What other turners aren't telling you, and how that relates to "innovative spirit"!

[Betty Scarpino]

EXACTLY!! And you give credit to him. Honesty abounds when given the chance. .....

Why is there a need to credit a form that's "out there" in the general public? I see no need to do that, ancient Chinese or recent makers. Bob Stocksdale does not "own" any of the bowl designs he made. Rude Osolnik does not "own" the candleholder design he made famous (but his have that special something unique to Rude). David Ellsworth does not "own" hollow vessel concept (potters have made them for years). David simply figured out technically how to make those forms in wood ... we are copying his technique. Nothing wrong with that. Techniques cannot be owned (but its okay to try to keep them secret). But David has revealed his secrets. David's hollow vessels are worth what they are because of his signature on the bottom. (David's pots definitely have a distinctive flare.)

A bowl is a bowl is a bowl. We woodturners are not making personally created artwork with our bowls and hollow vessels. But, when someone starts to embellish a bowl in a specific way, combining techniques, that bowl starts to become a signature creation.

Depending on the situation, I acknowledge specific techniques I've learned from other turners--that's a nice thing to do. How I combine and apply those techniques, though, becomes my own style.

Betty Scarpino, Editor, American Woodturner

 

[Mark Mandell]

Why is there a need to credit a form that's "out there" in the general public?

There is no such obligation unless, as Kelly posted, you are actually inspired by and seeking to emulate the other artist's work. Kelly stated he was using Stocksdale's forms. The issue is not whether Stocksdale "owned" the form, but whether Kelly attributed what he was doing to Mr. Stocksdale's influence. He could just as easily have said "I got into doing ancient Chinese rice bowl shapes" and have been just fine. He chose to acknowledge his inspiration, not as a matter of obligation, but rather as an example of personal intellectual honesty.

I applauded him for that. Nothing more.

 

[Edward Weber]

A bowl is a bowl is a bowl. We woodturners are not making personally created artwork with our bowls and hollow vessels. But, when someone starts to embellish a bowl in a specific way, combining techniques, that bowl starts to become a signature creation.


Betty Scarpino, Editor, American Woodturner

Could you elaborate on this, I sincerely do not understand this point of view.

If I turn a bowl, by definition it's "personally created artwork" There is no necessity to combine techniques or embellish in any way to achieve the status of "art".

 

[Hu Lowery]

simple is harder than elaborate

Not saying that some gorgeously detailed and intricate work is that way to hide errors, but the embellishments can easily hide imperfections. An old trick of anyone that sells used for very long!

Simple work is right out there in the open, naked to the world. Any imperfection in form or finish is glaringly highlighted. Over half the people that came into my body shops wanting to change the color of a vehicle wanted to paint it black. Not a problem, three grand plus any body work in the mid-eighties. About eight hundred for any other color including minor body work.

Nothing less than perfect body and finish was acceptable in black. Beautifully simple and simply beautiful. Anything less than show quality black never left my shop because any imperfection looked horrible. Those extra dollars weren't an excessive profit, there was that much more time involved in detailing to a level that took out factory imperfections and sanding.

Some potters in the southwest turn or shape beautiful stuff. For the the things they are going to carve and paint they sometimes buy cheap import pottery for blanks to work on.

I'm struggling to learn simple. It isn't to hard to add modest embellishments once simple has been mastered. I am miles from there, but while I play with some more involved shapes just because I am easily bored, I'll be a very happy camper if and when the day comes I can confidently turn a 12"-15" simple bowl and similar hollow form.

Hu

 

[Brian McInturff]

I think the point Betty is alluding to is you can take 20 regular bowls and those could have been turned by anyone. But when you add, say, pyrography then you start separating yourself. Take for instance Molly Winton and her "signature" work. Or another one would be Cindy and her elaborate Finials. It's not saying the bowls aren't art , just that some people start combining several things like carving, embellishments, pyrography, etc and develop a "signature".

 

[Betty Scarpino]

Could you elaborate on this, I sincerely do not understand this point of view.

If I turn a bowl, by definition it's "personally created artwork" There is no necessity to combine techniques or embellish in any way to achieve the status of "art".

Edward, I guess it boils down to whose definition of "art" we decide on. In the big "A" Art world, for the most part, very few in that world would consider the bowls most woodturners make Art. We may think they are, but they don't.

