Inspiration - Page 3 - WarmGlass.com

Inspiration

This is the main board for discussing general techniques, tools, and processes for fusing, slumping, and related kiln-forming activities.

Moderators: Tony Smith, Brad Walker

Post Reply
Brock
Posts: 1519
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2003 1:32 pm
Location: Vancouver, B.C.

Postby Brock » Sun Mar 14, 2004 1:12 am

Kevin Midgley wrote:Brock, For sure people will make similar textures for reasons you have explained so eloquently. The question is if people in their own way replicate a texture, wavy edge, application of foils, and then combine those elements with marks other artists consider to be their "look" that problems arise in the minds and pocket books of the "true" originator. You have to keep exploring the possibilities of your "look" to maintain an artistic edge. It is too easy to fall into a comfortable pattern of work and not explore design possibilities and grow.
Kevin


I agree Kevin.
My memory is so good, I can't remember the last time I forgot something . . .

PDXBarbara
Posts: 292
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2003 4:09 pm
Location: Portland, OR

Postby PDXBarbara » Sun Mar 14, 2004 3:02 am

Bert Weiss wrote:
People ask me why I would want to teach sink making. "Won't it create more competition for you?" My attitude is that the more glass sinks that the public sees, the more likely said public will go looking for one to buy. I am pretty confident that mine will be interesting to look at and I'm likely to get more business, not less.


Bert, your statement echoes Chihuli's attitude toward marketing & getting rich. (Phil Teefy talked about that in a marketing seminar once at HGH.) And Chihuli sure was right, eh? Unfortunately, of course, we all get to see pieces in-the-style-of-Chihuli all over the place. But Chihuli is a marketing star. And, to steer back to Jackie's original post, what's the status, on the continuum of creativity, of all those riders of Chihuli's coat-tails? (Even if Chihuli doesn't feel infringed?). In my opinion, they're commodities.

But we learn by imitating. All our lives. Primates are wired for it. It's not the end of the road. It's the beginning of the path. My writing prof. assigned us to imitate various writers in order to get INSIDE the structure of the story, essay, etc....what made that piece of writing great. In film school, one of the toughest, most invigorating assignments was to choose a scene from a b/w film, and reproduce it. Yow... nobody's pretending to be Ernest Hemingway, E.B. White, or Orson Welles. It's good exercise. But the influence of these artists merges with me, the imitator, in ways that would be tough to deconstruct. Doesn't make me great (wouldn't that be tidy?) like those artists, but they are in me.

There are people who profit by copying other work. They've always been around. Many succeed. That's life.

There's beauty in handing on what we know & do to others, to new generations. It's like seeding new births & is a gift to the future. Someone mentioned they learned pattern bars & highfires from Jack. I've learned a lot from Jack as well, though nothing I've made (except in his class) resembles his work at all. Jack learned these basic techniques from Klaus, though Jack took his pattern bars in his own direction. He's said he'd never sell Klaus-imitations...they were learning tools.

That's how things work, and work well. In our warmglass community, we've been developing a culture and a fresh tradition. Beautiful cycles & arcs & spurts of personal and collective growth. Some people become associated with a particular technique, even if they didn't invent it. It's not stealing to use the technique, even if you're not the one associated with it. Like Doug said about his coldwork (see Photography forum), battuto was around long before he was intro'd to it. After all, they were making pattern bars & chopping up cane to decorate kilnformed bowls thousands of years ago.

Use it if itakes you where you must go. You--and everyone else -- will know when you've crossed over into profiteering.
Barbara
Last edited by PDXBarbara on Wed Mar 17, 2004 4:08 am, edited 1 time in total.
Barbara Bader

Jackie Beckman
Posts: 475
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2003 5:01 pm
Location: Arizona
Contact:

Postby Jackie Beckman » Sun Mar 14, 2004 10:35 am

Don Burt wrote:If it was completely original it wouldn't be recognizable as art.

There's precious little originality out there to worry about. The hand-crafts are the last place originality shows-up. When it does, expect it to be ripped-off immediately and show-up in a Kay Beenie Weenie book (or whatever her name is). I just don't think its a problem.

