Back at it. (SUPERSTAR: in my mind)

Posted by Randi O'Brien | Posted in | Posted on 12:58 PM

0

Wow! It has been... FOREVER since I've tinkered with this blog. In Grad-School it was my  mission to document as much of what I was reading as possible.
What happened to that mentality (talking to myself)?

It has been a year POST-Grad-School... and my mission has been finding work, staying afloat, finding stability, building kilns, balancing family, and figuring out a new direction in my work. Not that I have accomplished any of the prior, but maybe it's time to begin the documentation again. That is: Documentation of my readings and how people discuss "craft." As I pick this blog back up, a majority of my readings will be ceramics centric and selfish to this, my favorite, medium... CERAMICS.

Cheers!
P.S. is it unusual that my feeling about working with this blog "would best be expresses in a monologue from the made-for-TV movie Portrait of a teenage Centerfold, starring Miss Lori Singer from Footloose." - Mary Katherine Gallagher in Superstar.

http://youtu.be/l2K4Fw-pmLw

Panel Discussion: Critical Making the Pink Elephant in the Room. By Randi O'Brien

Posted by Randi O'Brien | Posted in | Posted on 12:11 PM

0

Randi O’Brien
 National Council on Education for the Ceramic Arts
Panel Discussion: Critical Making the Pink Elephant in the Room

Location: Tampa Convention Center - Room 22
Time: 3:30PM Thursday, March 31st
Slide 1
Thank you Ben and my fellow panelist, and with much gratitude I would like to thank Trey Hill, Julia Galloway, and Beth Lo who have generously supported me over the past 3 years. It is certainly an honor to be hosted by NCECA and we are all grateful for Chanda Glending’s role is the opportunity. Slide 2

When Ben first approached us to participate on this panel and proposed the juicy sound bite “Critical Making: the Pink Elephant in the room”, I questioned which; of the many pink elephants in ceramics, was he referencing.

There is no doubt that there are many superficial hierarchies and comparisons in the ceramics field. Nevertheless and regardless of which ceramic pink elephant you decide to be burdened by, it is simply a metaphor for denial. It is my goal to depart from various justifications for denial, and focus on the bold and subtle qualities of critical making.

 It is easy to assume we know how to be critical, but I often see students and artists missing the entire point of critical thinking, and thus lacking the ability to make critically. So let me be clear from the beginning.

Critical thinking results in interpretation, analysis, and evaluation. Simple right? Unfortunately and what predominantly gets over looked are the foundational tools of evaluation. These tools are an explanation of the formal, methodological, contextual, and conceptual considerations of the work.  Investigation into formal (what I mean by this are the materials, and the elements and principals of design- line, shape, color, form, etc.), methodology meaning the procedure or technique in creating an object, contextual describing  the inter-related conditions in which something exists, and conceptual are the foundations to critical thinking and making.

 Equally important to critical making by means of clear analysis is the understanding that critical making is not a new method limited to the twenty-first century. It is a highly developed lineage that originated in ancient western civilization. For centuries, Socrates has stood as a model of intellectual inquiry: the ideal critical thinker. It is not any particular idea that earned him this reputation. “It is his method of questioning and cross-examination that is taken as the original model for critical thinking.”[1] Slide 3

What is exciting for this panel in particular is the occurrence and relationship of critical making to critical theory.  Critical making is not simply aligning yourself to an aesthetic theorist, following his plan, and calling it critical. In fact I find that critical making often ignites modes of critical theory. Slide 4

We see examples of critical making precede critical theory in the faithful and honest genera scenes of the 1700’s and the French enlightenment defined by Montesquieu and Diderot. Slide 4/ part 1 Manet preceding Charles Baudelaire’s writings on modernity in the 1860’s, and later Roger Fry in the 1920’s Slide 4/part 2 and Meyer Shapiro in the 30’s specifically address the way in which art precedes and is isolated from theory in its initial manifestation.

 My rational for reminding ourselves of this developed lineage of critical making is to address the pink elephant representing those who argue that they make critically because they follow the writings of Ruskin and Morris, or really any former critical theorist for that matter. As I stated before critical making has proved historically to precede theory.

  It’s not that I want to dismiss former theorists, as their ideals and modes of making in their context were brilliant. Rather I want to address a potential reason for denial in contemporary terms. Specifically, how many who still seem to be burdened by a pink elephant are missing a present contextual evaluation of their work.

 If the ultimate goal is contemporary relevance (and trust me … I do not assume nor imply it to be everyone’s goal), then I believe we can remedy most of the pink elephants by asking: was the art making critical by means of formal, methodological, contextual, and conceptual avenues.

What I would like to do now is look at a vein of art from the past 5 to 10 years that focus specifically on community and discuss the means by which they are making critically. Slide 5

I wanted to start my images with a familiar and obvious face. Ultimately what we are seeing here is the full employment of the 4 tools of critical making, which has certainly been one of the key factors to Ai Weiwei critical acclaim. Slide 6

Ai Weiwei has in the recent years become a household name in the contemporary scene. Between activism, philosophy, photography, film, and social and cultural endeavors he creates both subtle and bold political pieces that take a critical stand towards the drastic changes presently taking place in China. His ceramic works include examples that highlight a range of unprecedented use of Neolithic and Han dynasty vessels as historic “ready-mades”. Slide 7

 The formal qualities in his ceramic work are direct and poignant:  Neolithic ceramic vase or jars 5000 – 3000 BCE; and industrial paint. Slide 8

Methodologically his work is equally direct: With casual indifference he grabs a Neolithic jar , as though he is at a paint your own pottery store, and dips or drips thick, synthetic matt poise pinks, royal blues, teals, yellows, and reds. Slide 9

 The true brilliance of Weiwei’s work is the interconnectivity of form and method with context. In Western culture vases, urns, and other pots of this era are usually cherished for their anthropological importance, and are further seen as cultural treasures.  By employing them as ready-mades, Weiwei removes their context of preciousness only to reapply in a different system of cultural evaluation.  Philip Tinari has talked about “contemporary China’s curious relation to its past, a situation where destruction of historical artifacts happens almost daily.”[2] Weiwei has emphasized Chinas historical destruction by creating a gesture of cultural washing that virtually eliminates the past in support of a new synthetic-colored future. Slide 10