That does not negate that we've created something lovely and worthy of our own personal definition of "art," even if it's a bowl similar to many other bowls. I'm not denigrating bowls. What I'm trying to say is that if a person wants to be considered an artist (by people who discuss and categorize and define "Art"), even the most elegant bowl does not measure up to the Art world's standards. Something more must be done. Some say the "more" should be conceptual in nature. Some agree that decorative arts (even including a turned bowl) are Art.

I personally struggle with definitions because when we label something, we are putting that thing into a box that's probably smaller than it needs to be.

Edward, I'm wondering ... do you consider your bowls "artwork" or "Art"? I'm not saying you shouldn't, but the context is probably relevant.

Betty Scarpino, Editor, American Woodturner

 

[Edward Weber]

Thanks Brian, I understand the point better now, though I still don't agree.
IMHO I think the pendulum has swung too far in that regard.
It seems to be that the prevailing theme these days is that pieces need to have some kind of embellishment or "hook" or they just doesn't measure up.

The ability to turn a beautiful bowl that has the look, the feel, the shape, the finish etc, all the qualities we look for in a piece, without any extra embellishments, is becoming lost. It seems that its becoming less about actually turning wood and more about the additional processes.

 

[Betty Scarpino]

Not saying that some gorgeously detailed and intricate work is that way to hide errors, but the embellishments can easily hide imperfections. Hu

Not only does decoration sometimes hide imperfections and ungainly forms, a highly decorated bowl or teapot or whatever is not all that big of a deal outside of our somewhat isolated world of woodturning. That does not mean I think these things are not worthy or interesting, though.

Our woodturning field is in its infancy. We are currently glorifying embellishments that in a number of years will look dated and immature (and that's okay). I prefer a gloriously figured vessel to a highly embellished one that's not well done, BUT I applaud the turners who are exploring. It's through those trials and errors that we learn how to eventually make our work come alive!

I sing our praises for where we are! We are having such fun, sharing, playing, and making things. Don't think I'm suggesting we should strive for real "Art." That's often a pretty cold world with its conceptual Art that leaves my soul unsatisfied.

I love the turning field and its youthful exuberance. Every turner who makes a bowl and proudly displays it gets my thumbs up.

Betty Scarpino, Editor, American Woodturner

 

[Edward Weber]

Edward, I'm wondering ... do you consider your bowls "artwork" or "Art"? I'm not saying you shouldn't, but the context is probably relevant.

Betty Scarpino, Editor, American Woodturner

Now you're just trying to hurt my head.
Is it a distinction without a difference or can you define each one as being different from the other. Is all artwork art or is all art artwork?
I suppose I use the terms interchangeability, but now you have me thinking.

 

[Betty Scarpino]

I think the pendulum has swung too far in that regard. It seems to be that the prevailing theme these days is that pieces need to have some kind of embellishment or "hook" or they just doesn't measure up.

The ability to turn a beautiful bowl that has the look, the feel, the shape, the finish etc, all the qualities we look for in a piece, without any extra embellishments, is becoming lost. It seems that its becoming less about actually turning wood and more about the additional processes.

Edward, hang on because that pendulum has only begun to swing "too far." It'll go much farther. Gloriously farther!

Woodturning is becoming less about turning wood and at the same time, it's also becoming more about turning wood. Multiaxis and therming. Derek Weidman's work. Jerry Bennett's. Art Liestman. All of their work is strongly grounded in woodturning. We are expanding the nature of what it means to use lathes to turn wood.

But you are feeling a loss for beautiful bowls. Yes, they often take back stage to the new work being done. But at almost every gallery critique I've attended, the people selecting work to discuss intentionally include well-made bowls. Those will never go out of style.

Betty Scarpino, Editor, American Woodturner

 

[Betty Scarpino]

Now you're just trying to hurt my head.
Is it a distinction without a difference or can you define each one as being different from the other. Is all artwork art or is all art artwork?
I suppose I use the terms interchangeability, but now you have me thinking.

That sentence was unintentionally confusing, sorry. I was asking if you considered what you make to be Art/artwork? (Not one or the other.)