My newest work is spiritual and low carb.


So Don, you don't see this as a problem?????:
http://dell.shutterfly.com/osi.jsp?i=67 ... 4fb1810564

Jackie Beckman
Posts: 475
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2003 5:01 pm
Location: Arizona
Contact:

Postby Jackie Beckman » Sun Mar 14, 2004 11:03 am

My newest work is spiritual and low carb.


Oh, and another thing Don - speaking of low carb. If you gain "spiritual pleasure" at the thought of having something sweet, but can't because of that damn Dr. Atkins, try sugar free strawberry jello covered in that whipped cream that comes in a can. No carbs at all and it takes the edge off. It's the only thing that's kept my husband sane these past 6 or 8 weeks. That and the fact he's lost 25 pounds doing it!

Lani McGregor
Posts: 121
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2003 2:12 pm
Location: Portland, OR
Contact:

Postby Lani McGregor » Mon Mar 15, 2004 11:12 am

Jackie, good thread you started. But everyone is talking about TECHNIQUE here. Technique is not inspiration. It is just technique.

I love technique (I also love “craftâ€

Brock
Posts: 1519
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2003 1:32 pm
Location: Vancouver, B.C.

Postby Brock » Mon Mar 15, 2004 11:27 am

Well there's a point that all of us missed!

I guess Jackie meant the inspiration came from the technique.

Brock
My memory is so good, I can't remember the last time I forgot something . . .

Catharine Newell
Posts: 83
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2003 12:33 am
Location: Portland, OR

Postby Catharine Newell » Mon Mar 15, 2004 11:35 am

Lani McGregor wrote:Jackie, good thread you started. But everyone is talking about TECHNIQUE here. Technique is not inspiration. It is just technique.

Nor is glass particularly interesting in and of itself. Heresy. Get away from it occasionally. Look elsewhere.

I just got back from a trip out of town to visit a ceramist. On the trip I found a photographer. If you’re interested in inspiration, go to his website:

http://www.bsimple.com

I’ve never read more lucid commentary on inspiration. Or what it means to be an artist.

Incidentally, the images are not digitals.

- Lani

If you can't annoy somebody, there's little point in writing. - Kingsley Amis



My God. This is what it's all about. Thanks for posting, Lani.

Catharine

Don Burt
Posts: 536
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2003 8:45 pm
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio
Contact:

Postby Don Burt » Mon Mar 15, 2004 12:17 pm

Lani McGregor wrote: But technique, while important, is not what makes anyone’s work memorable.


What does then? Do you discount you count metaphor and allusion, the ability to evoke drama, illustrate with energy or passion, or communicate with form as techniques? Are they something else?
I steadfastly do not count work with 'a message' or an agenda, superior to that which is astonishingly beautiful as craft. I've mentioned them before: there are a handful of contemporary Japanese porcelains in the basement of the Freer that to me are significant as Picasso's Guernica or some Goya with a guy's head cut-off. Music is proof of it. I listened to Rach's piano version of Bach's partita in E major on the radio Saturday. I couldn't putty (not like I need an excuse to procrastinate on that) and listen to it. had to just stand still and try to get my brain around it. I count that piece as amazing technique, or combinations of two guy's techniques. Simple in form yet so complex in implication and potential that it makes the hair on your neck stand-up. Technique in my book.

Jackie Beckman
Posts: 475
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2003 5:01 pm
Location: Arizona
Contact:

Postby Jackie Beckman » Mon Mar 15, 2004 12:24 pm

[quote="Lani McGregor"]Jackie, good thread you started. But everyone is talking about TECHNIQUE here. Technique is not inspiration. It is just technique.

I love technique (I also love “craftâ€

Lani McGregor
Posts: 121
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2003 2:12 pm
Location: Portland, OR
Contact:

Postby Lani McGregor » Mon Mar 15, 2004 12:38 pm

Don Burt wrote:I steadfastly do not count work with 'a message' or an agenda, superior to that which is astonishingly beautiful as craft.


