged by the “art”/academic side of the field, which is
embodied by SNAG. The name argument is old, perennial and-to some
degree- valid. But the indignant posters come across as feeling
somewhat duped or taken advantage of. As if they have blindly joined
an organization (or purchased a publication) that purported to be
one thing and was in fact another. (Like a cat fancier buying a
magazine called “Kittens on Parade” and finding pages filled with
soft-porn cheesecake shots of women.) I wouldn’t buy or join
something without taking a look first.

It is a somewhat Pavlovian reaction that I experience when I read
these dogmatic postings on Orchid. My reactions to their reactions
come from the opposite side. After encountering the field as an art
class in college I knew early on what type of work I wanted to make.
I also discovered quickly that the key to a technical education was,
for me, outside of school, at the bench. I sensed that this was where
I could find out how to build the things that I wanted to make. Those
years at the bench were gloriously informative and peopled with
generous coworkers but were at times also filled with bitter and
burned out jewelers who were intolerant and dismissive of the type of
work that I wanted to make. I learned to keep my mouth shut and not
share my goals with them lest I elicit another chorus of
"artsy-fartsy". It has been a long time since I have worked in the
mainstream side of the business. But even now I see much of the
jewelry dogma and judgment coming from the proudly non-academic
/anti-ivory tower posts on Orchid. I hold neither BFA or MFA but I
have to try very carefully to respond to these posts without rancor.

As a maker (a term which for me incorporates but is not limited to
designer, problem solver, engineer, craftsman, artist and artisan), I
have felt at times marginalized by the trends that I’ve seen within
SNAG and expressed in the pages of the magazine. Some of it is not my
cup of tea, conceptually and formally. But I find it wasteful to
dismiss it on the face of materials, process or idea. I am more
interested in deciding why it is not working for me or in
articulating the reasons that I consider it to be poorly executed or
sloppily conceived.

But after all is said and done, I can see how some SNAG-critical
posters can feel somewhat betrayed. After spending a career-lifetime
developing the skills and talent to be at the top of one’s craft I
can imagine how seeing the term defining that career (in their eyes)
misapplied and wielded cavalierly could be irritating and even
insulting… I have certainly felt this way in the PMC threads that
have flared up every now and then. When some PMC enthusiast brashly
declares that anything that can be fabricated (or cast) can be
replicated–more efficiently – in PMC the throbbing of the vein in
my forehead knocks my hat off! I have made a life in this field
making work that I care about for reasons that at times may or may
not involve marketability or even the strict notion of wearability.
At this point in my career I’m very interested in other (non-metal)
materials and techniques. But I begin to feel condescended to when a
practitioner who has chosen to devote their career to producing more
classical objects from traditional materials states or implies that
non-metal(smithing) investigations are somehow invalid or don’t
belong within the field of metalsmithing. I am a metalsmith and the
objects that I produce, while sometimes not consisting majoratively
of metal, are a result of that training and exist with in the field…

There is good jewelry and poor jewelry. In metal, wood, fiber, gut,
PMC, Fimo, spun sugar and even macaroni. There are teapots that are
functional and vessels that were never meant to hold tea but can
still be considered teapots in their conception and design. For me it
is a matter mostly of honesty and intent and one to be considered on
a case by case basis.

Take care,
Andy

31

Thanks Andy Cooperman, for an articulate and heartfelt perspective
in your recent post on this thread.

Andy is obviously a person who thinks deeply about things. It shows
in his work as well as in his words. That’s what I like about his
work and about him as a person.

Many on this forum have particularly strong feelings about both
Metalsmith and SNAG, on both sides of the fence. If the sharing of
those feelings is pensive and thoughtful and well intentioned, it
doesn’t have to adversarial. Creating a few bridges over the fence
seems more productive than trying to build the dividing structure
even higher.

I like the posts that present a different vantage point than my own
myopic point of view, and compel me to widen my perspective a bit
more. Andy consistently does that, with his insightful commentaries

Michael David Sturlin
http://michaelsturlinstudio.ganoksin.com/blogs/

32 
Yes. By my count, there have been three phases. The original, the
glossy but still very much lapidary-oriented later one, and the
current one, which tries to cover a much broader field, but lost
most of it's attraction for stonecutters. It does seem to be
trying to get a better balance now, and I may re-subscribe in the
future.

