Showing posts with label robin updike. Show all posts
Showing posts with label robin updike. Show all posts

Wednesday, May 27, 2009

1995 part two

In this time line I pull quotes to illustrate a thread in popular and scholarly writing and criticism about glass. Here we will see current glass artists defending their art against the accusations and separating themselves from these stereotypes and, hopefully, find out how and where the now-common opinion was born. Fundamentally, the general thesis seems to be born of the question, What Is Art? This question I will leave to others to answer, here I am only documenting the written history of a popular way of thinking and a popular taste.

1995 Robin Updike:

"Cameras click and video cameras hum as William Morris, Dante Marioni and Lino Tagliapietra, all stars of the glass art scene, trot through their repertoire of crowd-pleasing skills.

They plunge molten glass globes into fiery furnaces. They spin the globes on rods like circus performers whirling plates on sticks. They wedge slab-sized wooden spatulas against the twirling, glowing glass. Flaming sparks fly through the air. Murmured oohs and aahs drift through the 50 or so onlookers at the Pilchuck Glass School hot shop in Stanwood. It's a mesmerizing show.

Meanwhile, just outside the hot shop, Dale Chihuly is being interviewed by a camera crew from CBS' "Sunday Morning." The shop is an open-sided, shake-roofed, octagonal pavillion that night and day hums with activity. Nestled as it is in the woods - a pleasure dome for glassblowers - there may be no more idyllic hot shop in the world.

A crowd has gathered to watch. Chihuly is unmistakable with his black eye patch, Trotskyite hair and trademark paint-splattered shoes. And he is, after all, not only the most famous glass artist since Louis Comfort Tiffany, but the founding spirit behind Pilchuck.

A little later will come the smoked-salmon feed for 400 served on paper plates, picnic-style, on the clearing in front of the rustic lodge - a Pilchuck potlatch - and the ceremonial burying of the time capsule, to be dug up in the year 2021 on the school's 50th anniversary. The school is this summer celebrating the beginning of it's 25th year, and calling it an anniversary.

There is also a ritual crowning of Anne Gould Hauberg on the back of a flat-bed pick-up. Hauberg and her former husband, John Hauberg, donated the 64-square-mile, bosky Stanwood site to found the glass school in 1971, and she is still considered the fairy godmother of the place. A glass crown has been made for her. She grins and vamps as it is placed on her head.

This is followed by a brief speech cheerleading for the school's $3.4 million capital campaign. The speaker: Jon Shirley, former Microsoft president and vintage car collector/mechanic, and now a Pilchuck advisory council member. The school needs improved kilns and a staff bath house, among other physical improvements, and it wants a $2 million scholarship endowment. Mark Haley, former college art student, one-time sculptor of fountains, current president of Brown & Haley candy company of Tacoma, and Pilchuck board president, also makes a few remarks.

Pilchuck has long attracted board members who are not only wealthy, successful and relatively youthful but, to a certain degree, hip.

Watching from the sidelines, a famous art critic who has been flown up to Seattle for a Seattle Art Museum seminar on glass art, seems baffled by the cheerful camaraderie and air of congratulatory goodwill. The day-long party strikes him as "tribal."

He wasn't far from the mark. The July 21 party was a ceremonial rite of passage of the Northwest clan of glass. Pilchuck has turned Seattle into the glass art capital of the U.S. Even, some say, of the world.

Woodstock for art hippies

Since 1971, Pilchuck has gone from a primitive summer camp for counterculture glassblowers with artistic aspirations - a Woodstock for art hippies - to a world-reknowned school of glass. Each summer the school attracts a teaching lineup of some of the world's leading glass artists, as well as acclaimed non-glass artists drawn to Pilchuck's ecumenical philosophy about art.

Tagliapietra, for instance, was a master glassblower at the legendary Venini glass factory in Murano, an island off Venice, Italy, before Chihuly brought him to teach at Pilchuck. Bertil Vallien, a Swedish master of cast glass sculpture and a Pilchuck regular, is one of the head designers at Kosta Boda glass factory in Sweden. This year Pilchuck students came from 24 countries and 36 U.S. states.

It's not uncommon these days to hear comparisons between Pilchuck and the glass art scene it has spawned in Western Washington, and the historic glass community around Venice, where for centuries master craftsmen produced some of the world's most sought-after goblets and glassware. Even the aesthetics of traditional Venetian goblets and vessels have been imported to Pilchuck. Marioni's classic forms are considered direct descendants of the Venetian style.

