The AAW, Detroit, and the Future

[Steve Worcester]

Steve,

You have quoted me inaccurately. The smiley was after #9, not #8. That creates a false impression.

Apparently you are trying to not understand me and you have succeeded. I have not objected to any substance used nor to any art. Many pieces are turned on a lathe and then embellished. Fine. Ed Kelle's excellent piece was turned on a lathe and then made to look like coral. Fine. The artist whose rectangular blocks were chosen had some elegant turned boxes that were not chosen. Why not choose his best work? In the IG I commented about this and was asked by a bystander where I would draw the line. I replied, "That's easy." and proceeded to draw an imaginary line with my finger between the two rectangular pieces and his turned work.

This isn't rocket science.

Smiley removed.
What I am trying to figure out is who is %80, who is %20 and what they want.

 

[rjones]

With some of the items picked at the IG was like being in a ford car club and going to a ford gallery with the nice ford that you built and showing it and a chevy wins best of show. we need to call it something besides woodturning if 80 to 90% of the work is done off the lathe.
Rjones

 

[George Guadiane]

George - Woodturning is a chance for me to escape from the troubling realities of life. Why would I want to drag politics, social issues, whatever into it? Having to confront what I'm trying to escape (whatever position is being taken) is a quick way to diminsh the joy of participation in this activity for me.

Ed

I understand and agree, to a great degree...
However, when you leave your nest and enter the big world, you gotta deal with life on life's terms, we all do.
I'm just saying that the solution for this is the same for you as listening to Rush and Hannity is for me... I listen till it gets too stupid and insulting (and my skin gets too thin), then change the station.
Once you see something you don't like, you can look away, or you can spend a lot of time and energy making yourself and everyone around you angry.
Seriously expecting others to comply to your standards in a free society like ours isn't going to get much traction (IMO humble or not).

 

[Ed_McDonnell]

... Once you see something you don't like, you can look away, or you can spend a lot of time and energy making yourself and everyone around you angry. Seriously expecting others to comply to your standards in a free society like ours isn't going to get much traction (IMO humble or not).

George - You have to look at the big picture here. It's not about me. It's not about you. It's not about compliance, changing opinions or winning arguments. It's all about the controversy and the conflict.

What's the point of the AAW embracing controversial art if it isn't going to generate significant controversy? Any good controversy (certainly any worthy of an organization of the stature of the AAW) requires strong display of emotions on all sides of the issue. The more irrational and heated the arguments the better. With any luck, actual physical confrontations will break out at the next IG and our standing within the art community will reach new highs!!!

Each of us who have expressed strong opinions here have directly supported the AAW in it's quest to expand the awareness of (and respect for) the work of AAW members within the larger art community. Those who have tried to push the controversy under the rug (or to the back porch) have completely failed to understand the larger strategy at work here.

I can barely contain my excitement.

Ed

 

[George Guadiane]

Now THIS is FUNNY!

George - You have to look at the big picture here. It's not about me. It's not about you. It's not about compliance, changing opinions or winning arguments. It's all about the controversy and the conflict.

What's the point of the AAW embracing controversial art if it isn't going to generate significant controversy? Any good controversy (certainly any worthy of an organization of the stature of the AAW) requires strong display of emotions on all sides of the issue. The more irrational and heated the arguments the better. With any luck, actual physical confrontations will break out at the next IG and our standing within the art community will reach new highs!!!

Each of us who have expressed strong opinions here have directly supported the AAW in it's quest to expand the awareness of (and respect for) the work of AAW members within the larger art community. Those who have tried to push the controversy under the rug (or to the back porch) have completely failed to understand the larger strategy at work here.

I can barely contain my excitement.

Ed

I would have liked to let yours be the last post, but it only seems fair to give you your due -
You made me laugh out loud!😀😛😱

 

[Doug Thompson]

The artist statement was meant to stir the pot and he accomplish his goal. We elect a board to do the best job they can to keep the AAW going and they do it the best they can... period. Can we do better... probably not. This was a situation that hasn't been addressed in the past so the artist statement had to stay no matter how much it offended the public. Next year the board could adopt a policy that no artist statement is allowed in the IG, this would solve the problem we had this year. Next year there might be a different problem to deal with so they could handle it when it occurs.

There is no big city that is safe after dark so why should Richmond be any different, no one got hurt so we did very good as a group to be safe. I'm sure the board has issues with every symposium that they need to deal with and do the best they can for what they have to work with.

Up on a soap box.
The war has affected all us, in our auto plant we have a list of kids as long as your arm who were lost in one day, it's a good daily reminder what these kids did because they believed in America. I don't know how Ford and GM ever got into this but they are American, if we can't support our own country one day the world will hand our fannies to us. I hope I never see the day when our troops go into battle in a Toyota because the company who made the Humvee went out of business.