Al - i wonder if what is happenning is that there isnt any money in
rocks and cabs ? or maybe there never really was any money in rocks
and cabs ? or that people today expect there will be money in rocks
and cabs ? i am not sure i am old enough to know this but i do know
most people today want a return for thier efforts and it is really
pretty darn expensive to outfit yourself with what it takes to cut
and polish and it takes lots of time and most of the buying public
does not appreciate the efforts of a slab-licker and rock hound in
my own small opinion

best regards goo

33 
problems that some posters are having with SNAG or Metalsmith run
quite a bit deeper than the name of the organization. I believe
that some posters are angry and feel attacked and judged by the
"art"/academic side of the field, which is embodied by SNAG. The
name argument is old, perennial and-to some degree- valid.

I have to agree with Michael D. S. - a very moving little essay by
Andy. Personally, I don’t really care very much, but I think it’s a
useful discussion none the less. What is SNAG about, and what COULD
it be about? I’ve never been a member, BTW - never will be, either.
I’m not angry, attacked or judged (who cares…), what I am is
profoundly dissapointed in what SNAG has become. Used to be it meant
something, and Metalsmith magazine was important, useful and
inspirational. Andy talks about metal clay (which I heartily agree
with… ) Metalsmith has largely gone towards those sorts of things,
in many people’s minds. For those who have watched it over the years,
I think it’s pretty safe to say that it has “dumbed down” rather than
ramping into something more and better. The proof of the pudding is
in the tasting, and you don’t gain an audience by telling them they
“should” appreciate it - they will subscribe only because they want
to subscribe, and because the magazine speaks to them. That this
discussion exists, and that it’s not the first time, says much.

It’s true that the two are different animals, but again we need to
look to the old world. Go to The Goldsmith’s Company:
http://www.thegoldsmiths.co.uk and just click on “Technology and
Training”. To my mind, SNAG has had the potential to provide that
sort of support to the US jewelry industry (of which we all are a
part), and it just doesn’t even approach that sort of thing. It’s not
labels - I see the point of “Metalsmith” being about metal, but Andy
is right about not being narrow, too.

The problem is that Metalsmith HAS become narrow itself - it’s just
that it’s narrow in the other direction. The good thing about Orchid
as an alternative is that it DOES speak to everyone, in effect.
Metalsmith doesn’t speak to me, and it’s just that simple…

34

Hi all,

I’ve been skimming out of marketing/branding curiosity since while
I’ve been meaning to hook up with my local guild, I’m not familiar
with “Metalsmith” or known SNAG as the parent org before this thread.
Pulled up their website today and here are two branding reactions as
well as my $0.02:

  1. All of this is anecdotal and while it may represent a
    significant faction, it’s also easily dismissed by
    management–especially coming from the outside. Having been on the
    board of a volunteer org I know how stretched they always are for
    time and skills, but from your the SNAG looks like a fair sized
    group, and I know at least a couple of you are reading this thread,
    so…

a) When was the last time SNAG did a member survey? How extensive
was it in content and sample? Did it address the publication at all?
Any trending from previous survey(s)? I’m guessing it’s been a while
or someone might have mentioned a survey in the thread by now. No
matter how close you feel you are to your membership, with 3,300 of
them, if you haven’t been getting quantitative feedback at least
every other year, there’s a fair chance your connection is off in at
least one or two key spots.

b) Does the magazine have an ongoing article suggestion or feedback
system separate from the contact page on the website?

c) Ever tried categorizing and tallying the threads on the SNAG
forum to see what topics are recurring? (Assuming it’s not moderated
to the point that dissention is squished, but even then the admins
should have an archive of blocked posts.) This is also
anecdotal/qualitative data, but a good secondary source of feedback
straight from the membership, and even a skim without tallying would
help provide ideas about what to ask on a survey.

d) Ever crunch membership rollover including any demographics
collected when people sign up/cancel and timing of significant
organization changes (fees, publication mods, chapters closed, etc.)?
As many years as you can reasonably pull data for and/or you think
will provide useful insights–different populations shift at
different paces.