Says Douglas Heller, owner of Heller Gallery in New York, one of the nation's most established glass galleries, "The Pilchuck culture, which is an outgrowth of Tagliapietra and Chihuly, is a return to Venetian classicism. Tagliapietra represents a lifetime of achievement. He's an Italian maestro.

"But suddenly there is a bunch of these Pilchuck-trained Young Turks challenging his work," said Heller. "All of a sudden Pilchuck is like a little Venice, and that's a brilliant achievement."

The Seattle emphasis

Even casual observers of the regional art scene know that Seattle and glass art are synonymous. Walk into an upscale retail building, such as City Centre on Fifth Avenue, or a hotel, such as the Seattle Sheraton, and instead of seeing paintings on the walls you're likely to see glass sculpture in cases. Such individual tastemakers as Jeff and Susan Brotman (he co-founded Costco), Jon and Mary Shirley, and Jack and Rebecca Benaroya (he is one of the area's major real estate developers) all have sizable collections of Northwest glass.

Seattle's role as the nation's glass art center has been particularly noticeable this summer. There have been glass shows virtually every month at several galleries. Pilchuck anniversary banners hang everywhere. The Seattle Art Museum organized a special glass exhibit (still on view) and hosted a day-long seminar on glass art last month. The next day many of the 300 or so glass artists in Western Washington opened their studios to the public.

One of the art exhibits at Bumbershoot next weekend will be a 25-year retrospective of the work of Pilchuck-affiliated artists. When the Museum of Northwest Art in La Conner re-opens in October, a gallery donated by the Benaroyas will be devoted solely to glass; the opening show will be works by Pilchuck's big-name artists. And though it is still some years in the future, plans are under way for for a museum of contemporary glass in Tacoma, Chihuly's hometown.

And the nonprofit, private Pratt Fine Arts Center in Seattle has become an in-city glass center. Many of its instructors and staffers also are affiliated with Pilchuck. In the Seattle glass community, all roads eventually lead back to Pilchuck.

Not since the ascendancy in the '40s and '50s of the so-called "mystic painters of the Northwest" - Mark Tobey, Morris Graves, Kenneth Callahan, Guy Anderson and friends - has Seattle been so closely associated with a particular art movement. And it's fair to say that without Pilchuck, there would be no Seattle glass culture. Some say that without glass, Seattle's entire art scene would be less dynamic.

"I think Pilchuck is really more essential to this city than the museum," said Linda Farris, owner of Linda Farris Gallery. "Pilchuck constantly has groups of people coming through here on this quest for glass.

"But they buy other art, too," said Farris. "One of the glass collectors who was in town for the last Pilchuck auction bought one of Sherry Markovitz's abstract works," she said, referring to a Seattle sculptor who makes beaded works.

The glass detractors

That's not to say there aren't plenty of people who dismiss glass as pretty but dull. Crowds flock to see Chihuly exhibits; SAM's '92 Chihuly show drew two to three times as many people as nearly any show since. But there are painters, sculptors, print makers and others who roll their eyes at the mention of glass.

Though by now it's a weary debate, there are those who still consider all glass art to be craft, a supposedly less intellectual pursuit than art. The same detractors describe glass artists as buff glassblowers making oversized candy dishes and paperweights.

In part it's sheer envy. Glass artists seem to have more fun. Judging from the attention they get and their sales, they're also popular.

Working at something that for practical reasons must be accomplished in teams, glass artists not only make art together but often share social lives. On First Thursdays, clusters of them make the rounds of gallery openings. While painters toil alone in their studios, glass artists, especially those who work with blown glass, buzz around in their undershirts, their studios cozy and warm from the furnaces, boom boxes turned up. Chihuly's Lake Union factory, called The Boathouse, is legendary for its parties.

SAM and Pilchuck, eager to validate glass' artistic merit, called their July seminar "Contemporary Glass: Seduction vs. Intellect." But judging from the growing collections of contemporary glass at museums, many curators already have decided glass belongs in art museums.

The Tacoma Art Museum has a Chihuly collection and SAM continues to acquire glass. At the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York, works by Seattle-area artists Ginny Ruffner, William Morris, Flora Mace and Joey Kirkpatrick, as well as Chihuly, will be among those exhibited in a show of contemporary glass to open at the museum in April and run through next fall. The pieces are from the museum's collection.