Don,

I don’t disagree. I should have written “memorable artâ€

Lani McGregor
Posts: 121
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2003 2:12 pm
Location: Portland, OR
Contact:

Postby Lani McGregor » Mon Mar 15, 2004 12:45 pm

Jackie Beckman wrote:... and I can see now why you have no use for day spas.


....are you NUTS?! Gimme AVEDA over SFMOMA any day! Deep Concept? Upper Colonic? Hmmm. Hard choice.

Jackie Beckman
Posts: 475
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2003 5:01 pm
Location: Arizona
Contact:

Postby Jackie Beckman » Mon Mar 15, 2004 12:49 pm

Lani McGregor wrote:
Jackie Beckman wrote:... and I can see now why you have no use for day spas.


....are you NUTS?! Gimme AVEDA over SFMOMA any day! Deep Concept? Upper Colonic? Hmmm. Hard choice.


Well, I just remember not being able to drag you outta WGW to the adjoining AVEDA day-spa. Didn't make much sense to me at the time . . .

Bert Weiss
Posts: 2337
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2003 12:06 am
Location: Chatham NH
Contact:

Postby Bert Weiss » Mon Mar 15, 2004 1:23 pm

Lani


I'm laughing because my response to seeing some of the images on bsimple is that I want to collaborate and print them on glass.
Bert

Bert Weiss Art Glass*
http://www.customartglass.com
Furniture Lighting Sculpture Tableware
Architectural Commissions

Jackie Beckman
Posts: 475
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2003 5:01 pm
Location: Arizona
Contact:

Postby Jackie Beckman » Mon Mar 15, 2004 2:25 pm

ALL of our work, any artist's or craftsman's work for that matter, is comprised of various components, teqhniques, colors, concepts, etc. There are an infinate number of possible "ingredients." Sticking with glass for this conversation, it doesn't matter if you're making plain float coasters, or something like Catharine's work - some of the most amazing glass being made, it is all a recipe, if you will. Now given the fact that the combinations are literaly endless, the likelihood that two artists could select the exact same "components" and use them in the exact same fashion is non-existant.

However, and this is subjective, it then becomes somewhat like a fingerprint - when do they decide they've got a "match"? Does a 6-point match count? An 8-point? And who decides if it is actually a "match" anyway? But, at some point, a reasonable enough conclusion can be made that yes indeed, they do have enough of a match to convict a guy. This is what I meant by inspiration crossing the line. Not trying to confuse technique with inspiration, I just think that the final outcome is a product of technique, inspiration, concept, etc.

Hmm . . . just reread this and I don't know if I've made myself any clearer or not, but it's already typed - may as well hit "submit" :?

S. Klein
Posts: 40
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2003 8:42 pm
Location: Orange, CA

Postby S. Klein » Mon Mar 15, 2004 4:06 pm

I am proud to say that in the past I have done my best to take inspiration from the following artists: Jackson Pollock, Mondrian, Miro, Barnett Newmann, Helen Frankenthaler, Jun Kaneko, and Peter Voulkos and Richard Diebenkorn and ???. I also sincerely hope that some of their influences are appearant in my work as I do admire their work. However, what I have taken from them is only a certain feel or structure that I feel will help me to express myself through my work.

I have taught many classes in the last few years. Students have tried some of my techniques and at times they have adopted them and after time they have changed them and made them their own. I don't think any of us own any technique, and given a sample and a little time most of us will figure out how a technique was accomplished. However, are we willing to go through the hoops required to do that technique? I try to stress in my classes that thought and design come before technique. Techniques are only tools, and, I believe that the wise and serious artist will continuously allow themselves to be exposed to techniques. I am so pleases with my students at the end of a class as they proudly display their thoughtful work that has gone beyond technique. Additionally I constantly get emails with images from former students and friends showing their work. Strangely enough, most of the images are either experiments that are waiting to be finished pieces, or, finished pieces that will influence and lead to the next piece.........my 2 cents...........steve
Steve Klein Studio
1650 N. Glassell, Studio U
Orange, CA 92867

Kitty
Posts: 437
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2003 4:12 pm
Location: Gig Harbor, WA

Postby Kitty » Mon Mar 15, 2004 5:01 pm

techniques usually aren't the hallmark of an artist. maybe that's why artists often freely share their technical knowledge. layout, coloring, pattern, the soul of the piece, those things come together and sing out an artist's name and intent.

when the visual quotation of another person's work is explicit, it isn't about a technique, it's copying.

