ELLIE ROBERTS
  • Home
  • Art
    • Iliad Series
    • Underflow Series
    • Mythology Series
    • Florals Series
  • Sketchbook
  • Gallery Visits
  • Writing & Research
  • Reading
  • Found Objects
  • BA(Hons) Textiles
    • First Year
      • A Textiles Vocabulary
        • Part One: Observing and Capturing
          • Assignment One
  • Home
  • Art
    • Iliad Series
    • Underflow Series
    • Mythology Series
    • Florals Series
  • Sketchbook
  • Gallery Visits
  • Writing & Research
  • Reading
  • Found Objects
  • BA(Hons) Textiles
    • First Year
      • A Textiles Vocabulary
        • Part One: Observing and Capturing
          • Assignment One

Reading

ART HISTORY, PRACTICAL BOOKS, ACADEMIC RESEARCH ECT.

Shinn, C (2009) 'Freestyle Machine Embroidery'

5/6/2020

0 Comments

 
Picture
Table of Contents
1: Understanding the Process of Freestyle Machine Embroidery
2. Colour Mixing
3: My Process for Making Embroidery
4: Adding Variety
5: Freestyle Machine Embroidery as an Artistic Medium

Appendices
1. Your Work Space and Equipment
2. Basic Colour Information 
3. Three Ways to Reproportion Artwork for Embroidery
Distortion


This is an interesting and highly practical book about free motion embroidery (or free machine embroidery). There is a lot of information about the practicalities of free machine embroidery presented here, and usually in a way that is easy to follow. In the earlier chapters (particularly chapter two on colour mixing), Shinn presents some exercises the reader can undertake for themselves in order to see how different approaches to stitching can affect the outcome, which I found highly valuable as a way of understanding not only my own work but also hers. The information on how to adjust tension to achieve different stitch types was both well presented and easy to understand - I think this section (in chapter four) could have been enhanced by the addition of similar types of experimental exercises for the reader.

Chapters one and three are particularly focused on Shinn's own work and process, which is quite different from mine in both form and intention, so while these were interesting, I'm not sure that I took as much from them as someone working, or hoping to work, in a style closer to Shinn's own might. 

I found Chapter five the most interesting in the book in that it profiled artists working with free motion embroidery in different ways, and directly discussed the techniques they used to create the kind of work they do.

Overall this is a practical book that is well presented, though probably not for the extreme beginner, certainly I think it would have been more useful for me to read earlier than I did - and would have saved me many hours of messing about at my own machine trying to figure out ways to achieve my desired affects (although I also suspect I learned far more during those hours than though reading this book!) There are excellent full colour reproductions of work (including close ups) and samples demonstrating techniques throughout. 
0 Comments

Johnson, J (ed.) (1999) 'Exploring Contemporary Craft: History, Theory and Critical Writing'.

23/5/2020

0 Comments

 
Picture
Table of Contents 

Contemporary Craft History
Contemporary Craft: A Brief Overview
Bruce Metcalf

Craft in Canada: Overview and Points from
 Canadian Craft and Museum Practice 1900-1950)
Sandra Flood

Reflecting and Affecting Craft: Federal Policy and Contemporary Canadian Craft
Alan C Elder

Contemporary Craft Theory
Craft and Modernity
Paul Greenhalgh

New Craft Paradigms
Ingrid Bachmann

Several Ideas about Ceramics
Walter Ostrom

Craft Theory and Education
Alexandra Palmer

Wood Practice
Peter Fleming

​Collective Memory, Craft History and Theory: A Canadian Perspective
Ron Shuebrook

Material
Gary Griffin

Critical Writing
What's Crafts Criticism Anyway?
Janet Koplos

Adorn Yourself With Attitude: Blister Packs, Fishing Weights, Toe Splints and Jewellery? Try it On.
Blake Gopnik

On Style
Mark Kingwell

Writing Craft: An Interdiscursive Approach
Robin Metcalf

Writing About Craft: Questions and Answers

I picked up this book in a quest to situation my thoughts about the looming Crafts vs. Art debate that I know is alive and kicking on both sides of the aisle and that I have also been playing with in my head since making the definitive 'switch' from painting and drawing to textile art. What do those two words mean together? Textiles is not an art form in an of itself, in the same way that 'painting' is not (one can, after all, paint a house...). But when someone says 'I am an artist' or 'we are going to an art gallery' the kind of work that these statements bring to mind is most likely painting, drawing, and other 'traditional' art forms like sculpture. Increasingly, I'd suggest that postmodern and post contemporary art forms (like video or performance art or installation) are also brought to mind. But how many people think 'oh, you're going to see some embroidery!'? Not many, I'd bet. In part, I personally feel uncomfortable about this because I see what I do and make as being art and not craft - yet there is lots of craft in what it is that I do. Undeniably so. And thus, my journey into the minefield of contemporary craft began here. 

