tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27254015.post6151619480559830079..comments2024-03-09T10:15:11.266+13:00Comments on Unravelling: Let Me Try This AgainMeghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01350447919000146804noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27254015.post-1176541550694768802011-01-12T10:31:31.945+13:002011-01-12T10:31:31.945+13:00Yes, scarves can be a piece of art. But they also ...Yes, scarves can be a piece of art. But they also get put on a shelf with items bought at target (in my clleet anyway.) when I painted silk, there was a limit to what the scarves would fetch. A fellow artist friend said too bad I didn't stretch them onto canvas panels as I could charge a lot more for them, as people would value them as art not fashion. All interesting.Dana and Daisyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14006886855600007312noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27254015.post-56583635282473830482011-01-11T09:19:33.850+13:002011-01-11T09:19:33.850+13:00Yeah, this is worth repeating. When I consider t...Yeah, this is worth repeating. When I consider the art/craft conundrum, I have in mind a square/rectangular piece of woven cloth, not wall hangings and sculptures, though there are nice works in that genre out there.<br /><br />I aspire to make art-scarves, maybe? I am now thinking back to a year or two ago a little before Connie Rose switched to quilting when she was considering "Art Cloth", a term I adore, and in my mind, still points to the unembellished, off-the-loom, wet-finished stuff, more or less.Meghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01350447919000146804noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27254015.post-88495864066407421612011-01-11T08:58:49.279+13:002011-01-11T08:58:49.279+13:00Deborah, it absolutely does. And early on in Text...Deborah, it absolutely does. And early on in Textile Lunch meeting, Rose Griffin (former textile teacher, former potter) pointed that out to me. We were talking about the strange writings of art critics and art writers at that time, but that was definitely something I didn't realize until spelled out to me. <br /><br />Having said that, something like a common language definitely helps, I think. For e.g. do you have friends who use "shade" to mean "in the hue of" or "tone" to mean "same/similar hues but different tones"? I know a weaver who uses a phrase "tone on tone" to mean "monochromatic", and photographers who use "monochromatic" to mean "achromatic". All this is fine as long as I understand what they mean, but to speak and understand accurately, I do need to understand the common (?) definition. But then Rose warned me the definitions are a little bit of a moving target. <br /><br />Oh, but Dana, a simple scarf can be a piece or art, surely? And not only do we evolve, but I now KNOW it's heavily reliant on societal fashion, too. <br /><br />One time, in an all out craft show, curators used mine to highlight a potter's work, whom I happened to know. The curators weren't sure if I liked it. I didn't post a photo of one of mine that really highlighted his pots, but here's a link: http://megweaves.blogspot.com/2007/10/wellington-peddling-my-ware-money.html. That's the fun of leaving curators and exhibition organizers to do their thing. I got noticed for starters because he's far better known than I, and sold two or three pieces there. So you can stick with scarves, or venture into something else. <br /><br />For now, I'm more interested in sticking to scarves and shawls and still make art-y (now I'm feeling a tad apologetic about the a-word) pieces than going into visual/textile art style objet d'art.Meghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01350447919000146804noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27254015.post-22803496267518923492011-01-11T04:22:44.195+13:002011-01-11T04:22:44.195+13:00I have known some artists whose droning on in self...I have known some artists whose droning on in self aggrandizement is off-putting and frankly, boring.<br /><br />However to talk about the elements of art in clear ways is important. I just think that one can over think these things.<br /><br />This from a person who can't seem to break out of the scarf format. (not to take myself too seriously) However, I also relate to what you are saying... are you a weaver, a maker, an artist, what? I struggle with the same. I have changed my personal website (which I do not promote as I never feels it really portrays me well) from artist to fiber artist to hand maker and now I have deleted it altogether. The thing is, we are always evolving and once we name what we are now, we soon change.<br /><br />Also, in thinking about an opportunity, I have been asked to have a joint art showing with a potter and an etching artist. Both are also craft heavy mediums. But I thought I will need to move beyond the comfort level of scarves. But what do I weave that approaches visual arts and not just a beautiful wrap to warm the neck? Luckily I have until 2012 to arrive at an answer.<br /><br />All these questions, and I can't help but think I just need to do and stop thinking so much. But first I will read your links. Perhaps picking up a sketch book would be useful too?Dana and Daisyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14006886855600007312noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27254015.post-54382201911957463152011-01-11T00:23:05.289+13:002011-01-11T00:23:05.289+13:00I have just read and re read your post because it ...I have just read and re read your post because it rang some bells with me. One of my sons is a painter (Art school educated!!) I love his work but he can sometimes, well rather frequently actually) become enmeshed in arty language which can make me feel clumsy!!! He doesn't mean it ,but there is often an elitist attitude underpinning the desire to seperate Art from practical craft. Its not that there isn't a difference but an attitude that one is not better than the other.Hope that makes sense.deborahbeehttp://deborahbee.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.com