Comment

Comment by Jessica Todd on May 1, 2017 at 8:19am

Harriete, I just saw this and thought I'd respond since I've really enjoyed discussing things with you in the past - of course, all of this comes from my "civilian" opinion, and not the editor you were directing it to, but she responds in her video interview with Brigitte. As someone who works in traditional materials/processes as well as new technologies, I first want to say that digital fabrication requires training, skill, and trial and error just like hand fabrication. To do it well, you invest the same kind of work to develop skills, push the boundaries of possibilities, and craft a "voice" as a maker. Just as with handwork, when it isn't pushed very far it can be "blah," as you mention. But I feel the same way when I walk through a jewelry gallery and see chunky silver rings with cabochons - I respect the fact that people are making work, but, I've seen it a million times. It's not terribly exciting, to me. To others, could be quite exciting. So, I think there is a spectrum of "blah" to "wow!" and where the work lies will always be a matter of opinion and perspective. However, unlike hand fabrication, digital fabrication is quite new and so in its infancy it has yet to be pushed to its limits, which, to me, presents exciting potential.

I also want to say that often it is assumed digital fabrication and hand fabrication are two separate practices, but many artists incorporate the two, visibly or invisibly, in some very exciting ways and with plenty of merit. Methods of mass production like molding and casting (which many jewelers outsource), or hiring someone to saw out a design you created, have been around and accepted for a long time, but I feel as though they don't have any more or less merit than 3D scanning an object to print in wax and cast, or getting something laser cut instead of a studio assistant doing it by hand. The difference is often that it is more affordable for the maker and requiring less equipment in one's own space, but I don't think that makes it "cheap" - I think that is more a question of taste (of both the maker and viewer). Anyway, like I said, just some things I have been thinking about in my own humble, un-titled opinion!

Comment by Harriete E Berman on April 17, 2017 at 9:27am

Brigitte, If it doesn't fit the moment, there is no requirement to ask...just thought that I would throw out a question.  

Comment by Brigitte Martin on April 17, 2017 at 9:18am

Harriete - I will ask the editor in chief and get back to you with a response!

Comment by Harriete E Berman on April 16, 2017 at 3:00pm

O.K. Tough question:
How does American Craft define it's audience?

It used to be that "Craft" was all about making it by hand with great skill. The tour-de-force of craft skills. 

Seems to me that this has evolved radically in recent years.

How much prejudice is there against the  "found object" or found materials. Though this has existed in the art realm for 60 years....is there still some resistance as defining this as "craft."

Also, is there any "craft" resistance to modern technologies such as laser cutting or 3-d printing?

Is there a problem with the laser cutting or 3-d printing as looking like the technology rather than the artist's brain/hand connection?.
For further explanation: A few years ago, I went on a gallery walk, and every gallery had laser cutting....and after a while, you just walked into the gallery and said to yourself, "more laser cutting" and moved on. It was a really boring crutch to expedient cost effective, (lower price) art making.

 

Harriete

Comment by Brigitte Martin on April 13, 2017 at 3:33pm

Harriete, I wanted to announce that next week, but I might as well do it now: I will be going live on fb Thursday morning at 11am CTR and Thursday afternoon at 3 CTR. That way people from both coasts can tune in conveniently. Looking forward to your question!

Comment by Harriete E Berman on April 13, 2017 at 1:51pm

Are we listening live?

What time?

I have a question.