GAS 2015 San Jose by Glass Art Society

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY JOURNAL SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA

2015

44th Annual Conference Interface: Glass, Art, and Technology San Jose, California, June 5-7, 2015

S A N

GAS Board of Directors 2014-2015 President Vice President Vice President Treasurer Secretary

Roger MacPherson Kim Harty Cassandra Straubing Ed Kirshner Alex Bernstein

Chris Clarke Jeff Lindsay Matt Durran Marc Petrovic Lance Friedman Natali Rodrigues BJ Katz Masahiro Nick Sasaki Tracy Kirchmann Jan Smith Jiyong Lee David Willis Jon Rees / Amanda Wilcox, Student Representatives

Staff

J O S E

Pamela Figenshow Koss, Executive Director Kristin Galioto, Communications Manager Shelbey Lang, Executive Assistant Kassaundra Porres, Office and Volunteer Coordinator Kim Harty, GAS Journal Editor* Ted Cotrotsos, Graphic Design* Laurie Streiner, San Jose Conference Event Planner* *part time / contract

GAS 2015 San Jose Conference Co-Chairs Steven Aldrich Cassandra Straubing Susan Longini Demetra Theofanous Dorothy Saxe, honorary co-chair

San Jose Conference Jurors & Reviewers

Emerging Artist Jurors: John Drury, Ginny Ruffner, Emma Woffenden Student Scholarship Jurors: Shane Fero, Corey Hampson, Kristie Rea International Student Exhibition Jurors: Tina Oldknow, Dorothy Saxe, Mary B. White Portfolio Reviewers: Mark Abildgaard, Benjamin Cobb, Einar and Jamex de la Torre, Laura Donefer, Bandhu Dunham, Michael Endo, Katherine Gray, Kari Minnick, David Schnuckel, Pamina Traylor

San Jose Conference Auctions

GAS Live Auctioneer: Kim Harty Saxe Gala Auctioneer: Jim Baker Auction Committee: Chris Clarke, Lance Friedman, Kim Harty, Pamela Jaynes, BJ Katz, Tracy Kirchmann, Pamela Figenshow Koss, Roger MacPherson

San Jose Conference Logo Designer

2 0 1 5 2

Christopher MacPherson

Conference Photographer Heather Ahrens

GAS Board of Directors 2015-2016 President Vice President Vice President Treasurer Secretary

Cassandra Straubing Kim Harty Natali Rodrigues Roger MacPherson Tracy Kirchmann

Alex Bernstein Chris Clarke Kelly Conway Matt Durran B J Katz Ed Kirshner Jeff Lindsay

Marc Petrovic Charlotte Potter Stephen Rolfe Powell Masahiro Nick Sasaki Jan Smith David Willis Amanda Wilcox/Emily Kuchenbecker, Student Representatives

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY â&#x20AC;˘ 2015 JOURNAL â&#x20AC;˘ SAN JOSE, CA

Circle of Palms and The San Jose Museum of Art

Published by: THE GLASS ART SOCIETY 6512 23rd Ave NW, Suite 329, Seattle, WA 98117 USA www.glassart.org Editor: Kim Harty Design: Ted Cotrotsos Design, Seattle, WA Printing: The Sheridan Press, Hanover, PA Conference Photographer: Heather Ahrens Copyright © 2015 by The Glass Art Society No part of this publication may be reprinted or otherwise reproduced in any form without the written permission of the Glass Art Society.

ISBN: 978-0-692-59637-1 The opinions expressed in the GAS Journal are those of the annual conference presenters, and do not necessarily reflect the beliefs of the Glass Art Society, its Board of Directors, or staff. Copies of this GAS Journal may be ordered from the Glass Art Society at a cost of $23 US (to GAS members in the USA, Canada or Mexico) or $28 (to GAS members in all other countries). For non-members, the GAS Journal prices are $27 and $32, respectively. Copies of articles may be purchased at 50¢ per page. Past issues (1983, 1985 through 1994, 1996, 1998 through 2000, and 2002 through 2014) are currently available at the same costs. A 10% discount is given on orders of five or more journals. Inquiries regarding over-the-counter sales and quantity-orders are welcomed. An order form can be found in the back of this Journal.