 While ready-mades have become a tool frequently used; this however, is not the well-worn tactic of the readymade famously employed by Duchamp, wherein the object lacked cultural worth until placed in an Art context.  “Instead, Weiwei’s chosen ready-mades already have significance”[3].  Working in this manner, Weiwei transforms precious artifacts into contemporary fine art. Slide 11

 Weiwei has challenged popular ideas on communities that are far reaching and include communities from the prehistoric past, to material culture, Eastern and Western, communities willing to destroy for the opportunity of success, and communities buying for symbolic status both in the historic and contemporary sense. ­ Slide 12

Similar in content, yet working with unfired clay, Kristen Morgin captures ideas of the past and the way the present lives in it. Whether they are teacups, carousel horses, cars, or Slide 13 comic books her works are splintered into many pieces and have the patina of timeless age. Accordingly, “each work simultaneously memorializes and destroys the object it portrays. Her decayed life-sized objects are realistic in scale and shape, yet they are abstracted through the process of their implied degradation.”[4] Slide 14

Her work occupies an intersection of cultural and economic interests that pays close attention to the ideal of property, value and negligence. Through her use of formal and methodological tactic she recognizes bodily ruin and hardship that are at once romanticized in her solemn and modest compositions. Slide 15

Similar to Weiwei, Morgin’s reflective nature on collection and selective choice on materiality calls into question the contextual standers for valuation and the contemporary misconception of timelessness. Slide 16

Staying in the mode of clay and not ceramics, Dutch designer Maarten Baas who was recently nominated designer of the year, has created a series title “Clay Furniture”[5]. Clay furniture is made of synthetic Clay, with a metal skeleton inside to reinforce the structure. Each of the pieces are made in his studio, and are “uniquely handmade by Baas and his team of ten assistants”[6]. Baas brings a linear finesse that is used to wage blunt satires and pose cutting ironies. Slide 17

  These works ranged from the experiential to the sculptural and they all pose a certain rebuttal to traditional design methodology. While Baas in his own words; “approaches design without knowledge of, or care for, predisposed boundaries,”[7]  his work is self reflective, and in fact acknowledges former traditions, establishments, and supposed truths to unveil its contemporary fallacy. Slide 18 In this self professed post-post modern approach, he features making about making in an attempt to make the audience aware of its ficitionality. 

 His body of work; while considered design, has the imperfect edge of an artist playing in the studio, which reflects his criticism of western ideology on design. And further reflects his desire to remain un-tethered by definitive “one-liners that tell us how things actually are, (i.e. form follows function).”[8]  Slide 19

 The materiality of synthetic clay introduces the proverbial un-tethered,  fantastic or impossible elements into a narrative that is otherwise normal. It is between the worlds of post modernism and systemized cultural interests where Baas has challenged both the global market community, his micro community of design, and the connoisseur community of clay and ceramics. Slide 20

Recently the show Object Factory: The Art of Industrial Ceramics’ at the Gardiner Museum, Toronto, challenges micro community and self investigation. While on the one hand this show captures design genera’s from the boldly cynical, re-use, DIY, digital manufacturing, and the traditional, on the other hand the artists meet at the crossroads of critical investigation. Slide 21 The artist share a deep ethical and social consciousness, the will to question the limits of design and the potential to be experimental and innovative. Slide 22 This is a community unafraid to engage conceptuality from both a skeptical and traditional avenue. The curators of these shows have questioned everything and the selected artists have done equally as much. Slide 23

What your seeing here is a tea pot by Jorgen Bey from his minuet series titled 144 minuets teapot. In the same vein as Baas, Bey calls into question making about making. Bey’s conceptual works demonstrate how the table can represent an intellectual space for feasting on ideas. Slide 24

Before I move on from the design phase of my talk I would like to encourage you check out this 5 min video about three designers who were approached by Jurgen Bey Slide 24/ part 1to document the way in which they could design critically about a specific location with Dutch clay as a foundation for inspiration.

 The designers of Atelier Kolk “operate as biologists, archeologists and ethnologists during their design process”.[9] Slide 24/part 2 They spent a year in residence at a farm in the Dutch Noordoostpolder, where they meticulously “investigated the specific vegetation, historic roots and local culture, to create designs that are strongly rooted in this specific area”.[10] Slide 24/part 3 It is a perfect illustration on the extensive mode of critical making. It’s an absolutely wonderful video and the work is even better!

(Design research in the Noordoostpolder: Atelier NL and Maarten Kolk http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P4chUCehdbY)

Slide 25
In the wake of the DIY movement and Craftivism we have recently seen a global and micro community rallying for a greater cause.  Last year Michael Strand put a spin on Indy-Knitting Craftivism and Craftfitti by developing the ArtStimulus Project. “Art Stimulus was set up as a clearing house for craft generosity projects that quietly gift everyday people with handmade objects.”[11]  Strand’s original art stimulus project was centered on the village like communities of Dwight, North Dakota (population 75) and Dwight, Nebraska (population 259).  Slide 26

 In Strand’s words; “Over a decade ago I had an idea to become more proactive about how Art is disseminated into society. Growing increasingly uninterested in "pedestal work" and the art market in general, I looked at other media”[12]- The Cup. His art stimulus cups are delivered by hand, and each cup is in a box with the top lid open, revealing a cup. On the top of a box is a sticker that simply reads "Hello" and on the interior is a note to the person who finds the cup. Strand makes a direct and simple connection with people and challenges the way that they would typically encounter handmade art or craft. Slide 27

The contextual act of gifting personal handmade objects to strangers in this techno-culture and hyper-reality is nothing short of a critical action. While straightforward, this basic action focuses on the nature of contemporary community through an investigation of accountability and engagement.

 At the same time Strand questions modes of community and art distribution, he also breaks away from the conventions of a structured aesthetic theory and employs methods of social practice[13]. Many postmodern artist, as a response to modernism, which frequently set its audience apart from themselves, attempt to involve the audience as much as possible over the course  or in a series of work. This participatory mode of making and engagement is also seen in the Obama Ware project, the recent auction Handmade for Japan, and the much anticipated Cuplomacy. Slide 28

 I have looked at the former artists from a ceramic or clay centric point of view, however in works that tackle making from a critical perspective; I believe they can then be evaluated alongside any so called blue chip, or fine art concepts. Again diminishing the pink elephant who concerns its self with inequality amongst the arts.