Off soapbox

 

[Max Taylor]

the AAW, Detroit and the future

You can criticize Detroit if you want to, but, if Americans werent buying the big cars back then, how long do you think they could produce them????? Just to add a little levity to the discussion.

 

[C Edward Moore]

Dustpan,

How happy is Detroit now?

A stated objective of the AAW Board is to have all chapters comprised of AAW members. This was discussed at the chapters meeting at the Symposium and was not well-received.

My point has been that the "Art Uber Alles" group (AUA) has made decisions that send implicit messages to the membership along the lines of "Artistic embellishment is more important than turning skills." Richard Raffan, one of the most influential woodturners in the world was at the Symposium. Many members began turning because they were inspired by his books and videos/DVDs. His turning skills FAR EXCEED those of most in the AUA group. Were any of his pieces selected by the AAW? No, the AAW exalts those who can embellish and not necessarily those who can turn. This may be driven by the Collectors and $$.

My contention is that 80% of the club members want to become better turners and they feel alienated because they think there is too much emphasis on embellishment. I think we need a better approach to increasing club membership than cramming it down people's throats. I think the AAW wins if it abandons the AUA approach and keeps the Main Thing the Main Thing.

In the interest of full disclosure, I do dye some of my turnings, although I try to keep the grain visible. I am not against embellishment, but I oppose exalting pieces that are essentially unturned.

 

[MichaelMouse]

My point has been that the "Art Uber Alles" group (AUA) has made decisions that send implicit messages to the membership along the lines of "Artistic embellishment is more important than turning skills." Richard Raffan, one of the most influential woodturners in the world was at the Symposium. Many members began turning because they were inspired by his books and videos/DVDs. His turning skills FAR EXCEED those of most in the AUA group. Were any of his pieces selected by the AAW? No, the AAW exalts those who can embellish and not necessarily those who can turn. This may be driven by the Collectors and $$.
.

Seems to me that the organization grows by outsiders joining, not by creating AUA members out of insiders. The turning can be an end, as it is for all, especially when they begin, or the means to an end for those who consider it a canvas. You have to demonstrate proficiency in the basics before you can do the freestyle, just as in skating. Most people, myself included, joined to increase their basic skills, not imitate others'. The AUA attitude is why those members drop away.

 

[hockenbery]

Ed,

I believe the AAW has a broad view of woodturning from the simplest cylinder to the elaborately embellished work. The variety of objects selected for awards bears witness to this. We endeavor to serve hobbiest as well as the professionals who make aliving selling their work

Instant Gallery Awards were given to
Irene Grafert, Dale Larson, Ed Kelle, John H. Williams, Ken Deaner, Derek Weidman, and Jon Sauer, as well as Benoit Averly.

These pieces may be viewed at the bottom of:
http://www.woodturner.org/sym/sym2008/photos/ig/index.htm

The Instant gallery critique panel Albert LeCoff, Louise Hibbert, and Steve Keeble were the jurors and in my opinion selected a well rounded set of work for awards.

Also from year to year we vary the focus of the AAW show. Turned for Use II was certainly for those members who prefer less embellished work.

I believe we have room for all types of work.

happy turning,
Al

 

[C Edward Moore]

Thank you

Al,

I would be remiss if I didn't point out that you encouraged me to go forward with the Boxmakers SIN event and that you were cooperative at all phases of that interesting journey. When castigating the Board I should have added a disclaimer all along that you had treated me kindly and had a bigger view of things than some.

So, thank you for your help in making the Boxmakers SIN a successful event.

It is easier to select the most glamorous piece than it is to select the most skillfully turned piece.

I truly believe that the AAW is in danger of losing its way. The IG was an interesting art show and the casual observer will forget that it is to be a woodturning exhibit. How many attendees did NOT put something in the IG because it is "just an art show" and "they look down on what I do"? Comments of this type were heard by several of us. If you make people feel unwelcome often enough they will go away. This latter point is exactly why many club members don't want to become AAW members. And the AUA Board members simply don't get it.

I love the work of Stephen Hatcher and have a couple of his pieces that were turned and then embellished. I also have pieces by Ray Key, Bob Rosand, and Richard Raffan. I value the work of "The Masters". I should also mention Phil Brown, Mark St Leger, and Don Riggs.

Thanks for your hard work, Al.

 

[hockenbery]

Ed,

I disagree that AAW focuses only on the high end art.

The pieces that received IG awards and the collection of work in the Turned for Use II provide abundant evidence that simple turned only work is given equal footing with work where turning is only a portion of the process.

Consider implementing a rule that 50% of the work must be done on the lathe;
from the get go we exclude: Segmented work, pens, pierced pieces, fluted pieces, spiral work, .......