Jane Adlin, Metropolitan Museum research associate of 20th-century design, said the U.S. is where the most innovative contemporary glass is coming from, and that Seattle "is the country's glass center. Pilchuck is the big place for glass," she said.

"We all talk about the Pilchuck spirit, but don't know how to define it," says Haley, the Pilchuck board president. "It's a sense of community, and the fact that not very long ago the art form was relatively unknown, so there's still a pioneer sense about the place . . .

"It's more than Dale Chihuly's Pied-Piperish personality. There's a sense of pushing new boundaries, finding new opportunities, of breaking through.

"Until Pilchuck, glass was an unsung art. That's no longer true."

Updike, R. "Capital Of Glass -- Pilchuck Puts Seattle On The Map -- With Ceremony And Fun, A Family Of Artists Celebrate A Major Milestone In Their Movement" The Seattle Times. August 27, 1995. Website Accessed May 27, 2009. http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/PrintStory.pl?slug=2138386&date=19950827

1995 Regina Hackett:

"

If Dale Chihuly's name passes into the language, as Thomas Bowdler's did in honor of his zeal as a censor, it will mean to dazzle (or daunt) with excess.

After making forests, giant butterflies, mutant swamp flowers and multiple clusters of swollen, pendulant breasts, the country's No. 1 glassman now plans to hang five of his 2,000-pound, vividly colored chandeliers over the Grand Canal in Venice, Italy.

Son of a Tacoma meatcutter, 53-year-old ((age)) Chihuly is now in residence with his crew in a tiny Finnish village called Nuutajarvi, population 400. With the blessings of the government, he has taken over the town's traditional glass factory and turned it into the temporary headquarters of Chihuly Inc.

Saying he owned the place would be understatement. Not satisfied with his shower, he commanded the Finnish army to build him a bathtub. Two hours later, it was ready for his leisurely soak. When he mentioned that a helicopter might be useful for his film crew, one was provided, an old, lumbering, camouflage-green Russian model that made canoes rock as it hovered overhead.

FINLAND IS the first stop on what Chihuly hopes will be a five-city glass-blowing tour. At each stop he plans to create a 2,000-pound glass chandelier, among other things. These are the chandeliers that will hang over Venice's Grand Canal, giving the gondoliers below something to worry about besides rain.

Actually, they won't have to worry much. Nobody is likely to be felled by a falling Chihuly. The man is excessive but he's not careless. If he hangs his pieces above the canal, they'll stay there until he takes them down.

Who's paying for all this?

``I am so far," he said, speaking from a portable phone down by the Nuutajarvian river as he directed a film crew to shoot an installation and sent various assistants scurrying with a seemingly endless series of requests.

``It cost me $200,000 for the Finnish trip," he continued. ``All I have to do is sell one chandelier and it's paid for. The studio work (for the five-city tour) will run about $1 million, and if I do a film in each place, the films will be a million each."

Money doesn't worry him. Expenses at his Seattle headquarters, known as the Boathouse, ordinarily run anywhere from $300,000 to $500,000 per month, he said.

Of course, a project such as ``Chihuly Over Venice" takes more than dough. He doesn't have permission to hang his chandeliers in Venice but feels confident he can get it. ``We're talking to the appropriate people," he said.

After spending two weeks in Finland, Chihuly plans to fly to Berlin to see the Bulgarian-born artist known as Christo wrap the Reichstag, the city's war-scarred old parliament building, in silvery fabric with blue ropes for bows. Afterward Chihuly goes to Venice where he hopes to nail down his installation plans.

``Christo is a big influence," Chihuly said. Christo is certainly the model Chihuly needs now. For this project, Chihuly will need Christo's organizational skills.

``I'm taking it one step at a time," he said, and then got distracted. ``Check the light in those trees," he called out to photographer Russell Johnson. ``It's too late to shoot. You need to be here at dawn."

CHIHULY ISN'T just directing teams of glass blowers in Finland. He's making installations as he goes. At his request, a crew stripped the leaves from a pair of 40-foot trees by the river and hung long, translucent glass cylinders on the straight, bare branches, ruby red on one and turquoise on the other.

As he spoke on the phone, three different film crews (one Finnish, one from KCTS-Channel 9 in Seattle and one hired by Chihuly) were focused on parts of the chandeliers, reportedly shaped like squashes or sides of ham, that were floating down the river in a series of photo opportunities.