 

[Odie]

The ability to turn a beautiful bowl that has the look, the feel, the shape, the finish etc, all the qualities we look for in a piece, without any extra embellishments, is becoming lost. It seems that its becoming less about actually turning wood and more about the additional processes.

Ed.....This pretty much is my belief, or was until Betty mentioned the pendulum is swinging. She's right that a simple well done bowl will never really go out of style, and equally true was when she pointed out that the newer things being tried in the realm of embellishment, is what seems to be the focal point of interest these days.

I guess a simple bowl, well done, and with great form, is a boring subject......even though the finished item is well respected in the woodturning community. It's been discussed until those fine points of execution are burned into our minds.......it's just that making, or the carrying out of all the necessary ingredients to accomplish that end is a very elusive thing to most, or many turners.

I do have an appreciation for the new and unusual (both embellishment and turning styles), even though my personal main objective is to produce more simple, but well executed turned bowl designs.

Betty.....question for you: When you mention "technique", does that term describe, or include what a turner can do with traditional, or current tools being used, or in vogue?.......or, does it also include tools of one's own design and the methods of applying those tools to wood that are non-traditional? What does that term, "technique", mean to you in the way you are using it?

This thread is becoming more interesting, and I thought it was played out a few pages back.......boy, was I wrong!............:cool2:

ooc

 

[Edward Weber]

That sentence was unintentionally confusing, sorry. I was asking if you considered what you make to be Art/artwork? (Not one or the other.)

I make many things and yes I consider some pieces to be art.

t's just that making, or the carrying out of all the necessary ingredients to accomplish that end is a very elusive thing to most, or many turners.

This kind of brings us back to your OP Odie, that "elusive thing" you mentioned, can't really be taught.
I have nothing against new techniques or the many different styles of embellishments being used today, it simply needs to be kept in proper perspective. A few years from now there will be something else to talk about, maybe the pendulum will start to come back.

 

[KellyDunn]

Betty, I have a deep respect for you. You know that. I was going to say we have a deep respect for each other but I cant speak for you. Even though I thought I could. Your points are valid but thats not the point. When I give Betty Scarpino kudos for her influence its out of respect for Betty Scarpino and what her influence on me means to me. Same with any person I care to mention when it comes to how I got to where I am. I may be bold as brass but I respect where I got what I got. Whether its Ellsworth, Stocksdale or you. To acknowledge those that mean a bunch to me is kind in my book. And a form of a toast, Cheers.

 

[Betty Scarpino]

I guess a simple bowl, well done, and with great form, is a boring subject......

Betty.....question for you: When you mention "technique", does that term describe, or include what a turner can do with traditional, or current tools being used, or in vogue?.......or, does it also include tools of one's own design and the methods of applying those tools to wood that are non-traditional? What does that term, "technique", mean to you in the way you are using it?
ooc

I think what you meant by "is a boring subject" is that if we only repeatedly looked at even the most awesome bowls, doing so would eventually bore many of us .... (not that splendid bowls are boring).

To me, (and this is loosely defined, it's late and I probably should just go to bed before I start blubbering) a technique is the particular way a person uses a process to manipulate material, by hand or with any tool (store bought or personally designed), as well as the way in which embellishments are combined and/or applied. For instance, I would say that woodburning is a process and the way it is applied to wood is the technique. Some turners make their own tips for woodburning to create a particular look and that's a technique. I might be able to duplicate that technique by using a commercial tip, though.


Betty Scarpino, Editor, American Woodturner

 

[Betty Scarpino]

Betty, I have a deep respect for you. You know that. I was going to say we have a deep respect for each other but I cant speak for you. Even though I thought I could. Your points are valid but thats not the point. When I give Betty Scarpino kudos for her influence its out of respect for Betty Scarpino and what her influence on me means to me. Same with any person I care to mention when it comes to how I got to where I am. I may be bold as brass but I respect where I got what I got. Whether its Ellsworth, Stocksdale or you. To acknowledge those that mean a bunch to me is kind in my book. And a form of a toast, Cheers.

Mutual admiration and respect, Kelly! (Now you can speak for me.🙂)

Yes, it is kind to acknowledge those who have influenced us and it is also informative. No one got to where they are in a vacuum.