​This book is the published papers of a symposium of the same title held in March of 1999 in Toronto. That accounts for the obvious Canadian emphasis in many of the papers. I am not used to reading conference proceedings that are just reproductions of the presenter's scripts, and I found that very off putting (this is a point about my own personal reading and thinking style, based on my academic background rather than about the subject of the book).

Overall, this book gave a decent enough overview of three main areas of Craft (in Canada, and often more widely applicable). The first was on the history of craft in Canada, including how museum and government practices have differentiated craft from art and the implications that has had on 'craft' practices. This was the least widely applicable section and so I skimmed it rather quickly. However, there were some really interesting points made particularly in the opening chapter about what craft is and the longevity of 'the handmade', even in modern contexts in which the handmade is not necessary any more. It got me thinking about ancient artworks and the way that functional vessels were also used in non-functional ways: like normal oil amphorae (pots) being decorated in distinctive ways and becoming trophies (though still filled with oil - the oil is the main prize).

The second section was the longest, purporting to look at craft 'theory', but actually many of the papers looked at craft practice and education. I particularly liked the two sections by craft practitioners on ceramics (Walter Ostrom) and woodworking (Peter Fleming). Ostrom discusses the idea of objects having both material and technical contexts, and that the theory of craft has to be bound up in craft history. I get the point, and I agree about the multifarious contextualisation of objects and how necessary that is, but I wonder about the idea of history being so important for practice (of course, this is not at all what Ostrom says, he is discussing craft theory here, which - like art theory - definitely needs a firm understanding of the history of the materials, methods, and subject matter). But, if we get caught up in the necessity of history in craft practice then do we neglect our own histories? When we are children we paint and draw without understanding the historical or theoretical context of the medium(s) and technique(s) we are employing. Can we not draw similar lines from messing about with play-doh to throwing pots? This came around again in Flemming's paper when he says "we gradually find ourselves captivated by the act of making, generating an object that never existed before". This is, obviously, not a craft specific thing (though Fleming is talking in the context of woodworking, and so making objects that, by and large, have some kind of functional purpose). In my own work I find the act of making is the most engaging - it is also the place where I am the most emotionally invested in the work. This was the same when I was painting as it is when I am stitching. But - to turn that on its head somewhat - when I make clothing for myself the captivation comes in the act of wearing, that is of using the object. The making is secondary to that. So, these are two points of thought that I suspect I will come back to: history and theory context, and the captivation in making over using.

The third section of the collection is about critical writing about craft. It was interesting in parts, but I found it very dull and repetitive if I'm honest. It was shocking to go from a very practitioner-led survey of the history and theory of craft in its many forms, to this section which seemed extraordinarily pompous (and that's coming from someone with three degrees in Classics, which is probably the most pompous of academic disciplines). I do not really wish to say any more about the section, but I suppose I should. This seemed to be the only place where the art vs. craft dichotomy was thrown into very stark relief. Several papers try to make out that art critics don't engage in craft because they don't have the historical context for craft practices. I found this argument to be weak every time it was raised (including in the reporting of the discussion section at the end of the book). The implication seemed to be that art critics were too busy to learn the context (in the financial argument of this case, it makes complete sense - the critic doesn't have enough paid time to learn the necessary history to complete the piece) and also that craft critics were usually not critics in the same sense as art critics and were too nice and fluffy with one another. There were very many issues raised and no real discussion about solutions. 

Having said that, this book was written some thirty years ago now, and things have moved on. In part that's why I don't want to go too much into this final section - because I think the distinction between 'art' and 'craft' has been blurred more than it was then. I also think that my art form - textile or fibre art - has gained more recognition as an art form in that time (as have other crafts, including pottery, while others perhaps have not). 

​Overall, this book didn't blow me away, and I wouldn't bother reading it again.
0 Comments

Borzello, F. (2016) 'Seeing Ourselves: Women's Self Portraits'.