Chihuly took 35 people with him to Finland, including eight Seattle glass blowers. He's being assisted by 12 Finnish glass-blowing students and 10 master Finnish blowers. They work in four teams, blowing an average of 2,200 pounds of glass daily, with a top figure of 3,000 pounds last Tuesday.

THE SUCCESS of art production isn't usually measured by its poundage. But while Chihuly set weight goals for the teams, he also set high standards for shape, volume, color brilliance and overall impact.

He has the show-business skills of a P.T. Barnum, and yet he's also an artist of consequence. He's the single most important force in elevating the status of glass art from fringe to something close to mainstream. He has forced the art world to reconsider its patronizing attitude toward decorative arts in general and proved that decorative arts have vast appeal to the general public.

His retrospective in 1992 at the Seattle Art Museum broke attendance records and proved exceedingly popular in each venue to which it traveled.

Chihuly and his crew plan to set up shop in Ireland this fall, followed by glass-blowing stops in France, the Czech Republic and Italy."

Hackett, R. "Euro Chihuly, America's premier glass artist is set to dazzle the continent." Seattle Post Intelligencer. June 19, 1995. accessed September 8, 2009. http://www.seattlepi.com/archives/1995/9506190064.asp


Sunday, April 5, 2009

1996

In this time line I pull quotes to illustrate a thread in popular and scholarly writing and criticism about glass. Here we will see current glass artists defending their art against the accusations and separating themselves from these stereotypes and, hopefully, find out how and where the now-common opinion was born. Fundamentally, the general thesis seems to be born of the question, What Is Art? This question I will leave to others to answer, here I am only documenting the written history of a popular way of thinking and a popular taste.

1996 Geoff Wichert:

"The three gaffers represented in A New Generation have a lot in common. They learned their skills over a decade of experience, working for and with the world's best glassblowers. They know how to make anything, over and over again, precisely the way it's supposed to look. It gives them great freedom, but also a particular idea about what the work is. They tend to produce variations on a theme, the glass world1s idea of a 'series.' They invoke the vocabulary of vessels, but for sculptural use, not for utility. They leave no fingerprints, and acknowledge gravity only by resistance. Shapes range from controlled to severe. Glass is thin. Colors run from strong to brilliant. [...]

Janusz Pozniak shows a dozen pieces twice the size of anything else. Aggressively colored with contrasting studs, they are blatantly sexual, and though they jest at male posturing, it's still one man teasing another. Jester, a large flask covered in bright yellow-on clear harlequin, has two counter-balanced necks, each spouting a chain of black balls. This is bravura glass making, accomplishing the more difficult feat of being genuinely funny without satire. Pozniak forgoes all but vestigial utilitarian references. Yes, these shapes could have become vessels, and those could be stoppers, but the real parallel is to human bodies with symbolic heads. This is a generation too ironic to admit a metaphor but too sharp not to make one."


Accessed from http://www.januszpozniack.com/articles.htm "A New Generation: Preston Singletary, Paul Cunningham and Janusz Pozniak" by Geoff Wichert
Glass: The UrbanGlass Art Quarterly, No. 64, Fall 1996, p.53, ill.

1996Robin Updike:

"Josiah McElheny, Three Alter Egos," Donald Young Gallery, through Feb. 22....McElheny also in this show is continuing his exploration into the authority of presentation. If art or artifacts are presented in a museum-like setting, in official-looking cases with typed-out 'labels' full of historical-sounding information, does that make the art or artifacts "real?" Does it make them 'honest?' Does it make them more artful or valuable than reproductions?

McElheny provides no answers. But mystery and ambiguity, along with some top-rate craftsmanship, are precisely what make this show seductive. Though highly trained in glass-making, McElheny is really a conceptual artist. Anyone expecting exploding color and extravagant beauty of the kind most associated with Northwest glass art will be disappointed."

"LOOKING THROUGH THE GLASS AT ART HISTORY AND AUTHORITY. " The Seattle Times (Seattle, WA). (Dec 26, 1996): H16. General OneFile. Gale. Seattle Public Library. ACCESSED 1 Apr. 2009.

1996 Sherry Stripling:

""Clearly Art: Pilchuck's Glass Legacy" begins today at the Museum of History & Industry...The show focuses on current glass being made by artists who live in Seattle and the evolution of glass since Pilchuck designers began. Herman said he asked former teachers and artists-in-residence to provide pieces they were doing at the time they were at Pilchuck.