Betty Scarpino, Editor, American Woodturner

 

[Hu Lowery]

"art"

Not only does decoration sometimes hide imperfections and ungainly forms, a highly decorated bowl or teapot or whatever is not all that big of a deal outside of our somewhat isolated world of woodturning. That does not mean I think these things are not worthy or interesting, though.

Our woodturning field is in its infancy. We are currently glorifying embellishments that in a number of years will look dated and immature (and that's okay). I prefer a gloriously figured vessel to a highly embellished one that's not well done, BUT I applaud the turners who are exploring. It's through those trials and errors that we learn how to eventually make our work come alive!

I sing our praises for where we are! We are having such fun, sharing, playing, and making things. Don't think I'm suggesting we should strive for real "Art." That's often a pretty cold world with its conceptual Art that leaves my soul unsatisfied.

I love the turning field and its youthful exuberance. Every turner who makes a bowl and proudly displays it gets my thumbs up.

Betty Scarpino, Editor, American Woodturner

Betty,

I occasionally drift into the edges of the art world having a few friends and some family who are artists, also knowing some photographers whose work easily reaches the level of art, but defining art is ever elusive. I saw a picture of a painting that was expected to bring a couple million a few months ago. Cut a piece of flat wood sixteen by sixteen, then take a four inch brush and paint it top to bottom. Let dry and go over the board with the same brush side to side not getting a full coat. I could create a very similar piece, twenty per hour. People would laugh till they hurt themselves if I tried to sell those for two dollars much less two million.

I'm a better than average technician, a decent designer able to step out the box when I need to, and a lousy artist! Fortunately for me 99% of people today don't know the difference between artistry and technical ability, probably because we all define these things for ourselves and perhaps I define it differently than 99% of people! 😀

All I can say about art and the work of master crafts people is that I know it when I see it. Some of the things mistaken for art only require technical ability, almost all art requires some technical ability.

Hu

 

[Odie]

The only thing that is necessary for anything to be art, is for one solitary person to believe that it is. How successful that thing is in being art, is how many people agree that it is.

The old saying about art being in the eye of the beholder, is true. Anyone can define art any way they wish to define it. Personally, I don't think it's possible to define "art" in any terms that would be agreeable to everyone.

To my thinking, many things made on a wood lathe cross the threshold of what is art. I suspect there would be disagreement on my idea of what lathe turned things are art, but if I believe it is......well, then it is!

Many here will remember the Norman Rockwell painting of the old sophisticated well dressed man standing in front of the abstract painting. It's obvious that Rockwell intended this to be a statement about art......and, he very obviously understood that art did not, nor could not have a universal definition.

ooc

 

[hockenbery]

The Search for the dividing line between art and craft continues to be an elusive quest.

I was taught in anthropology that art began when our hunter/gather ancestors became able to feed and cloth themselves working 10 hour days.
This left them leisure time to scratch patterns on spear handles, paint patterns on their pots, mark the walls of their caves.
Then they invented farming and one person working 10 hour days could feed 5 people allowing the other 4 to become builders, potters, weavers, artists

Just walked around the house and counted 14 bowls. (4 turned by us)

A small square Al Stirt bowl painted black with a faux basket weave texture - IMHO definitely Art!!!!
A translucent Gebhardt Schwenke (sp.) Norfolk Island pine? It will hold soup.
They are all pleasing to the eye and hand.

Al

 

[Mark Mandell]

I've been waiting to see how long it took to get into the old "Art vs. Craft" discussion.

So just for laughs, consider:

I hold advanced degrees in Art. I make sculpture and operated a professional studio for three years. I make furniture. I make jewelry. I make woodturnings.

Do I make Art? Beats me, and, what's more I don't care!

Why? Because worrying about whether what I do meets some other person's definition of "Art" tends to surrender an important amount of control over what and how I do what I do to somebody else's taste and/or prejudice, let alone to some kind of institutionalized set of criteria with which I may disagree.

If you call my "stuff" Art, do I get to disconnect the exhaust fan in the bathroom? How's about a special reserved parking space like those handicapped folks? 20% off at the "art supply" store? Rose petals spread on the floor when I arrive at a Symposium?

No? None of that?

Sheesh . . .

Well, so what's this big deal about being regarded as an "Artist" (or Arteeest, if you like) rather than simply as a maker?