I believe that is too narrow a view of turning.


Happy turning,
Al

 

[C Edward Moore]

Al,

Do Collectors go for work that isn't highly embellished? Why/ Why not? Was it Collectors who were ushered in ahead of the rest of us at the Banquet? Money matters. Are we trying to honor what we think Collectors will buy?

I am not opposed to embellished pieces. And if four salad bowls had been selected I would have been equally puzzled. But if one looks at a piece and cannot answer "Was it turned on the lathe? Or was it simply carved?", then maybe that piece belongs in a different show. It certainly doesn't deserve a woodturning award or recognition.

 

[john lucas]

Actually I believe collectors do both. I have seen photos of collectors houses and when you look around the rooms you will see all types of turnings, Just like you see in the instant gallery. Collectors are just like other people. They collect what they like and some like unadorned bowls and some like really fancy stuff.
I do think the instant gallery is not representative of the average turner, but that is because the you would not bring average work to a national show, you would bring the best could produce. Even at club meetings people don't always bring everything they turn. There are always a few exceptional people in each club and even though we try to convince people to bring in their work they don't always because they don't want it sitting next to the really nice work. Lets face it, high end work is intimidating no matter who makes it. Because of this I think you will never see a lot of bowls in the symposium instant gallery because most people simply wouldn't bring them unless the wood was really spectacular.

 

[Mark Mandell]

Or

we try to convince people to bring in their work they don't always because they don't want it sitting next to the really nice work. Lets face it, high end work is intimidating no matter who makes it. Because of this I think you will never see a lot of bowls in the symposium instant gallery because most people simply wouldn't bring them unless the wood was really spectacular.

Because the Instant Gallery is an "open class" "non-juried" display where the members, themselves, determine what is shown there! There are no themes, no requirements, no preconceived notions of what should or should not be there. The show is, and always has been "Bring your stuff to show us what you do, whatever that may be." As all artist-to-artist communications must be, the IG must be fully open, with the only criteria being that the exhibitors be AAW members. The IG is NOT the AAW, it is AAW members, individually. The AAW provides the opportunity, but it does not sanction the IG nor dictate, whether officially or otherwise, what goes on the tables. There's no "pro" table, or "newbie" section, or any rhyme or reason where stuff goes; everybody from Ellsworth, to Raffan, to Averly, to Mandell take their chances where their pieces go and whose stuff gets put next to them.

"Only done on a lathe?" Gee, I remember seeing several pieces in the IG that I could opine should not have been done on a lathe and several that could have been done a whole lot better without getting near a lathe. Nobody raised a fuss about them.

I'll submit that once the Board or any adhoc group starts to filter or restrict what can or can't be shown by individual members in the IG, it is then that the Instant Gallery will fail completely as a representative sample of what AAW members have been doing over the prior 12 months. Every year the AAW puts up a formal show; this year there were two. THAT is where any comments on the juries' choices should be directed.

If someone wants a "bowls only" show, by all means push for a S.I.N. show-n-tell for whatever is nearest and dearest to your turning heart.

But kindly keep yer mitts off the IG!! 😉

 

[Garmar]

I think you missed the point Mr Mandell. Its all about being intimidated by work(s) being presented that are so superior(at least in my scope of ability) I/some wouldn't be comfortable displaying. Kudos to those who exibit, but its not for unskilled turners or newbies such as myself.

 

[Mark Mandell]

I think you missed the point Mr Mandell. Its all about being intimidated by work(s) being presented that are so superior(at least in my scope of ability) I/some wouldn't be comfortable displaying. Kudos to those who exibit, but its not for unskilled turners or newbies such as myself.

Actually, I got the point. I put myself last on my little list. I had some second thoughts about putting "my stuff" in the first National Symposium I ever went to. Me next to an Ellsworth or some such? I must be nuts. And there were many pieces in that first IG that I regarded as more advanced, better done, etc. than my beginner's effort. But guess what, my piece was picked for the critique! Yeah, me, the nobody from New Jersey, who had no interest in selling anything or competing for nice little ribbons or awards. Why did I do it? To get real feedback from those better than I, real comments and suggestions on how to improve in terms that I could relate to because they were based on my own piece, not some construct of what a turning "should" be.

Truth be known, I actually disliked the giving of awards this year. Not that the selected pieces weren't meritorius, it's that the idea of singling them out for recognition tends to turn the IG into just another competition with a few winners and, by implication, a bunch of losers. That concept will, indeed, inhibit the sharing and learning that is the foundation of the IG, and will relegate the gallery to a place to go see stuff "I-will-never-be-able-to-do-and-so-redeem-myself-before-the-woodturning-gods'-eyes"

Mr. Garmar, if you let yourself be intimidated by what others do, then any public display will seem closed to you. The IG always has some spectacular work, but it also always has some lesser lights, its share of ho-hum stuff, and although I haven't seen any burn-pit fugitives, a few pieces open to the "why" question. That's actually (in my view) how it should be.