"I wanted to look at the people who have taught there because that's where the influence has really come from," he said. The marvel of glass art is that it springs from something so utilitarian, so much a part of our everyday lives, said Herman. One aim of the MOHAI exhibit is to take some of the mystery out of the transition.

"We wanted to create a multi-sensory effect," said lead designer Bruce Christofferson, "so that not just young people but everybody will remember the experience.""

"CLEARLY PILCHUCK GLASS SCHOOL IS A CLASS ACT, ONE OF THE NORTHWEST'S SIGNATURE ENTITIES. " The Seattle Times (Seattle, WA). (Feb 10, 1996): F1. General OneFile. Gale. Seattle Public Library. 1 Apr. 2009

1996 Robin Updike:

"'Murrine Storia,' group show of glass art, through April 6 at Elliott Brown Gallery...Elliott has assembled historical pieces created by some of Italy's most renowned murrine makers, and as the name of her show suggests, she is trying to tell the "story of murrine." Some of the pieces on display date to the late 19th century, some were made in the '50s. Other works are contemporary, made by young American and Italian artists who are once again intrigued by the time-consuming, unusual process. Works by Seattle glass artists Richard Marquis, the region's murrine expert, and Dante Marioni are included.

Like many art styles and techniques, murrine has gone in and out of style since it was first used by the ancient Romans as a decorative technique in glassmaking. The Italians have always been the experts, though in recent decades some younger Americans and younger Italians have revived it. These days there is something of a murrine renaissance under way, though because of the patience and practice required to master it, it's unlikely it will ever be a commonly used technique."

Updike. Robin. "THE STORY OF MURRINE YOUNG ARTISTS REVIVE OLD, INTRICATE GLASS ART. " The Seattle Times (Seattle, WA). (March 7, 1996): D22. General OneFile. Gale. Seattle Public Library. 1 Apr. 2009. Also Available Here, Accessed April 19, 2009: http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19960307&slug=2317655

"Clay, a Continuing Tradition," sculpture by the University of Washington ceramics department faculty... Back in the days when the idea of Seattle as a capital of glass art was little more than a gleam in Dale Chihuly's good eye, Seattle was known in art circles as a ceramic city. In the '70s and early '80s, the University of Washington's ceramics department was on the leading edge of the ceramic-sculpture movement. The department was home to a gang of influential ceramic artists, including the late, much-acclaimed Howard Kottler, who created ceramic art that had little to do with the arts-and-crafts-fair aesthetic of hand-thrown mugs and platters.

While ceramics was enjoying a renaissance by hobbyists who took evening classes to learn how to use a kick wheel, the U.W. gang was making sculpture - often big, heavy, figurative funk-art pieces - that happened to be made of clay. Reminder of ceramics legacy. In more recent years, the glass art phenomenon has overshadowed Seattle's ceramic-art scene to the point where many newcomers to the city aren't aware of the U.W.'s still highly-regarded ceramics department. But at an exhibition this month at his gallery, William Traver says he wants to remind art fans of U.W.'s ceramic legacy.

The group show includes work by Kottler, who died in 1989, and by Robert Sperry and Patti Warashina, both of whom received their ceramics education at U.W. before going on to teach in the department. Though both are now retired from U.W., the husband-and-wife pair remain the area's best-known ceramic artists. Since Traver is trying to show a continuum in this show, the exhibition also includes work by three younger ceramic artists, Jamie Walker, Akio Takamori and Doug Jeck, all of whom are part of the new, current generation of U.W. ceramics faculty.

In her essay that accompanies the show, U.W. art historian Patricia Failing writes that the U.W. ceramics department, and those who run it, has always displayed "an openness to an active engagement between ceramics and broader trends and development in the contemporary art world." By looking beyond the traditional artistic uses of clay, and by making artworks with intellectual content, Failing says, the U.W. ceramics department has set itself on a higher plane than more tradition-bound ceramics departments.

Certainly the works on display at William Traver Gallery seem to be about ideas, though sometimes it's difficult to fathom what they are."

Updike, Robin. "GLASS ISN'T THE ONLY GAME IN TOWN UW CERAMICS FACULTY SHOWS ARTISTRY IN CLAY. " The Seattle Times (Seattle, WA). (August 15, 1996): G23. General OneFile. Gale. Seattle Public Library. 1 Apr. 2009
.