Now, I grant you, nothing I make will eventually sell at Christie's for $100,000,000.00 (at least not while I or my known heirs are alive to care about it). If, however, you put a monetary value on your self esteem, what does that make you?

Thus, I suggest we concentrate on doing what we do to the best of our ability, strive to do better with each piece based upon our own internal criteria and goals, and leave the *&$#$$* labels to those who deal in them.

 

[Edward Weber]

This thread seems to have veered in a new direction, I hope Odie doesn’t mind
My point about what I consider to be over embellishment has been lost or at least a bit muddled.
Whether or not something is art or not is a different discussion. I was trying to figure out at what point a piece evolves into something other than a ‘woodturning†😕

#1. If someone rough turns a bowl, let’s say it takes 15 minutes. Then they carve the piece for 2 hours and take another hour to do some pyrography. Is it still a “woodturning�
#2. The same piece, once rough turned is cut into pieces and some, but not all of the pieces are used to create the finished piece. The finished piece, which is now no longer round in shape, has taken the same time to complete as did #1. Is this still considered a “woodturning�

Piece #1 is still easily identified as at least having been turned, mostly due to the shape, though the actual time “turning†is minimal.
Piece #2 however, is much more difficult to identify as to how it was made, let alone what percentage of turning was involved.
They are both certainly art, but which category, if any, do they now fit into?

 

[john lucas]

Edward It gets even more muddy when it's really hard to tell it's been on the lathe. Take the multi axis work of Derek Weidman. Not only has it been on the lathe but it's been on there a lot and at many different angles so people who are not knowledgeable about this style of turning will not think it's ever been on the lathe. Is it turning, sure is. Possibly more so than some of the ones you mentioned. Does it look like a turning? not to the untrained.
Personally I don't care. I try to create a piece of art or sculpture and the lathe is simply a tool just like my other carving tools. In many cases the lathe is the primary carving tool but in some cases it isn't.
Carvers take up the same argument. Is it done with power carvers or by hand. Then of course the Whittlers don't like it if you use more than a pocket knife.
It's either good or bad, you like it or you don't. Doesn't matter how it got there to me.

 

[Tom Coghill]

Ed,

Good point:

at what point a piece evolves into something other than a ‘woodturningâ€

Like most art, that decision belongs to the maker and the buyer (if it is being sold). This path of discussion is a long and winding road with many on and off ramps, not to mention a few roundabouts and cul-de-sacs.

One has to find the path that interests and inspires them the most, follow that path or (better yet) create a new path out there for others to follow or gain inspiration.

I have discovered that when trying to making ones own path, there are a lot of dead ends (the results are not what you expected and not "appreciated" by others). However, occasionally, you find a gem and that makes it all worthwhile!

Tom

 

[Bill Boehme]

This thread seems to have veered in a new direction, I hope Odie doesn’t mind

It was veering from the get go. I'm sure that Odie is just beside himself with concern about the direction of the thread. 😀 I'm joking, of course. Odie is enjoying it immensely as he said so himself a few post above.

My point about what I consider to be over embellishment has been lost or at least a bit muddled.
Whether or not something is art or not is a different discussion. I was trying to figure out at what point a piece evolves into something other than a ‘woodturning†😕

#1. If someone rough turns a bowl, let’s say it takes 15 minutes. Then they carve the piece for 2 hours and take another hour to do some pyrography. Is it still a “woodturning�
#2. The same piece, once rough turned is cut into pieces and some, but not all of the pieces are used to create the finished piece. The finished piece, which is now no longer round in shape, has taken the same time to complete as did #1. Is this still considered a “woodturning�

Piece #1 is still easily identified as at least having been turned, mostly due to the shape, though the actual time “turning†is minimal.
Piece #2 however, is much more difficult to identify as to how it was made, let alone what percentage of turning was involved.
They are both certainly art, but which category, if any, do they now fit into?

See the post immediately above your post for the answer to all of your questions. 😉

 

[Hu Lowery]

lying and boasting

The Search for the dividing line between art and craft continues to be an elusive quest.

