Bridging the gap : Concept & Technique
As I was exploring my facebook friends status reports this morning, I came across one that really got my brain ticking on a subject that has been in the background of our world since the start of my career.
Why is there a Grand Divide between the Conceptual and the Fine jewelry worlds? Fortunately, there are leaders within our industry working steadily to build a bridge. This conversation was inspired by Cindy Edelstein,Jewelers Resource Bureau, and her upcoming talk on Fine Jewelry in an Arts & Crafts Gallery. Interestingly, the first comment on her status in which Cindy mentioned her talk was a woman claiming it’s just not possible or at least not worth it to show Fine jewelry in such an environment.
The question this raised in my head is…just when did Fine Jewelry stop being “Art”.
Historically, if we look to the early 1900s, we can see jewelry of such extreme artistry how could it be referred to as anything but and yet the creations of that time had every quality that defines “Fine jewelry” today. The makers balanced creative vision with an extreme mastery of techniques. Artists such as Rene' Lalique and Georges Fouquet incorporated many techniques such as hand engraving , fabricating, stone setting, and enameling together to create illustratively and sculptural stunning works of art. Each creation pushed the envelope of design and displayed thorough attention toward wear ability and technique.
It is in our artistic nature to push the envelope. Just as Duchamp signed the toilet, Warhol painted the soup can, and Pollack splattered paint, contemporary jewelry was born. Concepts were pushed in new directions and techniques were broken down in new ways. Statements were being made and of course still are today. The challenge with the push toward concept and away from technique is that the envelope can be pushed only so far before it tears. As contemporary jewelers or instructors within this world, it needs to become our focus to keep technique to the foreground of our work. We should try to make a point of not just asking why, and look closer at how. We should hone our skills and remember that the objects we create, artistic statements aside, are meant to be worn.
I believe, Fine Jewelry does belong in the Art Gallery arena; for it is there that the consumer may better recognize the artistry which lies behind its creation. Through this, jewelry may enter a space in which it is not overlooked and overshadowed by the production world, but rather can be revered simultaneously for its technique and artistry.
Why is there a Grand Divide between the Conceptual and the Fine jewelry worlds? Fortunately, there are leaders within our industry working steadily to build a bridge. This conversation was inspired by Cindy Edelstein,Jewelers Resource Bureau, and her upcoming talk on Fine Jewelry in an Arts & Crafts Gallery. Interestingly, the first comment on her status in which Cindy mentioned her talk was a woman claiming it’s just not possible or at least not worth it to show Fine jewelry in such an environment.
The question this raised in my head is…just when did Fine Jewelry stop being “Art”.
Historically, if we look to the early 1900s, we can see jewelry of such extreme artistry how could it be referred to as anything but and yet the creations of that time had every quality that defines “Fine jewelry” today. The makers balanced creative vision with an extreme mastery of techniques. Artists such as Rene' Lalique and Georges Fouquet incorporated many techniques such as hand engraving , fabricating, stone setting, and enameling together to create illustratively and sculptural stunning works of art. Each creation pushed the envelope of design and displayed thorough attention toward wear ability and technique.
It is in our artistic nature to push the envelope. Just as Duchamp signed the toilet, Warhol painted the soup can, and Pollack splattered paint, contemporary jewelry was born. Concepts were pushed in new directions and techniques were broken down in new ways. Statements were being made and of course still are today. The challenge with the push toward concept and away from technique is that the envelope can be pushed only so far before it tears. As contemporary jewelers or instructors within this world, it needs to become our focus to keep technique to the foreground of our work. We should try to make a point of not just asking why, and look closer at how. We should hone our skills and remember that the objects we create, artistic statements aside, are meant to be worn.
I believe, Fine Jewelry does belong in the Art Gallery arena; for it is there that the consumer may better recognize the artistry which lies behind its creation. Through this, jewelry may enter a space in which it is not overlooked and overshadowed by the production world, but rather can be revered simultaneously for its technique and artistry.
Much like the argument about where fine art ends, and commercial art begins - I think this discussion is fueled by our desire to separate ourselves from that 'consumer-based' aspects of our art. For some reason, we tend to see art work that is done 'for art sake" as purer than art work that is done for commercial reasons.
ReplyDeleteabsolutely....Afterall it is uninhibited. Creation for the sake of creation and yet the commercial end drives us forward and even challenges us in directions which we maybe would have never headed. I have found my technique has improved by some of the most frustrating of the custom projects and the beauty is...at the end of the day that improvement returns with me to the piece I wish I could have been on. It really is all about Balance.
ReplyDeleteI would have to agree, when designing a piece of fine jewelry, inspiration is required. Inspiration is required when developing art as well, this seems like a viable comparison. I think most jewelers would agree that this is definitely a category of art, and sometimes creating a piece takes longer than creating a work of art.
ReplyDelete