Wednesday, April 1, 2009

1995

In this time line I pull quotes to illustrate a thread in popular and scholarly writing and criticism about glass. Here we will see current glass artists defending their art against the accusations and separating themselves from these stereotypes and, hopefully, find out how and where the now-common opinion was born. Fundamentally, the general thesis seems to be born of the question, What Is Art? This question I will leave to others to answer, here I am only documenting the written history of a popular way of thinking and a popular taste.

1995 Matthew Kangas:

"David Hickey, the winner of this year's College Art Association-Frank Jewett Mather award for art criticism, gave the keynote address, "Glass and the Beauty Thing." Alternatively rambling and humorous, with flashes of verbal brilliance, Hickey did his best to stake out his position vis-a-vis glass, beauty, and the status of American craft within the art world...Hickey went on to praise glass as a metaphor or emblem of civilization: it survives or is broken. He drew on its ties to the Age of Reason: it is 'reflective' and 'translucent' like Enlightenment throught and other 18th century landmarks using glass, such as the Salle des Glaces at Versailles and the windowlike view into Chardin's paintings of domestic interiors.

Concluding, Hickey restated a point made by many art critics who flirt with glass but are unwilling to commit to a real love affair: why have the crafts abandoned function at the very time when the fine arts have gone over to the vessel and the functional-appearing object? Ever since Duchamp signed a urinal and called it a 'readymade', function has had a siren-call effect on the fine arts. Picasso stressed found fucntional objects and was followed decades later by furniture sculptors Scott Burton and Richard Artschwager, minimalist Donald Judd's sculptures in the form of tables (tables in the form of sculptures?), and Rober Gobner, who proved that everything included the kitchen sink can be considered art.

At this point, Hickey's analogy of the 'craft world' and 'art world' passing like 'ships in the night--in opposite directions, to and away from function'--did not hold water. Could he have missed, through lack of exposure and research, the truth that craft materials have always had a tandem tradition of functional and nonfunctional art, right up through the 20th century? Why must the art world always relegate craft to pure function?

Regardless, by taking glass seriously and responding so articulately, Hickey raised the ante for other art critics who may have resisted the idea of glass art, let alone the idea of beauty."


American Craft. "Contemporary Glass: Seduction vs. Intellect." Kangas, Matthew. p. 10. October/November 1995.


1995 Robin Updike:

"Seattle art galleries have opened the new year with gusto, mounting shows of strong new work by established artists as well as some intriguing works by promising younger artists.
Also worth noting is that of the several major shows up this month, three are by artists who work in glass, wood or clay. While the discussion of art versus craft still is regularly aired in art circles, it's clear that the choice of materials has for some time not been a meaningful method of distinguishing art from craft. And judging from the well-heeled crowd at several of this month's openings, collectors are more interested in the ideas presented in the works, and by the aesthetics of their execution, than in an academic debate over the nature of art. (Unless otherwise noted, all shows are on view through the end of the month.)
The biggest crowd-pleaser is the dramatic show by glass artist William Morris at Foster/White Gallery. Morris, long associated with Pilchuck Glass School, is one of the luminaries of the international art glass scene. A former assistant to Dale Chihuly, he has been recognized as an accomplished artist in his own right since the late '80s. Several of his works are in the permanent collection of New York's Metropolitan Museum of Art, and he was recently awarded a fellowship from the National Endowment for the Arts.
His new exhibit, which includes some pieces at Foster/White's Kirkland location, is a continuation of his paleolithic series of pseudo-cave drawings on vessels, and bones, bodily organs and crude tools suspended from caveman-style frames. A new form is a sculpture he calls "Narwhal Tusks," a striking arrangement of long, slightly gnarled, twisted glass "tusks" leaning against one another like the frame of a tepee.
Most of the work was done last year or in the first few days of this year, and it's obvious that Morris has not run out of tantalizing ways to explore his fascination with petroglyphs, ancient rocks and shards, and the mysteries of pre-historic aesthetics."
Updike, R. "Art In The Craft: Galleries Open '95 On A Strong Note." The Seattle Times. January 17, 1995. http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19950117&slug=2099758