YMMV 🙂

 

[George Guadiane]

I think you missed the point Mr Mandell. Its all about being intimidated by work(s) being presented that are so superior(at least in my scope of ability) I/some wouldn't be comfortable displaying. Kudos to those who exibit, but its not for unskilled turners or newbies such as myself.

In turning (in my personal experience), everyone gets respect, no matter what level. Besides, "art" is subjective - I have seen numerous pieces of "art" that had obviously taken a lot of time and energy, that I didn't think were very good, and simple things that were elegant in that simplicity. Take a shot.😀

Actually, I got the point.
[edit]
Why did I do it? To get real feedback from those better than I, real comments and suggestions on how to improve in terms that I could relate to because they were based on my own piece, not some construct of what a turning "should" be.
[edit]
Mr. Garmar, if you let yourself be intimidated by what others do, then any public display will seem closed to you. The IG always has some spectacular work, but it also always has some lesser lights, its share of ho-hum stuff, and although I haven't seen any burn-pit fugitives, a few pieces open to the "why" question. That's actually (in my view) how it should be.

YMMV 🙂

I absolutely agree! I would like to add that I show my work wherever I can, many of the top turners in my area Paul Petrie, Keith Tompkins, Steve Sherman (actually a pretty long list when I think about it) have been happy to take the time to examine my work and make observations and suggestions.
In my case, I fell like I have learned more from what needs improvement than from the pats on the back when I get it right. I don't always LIKE to hear it, but I know I NEED to hear it, so I put myself out there... In my case (and I can only speak for myself), I get more enjoyment out of my turning when I get pointers that take me closer to my objectives.
Generally, turners are extremely generous, and when it comes to turning are kind and helpful. That was the biggest draw for me when I decided to try turning.

 

[Keith T.]

Hey Garmar, I think it's important to remember that we ALL started in the same place, and we have all suffered through the same learning curve. I urge anyone to display their work; one of the best learning opportunities in the entire symposium is to show your pieces to the established turners for their advice and suggestion. Most, if not all, would be glad to take the time to help...just be aware many of them may be on a tight schedule with demos, etc.

To play devil's advocate for a minute, how do you ask a turner NOT to display what they feel is their very best work at a national symposium? Do we REALLY want those who carve, blast, pierce, or otherwise embellish their work to go somewhere else? Do we REALLY want to discourage highly talented artists interested in turning from becoming AAW members as well?

I strongly suggest that before anyone takes sides on the pure turning/embellished turning topic, they thoroughly explore the work done by generations of turners who went before us...you will discover the very best turnings were almost invariably carved as well as turned. You will discover turnings that were spiral carved, gilded, fluted and reeded ... and (gasp) painted, centuries ago! . Consider just one maker; would you dare ask Thomas Chippendale NOT to carve his masterpieces?

I sincerely hope we can get past the politics that can easily divide us. I suggest rather that focusing on the differences between us, we should embrace the thing that draws us together...the love of working with wood.

 

[Garmar]

Mark; Keith, I understand your point(s). I will try to restate my observation about this thread. If you look at the first post by Mr Moore, the first sentence speaks volumes and explains exactly the message of this entire thread, or at least it should in my opinion. There appears to be a great deal of concern(my feeling) about the direction of the AAW, good or bad, as regards the beginner turner, novice turner. The message is (again my feeling) that one should be in good standing by paying dues and maybe be a silent member and not to quick to make suggestions. Example: I have on more than a few occasions opined(I like that word) about getting our journal protected in some manner against the USPS. I haven't received a single journal out of the last 4 that hasn't had some damage. If that is going to happen then fantastic. If not, why?
I've gained a tremendous amount of information through this organization and eagerly await the next and the next, ect. journal. But, it isn't the only place I can buy the information. Its like every thing in life, one tolerates until it becomes intolerable.
Keith, I'm kind of confused as to why you mentioned embellished turnings, but I like them alot and plan in the future to try my hand. But, one thing for sure, anyone will still be able to recognize it as being a TURNED object.
I took the original post by Mr Moore as a plea to the Association to wake up, and consider the majority of its members feelings about direction. I could be wrong but I don't think I am.

 

[Charlie Knighton]

intimidated

i was intimidated, but i did particpate and show 3 pieces

The show is, and always has been "Bring your stuff to show us what you do, whatever that may be

that is the way i came, i hope to improve, the bar is pretty high but i saw some pretty stuff

i did talk to Malcolm Tibbetts, RE Watts, Bill Collison, and Terry Mitchell in the IG. the quantity of quality in the IG and vendor area is what really sets the national symposium from the regional symposiums :cool2:IMHO

as i was packing pieces up i saw Jim Christiansen talking to someone, i had attended his and Stevem Hatcher's rotation on the critque process, and my biggest regret was not asking him to look at my pieces

 

[hockenbery]

Below photos of four pieces that received awards there were others.

