[Baren]: The mailing list / discussion forum for woodblock printmaking. Baren Digest Thursday, 8 October 1998 Volume 05 : Number 305 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: David Bull Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 22:17:27 +0900 Subject: [Baren 1813] Re: Printing and Profession I wrote: > > it seems to attract > > the kind of person who loves to be involved with the 'technique' of > > printmaking, to the detriment of simple artistic vision. and Ray replied: > I have to take issue with the last sentence. It is a little insulting to > suggest that if an artist loves to be involved with "technique" that simple > artist vision suffers. Actually Ray, that phrase is not my view. I was simply quoting Mary, who was telling us about a generally held view (if I understood her correctly ...) Confusing? > To suggest that ... artistic vision suffers because one chooses > to use a press instead of a baren is a non-starter. Or am I > misinterpeting your phrase? Of course, I too think the particular choice of tool is irrelevant ... I was simply pointing out that with more technical stuff around him, the lithographer or etcher has many more 'opportunities' to get sidetracked into technique. I _do_ know people who get so wrapped up in, and who enjoy so much, the 'technical' stuff, that it becomes the end in itself ... (And boy, I know one such person very very very well indeed ... I should, I look at him every time I brush my teeth!) And _I'm_ not insulted! Dave ------------------------------ From: jimandkatemundie@juno.com (James G Mundie) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 11:28:39 -0400 Subject: [Baren 1814] the lesser arts Dave Bull wrote: >Mary wrote (among a lot of other interesting things): >> ... with printmaking being considered a lesser art, practised by >> those whose technical skill outreaches their artistic vision ... The reason many perceive printmaking in general as a "lesser art" is because one needs to go through a number of indirect procedures before the completed image is produced. These intermediate steps are seen by many as 'a bad thing' which interferes with the freedom of mark-making. I don't subscribe to that school of thought, as I believe that through the extraordinary amount of planning that must go into making a successful print one can achieve a much more fully realized expression (something which is often lacking in the work of those painters who criticize printmaking's indirectness). In the case of woodcut, which does not require all of that heavy machinery, one finds that it receives even less credit in the wider 'art world' than other forms of printmaking because the craft is considered "primative"(in the context of 'savage' and 'clumsy' rather than 'back to basics'). We in Baren of course know that this sort of thinking is utter nonsense. While woodcut may not be a highly "technical" craft, it certainly is a craft (or 'art', if you prefer) that requires a great deal of skill. Mise le meas, James Mundie, Philadelphia USA ------------------------------ From: kim and paul Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 08:54:05 -0800 Subject: [Baren 1815] Baren Exchange Hello, this is Kim.... While the tools used in relief are less "technical" than with intaglio or litho, I think it is, still, a process as complex. i.e. -- ink opacity or transparency, what cuts to make, how wide, how narrow, reductive technique or mulitiple blocks, etc. I don't feel relief is "lesser" or "below" other printmaking processes. Also, I would like to know more about the Baren Exchange......... am I eligible to join, when will it take place, about how many prints to pull, etc. ------------------------------ From: Dean Brink Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 08:55:32 -0700 Subject: [Baren 1816] Re: Printing and Profession Posturing over which art might be deemed "higher" should be taken in the cultural contexts within which they historical arose (and rise and fall). In terms of the relative value of art, it has been treated as culturally valuable (meaningful to people, ideologically charged). But there is the art world as stock market, with works going up and down with availability of particular artist's and school's works. On the market side, works on paper are generally less valuable than works on canvas or other more durable materials. So in this way prints (usually on paper), along with them being inherently of 'series', are more commonly available and less "valuable." But in terms of cultural value, prints are a means of ideologically engagement which has the potential to tap into extensive traditions of meaning and images. The history of woodblock printing seems generally more rich and historically varied than say oil painting, which has a rather linear, easily traceable development. It has traditions all over the world, especially Japan and Europe. In Japan, for instance, woodblocks historically includes genres as varied as: porn, illustrations for books, graffiti handbills, strange pictures and crazy pictures (often political satire), as well as the ones we are more familiar with (sumo and kabuki ads, bijin, Hiroshige, Sharaku, Kuniyoshi etc). It seems that the woodblock genre has the potential for a wide range of reinterpretations and uses which could be culturally meaningful as fine art or as folk art. About the idea of a medium being pigeonholed: isn't the relation of subject matter, process and technique more significant than the medium alone (which has a historical context)? dean ------------------------------ From: Bill Ritchie Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 09:09:26 -0700 Subject: [Baren 1817] Re: Printing and Profession I was brushing my teeth and I looked at the reflection and I saw a guy who ought to figure out a way to apologize to the world of printmakers and artists, crafts people and designers all over the world. That guy in the mirror, a US citizen, spent 19 years in a state institution for higher learning, teaching the party line of art education as he knew it. Naturally--he learned it in a state institution. We all make mistakes, and in my humble opinion US art educators made a lot of them. The biggest one--and this is what I'd like to rectify--is going along with