I was taught in anthropology that art began when our hunter/gather ancestors became able to feed and cloth themselves working 10 hour days.
This left them leisure time to scratch patterns on spear handles, paint patterns on their pots, mark the walls of their caves.
Then they invented farming and one person working 10 hour days could feed 5 people allowing the other 4 to become builders, potters, weavers, artists

Just walked around the house and counted 14 bowls. (4 turned by us)

A small square Al Stirt bowl painted black with a faux basket weave texture - IMHO definitely Art!!!!
A translucent Gebhardt Schwenke (sp.) Norfolk Island pine? It will hold soup.
They are all pleasing to the eye and hand.

Al

Al,

I don't know about when art started but I know lying and boasting started soon afterwards! I was looking at some little known cave drawings in the general area of four corners, yep, being very vague, I have no right to disclose the location and never would publicly for the unprotected work to be destroyed anyway. What gave me a chuckle were the racks on the, I assume elk, reaching behind the hindquarters with many many points!

Hu

 

[Sergio Villa]

i' m not an art critic nor an artist although I enjoy good music, not rock type please! as well as other productions of the human creativity.
There are two points I would like to make and that stem from my own non expert experience.
Beauty is not necessarily art and should not be confused with it.
Second, I tend to call art any fruit of the human creativity that stimulates my brain in an deep positive emotional way. Obviously everybody has is own level of vibration of the brain in front of a piece of music or art in general, including literature and this depends from his own sensitivity but also education.
I believe woodturning can create beautiful things. Can it ceate also art? I do not know, perhaps a few pieces.

 

[Bill Boehme]

... What gave me a chuckle were the racks on the, I assume elk, reaching behind the hindquarters with many many points!

Just imagine if largemouth bass had been in the four corners area.

 

[Betty Scarpino]

I was trying to figure out at what point a piece evolves into something other than a ‘woodturning†😕

#1. If someone rough turns a bowl, let’s say it takes 15 minutes. Then they carve the piece for 2 hours and take another hour to do some pyrography. Is it still a “woodturning�
#2. The same piece, once rough turned is cut into pieces and some, but not all of the pieces are used to create the finished piece. The finished piece, which is now no longer round in shape, has taken the same time to complete as did #1. Is this still considered a “woodturning�

Piece #1 is still easily identified as at least having been turned, mostly due to the shape, though the actual time “turning†is minimal.
Piece #2 however, is much more difficult to identify as to how it was made, let alone what percentage of turning was involved.
They are both certainly art, but which category, if any, do they now fit into?

Edward, to muddy those waters even more, let's talk about segmented work. A turned segmented vase looks like a woodturning, but the maker probably spent 90% of her time designing cutting, sanding, and gluing all those tiny pieces. The other 10% is turning. By your definition, a turned, segmented vase may not be allowed to be called woodturning?

In my "book," time spend with something on the lathe is not a valid for determining "woodturning" or "not woodturning."

I highly carve my sculptures. But I start them on the lathe. For many years I've dedicated my work time to exploring what lies inside of a turned sphere or plate. It's exciting stuff! Am I not allowed to call myself a woodturner?

Jerry Bennett's lyrical sculptures don't even look like they are turned at all, but the turning process is essential. The techniques and processes he's perfected are revolutionary.

Besides, why try to exclude the work of people who only tangentally use the lathe? I'm all for being inclusive. An inclusive approach makes for a healthy, exciting, interesting and rewarding experience for everyone. Including bowl-makers.

I guess what I don't understand, Edward, is why you would want to exclude anyone or anything from your definition of woodturning? What's the harm? Who loses? Are you not getting what you need to make your time in your shop satisfying? I sincerely am curious ....

Betty Scarpino, Editor, American Woodturner

 

[Mark Mandell]

I highly carve my sculptures. But I start them on the lathe. For many years I've dedicated my work time to exploring what lies inside of a turned sphere or plate. It's exciting stuff! Am I not allowed to call myself a woodturner?

Barbara Hepworth (prominent British sculptor) was loudly criticized when she disclosed that her sphere-forms were first made on a lathe rather than being hand-carved into the initial ball which she then cut into to make some of her pieces.

https://www.google.com/search?q=Bar...org%2Fprofiles%2FBarbara_Hepworth.htm;630;523

 

[Bill Boehme]

Edward, if I may present you with a conundrum, the cardinal rule for artists is that there are no rules.