For information about the Glass Art Society, please contact us at 6512 23rd Ave NW, Suite 329, Seattle, WA 98117 USA. Our office hours are Monday through Friday, 9 am to 5 pm, Pacific Standard Time Tel: 206-382-1305 • Fax: 206-382-2630 Web: www.glassart.org • Email: info@glassart.org Cover Images: (front) Paul Stankard, Tea Rose Bouquet Botanical with Mask, 2004, flameworked colored glass encapsulated in clear glass, 5.5” tall, photo: Douglas Schaible (back) Paul Stankard, Honeybee Swarming a Floral Hive Cluster, 2010, photo: Ron Farina Credits for Photographers of the Artist’s Work Artists who have taken their own photographs are not listed here. Ron Farina (Paul Stankard, Honeybee Swarming a Floral Hive Cluster); John Healey (Paul Stankard, Golden Orb Column); Evelyne Lablance-Roberge (Alli Hoag, Inhalation); Colin Davison (Erin Dickson, Emotional Leak); David Williams (Erin Dickson, Emotional Leak (detail)); Andrea Keller (John Lewis, Ice Falls); Lawrence Huff (John Lewis, Glacier Vessel); Stuart Campell (John Lewis, One Shell Plaza Bollards); Reid Freeman (John Lewis, Israel Museum Water Feature); Lynn Zboyovsky (John Lewis); Salvador Pulido Arroyo (Christian Thornton, ...using recycled glass and alternative energies, Studio Xaquixe product); Michael Weber (Nikolas Weinstein, Courtyard Sha Tin Installation, Capella Installation); Bruce Damonte (Nikolas Weinstein, Bar Agricole Installation);

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

Jeff Benroth (Nikolas Weinstein, Proof of concept for dynamic pin mold...); Joe Upham (Dean Allison, Fred Birkhill with camera..., Mary Catherine Richardson, Ben Wright...); Mercedes Jelinek (Dean Allison, And I’m sorry I count not travel both, What would the earth look like if all the shadows disappeared); Russell Johnson (Nancy Callan, Azure Filigree Cloud, Unravel Orb); Charles Higgins (Mel Douglas); Stuart Hay (Mel Douglas, Drawn to a point, turning tide); Joan Kruckewitt (Jay Musler, ...demonstrating how to make a wineglass); Matthew Hollerbush (Daniel Curtrone, Object of Desire); Rachel Smith (Matthew Day Perez, Weaving Light); John Carlano (Kristin Deady, Site Lines);David Williams (Shaun Griffiths, Bound to Be, Bound to Be (detail), Being There, Being There (detail) All permission for photographic reproduction is the responsibility of the author. Unless otherwise noted, the photographs were taken and provided by the artist. Dimensions, when available, are usually given in inches or feet as height x width x depth.

The 2015 GAS Journal is supported, in part, by awards from the Corning Incorporated Foundation and the National Endowment for the Arts. Without their support, this publication would not have been possible.

C O N T E N T S R EFLECT I O N S President’s Message by Roger MacPherson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 San Jose Co-Chair Letter by Steven Aldrich, Susan Longini, Dorothy Saxe, Cassandra Straubing, and Demetra Theofanous . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

GLA S S ART SO CI E T Y AW AR DS Lifetime Achievement Award: Yes, A Career in Glass Ain’t Easy by Paul J. Stankard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Lifetime Membership Award: The Power of Community by Mary B. White . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . International Student Exhibition Awards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . GAS Student Scholarships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

10 12 14 14

INTERFACE : GL ASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY Keynote Lecture: Interface: Glass, Art, and Technology by Steven Aldrich; Panelists: Dale Dougherty and Dr. Jeffrey Evenson . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Willson Lecture: Looking Through Both Sides of the Window by Mildred Howard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Labino Lecture Panel: Exploring New Possibilities with Science and Art: The Corning Museum of Glass/Corning Incorporated Specialty Glass Residency - Moderator: Amy Schwartz; Panelists: Rob Cassetti, Glen Cook, Eric Meek, Tina Oldknow, Albert Paley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Strattman Lecture: The Critical Vacuum by Hyperopia Projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Littleton Lecture: Stories/Contexts by Therman Statom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Emerging Artist Presentation: The Specter of Sentimentality by Jacci Delaney . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 Emerging Artist Presentation: Properties of Materials and the Preciousness of Action by Justin Ginsberg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 Emerging Artist Presentation: An Arrangement of Skin by Alli Hoag . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

LEC TURE S

Architectural Quirks: Translating and Realizing Ideas in Glass Through Digital Design and Manufacture by Erin Dickson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 Cast Glass and the Environment by John Lewis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 Studio Xaquixe: The Facts of a Truly Sustainable Studio by Christian Thornton, presentation given by Salvador Pulido Arroyo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 Behind-the-Scenes: Installing Large-Scale Public Art by Kana Tanaka . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 Creating Problems by Nikolas Weinstein . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46

