Thursday, April 25, 2013

Thoughts from the past -- still relevant

Recently I acquired a pile of old magazines from a fiberart friend, The World of Embroidery, published in the UK, dating to the late 1990s.  I love to read old magazines, especially ones that I didn't read the first time around, and I particularly love to binge on the reading, going immediately from one issue to the next.  It bypasses the suspense of waiting a month for part 2 of a series, or for indignant reader response.

But there's a problem with inherited magazines -- sometimes the original owner has torn out pages.  You'll be reading along about something fascinating and all of a sudden, it's over, before its time.  So it was with disappointment that I got to read only the first page of an essay by Polly Leonard (now the founder/editor of Selvedge magazine) titled "Trends in textiles today."  It appeared in the July 1998 issue.

Leonard points out that trends emanate primarily from art schools, and that such teaching has increasingly been "issues-based" rather than focusing on functional and physical qualities of fiber work.  "Fine artists have adopted textiles and used them to communicate individual abstract ideas.  Thus the conventions surrounding technique and the use of materials have been demolished and reconstructed," she writes.

In the 1960s, which Leonard pegs as the beginning of  new interest in textiles, "there was a frenetic rush to explore the nature and potential of tactile material with very little critical appraisal.  Now.... artists are no longer preoccupied with breaking the rules.  Textile art must, like all art, be judged on its integrity rather than merely the current fashion of its subject matter or the novelty of its technique."

She wonders if "textile art" as a category should be obsolete, because much of it incorporates other mediums.  "In these works, the use of textile materials, if any, if subservient to the idea; the role of the category has become ambiguous."

Then comes the zinger:  "The policy of grouping work according to material does little to promote textile art outside the world of the enthusiast, and can serve to devalue it.  Good art is art, and perhaps bad art is more acceptable when it is called textile art.  Maybe then inadequacies can be camouflaged by technique."

That was at the bottom of the page, and I don't know what happened in the rest of the essay.  But there's plenty of food for thought already.

First, we are reminded that the UK has had a far more robust system of textile art education than we have in the US.  Whenever I read about the rigorous courses in the City & Guilds curriculum, or the (now-defunct) Julia Caprara School of Textile Art, I am envious.  Although some artists outside the UK are able to take advantage of this training through distance learning, we in the US generally see fibers as a barely tolerated poor cousin in art schools.

Second, the move toward conceptual elements in textile art hasn't been as dramatic in the US as apparently it was in the UK.  At least within the organized part of the textile art establishment, we're still largely still in the stage of exploring materials and techniques with little critical appraisal.  Even the quilt and fiber shows at the art end of the spectrum, such as Quilt National and Fiberart International, seem to be in this stage (although I'm interested to see what these two blockbuster shows will have on display this summer).

We used to have some critical appraisal in Fiberarts magazine, but that bit the dust almost two years ago.  Sometimes it appears in Surface Design Journal, the magazine of the Surface Design Association.  But mostly there's no place to look for comment on the big exhibits, or retrospective shows for major artists.  By contrast, these old Embroidery magazines have two or three reviews in every issue, and the writers have no problem pointing out weaknesses as well as strengths, an openness that would be difficult to match in US forums, where being nice is more important than exercising critical judgment.

Third, the reference to  "the world of the enthusiast" perfectly sums up the ghetto, or perhaps I should say niche, that most textile art finds itself relegated to in the US.  I am most familiar with the quilt niche so I will talk about that, but I suspect tapestry weavers or art knitters or other specialties could say the same about their own niches.

I follow the art quilt world closely, by visiting shows, reading books and catalogs, following blogs and belonging to organizations such as SAQA.  I can recognize the work of dozens of artists without reading the captions, and notice what's new and what's good.  There are many other artists who also follow this world, and there's nothing so satisfying as getting together with like minds, preferably at a show, for a good critique and gossip fest.   But we do constitute a world of enthusiasts, and I agree with Leonard that the very smallness of our world serves to devalue our art.

One answer is that if we want to be taken seriously as artists we need to escape the niche and look for all-media shows.  But I do love many aspects of that niche; it's been good to me, yielding a trip to Japan among other prizes and awards.  I wish the niche could become less comfortable and more rigorous, more like the mainstream art world.