1995 Robin Rice:

"In his second resident fellowship at the Creative Glass Center of America in Spring 2004, Dave Walters focused on two bodies of work. One was a continuation of his long-term interest in graphic images on blown glass vessels. The other was more sculptural and kinetic, incorporating elements from several media in addition to glass. These latter works sometimes resemble deconstructed human bodies. Glass brains, livers or stomachs hang like the elements of a wind chime—or a marionette, though not in a way which literally reproduces anatomic relationships. On occasion, these obliquely human, mobile elements are mounted on or in an openwork structure of forged steel.
Walters, who has worked as a gaffer for such luminaries as Dale Chihuly and Lino Tagliapietra, is able to blow glass into any form he desires to realize his designs. Some elements of his kinetic works have the thin walls and mathematical precision of scientific equipment. They endow mysterious apparatuses with a kind of scientific authority consistent with the bilateral symmetry of biological or organic forms organized into mechanical almost robotic systems. Are these objects pseudo-sentient? Elaborate experiments? Charicatures of research fashion?
Walters produces a line of functional glass; however, he is best known for unique vessels enameled with detailed narrative drawings which reflect his print-making background. Mythological and biblical stories provide material for imagery which he refocuses through a very personal prism. There are clear relationships between Walter’s work and that of printmakers like Albrecht Dürer or the more expressive William Blake, but two-dimesnional work on vessels also has strong links to the tradition of Greek vase painers. Another significant influence seems to be early Christian or Byzantine painting and mosaics, in which the surviving Roman tradition has evolved into a powerful linear emotional expression.
The Greek vase-painters depicted stories of the gods in limited colors. They and Byzantine mosaicists and other historic illustrators included text as Walters often does. The stories Walters tells, though, often take a grotesque and surreal turn which has earned him the soubriquet of “The male Judith Schaechter” (the much admired stained-glass artist with a propensity for depicting suffering, torture, and bloodshed). Unlike Schaechter, Walters works primarily with black and white and an occasional accent color.
He wanted to put most of his energy at CGCA into glass blowing: making vessels to be decorated with enamels which are applied and removed by scrafitto (scratching away) or sand-blasted after being fired. Combining additive and subtractive methods allows him to great freedom. However, while still at Wheaton, he could not resist experimenting with a recently acquired a pen which gives him a great deal control for stippling.
Walters designs vessels for specific images. He is working on ideas growing out of traditional children’s stories. “I find they are rich with possibilities and take me back to my own childhood—the monster under the bed.” He planned specific shapes to go with specific illustrations. For an Alice and Wonderland Tea Party, from a projected “Alice in Wonderland Series,” he planned a trophy-like representation of the “Drink Me” bottle topped with a tea pot.
His hammer-wielding Humpty Dumpty will be self-destructive, with only a broken, teetering ladder for rescue. “I like a tenuous relationship,” Walters admits. Buildings in his drawings are supported on thin stems; they “look solid but are only as permanent as what’s beneath.” Additional subjects proposed for the fairy tale series include Jack and the Beanstalk, Hansel and Gretel, and Rumpelstiltskin.
This artist brings his very impressive technical skills to bear on dark but archetypal subject matter. It will be interesting to see how—or if—he resolves his vision of the human body depicted in his kinetic works as a mechanistic, perhaps Cartesian entity with his more psychoanalytic graphic vision of the psyche."
Rice, R. (resident critic) "Dave Walters" 1995. Wheaton Arts, NJ. Creative Glass Center of America. website accessed May 2, 2009. http://www.wheatonarts.org/creativeglasscenteramerica/criticresidency/robinrice/waltersdave
1995 William Warmus:
The essay "The End?" reprinted in it's entirety. It can be found at William Warmus's website: http://www.warmus.us/
"Studio glass has its beginning and end in America, where the present situation offers opportunities in two directions. Looking back, historians have an obligation to write the history of studio glass and establish its key figures, its first wave. Looking to the future, artists have the opportunity to incorporate the technical legacy of studio glass into new narratives.







 Most art movements last only a generation and the styles grouped together under the term studio glass are not exempt. Exceptional is the fact that new waves of studio glassmakers and collectors often behave as if their world will continue to evolve at the rapid pace set by the early innovators. This leads to the marketing of “innovations” that repeat, sometimes unknowingly, the early successes of the first wave. The terrain of studio glass is only now being charted, its circumference and boundaries measured, our susceptibility to imitations lessened. Criticism of glass exists, but is sporadic and tends to be published in specialized journals. We need forceful criticism as a gauge of originality and corrective to excesses, whether of taste, price, or commercialism. Forget the endlessly distracting quarrels over “Is it Art?” We need critics and historians to engage in the debates from which consensus will emerge about the key artists and objects of the studio glass era, even if some turn out to be industrial designers, some objects made by production studios. And we desperately need critics who will generously champion and defend the individuals they support.






