Brooches
Esoteric (brooch), sterling, enamel on copper, pearls.
2021 began with a reflection on unresolved material narratives. I began interrogating the forms and ideas of Victorian writers, such as John Ruskin, many of whom, I assign to my History of Craft and History of Design students.
Ignoble (brooch), enamel on steel, gold leaf.
Ruskin would say that, “portable art — independent of all place — is for the most part ignoble art” (Ruskin, 1859. Two Paths, III). But, by place, if we don’t include the body, are we merely distancing a material from injury? Is ‘the decorative’ dishonest? Or is it the body?
Kaleidoscope (brooch), enamel on copper, steel.
What is the role of the maker when they intentionally interject? Does the interaction and decision to imitate create ‘dishonesty’?
“If you learn only to draw a leaf well, you are taught in some of our schools to turn it the other way, opposite to itself; and the two leaves set opposite ways are called ‘a design’: and thus it is supposed possible to produce ornamentation, though you have no more brains than a looking-glass or a kaleidoscope has.” (Ruskin, 1859. Two Paths, III)
Ocherous Stain (brooch), steel.
Does honesty exclude my intervention? Is longevity attached to honest materials?
“You all probably know that the ocherous stain, which, perhaps, is often thought to spoil the basin of your spring, is iron in a state of rust: and when you see rusty iron in other places you generally think, not only that it spoils the places it stains, but that it is spoiled itself—that rusty iron is spoiled iron.
For most of our uses it generally is so; and because we cannot use a rusty knife or razor so well as a polished one, we suppose it to be a great defect in iron that it is subject to rust. But not at all. On the contrary, the most perfect and useful state of it is that ocherous stain; and therefore it is endowed with so ready a disposition to get itself into that state.” (Ruskin, 1959. Two Paths, Iron in Nature.)
Cemetery Keys (brooch), wood, pearls, steel.
Ruskin makes a claim that we accept blunted states of being as they pile onto each other, inextricably linked and dependent, with contentment — as if these affirmations are self-evident and therefore harmless. But, when we begin to unpack these truths with our hands and our minds, what may come of it?
“We are all of us willing enough to accept dead truths or blunt ones; which can be fitted harmlessly into spare niches, or shrouded and coffined at once out of the way, we holding complacently the cemetery keys, and supposing we have learned something. But a sapling truth, with earth at its root and blossom on its branches; or a trenchant truth, that can cut its way through bars and sods; most men, it seems to me, dislike the sight or entertainment of, if by any means such guest or vision may be avoided. And, indeed, this is no wonder; for one such truth, thoroughly accepted, connects itself strangely with others, and there is no saying what it may lead us to.” (Ruskin, 1959. Two Paths, Preface)
Labor (brooch), enamel on copper, sterling, silverplate, steel.
When contemplating the work of Ruskin and its impact on the larger craft communities, we have to ask: how is the Gothic tied to morality, handwork and labor? Many of these arguments were propped up on an anti-illusionistic, Christian, and an optimistic positioning of the role of handwork as one that would triumph over industrialism. How can we approach the role of handwork and the ‘moral division’ between labor and the objects produced?
Fitter for a Humbler Place (brooch), enamel on copper, sterling, pearl.
“The less of nature it contains, the more degraded is the ornament, and the fitter for a humbler place; but, however far a great workman may go in refusing the higher organisms of nature, he always takes care to retain the magnificence of natural lines; that is to say, of the infinite curves. (Ruskin, 1859. Two Paths, III)
Wholly Unconventional (brooch), enamel on copper, sterling.
“And so in all other cases whatever, the greatest decorative art is wholly unconventional — downright, pure, good painting and sculpture, but always fitted for its place; and subordinated to the purpose it has to serve in that place” (Ruskin, 1859. Two Paths, II)
