Baren Digest               Thursday, 24 July 2003       Volume 24 : Number 2315


----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Bill H. Ritchie, Jr." <ritchie#seanet.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2003 07:53:32 -0700
Subject: [Baren 22314] Re: Baren Digest V24 #2313  

I have a different view of printmaking in its totality. I think it
originally was NOT reproductive, but a unique art form unlike painting or
drawing.

My view is that printmaking is nonlinear, using the logic that we begin
here, go through these steps, and end somewhere else with a finished thing.

If it's nonlinear, then what is it? Circular? Networked? Or, to use a fancy
new word, recursive?

Here's how I arrived at this viewpoint. I imagined cave people, working on
their creations on the walls of their cave. Some were painting, and
scraping, etc. using stumps, fingers, scrapers, in other words "tools" they
held in and which extended the facility of their hands and fingers.

Then we notice that some are using their hands as stencils and as
imprinters--you get the picture: Handprints. Silhouettes and relief prints,
in other words, quite a different way to shape an image--don't you agree?

And to me this is a "split" psychologically between painting and drawing
(extended hands/fingers, arm, wrist, shoulder motions) and printing
all-at-once. The former then can be classed as linear, logical and having a
different relationship to the human psyche than printing, which is
repeatable and--very importantly--comes from a matrix (a hand or a plate)
that was conceived for repetition (circular or recursive).

>From this viewpoint I think printmaking has little to do with painting and
drawing, artistically. Esthetically the comparisons are rich and deep. As to
reproduction and craftsmanship, I think this is a discussion for economists,
industry, business, and politics.

That's not a bad thing. In fact, if you agree that economics are important,
and artists and poets have value to society, then to participate in a medium
that is more extensively involved with economics (hence, politics and social
benefits) is really a good thing.

That's why I'm passionate about printmaking to the point of insanity! The
insane part comes when you consider that printmaking is the basis for all
subsequent development of media--from photography, through film, video and
cybernetics.

Thanks for reading.

- - Bill

Professional Career Site: www.seanet.com/~ritchie
First Emeralda Portal Site: www.artsport.com
Snail Mail: 500 Aloha #105, Seattle 98109
e-mail: ritchie#seanet.com

Professional Career Site: www.seanet.com/~ritchie
First Emeralda Portal Site: www.artsport.com
Snail Mail: 500 Aloha #105, Seattle 98109
e-mail: ritchie#seanet.com


------------------------------

From: "Gilda Zimmerling" <gemzeditionz#earthlink.net>
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2003 8:5:29 -0700
Subject: [Baren 22315] Gary Luedtke prints 

To Gary Luedtke,
If you could contact me off list. My husband is going to Hawaii for business 
and I would like him to see your prints. I couldn't remember what university 
or museum shop you said has your work on display. 

Thank you 
Gilda

------------------------------

From: barebonesart <barebonesart#comcast.net>
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2003 10:05:35 -0700
Subject: [Baren 22316] Re: Baren Digest V24 #2314 

Barbara mentioned something about taking ideas from before and there never
being anything new under the sun - particularly in modern art.  Right now I
think we are in what will be known as the Post Modern Era which includes
Deconstructionism - which is taking old things and making them new, which
explains why we see so much appropriation.  It  also explains some of the
"way out" things, such as Jan described that she had seen at the Swedish
Print Exhibition.  It is all about taking old techniques and trying to do
something new with them - something that won't look like it came from the
Renaissance, Middle Ages, 19th century, etc.  It is not easy! We see a lot
of stuff that is hard to understand - but, if we see it with Post Modern
eyes, it becomes more easily understood.

Forever the teacher - get her out of this mode,
Sharri


------------------------------

From: Aqua4tis#aol.com
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2003 14:53:49 EDT
Subject: [Baren 22317] Re: Baren Digest V24 #2314 


sharri
   thank you for explaining deconstructionism to me    i had a totally 
different perception of what that meant  and now i find that im a 
deconstructionist!!!
   i learn so much from you all!!!
georga


------------------------------

From: Artwks88#aol.com
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2003 15:09:11 EDT
Subject: [Baren 22318] Re: Baren Digest V24 #2314 



Hello,
Receive your digest regularly but never post or have questions.  Today I do 
need information regarding a print paper.  Has anyone ever heard of Van Gelder 
print paper?  From what I have in front of me it appears to be a laid paper, 
possibly machine made with line embossment.  The watermark is clearly Van 
Gelder.

Hope someone can help.  Thank you.
Florine Sar
ARTWKS88#aol.com



------------------------------

From: Barbara Mason <barbaramason45#yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2003 12:12:37 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Baren 22319] deconcstuction 



This is a great discription, but wish we could call it something else. 
It sounds pretty negative, doesn't it? Tearing things apart to re do them.
 How about changing it to constructionism??? Then we could just build on that...
Best to all,
Barbara



------------------------------

From: Julio.Rodriguez#walgreens.com
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2003 18:28:34 -0500
Subject: [Baren 22320] Re: contemporary gallery 

Hi Florine, welcome to posting at the barenforum....sorry I can't help you 
with your paper question but perhaps others will..soon....

