The Studio Glass Movement

[Studiodunn]

Just a little question burning in my wee brain for some time now regarding the Studio Glass Movement in America:

I'm curious why it appears that Michael and Frances Higgins have been, for the most part, excluded from the conversation. Why do you suppose that is? I know there are folks here who are perhaps more informed on this subject than I, and I honestly want to piece this together in my mind. Thank you for any insight you may have on this subject.

Ever Curious...

[Brock]

The Studio Glass Movement in America was a movement of glass blowers, individual small studios, not factories, that sprang up after a workshop, actually two workshops at the Toledo Museum of Art organized by Littleton, Labino and others in 1962. It had nothing to do with any other glass discipline. The Higgins worked privately in their studio at the same time as Maurice Heaton and a few others were rediscovering fusing. Two very different movements . . . I don't think the Higgin's ever got the credit they deserved.

[bob proulx]

Brock, I am always amazed at your knowledge on this subject.
Bob

[Studiodunn]

The Higgin's were at at least one of the Toledo workshops. The first. They had been successfully working with glass (fusing and slumping) in their living room for 20 years prior to the Toledo worshops. I've heard them referred to as "Early pioneers in studio glass"...But if Studio Glass was considered primarily "blown glass", then what category would a museum place the Higgin's in to distinguish their important contribution? Was it that The Studio Glass Movement hero's and heroines all made "fine art" and the Higgin's were more in the "craft" category? Just honestly trying to understand where they fit in in the conversation and context of the Studio Glass, because they had a long, established, productive history of creating beautiful works in their "studios".

I guess I need to further my research...I am very biased because I have always loved their work. It was just interesting to visit several different Museums this past year and not really see much reference to the Higgin's. At Toledo, there was one lovely drop out vase by Frances that I was happy to see in their collection. But I also feel they have been significantly over looked.

[Brock]

Was it that The Studio Glass Movement hero's and heroines all made "fine art" and the Higgin's were more in the "craft" category?

Yes, I think so.

[Bert Weiss]

Higgins, Heaton, and Sydenstrycker worked with adapting frit techniques used for vitreous enamel on metal, to glass on glass. During much of the 20th century, glass frit on metal played a huge role in architecture and consumer products. When I was a kid, gas stations were all covered with glass enamel on steel panels. Switching the substrate to glass was a small leap, but required compatible glasses. The big deal is that a glass frit on metal firing would take 15 minutes, and the layer of glass was so thin, that annealing time was not a time consuming factor.

I once attended a lecture by Harvey Littleton, where he explained that the studio glass blowing movement was bolstered by the GI bill after the Vietnam war. Soldiers came home to a free college education. Art schools were attractive and glass blowing was a most exciting program. As the GI bill dried up, so did the university furnaces go cold. There are few left, relative to the 70's and early 80's. The good news is that there was sufficient critical mass to keep the glass movement alive and growing.

Previous to Labino and Littleton, glass blowing was done in factory settings, and accomplished with skilled teams, ranging from apprentice to gaffer. Labino and Littleton developed glass recipes and furnace designs that could be scaled down for small studios.

For a centuries, the Italians messed around with creating murinnis and fusing them. Klaus Moje began to mess around with sawing up color bars, made for glass blowers, and fusing them together. He inspired the Bullseye Glass Company to create a palette of compatible fusing glasses.

Back in the 80's the craft and glass galleries that showed glass, had an aesthetic that leaned heavily towards round, transparent, and shiny. Few works that did not display these characteristics got sold. The public's aesthetics have evolved, thanks in large part to the efforts of Dan and Lani at Bullseye Glass.

[Studiodunn]

I would still argue that Higgin's were part of the Studio Glass Movement, (just another facet or branch of the movement) and that they made significant contributions that were, what I would deem as more ART than craft. They may have lost a little respect from their peers when they went commercial for a period of time, but they quit that eventually and went back to the studio fulltime. It appears they ran to the beat of their own drum, rather than engaging with galleries of the time, or organized glass groups, like GAS. They also didn't "teach" or pass on their techniques (that I am aware of), which it appears is a critically important factor which also helped fuel the Studio Glass Movement along. Those may be factors that inhibited them from being fully recognized. I'll save the rest of my pontificating for my next blog post...Like I know what I'm talking about? lol Just trying to piece a puzzle together in my mind.

At Sofa I picked up a copy of Studio Glass in America: A 50 - Year Journey by Ferdinand Hampson, president of Habatat Galleries in Michigan. Interesting read! While most of the artists in this book work with blown glass, there are a couple who don't necessarily. One works with a torch...Others cast...I may be wrong, but Toots Zynsky's beautiful pieces are not using "blown glass".

[Bert Weiss]

The studio glass movement as typified by galleries like Habatat, was extremely snobby and exclusive when considering whose glass to show. They first warmed up to sculptural kiln cast glass artists, like Dan Clayman. The big exception was Klaus Moje, however, at the time, he was working with glass blower color rods. For many years GAS was home to mostly blowers. The board of GAS realized at some point, that kiln fired glass belongs inside the fold. This was long after the Higgin's day. Slowly they have widened their scope. Some galleries, like Pismo, began to show kiln glass artists. Today the field is far more inclusive.

Dan and Lani, at Bullseye Glass worked really hard to get kiln fired glass the recognition it sees today.

[Tom Fuhrman]

Richard Lalonde gave a great presentation at last year's GAS conference on the early days of fusing and decorating with features on The Higgins and others. The Higgins were at some of the earlier GAS conferences as I met them at one. They and I were alum's of the same design school but they were there many years before me. There were others doing some similiar things as the Higgins but were more commercial and used primarily in the lighting industry, just like the majority of torch work was scientific ware. The Studio movement was more about creating glass that was art in a small studio and considered that by respected museums and galleries and have it attributed to an individual., not a "factory".

[Studiodunn]

I would have enjoyed seeing Lalonde's presentation. I wonder if it was recorded or available on DVD?

The impression I am getting after talking with a couple folks, is that the Higgins may have attended some GAS meetings, but they were not heavily involved. I personally happen to be more intrigued by Frances' work.

[Geo]

In terms of who has been left out of the conversation, I also feel the same way about Edris Eckhardt. Please correct me if I'm wrong, and I really do mean that, but I do get a "good old boy's network" impression of the Studio Glass Movement.

[Havi]

I would have enjoyed seeing Lalonde's presentation. I wonder if it was recorded or available on DVD?

.

ME too


Havi

[Tom Fuhrman]

It was recorded. GAS should have it, check with Richards he may have a copy. he highighted Erdis Eckardt as well.