The market for studio glass matured from roughly 1979-1989, led by legendary dealers, notably Ferdinand Hampson and Douglas Heller, who in many ways took the place of art critics as promoters of the “new glass”. In my mind, the key innovation in this market was the development of a close knit and highly involved community of collectors on a national (not regional) scale, unlike anything in the artworld, who for many reasons found that they enjoyed each other’s company, enjoyed taking glassblowing lessons, founding philanthropic societies to support emerging artists, etc.. Many were couples who collected as a means of enhancing a relationship, and many collectors were successful business people who brought a benignly competitive approach to acquiring studio glass.

 Since 1990, stagnation has been evident. Many of the founding collectors have built large, mature collections and consequently are less active. Impersonal forces, primarily discounting and studio sales, drive the nineties market and have taken the lead away from pro-active dealers and collectors: who are the new Hampsons, Hellers and Saxes of the nineties? What are the bold moves, such as opening a gallery in SoHo or energizing a major art museum (Toledo) to renew its support for contemporary glass? There are certainly signs of optimism, as some members of the new generation of studio glassmakers have been able to raise their prices by showing in a fine arts context where prices are traditionally higher. But should we be optimistic that the studio glass community and market is increasingly driven by external forces, and no longer by its own internal momentum, which now seems dissipated?










Will another 2,000 years be required before the word new can again be applied to glass making? The confused and incomplete styles of art we see emerging from glass studios today are indicative of experimental, transitional, rococo and mannerist work that, in moving away from studio glass traditions, has yet to establish its own identity. Some of the best work has simply taken its place in the art world in general and is unrecognizable as studio glass: Christopher Wilmarth, never a studio glassmaker, led the way in this direction.


Despite the success of Duchamp’s “Large Glass,” glass as a material for art has never been comfortable in association with the avant-garde or its pathological successors (even Galle, the sickliest of glassmakers, asserted the vitality of nature through his symbolism). Art glass that imitates the look and actions of the avant-garde appears immature and kitschy or stale and pompous. Maybe glass is too inherently healthy, glassmakers too accepting of diversity, to fully participate in the current art scene. Tiffany and Galle may yet emerge as more central to glass than Duchamp or neo-expressionism.

Perhaps the most promising glassmakers are now renovating venerable glassmaking traditions by producing vessels and figures within a narrative art that has links to traditional storytelling. Maybe the word renovation will come to replace the word deconstruction as a mantra for the nineties. The interest in narration, in narrative art, is significant for renovation: retelling is a means of renewal. Narration promises to be the tool that is added to the “technical” tools developed by studio glassmakers over the last 30-odd years, a tool that is necessary for retrieving lost legacies and for opening up future horizons. As Paul Ricoeur, the essential philosopher of narrative, wrote: “Making and narrating have become the two sides of one process.”



Today, making glass and narrating are the two sides of one process. Yet narrative studio glass should not be weakened by narrowing its definition to a sort of three-dimensional storytelling or by appropriating to itself the roles of painting and sculpture as documentarians of the pathological and the unhealthy. The role of narrative in glass, like the role of telescopes in astronomy, should be nothing less than the humanization of time and space, so that we can make a home in the expanding universe. This project promises to establish for glass a role independent from the other arts.



William Warmus

Ithaca

June, 1995



This essay appeared in Glass magazine, Autumn, 1995. It was reprinted in Glashelder, #5, January 1996. Precursors have appeared in Design Visions, the exhibition catalog for the Australian Crafts Triennial, 1992, where I am grateful to Robert Bell for his encouragement, and in an exhibition catalog for the New Jersey Center for the Visual Arts earlier in 1992. Lost Legacies Salvaged: In the Aftermath of Studio Glass was published in Glasswork magazine in Japan in 1993, with the support of Koji Matano. The quote from Littleton is from a letter to the author dated August 26, 1993. For those who would question the role of the factory in the development of studio glass, I suggest they consider the definition of a factory in Webster’s Unabridged: “an establishment for the manufacture of goods” where manufacture means to make “by hand, or especially, by machinery.” For those interested in approaches to studio glass as a community, I suggest New Communitarian Thinking edited by Amitai, Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 1995."
Warmus, W. "The End?" Glass Quarterly, Autumn 1995. Website accessed May 6, 2009. http://www.warmus.us/The%20End%20essay%20Warmus.htm