The one that began this thread is on the right.

Whether you like it or not it is a very well done piece and one that requires considerable skill.

Please consider the other three.

 

[Keith T.]

Garmar, My reference to embellished turnings was not aimed at your comments, but towards the general tone of some of the posts that the highly embellished turnings somehow don't belong. I should have stated that more clearly.

 

[hockenbery]

Ed,
The purpose of the Banquette Auction is to raise funds for the EOG. Tables are RESERVED for Demonstrators, Board Members, and anyone who made significant purchases in the 2007 Auction.
The whole purpose of the AAW is turning education.

The Instant Gallery critique panel made the selections for the awards.
All are well respected. I believe they honored what they felt were the best work.
Are they pieces collectors would want? You betcha!


I respect the jury process. But I also recognize that another jury panel of equally respected individuals would not have picked the same pieces.

-Al

Al,

Do Collectors go for work that isn't highly embellished? Why/ Why not? Was it Collectors who were ushered in ahead of the rest of us at the Banquet? Money matters. Are we trying to honor what we think Collectors will buy?

I am not opposed to embellished pieces. And if four salad bowls had been selected I would have been equally puzzled. But if one looks at a piece and cannot answer "Was it turned on the lathe? Or was it simply carved?", then maybe that piece belongs in a different show. It certainly doesn't deserve a woodturning award or recognition.

 

[n7bsn]

Ed,
The purpose of the Banquette Auction is to raise funds for the EOG. Tables are RESERVED for Demonstrators, Board Members, and anyone who made significant purchases in the 2007 Auction.

Which I certainly agree is a fine idea. Recall that one item (in 2007) went for over $10K ($17K or so, as I recall). If someone is willing to pay that much, I think they should get special seating. Considering that the income the AAW gets from these items allows the AAW to fund the Grant Program, without this income, the members would have to fund everything

The whole purpose of the AAW is turning education.

-Al

Exactly, the club I am in got an AAW grant this year, for more then our (combined) membership dues. If it wasn't for AAW members willing to donate really great pieces, and collectors willing to buy them, these grants would be much smaller and fewer (if they existed at all).

The entire point of this program, is to get people that aren't turners to help us fund our hobby

IMO, a GREAT IDEA

TTFN
Ralph

 

[Clayton]

Banquet...

I was one of those who went in early. There were about 8 of us who were spotters for John Hill during the auction and we had a meeting before everyone came in so as to survey the room and chose where spotters needed to be once everything got started. There were others who were in charge of different aspect of the banquet who also had to be in the room early.

As the spotter for the front area (where many of the "collectors" sat) I can tell you the people who occupied these tables came in with the rest of the attendees when the doors were opened as far as I saw.

There were a few people who came in due to needing to be out of the crush of people due to handicap type issues. Crutches and wheelchairs. I see absolutely no issues with them getting away from getting hurt by the running of people coming in. I literally saw one individual almost knock one of the tables over trying to get ahead of others coming in.


Clayton

 

[C Edward Moore]

Who's on first?

Garmar,

Thank you for reading my initial post with an eye towards understanding it, rather than just towards refuting it. Your last statement in your post (#60) was spot on. As a former mathematics professor, logical inconsistencies set me off. One of the stated goals of the AAW is to increase AAW membership among club members. I accept that as a reasonable goal. Examine the situation from the point of view of the club member who does NOT belong to the AAW. For them to decide to join the AAW they must see a positive reason for joining. A large number of these folks are interested in woodturning, but they don't care about embellishing. That is their choice. If the AAW mandates that they must join, then the clubs will lose members and there will be no increase in AAW membership.

The club members who don't belong to the AAW have occasionally been vocal on other forums. They are interested in woodturning, they are not necessarily interested in embellishing their work, but most importantly, they don't want to be bullied by the Art Uber Alles group and made to feel unwelcome and unworthy. They don't want their politics insulted and they see woodturning as relaxation and an escape from the ugliness of politics. It is my contention that the AAW was inconsistent if it wants to encourage the outsiders to join up. Selecting non-turned work for an award adds to this inconsistency. The turned work of the same individual was better than the piece selected.

Keep the Main Thing the Main Thing.

 

[John Jordan]

I feel compelled to make a few observations here, please forgive me as my intentions are good.