The bottom line is that critical making in the ceramics field is one of many broad techniques to engage our audience. Yet it is the artist who engages critical making through the use of formal, methodological, contextual, and concept that are unburdened by any supposed pink elephant.
                                                                                                                                                           

To switch modes here: After I had finished this presentation Ben recently informed us that he would like us to address our own work and the modes we make critically… Slide 29 While I’d like to attest to how I’m working towards some greater conceptual significance; In truth, I don’t feel I make as critically as I could. Slide 30 My instincts rest at the heart of history and investigating what was. I constantly worry about making historical estrangements and misappropriating imagery without intent. Slide 31 I’ve recently finished a series of deer that, methodologically were founded in a deep appreciation for craftsmanship, but lacked a connection to the formal and contextual elements in my work. Slide 32I was trying to create clean forms, with voluptuous or sinuous tension; which in this deer series, hinted to the traditional model of allegorical narrative and sculpture. Slide 33 While I referenced historical allegory I tried to transform them into allegories of the present rather than historical re-appropriations.
Slide 34 I’ve just entered into my final year of grade school. In this next 8 months I hope to refine my ideas, in the attempt to better employ my use of materials, techniques, and context into a holistic and fluid concept. The true responsibility for me is to the idea. Thank you.
Bibliography
Carroll, Robert Todd, Becoming a Critical Thinker, (©2004 Robert Todd Carroll)

Friedman Benda Gallery, “Ai Weiwei: Dropping the Urn”, Press Release, Feb 24- April 18            2010, http://www.friedmanbenda.com/exhibitions/2010-02-24_ai-weiwei- dropping-the-urn-ceramic-works-5000-bce-2010-ce/

 Haeusslein, Allie, “From the DS Archive: Ai Weiwei”, Daily Serving: An Internation           Forum for the Contemporary Visual Arts, http://dailyserving.com/2011/03/from-the-  ds-archive-ai-weiwei/

 Johnson, Garth, “STRANDED!”, Extreme Craft, http://www.extremecraft.com/

Kolk, Maarten, “Atelier NL: Design in the Noordoostpolder, Holland”, Design research    in the Noordoostpolder: Atelier NL and Maarten Kolk,        http://www.artbabble.org/video/boijmans/atelier-nl-design-noordoostpolder-   holland

 Maarten Baas, Clay Furniture, http://www.maartenbaas.com/

New Museum of Contemporary Art, “Kristen Morgin Biography”, Exploring         Unmonumental http://www.gclass.org/artists/kristen-morgin

 Strand, Michael, “Dwight Projects,” Art Stimulus: Bringing Art to the People, http://artstimulus.org

So creative!

Posted by Randi O'Brien | Posted in | Posted on 8:23 PM

0


The BPA-Toe Jam from Gregor_Helmond on Vimeo.

Conditions of Possibility

Posted by Randi O'Brien | Posted in | Posted on 8:02 AM

0

It is precisely the break between the world of sensual immediacy and critical theory that the greatest of our ceramic makers and thinkers plunge. This “timeless urge that moves us again and again” should enter into mediation with critical theory, for what seems as oil and water is in fact the cream in our coffee on the four am shift of a brisk January firing. I’ve returned from the Critical Santa Fe symposium and have had the time and mentorship to productively reflect from this opportunity. The following are my observations, interpretations, and conclusions.
No three page summation would be able to satisfy your interest in the occurrence of the symposium, or the integral after hour table talk between historians, critics, and makers. Let’s be realistic; your assumptions are correct if you assumed that there would be stagnant conversations created by the individual insecurities of a maker, your assumptions are correct if you anticipated term twisting, and linguistic labyrinths that leave one lost in translation . Your assumptions are correct if you envisioned both impassioned arguments, and profound sincerity . Your next question would of course encourage me to divulge all of the insightful information received. While there were a variety of panels and individual speakers it would be safe to refine the overall context of the CSF symposium to two main discourses and disciplines: 1. Critical Theory of Modernity and 2. the act of writing in criticism (how words have been used in criticism, poetry, the growth of descriptive words, where criticism is published, where it has failed, etc) . As I can now safely presume your eyes may be glazing over and your final disappointed assumption; that there would be a divorce between process and critical theory, comes full circle. If it is the case that you assumed as much, then you are incorrect to a degree. I’m sorry to say that no presenter successfully touted the metaphorical significance of shaping clay, nor the importance of one’s journey. However; while I appreciate the significance of both, that wasn’t the point and rightfully so. Nevertheless this does not necessarily negate the avenues presenters offered for broader theoretical connections to materiality, process, and the journey.

In the community of woodfiring, it is my conclusion that you as a general group are the most insightful in continental philosophical awareness and, in the context of firing, carry on with most excellent discussions of love, poetry, and other forms of divine madness. Yet within this niche we lack quality control and broader interconnectivity of disciplines, which has sadly led to (you have of course heard this criticism before) incestuous reproductions both in writing and making. This of course leads me back to elaborating on the dialogue of CSF and the relationship of how ones specific discipline (in this specific case woodfiring) can and does in fact converge with a broader interconnectivity to theory.

If your aim (in terms of making or critiquing) is to redefine the relevance of woodfiring to the establishment of 21st century aesthetics then you must read and look at the development, growth, and current trends of modernity as a broad discipline; politics, faith, economy, and yes even ceramics. You must read Baudelair, Lacan, and Foucault. While it is not everyone’s aim to redefine relevance; the point of this example is, for one to dictate the nature of what is or should be, one must probe to the foundational basis of knowledge and experience. In terms of CSF and in terms of general artistic progression, modernity will always be a key theory. In general observation it seems that makers of a traditional vein cringe at the word modernity. Yet, I plead with all traditionalists to not assume that the idea of modernity equates to the severance of ties with historic practice. If one were to probe the dialogue of modernity, they would find encouragement to understand and reflect on the historic, and to further analyze and respond to ones immediate surroundings through a historic and educated understanding.