29/6/2018

0 Comments

 
Table of Contents
Introduction
The presentation of self

1. The Sixteenth Century
In the beginning

2. The S
eventeenth Century
A new self-confidence

3. The Eighteenth Century
Professionals and amatures

4. The Nineteenth Century
The opening door

5. The Twentieth Century
Breaking taboos

6. Into the Future
The feminist impact

Conclusion
Drawing breath

Frances Borzello's Seeing Ourselves: Women's Self Portraits could not have come at a better time for me. I've been thinking about what to do for assignment one for Practice of Painting and had kind of come up with idea of doing an absent self-portrait - a still-life collection of things that represent me. I have been thinking a lot about self portraiture recently - as my last general research post attests. Having re-started therapy recently, I have been thinking about the place of self and of myself in my life.

Borzello's volume is arranged by century, with each chapter dealing with themes and issues that arrise predominantly within the art of that particular century - these themes are well represented by the sub-titles of the chapter. The book is really well illustrated, with 200 images that represent a vast array of styles and media, over a period of five hundred years. The book is ambitious in that regard, but does not disapoint. The aim of the book seems to be to present a broad overview of the self-portraiture of women over a long time period, rather than to argue for a specific type of advancement though the genre of self-portraiture. In this repsect, the book is a valuble starting point for anyone - not only women - to think about the role that self-portraits play within each artistic epoch and, therefore (as Borzello comes around to in the final chapter and conclusion) within our own artistic frameworks. There is no way a female artists can undertake self-portraiture without tapping into the history of self-portraits and women's self-portraits in particular, whether or not she knows it. At the very least, (some) viewers will have this frame of reference when viewing the work (not that I want to get all Death of the Artist or anything).

I found it incredibly interesting to think about the historical framwork within which (women's) self-portraiture does sit. As an ancient historian who is interested in the way that material culture talks about people in their absense, I find the idea of representing the self in a raw and realistic way (relative to the artistic period) incredibly daunting. Ancient portraiture, while something that does exist in the archaic and classical periods, is highly styalised. The Kore (kore means 'maiden' and generally refers to unmarried girls) statues of archaic Athens, for instance, are beautiful and expressive - and some of them do represent individual girls and women who are named (either in inscriptions on them, or on the plinth on which they stood). This, for example, is a famous statue of a girl named Phrasikleia, who died unmarried and this was errected as a grave marker.
PicturePhrasikleia Kore, National Archaeological Museum. Photo Ellie Roberts (August 2017)
In that regards, it was very useful for Borzello to really lay out the distinct history of self-portrature in a (significnatly!) more modern context than one I am familiar with.

I was surprised at the (contextual) modernity of many of the works, some of which did not seem to fit into what I think of as their 'stereotypical' period styles. This made me feel really excited and energised by the works, that women are doing innovative and wonderful things that push boundaries both by the style of their works and, probably most importantly, by the subject matter. Themselves.

The book also made me start thinking about what the purpose of my writing about the books I read is. It's difficult to step out of the 'academic' desire to review each book, but that is not what I want to achieve from these posts. I want to think about how the various things fit into the work that I am doing, not as an academic or an art historian, but as a practitioner. As a painter.

To that end, this book has inspired me to start thinking deeply about the way that I portray myself, about my desire to paint self-portraits. About tapping into some of the convetions that female artists have set down - I'm not a good musician, but the painting of self-with-piano, for example, can mean something incredibly telling for me as we have a piano at home and my husband plays. Thinking about the ways I can represent that while still playing on and with the convention set down by artists like Lavinia Fontana and Sofonisba Anguissola in the sixteenth century. Portraits with a closed piano in the background, or with my husband playing, back turned. Although this is something that I'd never considered before, reading about the way that women in the past have emphasised their competencies in a world that continually denied them agency has been incredibly thought provoking and inspiring.

0 Comments

Gompertz, W. (2016). 'What Are You Looking At?: 150 Years of Modern Art in the Blink of an Eye'.

4/6/2018

0 Comments

 
What are you looking at?: 150 Years of Modern Art in the Blink of an Eye (WAYLA) is a deceptively well written and self-effacing book, written by William Gompertz, the arts correspondent of the BBC, and former Tate Media director. His writing is engaging and the narrative he weaves around the artists, movements, and key artworks is dense and intelligent but approachable. It title is somewhat misleading, though, as this book cannot be read in the blink of an eye. It is a tome. Of sorts.