I would point out that Dale Larson's bowl got an award, and year after year his simple bowls are recognized because there are, quite simply, as good as it gets. It might surprise some that the biggest fans of his work are those this thread might have you believe are against such things. Of those fopur pieces Al posted as examples, there are at least a couple I would have chosen differently-so what?

I have been to all 23 annual gatherings, and have put three pieces in every one. I have given the formal critique at several, and often have given personal critiques/advice/encouragement, sometimes without being asked. I have walked through the IG every year, many times with others I respect, and I have attempted to see every piece. Some don't take me very long to look at to be sure, but I have NEVER heard anyone with any knowledge at all be disparaging of what may be simple work, purely turned work, or work of an obvious beginner. On the contrary, I feel, as do most of my fellow "professional" woodturners, that if you have put your time and good effort into it your piece(s), it belongs in the instant gallery (or your local club show and tell). If you don't put it out there, you deprive me, and others the chance to share in your joy at the experience.

Who cares if it's embellished, or not? Hollow or not, painted or not? You should pursue what interest YOU. And none of us really needs to start drawing arbitrary lines to define OUR interest, and then expect others to conform to those lines. What a dull world that would be.

There is not any comparable field where one can go and see and interact with many of the leading proponents of that field as they can with woodturning. Yes, I know the long history of woodturning, and it's not those turnings found in the pyramids, or the industial arts classes some of you had in high school that are responsible for the popularity of woodturning today. It is these very proponents. I guarantee if you went up to Dave Ellsworth or Richard or any of those folks and introduced yourself, or asked a question, you were treated with respect and friendliness.

There is a lot of interest in beginner's topics, and there is aways plenty of that available at the symposium and in the Journal. But there also has to be things that are of interest to those of us that have been at this a long time. We like to learn and be stimulated, too. And what does that for some may not be of interest to many. Good, that's as it should be. The day everyone is enjoying and liking all aspects of what goes on within AAW is the time it has lost it's heart and soul.

For what it's worth, I had a bunch of Richard Raffan's work on a table in our booth, to give him a hand trying to sell a few since he was busy demonstrating. Know what sold the best? The pieces that were completely covered with a copper mixture and patina-no wood showing at all-to other turners at thatl. Go figure. He makes good work when he loosens up a bit. 🙂

Finally, I would point out that there seems to be some perception, or the promotion of a perception, that there is a group that benefits from some sort of art/collectors/art mystique thing within the AAW. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Those of us that have for many years made a living from "gallery" or "collector" work do so without much influence from AAW. We have and, do try to make the AAW MORE relevant to what we do. With small exceptions, the fact is the real gallery/museum/collector market has been, and still is largely outside any influence, or even any recognition of the AAW. That's one of the reasons the POP committee was formed. The same POP committee which by the way, was instrumental in the forming of the Special Interest Nights. POP recognized that there are MANY groups within AAW, and it was a way to provide some support and common ground for those groups.

Also, these people have donated, over the last 23 years, work that has raised at auction, hundreds of thousands of dollars. Dollars that go to the scholarship fund for chapters and individuals. Scholarships that anyone reading this can apply for and stand a VERY good chance of getting it. Scholarships that by and large support the newer, and beginning turners. It pains me to point this out, as I know of no one (professional or casual) that has ever asked for any recognition for their contribution, however humble or grand. And don't believe any nonsense about how it advances the value of one's work/career etc. The AAW auction is not the real world, it's not Sothebys-it's a fundraiser. No one outside the banquet even knows about it.

Finally, finally, it was these very "Art Uber Alles" types that intially formed AAW, not to be exclusive, but INCLUSIVE of ALL types of woodturners-hobbiest, professional, artist, woodbutcher, architectural, and all the rest. Don't be too quick to wish them away, they might go. The same is true of the VOLUNTEER board members.

Lighten up.

With respect,

John Jordan
N OO BE it says so at the top.😀

 

[Ed Davidson]

Thank you, John. For those who are not familiar with POP, check it out.

 

[Russ Fairfield]

Just a few observations after wading through all of this -

It wasn't that many years ago that similar criticism was being leveled at the AAW because there was too much for the beginners. The only difference was that the Internet wasn't as universal as it is today.

Nothing stops in time. What everyone here is calling the "unembellished" type of work was the stuff of the experts 20 years ago. I remember when the 1st natural edge bowl was the latest art form at the Symposium, and it got a lot of flack because it wasn't "pure woodturning". And it wasn't that many years ago that segmented turning wasn't considered woodturning by those who were the leaders of the AAW. I hope the AAW doesn't go back to that era.

I must be missing something or not paying attention. I have never embellished a piece of turned wood, and probably never will, and I have never felt intimidated by those who do, nor looked down on because I don't.

 

[Barbara Gill]

I feel compelled to make a few observations here, please forgive me as my intentions are good...

Lighten up.