Art is too complex to put it in a box. Expressionism, for example, is a movement that emphasizes the conveyance of emotions and feelings ... what the artist was thinking to inspire the work. That is why you will sometimes hear inquisitive people remark when viewing expressionist art, "What was he thinking".

 

[Odie]

Art vs craft........

Something that I don't think has been mentioned yet......is the psychological perception people have when thinking of the exact same object, depending on whether the thought process is related to art, as opposed to craft. I'm not speaking of the artist's, or maker's perception of his/her own work.......but, the person who purchases, or acquires those things.

For instance, lets take a finely made vase, superb in detail and creativity......and, put that vase in a gift shop. Take the same vase and put it in an art gallery. Chances are, the exact same vase will (or could) command a much higher selling price when purchased in the gallery setting. The purchaser of the vase in the gallery is more likely to treasure that vase quite a bit more than the purchaser of the same vase in the gift shop.

(Of course, you can't paint all purchasers with the same broad brushes I used in the example......but, it is my opinion that generally, the hypothesis will bear out to be true.)

ooc

 

[Edward Weber]

By your definition, a turned, segmented vase may not be allowed to be called woodturning?

I must not be making myself clear.
I don't have a definition of what is or is not considered "woodturning" that's why I asked the question. I'm not trying to argue some conclusion I already have, I'm trying to learn something.
I do create segmented work, but comparing it to a one piece bowl is apples and oranges. Its also refereed to as "segmented turning", meaning it has it's own classification.

I guess what I don't understand, Edward, is why you would want to exclude anyone or anything from your definition of woodturning? What's the harm? Who loses? Are you not getting what you need to make your time in your shop satisfying? I sincerely am curious ....

I am not trying to exclude anyone or anything, I was only asking those who have more knowledge about these things than I do.
At what point a piece evolves into something other than a ‘woodturningâ€
If something evolves from a "woodturning" into something else it doesn't diminish it in any way, we just refer to it by another name. All the qualities that make it a piece of art are still in tact, no one or no things are excluded.

Besides, why try to exclude the work of people who only tangentally use the lathe?

I have a wooden dresser with turned drawer pulls, is it a "woodturning", I don't think so. 😀🙄
Good discussion, but now my head hurts again

 

[Odie]

I must not be making myself clear.
I don't have a definition of what is or is not considered "woodturning" that's why I asked the question. I'm not trying to argue some conclusion I already have, I'm trying to learn something.
I do create segmented work, but comparing it to a one piece bowl is apples and oranges. Its also refereed to as "segmented turning", meaning it has it's own classification.


I am not trying to exclude anyone or anything, I was only asking those who have more knowledge about these things than I do.
At what point a piece evolves into something other than a ‘woodturning”
If something evolves from a "woodturning" into something else it doesn't diminish it in any way, we just refer to it by another name. All the qualities that make it a piece of art are still in tact, no one or no things are excluded.

I have a wooden dresser with turned drawer pulls, is it a "woodturning", I don't think so. 😀🙄
Good discussion, but now my head hurts again

You know, Ed......I believe I understand the point you're making. I don't have a definite answer to the question of just when an object becomes more an expression of something else than it serves to exemplify woodturning as a basis for it's existence. The answer is likely somewhere in the grey area known as personal opinion! 😀

I have seen quite a few famous, and talented "woodturners" who are experts at embellishment, but produce very run-of-the-mill turnings as a basis for where their real expertise is. Possibly, an answer to the question might be in eliminating everything that isn't done on the lathe, and analyze what's left. If what's left doesn't generate the same level of praise.......then, it's the embellishment that is the real generator of that kind, or level of acclaim.

Is it still a turning?.......Well, sure it is......but, let's not let the embellishments overrule the value of finely executed tool preparation and control, which minimizes distortion from unnecessary sanding......and a sense of design created, or established by lathe techniques, and so forth......

We seem to be at a point where excellence in lathe use seems to take a back seat to all the add-on glamour. Again, this is not to say that all this embellishment isn't a valid, or authentic part of the total lathe community.......but, it certainly does tend to minimize what is actually being done on the lathe.

ooc

 

[Betty Scarpino]

Oh, okay Edward, I think I understand your question. But ... it's not important to me to define "woodturning," so I cannot help you, sorry. Even if I took a stab at a definition, it would only be my opinion. Labels are limiting enough, let alone trying to categorize or write a difinitive definition of something as broad as woodturning. Besides, what would we use that definition for, anyway?