I would argue that while woodfiring and ceramics is of a rich historic linage, the connection to modernity is still applicable. If we were to briefly evaluate the socio-political concerns and trends of today (aka: modernity) the dialogue would be bombard by ideas of conserving, sustaining, and developing communities on both global and individual levels. Of course these communities include everything from environmental, financial, educational, to smaller communities like the “Church of Craft” , my Montana fishing community, and to the extent of this article the woodfiring community. This connection to community is vague, often over played, and incorrectly inserted in woodfiring. However, CSF’s conclusion and my point are for the woodfiring niche to look at the qualities of their discipline and connect these qualities to alternative and broader disciplines. Take a moment to look at trends with Hugo Boss nominees (The Hugo Boss award is overseen by the Guggenheim Museum and is revered and honored as a leading contemporary art award): Roman Ondák, Caofei, Rirkrit Tiravanija. Caofei has developed a utopic interactive cyber world to compensate for the pitfalls of contemporary society, lack of community, and a disconnection to place. Rirkrit Tiravanija’s work assesses the socio-political role of the artist through a literalization of “art’s primitive functions: sustenance, healing, and communion” , by empting out galleries and inserting makeshift kitchens or homes for viewers to simply eat, live, or converse at will. These acts of contemporary community construction and inquiry mirror acts of woodfirer’s who gather local weathered rock fragments to construct the simplest of serving objects- a bowl. This act of community assessment mirrors many woodfirer’s sentiment that local clay “provides the richest connection to place”. The labor and process of woodfiring is by no accidental chance a commentary on the value of one’s community and should be recognized as such. This is just one brief and oversimplified connection that the woodfirer’s processes’ have to modernity and contemporary critical theory.

While the niche of woodfiring further specializes itself with myopic technical or aesthetic alterations, we can of course argue with each other about the need for progression versus mastery, or we can look at how your processes, metaphors, and journey’s are overwhelmingly connected to the broader conversation of modernity and the general discipline of art. Ultimately for the discussion of woodfire aesthetics to regain its integrity in contemporary conversations artist and critics must address the unity of theories, traditions, processes, and objects as a working whole. Only then will woodfire practices redefine its relevance to the establishment of 21st century aesthetics, and only then will woodfired objects transcend their quantifiable parts.

The bottom line of CSF and myself is not to encourage the counteractive conflict of art versus craft, tradition versus modernity, or colorful pots versus brown pots because all of these conversation could be sorted out and transcended by a maker-critic who proudly engages and analyzes his (or her) discipline, tradition, process, etc., and of course his relevance to a broader social picture. A simplistic brown bowl may seem empty and irrelevant in comparison to the complex conceptual endeavors of the ultramodern. Yet it is in the subtle curve and emptiness of your bowl that the actual and cultural function depends. It is in emptiness of a bowl that we can recognize our own societal emptiness, where we can see both the product of and answer to suffering. It is in the articulation of your clays connection to place, that society’s dislocation to place is best analyzed and evaluated.

When you sit down at your studio this week do some quality control. Look at your surface. Are you just another flash versus ash, or is their more you can to do better articulate your end goals. Honestly analyze your intentions and object. Maybe your conclusion is that you do in fact fit to a broader social dialogue and should thus be recognized for it, or maybe you’re simply making another Voulkos sculpture or MacKenzie tea bowl and woodfiring it because it reduces your accountability to surface. To either end this self realization will only better the visual culture of woodfiring. To either end this self actualization will help to marry critical theory and process in a union where we can examine the conditions of possibility.

Contemporary Ceramics and Critical Theory: Prestige, Professionalism and Perspective. by Glen R. Brown

Posted by Randi O'Brien | Posted in | Posted on 9:41 AM

0

This is an annotated evaluation of the following:

Contemporary Ceramics and Critical Theory: Prestige, Professionalism and Perspective. by Glen R. Brown
Glen R. Brown, “Contemporary Ceramics and Critical Theory: Prestige, professionalism and Perspective”  Ceramics: Art and Perception, No. 75 2009, 107-110.

Reviewed by Randi O’Brien

A profound article on fundamental short-sighting’s within the contemporary ceramics field, Contemporary Ceramics and Critical Theory: Prestige, professionalism and Perspective written by critic and Art History Professor at Kansas State University; Glen R. Brown, engages new perspectives on the demand for a change in ceramic criticism. Brown presents a rationale for critics and studio ceramicists to engage a sophisticated approach of critical writing and critical theory. He argues that stereotypes and assumptions of criticism create barricades the make for naiveté within writing and the dialogue of critical ceramic evaluation which Brown believes is pivotal when addressing the outcome and lament of critical discourse within ceramics. Brown is particular to point out new methodologies for contextualizing and the cannon’s for art historians to deconstruct specialized fields and further connects these practices to the promotion of critical ceramic evaluation. My overall impression is that Brown has prescribed his contention in an authentic and dedicated way while invoking a pertinent and appropriate authority.

Ceramicists would find this article useful for developing a holistic perspective on the pitfalls of their grievance’s with the quality of critical evaluations on ceramic work as well as a new insightful perspective on the continuing dialogue within ceramic evaluation. Brown has been able to call attention to the downfall of criticism within ceramics and further suggest an in-depth understanding of both ceramics and criticism (history, tradition, process, practice, etc.) which gives support to his key claim that; “it seems to me terribly naïve to suppose that an increased emphasis on criticism will automatically exert a positive and prestigious effect on contemporary studio ceramics. Such an outcome can only be truly realized if criticism is itself approached critically- which is to say if criticism is not promoted blindly but rather with an adequate understanding of its history, the vocabulary that has developed around it, the variations it currently assumes, the problems that confront it in various fields in the humanities and the potential benefits and negative consequences that it may entail when applied to contemporary ceramics”

Pee Wee Herman Does Arts & Crafts

Posted by Randi O'Brien | Posted in | Posted on 9:35 AM

0

Slanted and Enchanted: The Evolution of Indie Culture. by Kaya Oakes

Posted by Randi O'Brien | Posted in | Posted on 9:14 AM

0

This is an annotated evaluation of the following:

Slanted and Enchanted: The Evolution of Indie Culture. by Kaya Oakes
Kaya Oakes. Slanted and Enchanted: The Evolution of Indie Culture (New York: Holt Paperbacks 2009)

Reviewed by Randi O’Brien

Slanted and Enchanted: The Evolution of Indie Culture written by author and lecturer at UC Berkeley Kaya Oakes, investigates the practice of indie culture. Oakes presents a journalistic perspective of indie communities for readers to understand the central tenets of DIY community service and empowerment. Oakes is poetic in her journalistic perspective and observations of DIY culture that includes Early Independent Networks, Punk Roots, Indie Regionalism in Berkeley, Independent Literature, Comics, Indie Rock, and Indie Publishing in the twenty-first century, as well as Crafting and the Indie Design movement. My overall impression is that the author has a poetic knack for observation and presents her observations in an engaging and descriptive story board.