Amy Schleif-Mohr
Posts: 280
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2003 5:18 pm
Location: Milwaukee

Postby Amy Schleif-Mohr » Mon Mar 15, 2004 5:13 pm

Wow...I want to reform my response after all this enlightenment. All of you have made me re-examine (again) my thought on my work and where (in my body/soul/brain) it comes from.

For a long time my inspiration has come from observing human interaction as well as letting my hand go. I'm not sure how to explain this but I'll try. When I do this I am usually listening to music that just about brings me to tears. Ode to Joy is a biggy. I just let my hand make marks on a page and eventually a composition emerges and I then start to make decisions based on the initial compostition. Anyway, back to the human interaction part...I am a huge fan of people watching. Interactions between strangers and people who know eachother in differing degrees are emensly (sp?) interesting to me. In addition to this I also consider form a huge influence. I'm talking about forms that I see on a daily basis, like the curve of a bridge or the criss cross of cieling angles. The changes in the color according to the edge of a corner.

Most of all reciently I was able to TA for a vitreograph workshop in the printmaking deptartment of Univ. of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. These two days have really impacted the way I am thinking about my work. Just in the possibilties of layers. You want to see some amazing vitreographs, look at Clair Van Vliet. Just do a google search on her. The visiting artist actually was one of the printers from Littleton Press. Anyway, printmakers blow me away. I will definately be inspired by this workshop.

So, I think, for myself, inspiration can and does come from all parts of my life and is constantly changing.

Amy

slats
Posts: 110
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 9:19 pm

?

Postby slats » Mon Mar 15, 2004 5:20 pm

so that means that anyone who does pattern bars is copying Lisa? or raking is copying Patty..........how absurd!

THE HORSE IS DEAD...........GET OFF IT. :!:

Jackie Beckman
Posts: 475
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2003 5:01 pm
Location: Arizona
Contact:

Re: ?

Postby Jackie Beckman » Mon Mar 15, 2004 5:34 pm

doctac wrote:so that means that anyone who does pattern bars is copying Lisa? or raking is copying Patty..........how absurd!

THE HORSE IS DEAD...........GET OFF IT. :!:


How on earth did you get that from this long, informative and thoughtful thread??? In fact, just the opposite is what has been stated in most of the posts. Wow - I don't think you read peoples thoughts here with any sort of comprehension at all. And speaking for myself, I'd prefer not to be yelled at to, "GET OFF IT!" If you've lost intrest in this thread, by all means, skip it.

Jack Bowman
Posts: 126
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2003 10:52 pm
Location: Utah
Contact:

Re: ?

Postby Jack Bowman » Mon Mar 15, 2004 6:06 pm

doctac wrote:so that means that anyone who does pattern bars is copying Lisa? or raking is copying Patty..........how absurd!

THE HORSE IS DEAD...........GET OFF IT. :!:


I got just the opposite out of the discussion. For example, I combed glass long before I took Patty's class last summer. In fact, I gave up my combing turns in that class so that those who had not done it could have more turns. I concentrated on the many other aspects of the class. BTW, combing has been done for centuries.

So... I enjoy combing black and white. I get some interesting effects that I can use in many ways. I plan on incorporating some in a mask or series of masks. Likely it's been done but I haven't seen it nor do I care to right now. Black and white, in the form of zebra fur has been incorporated into masks and shields for centuries. But if I go to the mall and see some local artist combing black and white I'm sure not going to send them a cease and desist letter like I received last week. Black and white combings may become part of a style that I incorporate in the future but I certainly wouldn't claim it as "mine".

That, and much more, is what I think this thread is about.

Jack


Post Reply

Return to “Techniques and Tools”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 45 guests

Warm Glass

2575 Old Glory Road, Suite 700
Suite 700
Clemmons, NC 27012
Phone: (336) 712 8003
Email: wg@warmglass.com