a hundred years of economic engineering tacticians who separated art and technology. It separates people today when the words come up. By separating art and technique, art fit in politely with economic engineering, itself depending on crossing politics and economics. That's my viewpoint. And I am sorry. It's no fun listening to that old printmaker's devil. Then, when economic engineers applied the specter of haves and have nots to the architecture of US education (and art and technique were arranged in neat boxes called major, minors, electives, etc) then it was possible to design marketing and sales accordingly. College enrollments rise and fall like the stock market according to curricular plans, forecasts, etc. of industry and business. Likewise salaries and security. Poor Muse! Culture Beware! She (it? he? they?) survives, however, and so do we despite the rancor and fuss over tools and methods, who is best, who qualifies, who's professional and who's amateurish, dilletantish, has the biggest press or the most expensive baren, etc. I apologize--a failed art teacher. I should recall all the art degrees given to my 2000 art students (like they do when a car is found to have a faulty part). Is there more I can do? Perhaps with the Internet all artists, crafts people and designers world wide will ignore the art educators' ecnomic engineering. They settled for pettiness when really more important and healthier prospects are in the offing for creative human beings. People are so creative, so imaginative! People are inventive, and they discover wonderful things--new and old. I love printmaking, but I love people more. Yet it is printmaking--and its descendant technologies (like this cool computer I am fortunate to have) that makes arts' evangelism possible, thus the exchange of people's love. That guy in MY mirror has finished brushing his teeth and, if all progresses on these printmaking mail lists, he's also finished dividing continuous education into itty bits. Don't get me wrong. I'm not sorry. Let's just keep expanding this Baren List as we have been doing. Here's a funny story: I was at Atelier 17 on a visit to S. W. Hayter. I was showing him my prints, some of which combined blue-process photographics with intaglio. "What's that blue?" he asked me. "Cyanotype," I replied. "Cyanotype. You mean blueprint!" I shrugged, and started to answer. "Cyanotype is merely a blueprint that went to college, professor," he snorted. I loved that guy! ------------------------------ From: Ray Esposito Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 12:10:05 -0400 Subject: [Baren 1818] Re: Printing and Profession Dave As always, thank you for your thoughts. I guess my point was that as someone who loves the 'technical' aspects of printmaking - the press, making the plates, inking, proofing, etc, I see this as adding to, not substracting from the artistic vision. Some people get so wrapped up in the technical that other aspects could suffer. At the same time, many artists use everything available to them to increase their artistic vision. This topic is no big deal. I just wanted your thoughts and thank you for them. Cheers Ray Esposito ------------------------------ From: "David Stones" Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 02:38:50 +0900 Subject: [Baren 1819] Re: Printing and Profession(als) Dear All, I'm not going to get into the above discussion on the Profession(als) part (excluding my previous post on work attitudes etc.) but, like Dave B, I'm also very isolated and often wonder why woodblock prints "rank" as a "lesser art" over here in Nippon. For those who would like to know, the basic division (in my area at least) is still that woodblock prints are classified as craft-related work and not an art/fine art when it comes to exhibiting or entering certain shows... and, of course, marketing. I've no idea at all what other parts of the Baren-world are like, except for a brief foray into the U.K., but here we get pegged into a slot that has all sorts of repercussions down the line and is probably a reason why not so many young Japanese want to take up the art in its traditional form (?) - and why those who are still involved are finding it ever- more difficult to obtain basic materials like solid-wood blocks or a reasonably-priced baren. When compared with any mechanical means, our woodblock print ways may appear definitely "basic" - the only machine I use (besides the carpenter's circular saw and planer to rough-cut my blocks) is an electric screwdriver/drill for the screws that hold the battens on each end of the blocks to prevent (ha! ha!??) warping... but someone up there near Tokyo IS maybe being a bit reserved in saying there's little technical expertise - maybe he can't see his skills for that beard! Anyway, for me, coming from a technical, chemical-laden, commercial printing background I know both sides of the coin - and maybe won't exchange my blocks for plates and presses (no disrespect to other members! - please don't protest) to do prints as I just find using natural materials to create artwork "my thing" - and try to encourage it... even though I do criss-cross back and forth now by going to a commercial printing company to learn the latest computer-run stuff... a paradox, but that's how it is in this writer's print world right now... Things may change here (?) - but it would be nice to know how other people's woodblock prints are received ("ranked?") in their respective locations for, as Mary touched on, cultural factors - some of which I used to crash into daily - do form strong opinions and "rules" that maybe others find confusing, even irritating - but possibly contain never-considered values. Print on... Dave S ------------------------------ From: Graham Scholes Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 13:27:01 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Baren 1820] Re: Baren Exchange Hi Kim. You will be welcome to the group. There are no reqiurements other that to have a keen desire to create and do woodblocks. Oh, it does help if you are warm and breathing. Graham PS You have to put up with Ray, though......