  1. The page I went straight to from Home was Even if I’d never seen
    this thread, I would have found the “Metalsmith” cover
    featured–amputated toes–both repulsive (harsh, sorry, but accurate)
    and completely inconsistent with the magazine title and “Society of
    North American Goldsmiths.” I have no idea what the story is behind
    the image as it’s “artistically” placed in isolation on the cover,
    but the designer could have potentially retained my interest in
    several ways. (And yes, I do have graphic design along with the
    MarCom and research in my background.)

a) A prominent title explaining the photo that I could absorb from 3
feet concurrent with the image and publication name. Yes, it reduces
the impact of the photo, which is exactly the purpose in this case.
It off-sets any dissonance (and in this case distaste) for anyone who
sees the publication on a newsstand or gallery coffee table. You
can’t assume the issues will only end up in subscribers’ hands.

b) An airbrush fade rather than bloody flesh cut on the foot and toe
rings or chainmail would have made me perfectly happy.

c) If it’s actually made of metal and surface colored, then showing
it half-painted or even just mold/metal shavings and a brush/pigment
next to it, or two pieces by the artist for unfinished/complete, or
cross-section, would have changed it from gross to impressive. Don’t
let a graphic designer’s generic aesthetic overrule your branding.
You don’t need to look like some cluttered crafting weekly, but as an
artist subscribing to develop professionally, I’ll find a hint of
what/why far more intriguing than a pretty black box, even if that
hint is just that it’s visibly made of metal. You could even
Photoshop the half-painting or cross-section as long as you admitted
it in the article (vs. back of cover or some errata section).

But as it is, that cover looks better suited to “Forensics
Quarterly.” At the least, the Join page should swap to a more metals
or jewelry related one, even if this is the latest issue.

$0.02) Since I’m not a SNAG member and haven’t seen the publication
at all yet, the rest is of course completely dismissible :-). I’m a
relative newcomer to the craft and naturally perpetually blown away
by the scope of possibilities in working metal, but I can’t imagine
even the veterans have nothing left to learn…

Hot forging (rarely addressed beyond ferrous), lamination, and cold
forging from classic anvil work, to fold forming, rolling, drawing,
and chasing. Hot connections from fusing to soldering–along with
their umpteen fluxes, firescale preventers, heat shields, surfaces
and aids. Cold connects both static and kinetic such as hinges.
Issues in combining metals with disparate materials, especially in
hot connects or at different production stages. Annealing and
hardening and gauging temperatures. Presses from Arbor to Hydraulic
and dies. Hand sawing vs. assorted power saws vs. dies vs. plasma
cutting–and tips for different metals. Granulation and filigree.
PMC vs. and with various other casting and smithing techniques. Wire
weaving and wrapping. Surface treatments from sandblasting to patinas
to etching to anodizing to plating to enamels and pigments–and how
they interact with other materials. Stone settings for different
techniques, including maybe quick tips or links for drilling 101.
Jump ring production and incorporating mail/chain elements. Making
your own tools and creative alternatives to traditional gear.

Modularization and other production techniques. Make vs. buy and
finding hourly studio space with large gear. Chem and physics
refreshers for what’s happening as we work–beyond the proper name
of “Pickle” and that it’s an acid ;-). Ergonomics and shop safety.
Torches from your first butane to starter ($<250) propane to
modifying tips and configuring multiples off a single tank setup.
Artist profiles with tips/ tricks/ favorite tools. Book, class,
conference, and gear reviews at different price/ experience levels.
Emerging technologies, gadgets, or materials such as S88–and how
they might compare/interact with classics. The business side of the
industry such as a key law, new vendor, new channel, pricing models,
or marketing technique such as DIY photography. Recurring Annual
issues on particular topics…

I just suppose I’m having trouble seeing how they’re running out of
metal-based items to the point that this has become an ongoing
issue. I do relate to the folks who started the thread saying they
felt “Metalsmith” had gone off track if pieces featured have
frequently not had metal in them. I only made it about 1/3 of the way
through “500 Bracelets” because I consider jewelry to be wearable art
and something 5" in diameter, or made with barbed wire, white
feathers or Kleenex does not fit my definition of “wearable.” More
mundane examples would have been more inspirational.

At the same time, as you can see, I’m also not talking all metal all
the time. For the slightly tangential articles, such as the business
issues, I’m not suggesting “Metalsmith” become “Businessweek” or
other specialty journals, rather it draw attention. Like a recurring
column with a series of news blurbs and “For more about the import
tax see [links].” Or a sidebar to round out an article on making
bails and other findings “Drilling Stones 123 + [links/books]”
because a fair number of metal workers might wonder “How do I drill a
stone anyway?”