WAYLA approaches broad movements of the art world in each chapter, moving forward though time in general, but with some stilting back and forward as various movements overlap but are treated in different chapters. This works well for the reader, as there are clear delineations between movements, but Gompertz could do more to make this clear within the text itself.
Table of Contents
1: The Fountain, 1917
2: Pre-Impressionism: Getting Real, 1820--70
3: Impressionism: Painters of Modern Life 1870--90
4: Post-Impressionism: Branching Out, 1880--1906
5: Cezanne: The Father of Us All, 1839--1906
6: Primitivism, 1880--1930 / Fauvism, 1905--10: Primal Scream
7: Cubism: Another Point of View, 1907--14
8: Futurism: Fast Forward, 1909--19
9: Kandinsky / Orphism / Blue Rider: The Sound of Music, 1910--14
10: Suprematism / Constructivism: The Russians, 1915--25
11: Neo-Plasticism: Gridlock, 1917--31
12: Bauhaus: School Reunion, 1919--33
13: Dadaism: Anarchy Rules, 1916--23
14: Surrealism: Living the Dream, 1924--45
15: Abstract Expressionism: The Grand Gesture, 1943--70
16: Pop Art: Retail Therapy, 1956--70
17: Conceptualism / Fluxus / Arte Povera / Performance Art: Mind Games, 1952 Onward
18: Minimalism: Untitled, 1960--75
19: Postmodernism: False Identity, 1970--89
20: Art Now: Fame and Fortune, 1988--2008--Today


Like Kemp (2014), women don't get a look in until relatively late in the book, but unlike Kemp, Gompertz explicitly acknowledges this, and looks at some of the systemic reasons why women have been pushed to the background: 'Where, you might wonder,' he says, 'are the female artists? Evidence suggests that if you were a female artist practising between 1850 and 1930 you might be tolerated, but you probably wouldn't be venerated' (location 3864 of 6225 [Kindle*]). While I might argue that including some of those 'tolerated' female artists producing ground-breaking work alongside their male peers might be preferable to just mentioning that they were there, this acknowledgement does two things that a simple inclusion doesn't do. First, it forces the reader to confront their own complicity in forgetting female artists. 'Where, you might wonder...' Had you wondered? You can pretend you had, of course, but very few of us actually would do. Second, it forces us to think critically about the system of 'ground-breaking progressives' - Gompertz says as much: 'But then weren't the pioneering artists and the movements they championed supposed to be challenging society and the status quo?' (3872-3875) - and how they were not (always, nor in every way) as progressive as we might think. That is to say, it forces us to remember that even progressives have progressed - we cannot anachronistically apply our own cultural norms onto people who did not share those norms.

And therein lays what is really great about Gompertz's book. It's light, witty, presents sometimes fictionalised accounts (Gompertz confesses this early on) of many of the most influential artists, movements, and artworks of 'modern art'. But it is no less critical of those movements - and of what is left out of 'modern art' because it just doesn't really fit, or because of social 'faults' (or what we may consider such now). And, crucially, it makes us - the reader, as artists, or art historians, or interested lay people - to understand the role that we - as 'society' - have played in those people and movements who have been left out.
0 Comments

Kemp, M (2014) Art in History: 600 BC - 2000 AD.

31/5/2018

0 Comments

 
Picture
I'm not quite sure how to begin on Kemp's Art in History. I found it troubling that the first mention of a woman was  on page 187 (out of 214 pages of text), and the small spate of women here included Artemisia Gentileschi (who should probably have been mentioned during the discussion of the Baroque period, given she is one of it's more enduring figures...). I also expected to be put on the wrong foot from the off, as the book opens with a chapter on ancient art, which is something I teach as a professional ancient historian. But the chapter was both clear and (mostly) correct, so that was a nice surprise.

The book is well illustrated and written in an engaging style, that tries to play to both the interest in talking about the artists' lives and the necessity to talk about their work. I particularly liked that Kemp also discussed the way that media changed across the centuries.

All in all, this was a nice smooth introduction back into reading about art for me - something I have not done (with the exception of ancient art) for a long time. I suspect it will take me a bit longer to start remembering how to write about art (and about art scholarship) though.

0 Comments

    By author

    All
    Borzello F
    Gompertz W
    Johnston J
    Kemp M
    Shinn C

    Archives

    June 2020
    May 2020
    June 2018
    May 2018

© COPYRIGHT 2018. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
  • Home
  • Art
    • Iliad Series
    • Underflow Series
    • Mythology Series
    • Florals Series
  • Sketchbook
  • Gallery Visits
  • Writing & Research
  • Reading
  • Found Objects
  • BA(Hons) Textiles
    • First Year
      • A Textiles Vocabulary
        • Part One: Observing and Capturing
          • Assignment One