Found an interesting Japanese gallery with many works by contemporary 
artists...not sure if they are constructionists or deconstructionists {;-) 
 ....but nice works, not only tons of woodblock but also much intaglio, 
silkscreen, lithographs, etc...

Check it out...to see what others are working on...

http://yoseido.safeshopper.com/index.htm?8337

thanks...Julio
ps. could not let this post go by w/o one more thing about 
Jacoulet....most of his subscription prints seem to be in what it's called 
"large-oban" or approx.  18.5 X 14.5" 

------------------------------

From: Julio.Rodriguez#walgreens.com
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2003 19:11:14 -0500
Subject: [Baren 22321] Re: contemporary gallery 


Almost forgot, check out the "Yuki Rei" barens at:

http://yoseido.safeshopper.com/163/cat163.htm

Julio
ps. I thought he had passed away recently ? he of authorship fame with 
Toshi Yoshida....am I confusing the
artist ? 


------------------------------

From: David Bull <davebull#woodblock.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2003 09:22:07 +0900
Subject: [Baren 22322] Re: contemporary gallery 


>
> http://yoseido.safeshopper.com/163/cat163.htm
> ps. I thought he had passed away recently ? he of authorship fame with 
> Toshi Yoshida.
> ...am I confusing the artist ?


Same guy ... I have no idea if he is still alive or not ...

Ridiculous bloody print prices - what kind of ego must a person have to 
put numbers like that on a woodblock print?!

Dave


------------------------------

From: David Bull <davebull#woodblock.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2003 09:36:53 +0900
Subject: [Baren 22323] Re: contemporary gallery 


> http://yoseido.safeshopper.com/163/cat163.htm
> ps. I thought he had passed away recently ? he of authorship fame with 
> Toshi Yoshida.
> ...am I confusing the artist ?


Aha!  So it seems that this was a [Baren] message, and not a private 
email from Julio!  :-(

So in that case, my language should have been calmer - but anyway, the 
feelings are the same!  A price of $1500.00 goes against the very 
concept of a woodblock print as a 'multiple' - something that should be 
produced and distributed as widely as possible ...

What _is_ a reasonable price for a woodblock print? Well, shouldn't we 
simply price our prints at the same price that we would expect to _pay_ 
for them?

Dave


------------------------------

From: FurryPressII#aol.com
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2003 22:15:41 EDT
Subject: [Baren 22324] Re: contemporary gallery 


If you think 1,500$ is way to high   you should have seen the price of prints 
of contempory artists during the last inflated price bubble.   I rember 
seeing 100,000$ for prints of artist who were still alive making prints. It was so 
bad that contempory artists were getting more than early copies of Albrect 
Durer.

john


------------------------------

From: Barbara Mason <barbaramason45#yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2003 23:44:53 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Baren 22325] Re: contemporary gallery 


Julio,
this was very interesting work, some of it must have cultural
significance that we are not aware of. It is alwasy a problem,
looking at work from your own culture with all your own baggage.
Some of the work is so very good and some of it seemed
unsophisticated enough that I wonder what it is doing for sale
with this excellent work? An odd mix, but again interesting. I
agree with Dave on the prices...what are they thinking. We can
sell work in Oregon if we price it reasonably, but even very well
known artists do not command these prices....unless they are
dead. 
Barbara

Julio.Rodriguez#walgreens.com wrote:

>Almost forgot, check out the "Yuki Rei" barens at:

>http://yoseido.safeshopper.com/163/cat163.htm Julio ps. I thought
>he had passed away recently ? he of authorship fame with Toshi
>Yoshida....am I confusing the artist ?



------------------------------

From: michael schneider <mikasch#t0.or.at>
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2003 11:54:11 +0200
Subject: [Baren 22326] Re: contemporary gallery 

Barbara,

I hope you will find my work not unsophisticated when it will appear at 
the yoseido page ;-). Yoseido is the gallery, that will hold my show in 
November. They are of high reputation and have customers all over the world.
To the prices; as with all other things, supply and demand make the 
price. I am surprised that printmakers themselves criticise high prices 
for prints in the first place. Having a market where a print is regarded 
so valuable, is a good thing for a printmakers. And the fact that a 
thought after piece is priced higher than what I would find reasonable 
for my own work is offering a potential for my work to increase its value.
A word to Dave. You are right that printmaking has been for a long time 
based on the concept of producing multiples to be able to sell higher 
numbers of works for a lower price. or not to sell them at all but to 
publish them for a different reason. ( political, religious, 
ideological, and so on)
The different printmaking techniques therefore come with their past and 
that includes a special iconography and character. These levels of 
meaning might be used by an artist to express ideas in the form of 
printmaking without the intention of producing as many copies as 
possible. (A thought that is also part of my concept.)

Yours,

michael

------------------------------

End of Baren Digest V24 #2315
*****************************