(<; ------------------------------ From: Ray Esposito Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 17:00:52 -0400 Subject: [Baren 1821] Re: Printing and Profession(als) Dave Stones wrote: >For those who would like to know, the basic division (in my >area at least) is still that woodblock prints are classified as craft-related >work and not an art/fine art >Things may change here (?) - but it would be nice to know how other >people's woodblock prints are received ("ranked?") in their respective >locations Dave This is one of those great subjects that come up on Baren occasionally that has no real answer. If membership is now 60, you can look for 60 different answers. From my perspective, woodblocks are as valued here in the states as are most all other areas of printmaking. I belong to eight (nine??) printmaking societies and clubs. I joined so many because like you, I am isolated and wanted to get in touch with as many printmakers throughout the country as posible. Having done so, and having seen or participated in a number of shows and exhibitions, I can tell you that every show I see has woodblocks, linocuts or other variations included. At least in my experience, wood blocks are not discriminated against in the US. I do not feel that woodblocks are looked down on in the States and the only ones who do so are usually the elitists who aren't worth considering anyway, or the woodblock artist himself or herslef who lack the confidence in their work. Those wood block artists I know in the states who believe in themselves like Jim Mundie are very successful. (Mundie has a lot of other problems but we'll discuss those later.) I am one of those who firmly believes in the school that says if you believe in your work you will succeed. If you doubt your own work, so will others. That is a matter of the individual not medium. I never have any doubts in anything I do. When I fail, and I have done so brilliantly in the past, I do not think of it as failure but experience. Some think of that as arrogance. Others view it as confidence. Here in the states, if you think wood block is a high art form, then it is and you will gain acceptance for your work as such. Just my thoughts. Cheers Ray Esposito ------------------------------ From: David Bull Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 07:51:06 +0900 Subject: [Baren 1822] Re: Printing and Profession(als) Boy oh boy oh boy ... so much 'meat' waiting here in my mailbox this morning! A million interesting points to respond to ... but only time/space for one ... Dave Stones wrote (about the status of woodblock here in Japan): > ...that woodblock prints are classified as craft-related work and > not an art/fine art when it comes to exhibiting or entering certain > shows ... It's of course, because of the extremely long tradition here of woodblocks being the main medium of commercial printing. For three hundred years, right through the 17th~19th centuries, commercial printing _was_ woodblock printing. As Dean mentioned, you name it - books, pamphlets, illustrations, playbills, ... - everything was done with woodblocks. The Heidelbergs arrived from Germany at the end of the 19th century and blew all the blocks away, but people haven't forgotten about this long tradition. A second (and major) point, is that ukiyo-e prints, with which most of the western world is captivated and fascinated, have always been considered a 'lesser' art here, because their entire raison d'etre was commercial. So ask someone here to list the 'arts'. You will get something like this: calligraphy, pottery, painting, dance, classical music, flower arranging ... Woodblock printmaking is such an inconsequential thing as to not even 'register' on most peoples' list ... And man oh man oh man am I _glad_ of this! Why? Because all of those other arts are completely bound up in ossified traditional ways of working - and the 'iemoto' system controls _everything_. That's the system you've probably read about, where a 'sensei' is the master of each particular 'school' of doing things, and the students start out by kissing the ground under him, and then slowly working up through the ranks, learning _only_ the 'approved' techniques and ways of doing things. But woodblock? No way. We're 'free', really really free. Free to make whatever crazy prints we want, free to live alone and not be bound by 'school' rules, free to starve and free to make a mint ... Free! Ray wrote: > I am one of those who firmly believes in the school that says if you > believe in your work you will succeed. If you doubt your own work, so will > others. Yes! Dave B. ------------------------------ From: David Bull Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 08:09:31 +0900 Subject: [Baren 1823] Second Thoughts ... Excuse me for this ... for sending again so soon ... But it now occurs to me that my previous post may leave everybody with one major wrong impression. I was speaking of the 'status' of woodblock printmaking in the 'art' world, and of its very low ranking there. Please remember though that, as we have mentioned before, woodblock printmaking _is_ considered a 'normal' activity for someone here in Japan, whether as a hobby or to make a living. Imagine a class at school, and the teacher is asking all the kids 'What does your daddy do?' 'He's a fireman' 'He's a teacher' 'He's a baker' 'He's a woodblock printmaker' 'He's a factory worker' Complete and total acceptance. Nobody would laugh. Nobody would think it was the slightest bit strange. The teacher might think to herself 'So _that's_ why little Johnny has patches on his clothes!', but that's on a par, I think, with any society. So 'low rank' in the world of 'culture', but complete acceptance in the general society. Which would _you_ rather have? Dave B. (And now I'll _really_ go back to work ...) ------------------------------ From: Jack Reisland Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1998 00:14:50 -0700 Subject: [Baren 1824] Re: Baren Exchange Graham Scholes wrote: > Hi Kim. > You will be welcome to the group. There are no reqiurements other that to > have a keen desire to create and do woodblocks. > Oh, it does help if you are warm and breathing. As I read Kim's questions, she is inquiring about the Print Exchange, that is already in progress. Jack Reisland ------------------------------ End of Baren Digest V5 #305 ***************************