My editorial philosophy has been to be inclusive of everyone who chooses to have his or her work relate in some way to woodturning. Even then, I occasionally include something non-turned if it's pertinent to an article. For example, Michael Peterson's profile article a few years ago. Many of the photos were of sculptures not turned. I chose to have the article in the journal because early in his career, Michael was primarily a woodturner. Today he rarely, if ever, turns. His work serves as an example of, for instance, hollowing a log, but using a chainsaw. That might inspire a turner. And, Michael occupies a historical place in the turning field.

In addition, I have avoided having the endless "art versus craft" debate in the journal. Actually, I try to avoid "anything versus anything else." Instead, I prefer "this AND that." Everyone can come to my party! 🙂

The next editor of the journal may have a different approach, though.

Betty Scarpino, Editor (for a few more months 😀), American Woodturner

 

[Edward Weber]

But ... it's not important to me to define "woodturning," so I cannot help you, sorry.

After all this discussion, that"s your answer, you're killing me 😀

 

[Brian McInturff]

Well shoot, let's throw another wrinkle in then. The finish itself. A bad finish can ruin a perfect woodturning. And then there is the French Polish using a little stain that can "hide" some imperfections. Or the piece that is turned then "distressed" to look like it came from an era long ago. Or translucent dyes. Or, or, or??? lol

I love this topic because there is no right OR wrong answers!

 

[Mark Mandell]

After all this discussion, that"s your answer, you're killing me 😀

Ed, if you're searching for parameters for a definition of s**t made with a wood lathe, I think you'd best get a dishpan for a hat, a trusty sidekick named Sancho, and set your sights on the nearest windmill.

Only a few years ago, the concept of "turned wood" was rather easy to categorize and pigeon hole. The definition has, however exploded as a purist's use of a wood lathe to make round things has been relegated to the importance of a table saw, a jointer, or any other woodworking tool. What once held the mystique of a somewhat exotic process has become rather commonplace and users view it as a means to an end rather than a category with its own rules and limits.

I've spoken to several folks, mostly retirees, who were initially really happy to have discovered a niche hobby that they could seem to excel at with a bit of effort but now finding that whole lots of people were getting involved and changing what had seemed to be the "rules of the game" or the definition of good work.

These were folks who wanted to make stuff, liked working with the material, but got really upset when somebody started talking about "art forms", sophisticated "design concepts", and showing stuff that was so far from round that they couldn't see where the object had ever been within 20 yards of a headstock.

Bottom line here is that Ed Weber just needs to define what woodturning means to Ed Weber and go with that. Don't look to Betty or me or Odie or anyone else to hand you the definition. They are very likely to be very different and do nothing more than confuse you if you let them.

Peace

 

[Betty Scarpino]

..... you can take 20 regular bowls and those could have been turned by anyone. But when you add, say, pyrography then you start separating yourself. Take for instance Molly Winton and her "signature" work. Or another one would be Cindy and her elaborate Finials. It's not saying the bowls aren't art , just that some people start combining several things like carving, embellishments, pyrography, etc and develop a "signature".

Brian, I meant to respond to your post earlier. Yes, so true what you wrote. And, there are some turners whose bowls/vessels become signature, such as Bert Marsh or Bob Stocksdale (and David Ellsworth/John Jordan for hollow forms). Their work soars! It soars because they've spend hundreds/thousands of hours learning how to pair forms perfectly with wood. These turners are masters at knowing which form works best for a particular piece of wood.

Artists, craftsmen, turners, potters .... the ones whose work repeatedly gets recognized are those who spend hours and hours in their shops and studios.


Betty Scarpino, Editor, American Woodturner

 

[Edward Weber]

Ed, if you're searching for parameters for a definition of s**t made with a wood lathe, I think you'd best get a dishpan for a hat, a trusty sidekick named Sancho, and set your sights on the nearest windmill.

Great post, and thanks 🙂

 

[Mark Mandell]

So Who Wants

to really be an "artist?

Be careful what you ask for . . .

http://www.gocomics.com/toomuchcoffeeman/2013/04/12#.Utq5__so7Ks

😀