In this book, the author has relied on personal observations and sites personal accounts of early zine and indie interviews. While this article is a smooth read that is entertaining and well articulated the Crafting and Indie Design portion of her book is lacking any complex observation or evaluation of the DIY craft movement. Though lacking in contribution to the larger craft dialogue in terms of DIY craft history or contemporary perspectives craftsmen would find this article useful for an entertaining and journalistic perspective of the later indie and DIY movement.

DIY: The Rise of Lo-Fi Culture. by Amy Spencer

Posted by Randi O'Brien | Posted in | Posted on 9:11 AM

0

This is an annotated evaluation of the following:

DIY: The Rise of Lo-Fi Culture. by Amy Spencer
Amy Spencer, DIY: The Rise of Lo-Fi Culture (London: Marion Boyars, 2008)

Reviewed by Randi O’Brien

A comprehensive and holistic book on the development, distribution, and evolution of DIY culture, DIY: The Rise of Lo-Fi Culture written by author (with an upcoming book soon to be out in 2011 London Clay), currently researching a PhD in Cultural Studies, Amy Spencer. Spencer presents a wide-ranging perspective of individuals working to create their own cultural identity in the wake of pop consumerism for an audience interested in the emergence of indie/DIY technology or an audience interested in the cultural revolution that has developed into today’s modern DIY culture boom. Spencer is impressive in her approach to address the multiple veins within the development of DIY culture, she highlights press, art, political, music, radio, punk, queer, feminism, and craft (to name a few) and has further addressed specific categories, individual, and movements within each genre. The depth of knowledge and research into these categories and sub-categories is masterful. My overall impression is that Spencer has developed this documentary in a realistic way while utilizing relevant, understandable, and applicable language.

While Spencer’s book only briefly documents craft, craftsmen would find this book useful for cultural developments and movements that connect current craft communities use of technology and have further united craft in the search for independence from mainstream culture. Though lacking the professionalism of a well edited scholarly book the book makes up in over all mass and wealth of interconnected knowledge to a variety of twenty first century independent practices.

Handmade Nation: The rise of DIY, art, craft, and design. edited by Faythe Levine and Cortney Heimerl

Posted by Randi O'Brien | Posted in | Posted on 9:09 AM

0

This is an annotated evaluation of the following:

Handmade Nation: The rise of DIY, art, craft, and design. edited by Faythe Levine and Cortney Heimerl
Faythe Levine and Cortney Heimerl, ed. Handmade Nation: The Rise of DIY, Art, Craft, and Design (New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 2008)

Reviewed by Randi O’Brien

A book on the romantic perspective of “do it yourself” (DIY) artist/craftsmen, Handmade Nation written/edited by craft shop and gallery owner, author, and maker Faythe Levine, and crafter and critic Cortney Heimerl, is supporting documentary to a DVD under the same title. The editors present a compilation of personal experiences of DIY craftsmen for a target audience that could be open to the vast community of craft, however due to the limited perspectives (education, age, and function) this article reads more as a catalogue or an Etsy bio page of multiple craftsmen. My overall impression is that the author has missed an opportunity to specifically address the rise of DIY, art, craft, and design in our handmade nation. Few of the 28 articles mention the development of the DIY practice, as the title suggests. While the title suggests potential avenues of research and craft theory development, Levine and Heimerl compose these documentaries in a preverbal sales catalogue that markets the individual crafters experience and blogs or websites, which ironically is quite universal and uninspiring. This is not to say that there are no noteworthy or commendable experiences within this documentary, rather it is a question of what makes DIY an important and progressive movement within the crafts that Levine and Heimerl do not answer. Levine and Heimerl propose an exciting direction yet are missing the basics of description, interpretation, and evaluation that make for good documentaries, writing, and critical analysis; which this topic certainly deserves.

Readers would find this article useful in the search of exciting craft based blogs; however I would personally recommend Garth Johnson’s extreme craft blog for better articles and direction on DIY, indie, and contemporary craft culture.

Ceramic Lesson

Posted by Randi O'Brien | Posted in | Posted on 9:04 AM

0

Making Space for Clay?: Ceramics, Regionalism, and Postmodernism in Regina Saskatchewan. By David Brian Howard

Posted by Randi O'Brien | Posted in | Posted on 9:01 AM

0

This is an annotated evaluation of the following:

Making Space for Clay?: Ceramics, Regionalism, and Postmodernism in Regina Saskatchewan. By David Brian Howard
David Brian Howard, “Making Space for Clay?: Ceramics, Regionalism, and Postmodernism in Regina Saskatchewan” in Neo Craft: Modernity and the Crafts, ed. Sandra Alfoldy, 33-46 (Nova Scotia: The Press of the Nova Scotia College of Art and Design, 2007)

Reviewed by Randi O’Brien

Making Space for Clay?: Ceramics, Regionalism, and Postmodernism in Regina Saskatchewan written by the Associate Professor of Art History at the Nova Scotia College of Art and Design, David Brian Howard, researches the building of universality within modernism and the “revolt against modernist orthodoxy” within ceramic artist of Regina Saskatchewan. Howard presents a view and model for ceramic artist to investigate the contradictions of regionalism and cultural resistance which the author believes is topical when addressing the context of rejection of modernism and the “relationship between diverse material practices and regionalism”. My overall impression is that the author has fleshed out the claim in a personal and immediate way while making the argument approachable to a variety of regions.

