n

Let me start with the following quote: “With ‘The Creative Force’ as the competition’s theme the entries reflected a concerted effort to express new concepts, resulting in a fascinating range of graphic imagery and personal statements employing words and stitched messages. Although rooted in the rich tradition of quiltmaking, the majority of submissions portrayed an intentional break from classic quilting with the obvious aim to achieve something ‘new’ in wall art. That focus, in my opinion, was the most characteristic weakness of many of the entries I reviewed”. Now, what was it he just wrote? Didn’t he use the word ‘weakness’?

Really, if he doesn’t continue like this: ”Dominated by exquisite use of materials and elaborate technique, the works did not achieve a cohesive composition, successful design, or original artistic statement”.

How dares he? What kind of high horse is this fellow riding? Why can he not appreciate the innovative efforts of so many to break away from the traditional ways of making quilts. Because this is what art is about, isn’t it – being innovative?  No, I’m afraid the fellow is right. The fellow is by the way Paul J. Smith, Director Emeritus, American Crafts Museum, New York, and the words quoted above were found in the Juror’s Statement [SAQA Journal, Fall 2006 issue, page 12] over the exhibition “The Creative Force” arranged this year by the Studio Art Quilts Associates (SAQA) in the United States.Why is he right? He is right, because breaking away from the traditional ways of making quilts does not by default make a piece a piece of artwork. Someone rejected in the selection process may say: “It is artwork! I suffered and worked hard and put my whole soul into it and my technique and sewing skills are known nationwide to be impeccable! I used fabrics that I treated in all kinds of innovative ways from curing them for a year under three feet of mud to rolling them in tuna fish and tomato sauce like a German avant-garde artist in the 60’ies. It must be art – damn it! That juror must be reactionary and ultra-conservative”.Whether he has a conservative view on art or is leaning towards the cutting edge of contemporary art is irrelevant, because his point is valid. Whereas Inge and I may waiver on the point about an original artistic statement, we are of the opinion that cohesive composition and successful design are pre-requisites for good artwork. When we refer to “good design” we implicitly include the adjectives “cohesive” and “successful”. Introduction of new materials or techniques do not do it alone!

We have in previous entries on this blog referred to and emphasized the importance of good design and stated that good design always holds. For the realization of a cohesive composition and successful design – to use the words of Paul J. Smith – one need good implementation skills (sewing, embroidering, painting, etc.) and for bringing the piece to the upper ranks of good artwork these skills need to be impeccable. Implementing skills alone do not do it!

So, to approach the calibre of work which Paul J. Smith and his confrères with pleasure would consider for an exhibition the artist must keep in mind that introduction of new materials or techniques do not do it and implementing skills alone do not do it. The work must feature cohesive composition and successful design!

The other day, it was last Monday as a matter of fact, I visited for the first time this year Inge’s garden – the Parc du Chateau de Chantilly. Well, it is not really hers but she considers it her garden and visits it throughout the year and is consequently on nods and bonjour with the staff at the entry and the park-keepers.

Whereas it for her was being there again, it was for me a visit to a place which I knew, but not really knew. So my senses were alert to new discoveries. I was observant – far more intensely than when I walk on my trodden path in the 15^th arrondissement of Paris. You know, I see the Eiffel Tower almost every day, and the golden dome of Les Invalides, and experience le Metro and other very Parisian things, which the tourist would notice and feel and live and take in with every breath. I walk there and notice predominantly how light conditions vary during the week. For me, the tourist’s observance and awareness of being in a foreign place have long gone.

But last Monday in the park I experienced this high level of observance. It was all provoked by the presence of spring. I was about saying that it was provoked by the intensity with which spring was pressing on everywhere. But that would not be true, because spring was very modestly putting its fingerprints on the park in the form of small flowers, prominent buds, new green leaves on some bushes and a few trees. The light from the clear sky was crisp and temperature modest. So it was not a pendant to the 7^th symphony of Beethoven that I experienced. It was rather a lively suite for a flute.

Despite the presence of spring was all around us we had to look for it – and that was what made it a truly interesting experience to be in the park that day. We had to be observant, we had to discover. The first anemone, for example. A periwinkle leading to a violet almost hidden amongst dead leaves. A fresh sprout on a beech. Our observance was constantly stimulated leading to continued discoveries – including the sense of being present and alive.  It was a lineal experience of discovery developing into a full circle of multi-dimensional awareness. In all its modesty, it was wonderful.

“Being observant and aware is in our opinion the two most important pre-requisites for moving on creatively” we repeated to ourselves later that day. I write repeated, because Inge and I had discussed and processed this topic very intensely last summer. Why did we discuss this?

Well, you see, at that point in time we had consistently declined invitations to give classes or lectures. We primarily said no because there are so many classes out there on all sorts of techniques, and we felt absolutely no inclination to teach anyone else our techniques – not so much because it would breed copycats but more because we are of the opinion that once artists/quilters have developed a good design then they are better helped in finding ways to implement this design in their own ways, applying techniques and methods that fall natural to them on an individual basis. This individual way of implementing will also emphasize the individuality of the ingoing design.

We concluded last summer that whereas we would stay firm on not giving classes on studio techniques, we would consider developing lectures and seminars to help people to move on creatively – to establish this ingoing basis of a good design. When taking a look at our own studio activities to find ways and forms for providing this help we concluded that our artistic lives depend on being observant and aware, and that we consistently over the years have worked on improving these qualifications. For transforming impressions to motifs we also concluded that we – in addition to honing this sensing capability – have worked determinedly on improving the design aspects of our works.  We felt conclusively that we should first and foremost help artists/quilters to be observant and aware – in other words to see – and by doing so help them to move on creatively. Subsequently we could discuss ways to move into the field of design taking into account the individuality of our students, as they would now have become.  