5 comments:

  1. You're getting spammed again..
    The above 2 comments and one of yesterdays are leaders to unsuitable sites..

    If only the education system in the UK was matched by any respect or knowledge among the onlookers/customers.. Mine tend to the "Oh look, it's all made from scraps" style, or they will spend ten minutes telling their companion how I have made a particular piece (always wrongly, and without asking.. If corrected they Huff)

    There's a lot of good work here, but the Cand G courses tend to repetition and are very old-fashioned on the whole..

    Helen Howes

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Helen -- I check the comments every time I sit down at the computer and generally am able to remove the spam within a couple of hours. I really don't want to have to put on the nonsense word test unless I have to.

      Sorry to hear that the great UK programs I've heard such wonderful things about have feet of clay. There's no cure for the ignorant viewer, much the pity.

      Delete
  2. I totally agree Kathy.
    Many artists (of all disciplines) complain of the lack of reviews on the local and national (and for that matter, International) level. Could it be that publications aren't interested? Focusing instead on how to get more advertisers for ink and paper production rather than providing more content? The publishing world is in a gruesome state right now.
    My hope as an art quilter is that our advocates (SAQA, FiberArt Now, SDA, QN, FiberArt International) can put more muscle behind the effort to have galleries and museums look at fiber art not as a lowly wannabe but a valid player in the art world. Navel gazing gets us nowhere.
    For now, I call myself an art quilter, with all its attendant connotations. I am proud of the tradition and seek a certain level of professionalism through the pursuit of my art. It matters to me that people see my art and I am deeply interested in what they think of it.
    So how to proceed?
    Make more art. Go direct to the public through the web. Apply to multi-media shows. Stir up the navel gazers. Speak up.
    You are a strong voice for all of these actions. Let's pump it up on all fronts. Thanks for your efforts Kathy.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hi Kathleen,
    I've read this post 3 times. There is so much here and I've had my thoughts running from here to there! I know you study art and you are much more of an expert than I'll ever be, and I think we need more experts to open up minds to different arts, even quilting art! I have always quilted, and have not done much traditional quilting. I have also never tried to have tiny stitches or exact work. The Gee Bend quilters have always spoke to me. I learned to quilt from a lady in a nursing home in 1963 who just had a needle, thread, sometimes scissors and paper bags with old cotton waist dresses in them. I still have one of her quilts, which she gave the top to my mom and then in the late 1970's my mom quilted it. The quilter was long gone by then, but her name was Mrs. Oliver and I'll never forget what she instilled in me.

    I like what was quoted here: Textile art must, like all art, be judged on its integrity rather than merely the current fashion of its subject matter or the novelty of its technique."

    YES...on its integrity rather than current fashion!!! Just like all those famous artists that didn't get their full recognition while they were alive because their work was so different from the normal of their day.

    My husband NEVER liked paintings that didn't look like photographs. NOW, he is a stain glass artist, and guess what? His art is abstract and he loves to hear what peoples different interpretations are in each work he does. Even if it is to look like something, it has it's own twist. He did a heart that also looks like a chicken's head! LOL

    It was interesting what you said about used magazines and then finding that a page you need is missing. I'm terrible about tearing out the page I want and passing it along. I wonder how many people I've frustrated!

    I'll be going back and re reading some of your posts and this one.

    Oh, I also thought architechure (?). Wouldn't the world be a boring place if all houses and buildings where all the same???!!! I love googling all types of buildings around the world. ♥♥♥

    ReplyDelete
  4. Your posts are thought provoking, and I get a great deal out of reading them. I'd love to have a long conversation with you on this and related topics. But I'll limit myself to one comment here. You excerpted this comment: She wonders if "textile art" as a category should be obsolete, because much of it incorporates other mediums. "In these works, the use of textile materials, if any, if subservient to the idea; the role of the category has become ambiguous."

    I underscore the following concept, and agree it is a zinger:
    "the zinger: 'The policy of grouping work according to material does little to promote textile art outside the world of the enthusiast, and can serve to devalue it. Good art is art, and perhaps bad art is more acceptable when it is called textile art. Maybe then inadequacies can be camouflaged by technique." '

    I agree with you as far as saying good art is art. But when we then categorize it, such as textile art, fiber art, or quilt art, we step backwards into the comfortable ghetto, and create a barrier to our work being seen simply, or not so simply, as art. To step out of the niche, I think we need to drop these labels.

    ReplyDelete