The Fate of Craft. by Larry Shiner

Posted by Randi O'Brien | Posted in | Posted on 8:59 AM

0

This is an annotated evaluation of the following:
The Fate of Craft. by Larry Shiner
Larry Shiner, “The Fate of Craft” in Neo Craft: Modernity and the Crafts, ed. Sandra Alfoldy, 33-46 (Nova Scotia: The Press of the Nova Scotia College of Art and Design, 2007)

Reviewed by Randi O’Brien

An inquisitive article on contemporary issues of the word craft and the anxiety and associations that follows craft classification, The Fate of Craft written by author, and Emeritus Professor of Philosophy, History, and Visual Arts at the University of Illinois Springfield, Larry Shiner, considers descriptions and associations of the word craft as well as examines “crafts position between design and art”. The author presents a line of reasoning for craftsmen, designers, and artist to observe the overlap and barrowing of elements (hand, material, mastery, and use) between design, art, and craft that does not necessarily make three distinct areas of practices, which the author believes is necessary to fully understand that the term “craft” has a flexibility and strength in its ambiguity. Shiner regularly proposes philosophical and critical questioning of the term craft that elicits multiple perspectives and rationales. My overall impression is that the author has expanded the discussion of craft labeling anxiety in a voice and line of inquisition that develops strength for the term craft in a non-binding and masterful way.

In this article, the author has relied on past theoretical debates in the crafting field, some of which include Peter Dormer in the Culture of Craft, Paula Owen in Objects and Meaning, David Pye in the Nature and Art of Workmanship. Makers and thinkers of all practices would find this article useful for an understanding on how each field or practice barrows fundamental elements from one another, as would craftsmen looking to develop an argument for the nature in which craft museums, craft magazines, and other craft organizations are dropping the term craft from their titles to adopt other labels.

Replacing the Myth of Modernism. by Bruce Metcalf

Posted by Randi O'Brien | Posted in | Posted on 8:57 AM

0

This is an annotated evaluation of the following:

Replacing the Myth of Modernism. by Bruce Metcalf
Bruce Metcalf, “Replacing the Myth of Modernism” in Neo Craft: Modernity and the Crafts ed. Sandra Alfoldy, 4-32 (Nova Scotia: The Press of the Nova Scotia College of Art and Design, 2007)

Reviewed by Randi O’Brien

Bruce Metcalf writes a masterful article on contemporary social conditions within the ceramic field. Replacing the Myth of Modernism written by jeweler, author, and lecturer Bruce Metcalf, examines crafts envy and assimilation into the arts while calling for and addressing the fundamental differences essential to craft. Metcalf presents a contention for craftsmen to set aside modernism (or the principles that have elevated modernism) to re-address social and psychological functions, production, craftsmanship, the senses (tactility), and decoration to reshape meaning that is “relevant to social conditions today”, which the author believes is fundamental and beneficial for the survival and sustainment of modern craft. Metcalf is keen to point out modernist theory and the consequential effects on crafting practices. My overall impression is that the author has developed his contention in a practical and persuasive way while exercising a clear, relevant, and convincing methodology.

Craftsmen and critics would find this article useful for reigniting meaning and significance in what they choose to decorate, produce, sense, and critique within the crafting field. The author has been able to identify key obstructions in modernist theory of craft which gives support to Metcalf’s claim that; craft would be better off to “relinquish art envy and stop aspiring to the alleged nobility of fine art”. In summary, I believe that the author’s position that through embracing the conceptual foundations of craft; not art theory, has been progressively developed and justified.

Craft Talk

Posted by Randi O'Brien | Posted in | Posted on 8:53 AM

0

Affectivity and Entropy: Production Aesthetics in Contemporary Sculpture. by Johanna Drucker

Posted by Randi O'Brien | Posted in | Posted on 8:52 AM

0

This is an annotated evaluation of the following:

Affectivity and Entropy: Production Aesthetics in Contemporary Sculpture. by Johanna Drucker
Johanna Drucker, “Affectivity and Entropy: Production Aesthetics in Contemporary Sculpture” in Objects and Meaning: New Perspectives on Art and Craft, ed. M. Anna Fariello and Paula Owen, 24-34 (Maryland: Scarecrow Press Inc., 2004)

Reviewed by Randi O’Brien

Affectivity and Entropy: Production Aesthetics in Contemporary Sculpture by the Martin and Bernard Breslauer Professor of Information Studies at UCLA Johanna Drucker, considers the production of values and the values of production. The author presents a disorienting and technically backwards article for an audience interested in objects and meaning. She attepmts to convey a shift in attitude towards affectivity and entropy which the author believes is “how to make art count [and] how to make it show up on the cultural scene. Drucker writes a sloppy article that take well over fifty percent of her article to summarize her main thesis which is unclear and whishy washy. My overall impression is that the author has come to her topic point, thesis, and conclusion in her last four paragraphs

In this article, the author has relied on linguistic artifice to support her article. Though lacking clarity and efficiency of language, and word choice, as well as a defining and direct argument the article does have some concise sentences’ that recollect the article to a general foundation, and in terms of future improvements if this article were to be stripped down to the core topics and address in a logical or well articulated format the potential of the argument could be better understood and valued.

Moving Beyond the Binary. by James H. Sanders

Posted by Randi O'Brien | Posted in | Posted on 8:49 AM

0

This is an annotated evaluation of the following:
Moving Beyond the Binary. by James H. Sanders
James H. Sanders, “Moving Beyond the Binary” in Objects and Meaning: New Perspectives on Art and Craft, ed. M. Anna Fariello and Paula Owen, 88-103 (Maryland: Scarecrow Press Inc., 2004)

Reviewed by Randi O’Brien

This is a commendable and persuasive article on fundamental considerations of art history, aesthetics, and criticism within the larger framework of cultural studies and social theory within the visual domain, and specifically craft field. Moving Beyond the Binary written by the Assistant Professor in the Department of Art Education of Ohio State University James H. Sanders, interrogates and offers solutions to traditional hierarchal distribution of aesthetic. The author presents a line of argument for historian, critics, educators, makers, and viewers to redevelop a critical valuation process that strips away the continuation of gendered, racial, and queer labeling to embrace the importance of “theories of craft that dignify the multiple experiences of the maker”. Which the author believes is essential for aesthetic perception in craft aesthetic theory. Sanders is quick to call attention to the separation of the intention of a maker and the interpretation of the viewer sighting situations in gender, race, and sexuality where the maker avoids a sense of identity to fit in to the more acceptable hetronormative hierarchies. Sanders further address that this dismissal of identity reaffirms old standards in aesthetic hierarchies and regress the potential of craft theory to male-dominate, white, homophobic labeling. My overall impression is that the author has developed the rational in a persuasive, controversial, and praiseworthy way while offering both critical questions of the field and resolutions to problems addressed.