With respect,

John Jordan
N OO BE it says so at the top.😀

So very well said and I really think your message reflects the feelings of the majority of us.
I didn't copy all of John's post but it is worth reading several times.

 

[Barbara Gill]

Just a few observations after wading through all of this -

It wasn't that many years ago that similar criticism was being leveled at the AAW because there was too much for the beginners. The only difference was that the Internet wasn't as universal as it is today.

Nothing stops in time. What everyone here is calling the "unembellished" type of work was the stuff of the experts 20 years ago. I remember when the 1st natural edge bowl was the latest art form at the Symposium, and it got a lot of flack because it wasn't "pure woodturning". And it wasn't that many years ago that segmented turning wasn't considered woodturning by those who were the leaders of the AAW. I hope the AAW doesn't go back to that era.

I must be missing something or not paying attention. I have never embellished a piece of turned wood, and probably never will, and I have never felt intimidated by those who do, nor looked down on because I don't.

Also well said (I didn't know how to combine quotes). I think that most of us are not intimidated by viewing work better than ours. Quite frankly if someone is discouraged by reading a magazine full of marvelous turnings and challenging projects, maybe they should find another hobby. Also I think beginners who really like turning will find projects without being spoon fed.

 

[John Abt]

As a relatively new turner, I want to thank John Jordan and Russ Fairfield for their words. I found them very encouraging. This was the first time I submitted anything to the IG and was very apprehensive about doing so.

I realize that I may never be as good as most of the other turners in the gallery. Heck, I'm still thrilled when my bowl has a bottom.🙂


I joined the AAW to help me develop my skills as a hobby. I don't want to be a professional simply because I want to do this on my own schedule and not need to do marketing and the other things professionals have to do. I just want to enjoy myself.

So, once again, thanks to John and Russ for their words and thanks to everyone that has helped me learn over these past two+ years.

 

[C Edward Moore]

If Newbies could just read!

John (Jordan),

Thank you for taking the time to put things in perspective. I feel however that you have attributed some things to me that were definitely not said by me. I have quite clearly said that I like embellishment - I referred specifically to the work of Stephen Hatcher as an example. So I did not say that embellishment is not welcome nor is it inappropriate. Nor did I say that any work, other than offensive work and political diatribes, should not be displayed. I did indicate that those who wish to exercise their right to free speech should do so on a wall outside of the IG.

At no time did I say that any Board member should or should not be elected or re-elected. I personally was "given an attitude" and treated rudely by a Board member. A simple "Sorry Ed, there's nothing that can be done now.", would have sufficed, but I was given a rude answer. I specifically gave praise to Board member Al Hockenbery, who encouraged me to go forward with the Boxmakers SIN. I am told that we had at least 123 in attendance. Follow-up comments from panelists and attendees suggest that it was worthwhile.

At no point did I denigrate any work. I DID indicate that the wrong work of the artist was selected for an award over his own better work. I did say that it is about woodturning and that the AAW should be about work that has been turned at some point. I specifically applauded the work of Ed Kelle, which was a piece that was turned and then carved to resemble coral. That piece was certainly embellished.

When opinions are involved it is always dangerous to extrapolate and assume things outside of what has been stated, when in fact these things may not be true. In this case, evidence shows that they are not true.

I did comment on N OO B posts. 😀

Shoot me for what I said, but not for what I didn't say. 😀

 

[John Jordan]

As a relatively new turner, I want to thank John Jordan and Russ Fairfield for their words. I found them very encouraging. This was the first time I submitted anything to the IG and was very apprehensive about doing so.

I realize that I may never be as good as most of the other turners in the gallery. Heck, I'm still thrilled when my bowl has a bottom.🙂


I joined the AAW to help me develop my skills as a hobby. I don't want to be a professional simply because I want to do this on my own schedule and not need to do marketing and the other things professionals have to do. I just want to enjoy myself.

So, once again, thanks to John and Russ for their words and thanks to everyone that has helped me learn over these past two+ years.

John,

If you have sweated over it, then it ought to be out there for all to see. It encourages others to do the same. Mean spirited comments etc. are very rare in my experience.

Just by putting it out there, you're way ahead of a lot of people -those who didn't.🙂

John

 

[John Jordan]

John (Jordan),

Thank you for taking the time to put things in perspective. I feel however that you have attributed some things to me that were definitely not said by me. I have quite clearly said that I like embellishment - I referred specifically to the work of Stephen Hatcher as an example. So I did not say that embellishment is not welcome nor is it inappropriate. Nor did I say that any work, other than offensive work and political diatribes, should not be displayed. I did indicate that those who wish to exercise their right to free speech should do so on a wall outside of the IG. You DID however assert that 20% of AAW "looks down on" the other 80%. You then constructed a straw man-the AUA, and railed against all the things they are doing to the detriment of AAW. Who are these people? IS there a list? How do I join?