Cheers,

Ann Ray
Jewelry site coming soon :slight_smile: Day job:
http://www.querygroup.com
http://www.practicalsurveys.com

35

Hello Andy et al,

Once again Andy has articulated beautifully his respect for the
range of interests in our field. It IS a broad field of
’stuffmakers’, all of us invested in the end products that our skills
and talents manifest. Thank you Andy for so carefully speaking your
thoughts on this subject.

Linda Kaye-Moses

36

Many good points have been in the recent thread about Metalsmith and
SNAG. It’s accurate that after forty years SNAG’s name doesn’t convey
entirely who we have become, and that Metalsmith has evolved to
include jewelers, designers and metalsmiths who are working with some
alternative materials. Yet its primary focus consistently remains
metals.

As the board member liaison to Metalsmith I invite you to check out
the inside of the current issue, or any other issue we’ve published
this year. There’s more to the magazine than the most recent cover.

Go to snagmetalsmith.org and click on the /Metalsmith/ magazine to
flip through the entire issue. You will find a range of subjects that
reflect a variety of approaches within our field. There are articles
on Contemporary Mourning Jewelry, Metalwork of the Brass Age,
departments featuring Mary Lee Hu’s studio and an exhibition review
of Wendy Ramshaw’s Drawing in Gold.

Yes there are some unusual pieces, and yes not everything is made
solely with metal. Some work will inspire and others may not.
However I believe we are united by our training and background in
metal that has prepared us to combine other materials into our
jewelry and metalsmithing in many different ways. Metalsmith’s
mission statement is “to document, analyze and promote excellence in
jewelry and metalsmithing. In fulfillment of the goal of producing a
significant document of the field, editorial content will emphasize
contemporary activities and ideas, with supportive content to include
relevant historical work and critical issues.” This is a diverse
field, and Metalsmith strives to represent the diversity that our
field encompasses. As Andy said, we are lucky to have both Orchid and
SNAG/Metalsmith

Sandie Zilker
SNAG Board

37 
Thanks Andy Cooperman, for an articulate and heartfelt perspective
in your recent post on this thread.

Thank you Michael, for commenting on Andys’ thread, and thank you
Andy, for a balanced perspective. I’m one of those passionate people
with an opinion on SNAG etc. But I do in reality find “my” reasons
for making what I do dismissed by many people, college educated and
non college educated. I can relate to over opinionated, presumptuous
attitudes that short circuit the learning process.

Raymond Brown

38 
i wonder if what is happenning is that there isnt any money in
rocks and cabs ? or maybe there never really was any money in
rocks and cabs ?

Goo (and all…) the original Lapidary Journal (don’t know when that
was, but it was long ago…) was also somewhat mis-named. It could
have been better called Rockhound Journal - cutting rock was almost
secondary. Many of the articles were the like of “We went to North
Carolina to an old quartz mine and this was our experience…”
Others were about cutting, yes. It was mostly a magazine about rocks
for and by people who love rocks, and it was pretty funky for a long
time. Living in New Mexico, it was pretty much all over the place -
you might find it in a dentist’s office… I don’t have any
personal knowlege of the finances of it - my own guess is that it was
a magazine of the 50’s and 60’s -into the 70’s, and like the
hairstyles of the time, it fell out of fashion… It still survived
(survives?), of course, but it just isn’t what is was…

39 
i wonder if what is happenning is that there isnt any money in
rocks and cabs ? or maybe there never really was any money in
rocks and cabs ? or that people today expect there will be money in
rocks and cabs ? i am not sure i am old enough to know this but i
do know most people today want a return for thier efforts and it is
really pretty darn expensive to outfit yourself with what it takes
to cut and polish and it takes lots of time and most of the buying
public does not appreciate the efforts of a slab-licker and rock
hound in my own small opinion

Hi, Goo. Yep, you’re right. It’s like golf - millions of people
enjoy playing it and dream about going professional, but only a very
few make a living at it, and even fewer get rich.

Rocks and gems are a great hobby, but the average lapidary will
never get back the money they put into it.

Al Balmer
Sun City, AZ