In this article, the author has relied on surveys of active studio artist, statistics, and prior aesthetic theory in both the craft and art fields. Historians, critics, educators, makers, and viewers would find this article useful for potential direction in new aesthetic theory as well as suggestions of developing a stronger critical base when evaluating art. Though lacking a humble perspective the article provides specific critical questioning, specific examples, and specific resolution that are refreshing and exciting to read.

In summary, I believe that the author’s position that “more than craft’s simple inclusion within the range of objects considered as art, seeking instead a valuing of craft and art studio practice as models for policy analysis, research, and pedagogical performance. These include explorations of craft as metaphor, as theoretical process, and as a foundation for libratory curriculum. In short”, “an aesthetic theory of craft that challenges the raced, gendered classed, and the hetronormative notions that have imbued fine art with surplus economic and cultural capital and denigrated craft’s functional and social embodied meanings”, has been engagingly defended.

Critical Approaches: Fragments from an Evolution. By Patricia Malarcher

Posted by Randi O'Brien | Posted in | Posted on 8:47 AM

0

This is an annotated evaluation of the following:

Critical Approaches: Fragments from an Evolution. By Patricia Malarcher
Patricia Malarcher, “Critical Approaches: Fragments from and Evolution” in Objects and Meaning: New Perspectives on Art and Craft, ed. M. Anna Fariello and Paula Owen, 36-53 (Maryland: Scarecrow Press Inc., 2004)

Reviewed by Randi O’Brien

This is a reflective article on the enduring discussion of the conflicting critical approaches taken when evaluating the field of craft. Critical Approaches: Fragments from an Evolution, written by author and fabric artist Patricia Malarcher, investigates a “body of critical writing on craft that has been evolving slowly”. The author presents a view for craft connoisseur to see the lineage and confliction within critical evaluations of craft as a general field; including glass, fibers, and ceramics, which the author believes is finally making its impressions on the critical landscape for the crafting field. Malarcher is dedicated to point out multiple perspectives of critics evaluating the same or specific shows of artist and craftsmen. My overall evaluation is that the author has represented her research in a creditable way while employing a clear and logical lineage of the critics who perceive art and craft from both perspectives and biases.

In this article, the author has relied on chronologic research of critics who have evaluated craft from the 1940’s to the mid-1990. Malarcher sites both insiders and outsider critics of the crafting field including Harold Rosenberg, Newman Rice, and Roberta Smith. The author contends that while on the one hand critical evaluation has elevated in significance through the nineties, on the other most critics leave out a holistic engagement of the crafts. For example when one review of a show is published it may rely heavily on form, function, and process, yet entirely overlook expression and vice versa. Emerging critics would find this article useful for the mistake that have been mad and the needs that must be addressed when evaluating craft objects. Reader will find that after reading this article they are better able to use the individual and selective successes Malarcher pinpoints of contemporary critics and will be able to harmonize these specific case studies to develop a holistic approach to evaluating both craft and art. Though lacking any actual suggestions for improvement or suggestions of reading by critics who Malarcher feels connect all the critical foundations of craft evaluation the article is a good stepping stone to address the continued need for critical evaluation the engages material, process, function, expression, and aesthetic effect.

Labels, Lingo, and Legacy. by Paula Owen

Posted by Randi O'Brien | Posted in | Posted on 8:45 AM

0

This is an annotated evaluation of the following:

Labels, Lingo, and Legacy. by Paula Owen
Paula Owen, “Labels, Lingo, and Legacy” in Objects and Meaning: New Perspectives on Art and Craft, ed. M. Anna Fariello and Paula Owen, 24-34 (Maryland: Scarecrow Press Inc., 2004)

Reviewed by Randi O’Brien
This is a noteworthy article on fundamental labeling and use of language within the craft field. Labels, Lingo, and Legacy: Craft at a Crossroads written by the president of the Southwest School of Art and Craft Paula Owen, addresses classifications within the crafting field that perpetuates ambiguity “leaving the field without a central base, theoretical framework, or ideological principles”. Owen presents a contention for scholarly documentation to examine the motives and a structure by which we classify or declassify craft which the author believes is significant for the integrity of contemporary craft and emerging hybrid artist/craftsmen. Owen is keen to point out the crossover of conceptual and tactile dimensions within emerging crossover artist and/or hybrid artist, yet warns artist looking to call themselves hybrid-crafters to address function as a primary objective within craft. My overall impression is that the author has developed this line of argument in a plausible way while expressing a simple and appropriate voice.

In this article, the author has relied on older writings none dating post 2000, and directly quotes prior articles on object and meaning to defend her position. Owen sites Janet Koplos (1992), Howard Risatti (1998), and other scholars of objects and meanings. The author contends that a crossroads is emerging in the craft field that may split or scatter crafting ideology. Artist and craftsmen crossing the divide and balancing both fields within there objects or concepts would find this article useful for reference of critics and writers documenting and supporting this hybridization; even though Owen may be biases against this hybridity, as would craftsmen who are looking to strengthen their general knowledge of crafting categorizations. Though lacking contribution to the larger methodological or theoretical debate of categorizations by means of solution or potential resolutions the article provides critical questioning to the overall debate.