At no time did I say that any Board member should or should not be elected or re-elected. I personally was "given an attitude" and treated rudely by a Board member. A simple "Sorry Ed, there's nothing that can be done now.", would have sufficed, but I was given a rude answer. I specifically gave praise to Board member Al Hockenbery, who encouraged me to go forward with the Boxmakers SIN. I am told that we had at least 123 in attendance. Follow-up comments from panelists and attendees suggest that it was worthwhile.

At no point did I denigrate any work. I DID indicate that the wrong work of the artist was selected for an award over his own better work. I did say that it is about woodturning and that the AAW should be about work that has been turned at some point. I specifically applauded the work of Ed Kelle, which was a piece that was turned and then carved to resemble coral. That piece was certainly embellished.

When opinions are involved it is always dangerous to extrapolate and assume things outside of what has been stated, when in fact these things may not be true. In this case, evidence shows that they are not true.

I did comment on N OO B posts. 😀

Shoot me for what I said, but not for what I didn't say. 😀

I was replying to the tone of the thread, which I find to be extremely negative and opinionated. I didn't reply to you specifically, but I can, and didn't say anything about electing (or not) board members. You DID assert that 20% of AAW "looks down on" the other 80%. You then constructed a straw man-the AUA, and railed against all the things they are doing to the detriment of AAW. Who are these people? IS there a list? How do I join? Names, please. I am an active charter member, have been to many chapters around the country, and I find these assertions preposterous.

I've bitched to the board plenty over the years (just ask them), but don't publicly do it. Instead of just complain, I joined and put a few years into the POP committee. There are opportunities to help for those that are so inclined.

Obviously there are people that disagree that the "wrong" pieces were picked. If you had picked, or any of us had picked, it would be different. Thats how it works. So what? None of us has lost anything because of the judge's choices, and some folks got some nice recognition.

As regards the piece that caused so much stir, much has been said about the "message". I find it curious that no one talked about the actual piece. It was not a particularly good piece, IMO, so I was not really interested in reading it, or about it. As my friend Clay Foster says, "A strong message requires strong work"

Walk on by is an option.

John- likely to remain a NOOB

 

[C Edward Moore]

I was replying to the tone of the thread, which I find to be extremely negative and opinionated. I didn't reply to you specifically, and didn't say anything about electing (or not) board members. I was responding to the idea that if AAW doesn't get it together, there will be some sort of mass exodus. Not gonna happen.

John- likely to remain a NOOB

John,

Again you have misquoted/misinterpreted me. I said:
"I have a pessimistic view of the future for woodturning and I predict the decline of the AAW. As the old geezers, myself included, die off the lack of shop in high school is generating a population that will not look to woodturning for recreation nor as a vocation. I can't predict when the decline will start but it can't be more than ten or fifteen years from now. Efforts to make AAW membership mandatory for all members of new clubs was apparently roundly booed by chapter representatives at the chapter meeting. This high-handed approach will not improve things. The AAW is riding the crest now, but the wave is coming ashore."

I have predicted that the demographics will probably cause a decline in our numbers, but NOWHERE have I said that anyone will leave in a mass exodus, except due to natural causes as we age. I did suggest that we can't make rules and expect people to join. Implicitly I am suggesting that we must make people WANT to join and I don't think that we are going about it in a way which will lead to success.

Shoot me for what I said, but not for what I didn't say. 😀

 

[n7bsn]

...
John- likely to remain a NOOB

Sorry John, you've passed NOOB, and I doubt anyone would mistake you for a NOOB anyplace.

TTFN
Ralph

 

[Harvey Mushman]

As regards the piece that caused so much stir, much has been said about the "message". I find it curious that no one talked about the actual piece. It was not a particularly good piece, IMO, so I was not really interested in reading it, or about it. As my friend Clay Foster says, "A strong message requires strong work"

My thoughts exactly! When a photo was finally posted of the work in question, I thought that it should have been firewood! Political message aside, if this would have been juried exhibit, this piece would not have come close to being included. Personally, I didn't care for this particular piece nor its politically charged statements.

Now, look at all the fuss it has caused. It is like watching a train wreck. Whether you simply turn your work in a traditional fashion or embellish it in any way, it is still turning. Would a painter like to be limited to only a few colors of paint on his pallette?

C'mon guys! Don't turn this into a Grumpy Old Men's Club!!!!!!

 

[Bill Grumbine]

John- likely to remain a NOOB

Hey, how did John get his thingie changed from NOOB to member!?! I had to post my way out of ignominy, and at some expense to my dignity from other members. 😛 Besides, how do we know it's really John Jordan? It might be another John Smith. 😱 😀