So, we took the consequences of this philosophy and developed a one-two hour lecture which could serve as an un-complicated starting point from where to move on and improve awareness and observance through the involvement of a spouse, partner or friend – none of whom need to be artists or quilters themselves. This is the beauty of our lecture. For those who want to move into the sphere of design and deal with the creative process at a deeper level we further developed a full day seminar, which – by the way – also could be of interest to the same spouses, partners and friends. We felt that these two modules would complement well the multitude of courses and classes available. So, next time someone inquires about classes or lectures we have a positive answer. 

Why is it that fond memories of a lovely dessert on the even so lovely island of Belle Ile en Mer got our thoughts back to evaluation of artwork in general and art quilts in particular?

These two subjects should be very far from each other conceptually, if not for anything else because one is an object and the other an act. What is it then that they have in common – apart from being discussed philosophically in a blog?

Their coinciding point is our apprehension of the art coming from a chef’s kitchen and the art coming from an artist’s studio.

-

A dessert is served in an arrangement designed by the chef to present it in an inviting way which emphasizes the experience of taste that he has prepared for the guest in the restaurant. At the time of serving the guest will have satisfied the basic needs and is typically neither thirsty nor hungry, so the artistic components in that concluding course will play a very important role in the overall aesthetic impression of the meal.

If it is not an overly stressed businessperson constantly talking on the cell phone and reading a paper while eating and never really detecting what goes down, the guest will usually spend a little time to take in this visual and perhaps also olfactory experience before the cutlery get going.

-

A piece of artwork is presented as composed and designed by the artist in a way which supports and emphasizes the message or the experience the artist has prepared for the viewer. Most visitors to galleries also have their basic needs covered and have readied their aesthetic senses for stimulation.

-

Common to the guest in the restaurant and the visitor in the gallery is that they are presented with a piece of artwork, which they experience in their own individual ways.

What also is common to them, I believe, is that they evaluate the artworks as presented and know with themselves if composition, design and artistic expression worked well together and it conclusively was a good piece of artwork.

To get to this level of evaluation neither of them needed to go to the kitchen to check which ingredients the chef used or to the studio to check the types of paint and brushes, fabrics or thread the artist used.

-

If the guest in the restaurant can do it, and the gallery visitor can do it, why is it that jurors of some exhibitions cannot and absolutely must have a sample of the quilt included with the application?

-

Whereas such requirement may be understandable where a needlework teacher in primary school wants to check how the kids are progressing it is absolutely incomprehensible how such requirement can gain a footing in the jurying process for an art exhibition.

“Aha, Steen. I got you!” some of you who read earlier entries on this blog may say. “You have a psychological issue with needlework teachers and you use this blog as an outlet for an inner animosity!”

-

No, this is not true. I actually could have fallen in love with a needlework teacher – Inge could very easily have become one. I have nothing against needlework teachers, but I have a genuine problem with needlework teacher habits of nitpicking in the details when it comes to jurying artwork. They are incompatible – and from the artist’s point of view incomprehensible. So incomprehensible that they increasingly cause artists to abstain from applying to exhibitions where such requirements reign.

It is no wonder that organizers of exhibitions requiring samples of an artwork for the jurying process express concerns of reduced interest from the art world.

It is just too ridiculous for artists to keep cut-offs or waste time on reproducing samples of a piece which may have been finished a few months ago. Yes, it is not unusual that artists need some time with a piece before deciding on its suitability for a given exhibition.

-

Whereas it is true that details may and can play a role the artistic evaluation of a piece of artwork in a final judging process, where the piece will be present, it is also true that good design always holds – and that is what jurors should be concerned about. It is not the artist’s job to teach applied techniques to the jurors.

These days we are giving our website an overhaul and as you can imagine this leads to discussions on what sort of information would be helpful for those visiting the site as well as meeting our objectives. Such discussions very soon include the concept of a good design and our case is no different. We of course discuss how to arrange the various types of information that we eventually want to see included on the website. But this is more concerning lay-out, and the reflections I wanted to share with you in this blog were not so much concerned with that – rather whether a good design holds up in web based images or whether it suffers due to the lack of fine details.  

Well, we should have the answer to that question, you may think, since we have been discussing the subject of image resolution in earlier entries on this blog. And you are right. Yes, we know the answer and that is that a good design is a good design and a bad design is a bad design. A good design always holds up and additional details cannot turn a bad design into a good one.  Images of artwork displayed on the web will be subject to the resolution of the screen, and are typically provided with a resolution of 72 pixels per inch – this is the resolution we use on our website – and the dimensions of our images are matched to the layout of the website, but rarely larger than 800 pixels in either dimension – so they remain largely within the size of a computer screen. 

So, on the website you really will not see high resolution images with corresponding level of details. We are, however convinced, that viewers from these images nevertheless will get the feeling of coherence in the design of an artwork and a sensation of being invited to enter into it and think it further – if these qualities are inherent in the artwork. So, what works for visitors to our website – yes, now I’m switching the tracks – also should work for juries selecting artworks for an exhibition. Evidently, you think. Yes, but there are still quarters amongst jury-members, where selecting artwork from digital images on computer screens or on wall displays via digital projectors is not satisfactory. Why is that? It apparently is because they feel deprived of the possibility to dive down into the deeper levels of details. 

One does not need details to select the good artworks from the bad and the worse, so I do not understand this requirement. If the purpose of the jury is to do something else than jurying and they need details for that, then they should state so and require additional detail-views from the artists – instead of blaming the full-view images for not allowing for meandering around in the details.

But what could this something else be? Could it be the old habits of needlework teachers paying more attention to detail than overall artistic expression which still haunt the world of textile art?