Retro Walk It Out

Posted by Randi O'Brien | Posted in | Posted on 8:39 AM

0

Craft within a Consuming Society. by Gloria Hickey

Posted by Randi O'Brien | Posted in | Posted on 8:33 AM

0

This is an annotated evaluation of the following:

Craft within a Consuming Society. by Gloria Hickey
Gloria Hickey, “Craft within a Consuming Society” in The Culture of Craft: Status and Future, ed. Peter Dormer, 83-100 (New York: Manchester University Press, 1997)

Reviewed by Randi O’Brien

Gloria Hickey is a contemporary craft writer and curator. In Hickey’s article she address the attributes that make craft appropriate as a gift as well as the process in which people inject themselves into the action of consumerism. For example, the way in which we experience the process of shopping as a retailer, buyer, and receiver and the way in which we add meaning or a value to a specific object; security blankets. What is especially exciting about Hickeys article is the engagement with authenticity and cultural identity that a buyer will align with craft. While the association of cultural identity and authenticity is synonymous with craft in the consumer mind and often elevates the identity of craft with in markets, Hickey addresses the down fall of misconceptions in the assumption that craft is rustic, irregular, or rudimentary in nature, often lending to a primitive aesthetic.

Hickey concludes that a majority of craft based objects are not bought as gifs yet rather as a distinctive article or collectable. This is in direct correlation to a consumer’s relationship to expectation and association of marketing. The consumer is essentially buying the craftsman, the limited edition, or the specimen which often skews or re-contextualizes the craft object. Hickey’s article is an appealing theoretical addition to discussions on value and meaning within objects that are handcrafted in contemporary society. Additionally Hickey’s bibliography is full of references on materialism, rituals, gifts, marketing, tourism, consumption, and other theoretical debates on objects and meaning; 26 additional articles in total.

Craft and Art, Culture and Biology. by Bruce Metcalf

Posted by Randi O'Brien | Posted in | Posted on 8:30 AM

0

This is an annotated evaluation of the following:
Craft and Art, Culture and Biology. by Bruce Metcalf

Bruce Metcalf, “Craft and Art, Culture and Biology” in The Culture of Craft: Status and Future, ed. Peter Dormer, 67 -82 (New York: Manchester University Press, 1997)
Reviewed by Randi O’Brien
It takes immense dedication to effectively balance the roles of maker and writer. Bruce Metcalf is certainly a key model when looking to artists who are able to clearly articulate significant meaning and understanding in their field as well as retain the integrity of making. Craft and Art, Culture and Biology is one of a hundred plus articles written throughout Metcalf’s career, published in 1997 this is a mid-career article.

Metcalf clearly and articulately navigates through the mine field of the art versus craft continuum. Withinin Metcalf’s article his primary objective is to address the ineffective standards for comparison of art versus craft, through the different biological and social context in which craft and art are rooted. He engages this argument through two secondary points of view that promote larger understanding of the theoretical and historical context of craft. Metcalf opens with the first of his two standpoints by addressing the importance of craft retaining its materiality regardless of the philosophical tendencies of art. Craft as a class of objects needs specific characteristics and limitations: handwork, traditional craft materials (post industry), and context. While Metcalf argues that it is necessary for craft to address these characteristics, he also emphasizes the “elastic quality” of these terms. Although Metcalf uses the word limitation as a synonym of craft, he smoothes the water through an evaluation of dematerialization in post modernism. Concluding that craft limits are not negative in effect, yet the limits of material, technique, and context that post modern art lack is the supporting and defining structure of the craft world.

Metcalf further addresses the ineffective standards for comparison of art versus craft, through different biological means of hierarchies established in the art and craft worlds. Metcalf addresses intellectual thinking as a primary faculty of post modern art, and further questions the legitimacy of placing biological intelligences in hierarchies, for example bodily intelligence versus linguistic intelligence, or mathematical intelligence. The basis for Metcalf questioning is founded in the research of Howard Gardner, who places biological intelligence not in hierarchies, rather in separate divisions. Gardner’s research revises “the standard hierarchies of mind over body”, and suggests “that there is no biological basis for placing the various human intelligences in a hierarchy”. Metcalf concludes; through various reference to neurobiologists, anthropologists, and psychologists, that craft cannot be compared to an art world that places its values in verbal and logical cogitative abilities” because craft is a universal human nature that uses bodily intelligence equally to logical intelligence. To fully understand the capacity of craft one must evaluate craft through bodily intelligences as well as logical inteligences.

Metcalf’s main arguments are clear and convincing, and through his use of outside sources he develops an argument that contributes to methodological and theoretical debates in both the art and craft realms. This article is a valuable perspective of the difficulties between art and craft comparison.

Posted by Randi O'Brien | Posted in | Posted on 8:23 AM

0

This is an annotated evaluation of the following:
How Strange the Change from Major to Minor: Hierarchies and Medieval Art By: T.A. Heslop
T.A. Heslop. “How Strange the Change from Major to Minor: Hierarchies and Medieval Art” in The Culture of Craft: Status and Future, ed. Peter Dormer, 53-66 (New York: Manchester University Press, 1997)

T.A. Heslop's article is a documentation on the changing the hierarchies of artistic endeavors of the twelfth century. The hierarchies Heslop categorizes are founded in the separation of the forge and furnace versus painting and sculpture. Heslop defines the socio-political connotations of craft in the eleventh century, sketches out the developments, and further equates the status of crafting mediums (metal-smiting, glass, and furniture) to divine complicity.

Heslop pinpoints the attraction of material as the essential and key factor to the authority craft claimed in the eleventh century. Glass and metal ornamentation was an attempt for medieval patrons to mimic biblical representations of the art practiced in Bezaleel, the early paradise lands found in Havilah, and the garneshed walls of New Jerusalem. Both the technical and ornamental practice was equated to the divine characteristics of biblical peoples and land. Heslop describes the sift in the authority of divine craft to a focus on the representation of human form. During this shift of attraction to imagery Heslop describes craft as “attempting to play the games of painting and sculpture” and essential loosing the” power to amaze the senses by a dazzling display of color and virtuosity”.

Personal Evaluation
Heslop article is an exciting document of the relationship of crafting mediums and practice to divine conceptual agendas. Heslop is clearly biases towards the function of craft and the stimulation of senses through craft. He asks exciting and critical questions of the loss of the audience’s capacity to critically engage craft due to their lack of knowledge and inexperience with difficulty of making. He additionally questions the audience’s ability to look with informed imagination and sense the quality of things through their maker and themselves. Heslop questioning is biased yet articulated with honest evaluation and concern for the “minor” connotations of craft.