D EMO N ST RAT I O N S HOT GLASS Combining Techniques: Casting into Mold-Blown Layers by Dean Allison . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Brain on Cane - Demo by Nancy Callan; Text by Katherine Gray . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Demo? No Problemo. Call Paul, Y’all! by Paul DeSomma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pointillism on the Blowpipe by David Patchen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Why Me? by Nate Watson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . COLDWORKING Fred Curtis and Róisín de Buitléar: Glass Cutting from Waterford The Glass City, Ireland by Róisín de Buitléar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Surface Tension by Mel Douglas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Chipping of Glass by Vladimir Klein . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Secret Teachings of the Coldshop by Johnathon Turner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . FLAMEWORKING Kinetic Construction Techniques by Bandhu Dunham . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sculptural Bird Bead by Kim Fields . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sculpting Natural Forms in Boro by Demetra Theofanous and Beau Tsai . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Torchworking on the Lathe by Jay Musler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . It’s Not Serious! How to Have Fun Flameworking as a Team! by Karina Guévin and Cédric Ginart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . OTHER Mold Making and Lost Wax Kilncasting by Mark Abildgaard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

49 51 53 54 56 58 60 62 64 67 77 78 80 82 83

LEC - M O S Bridging the Gap from Digital to Hand: Using CAD/CAM to Create a New Language of Form within the Traditions of the Handmade by Daniel Cutrone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86 Poured, Plopped, Splashed, and Smeared! by Matthew Day Perez . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 The History of Photosensitive Materials and their Potential for Artists Working with Glass by Kristin Deady . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91 3D Printing Meets Glass by Mark A. Ganter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94 Through the Looking Glass Zoetrope by David King . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97 Mastering the Void by Joanna Manousis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 Illuminating Glass in Architecture by Rui Sasaki . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 Water Jet Cutting: Tips, Tricks and Applications by Shaun Griffiths and Stephen Jacklyn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104

P A N ELS At-Risk Youth Forum: Serving Underserved Youth: Exploring best practices of top “at-risk” glassblowing programs - Moderator: Andrew Page; Panelists: Pearl Dick, Kit Evans, Barbara Keisler, Tracy Kirchmann, Jessi Moore, Robert Minkoff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107 Green Forum: Simple Green - Moderator: Tracy Kirchmann; Panelists: Julie Conway, Hugh Jenkins, Timm Muth, Dan Schwoerer . . . . . . . . . . . 110

A D D I T I O N AL P RE SE N TAT IONS

Presenter Abstracts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112

REMEMBR ANCE S

Memorial Tribute to Marvin Lipofsky By Fritz Dreisbach, Henry Halem, Michael Taylor, and Audrey Handler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114 Memorial Tribute to Susan Holland-Reed by Joseph Rossano . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116 Memorial Tribute to Yoriko Mizuta by Susanne Frantz and Helmut Ricke . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117

G A S 2015 : CONFERENCE E V EN T S & PROGR AM

George and Dorothy Saxe by Kim Harty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119 44th Annual GAS Conference Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120 Pre-Conference and Post-Conference Workshops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122 Special Exhibitions and Gallery Hop . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123 Vendors in the Technical Display . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124

G A S 2 0 15 AC K N OW L E DGE ME N T S

Conference Committee, Donors, and Volunteers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127 Glass Art Society Upper-Level Members . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130 GAS International Student Exhibition Award Donors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133 Past Award Recipients, Conferences, Board Members, and Editors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134 GAS Membership Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136 Back Issues of the GAS Journal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136

A D VER T I SE RS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140 GAS IN CORNING : 2016 CONFERENCE PREVIEW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

R E F L EC T I O N S

James Labold, Jamex de la Torre, GAS Executive Director Pamela Koss, Tina Oldknow, Einar de la Torre, Robin Rogers, and Benjamin Cobb at the Opening Reception.

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

President’s Message By Roger MacPherson

The Tech Museum of Innovation, photo courtesy Team San Jose

Roger MacPherson, GAS President, 2014-15

Congratulations, GAS members, on making the Glass Art Society’s 44th conference a wonderful success. The tech town of San Jose proved to be a fabulous location for the conference theme Interface: Glass, Art, and Technology. This conference had a totally different techie vibe with excellent demos, perfect weather, and great attendance. I would personally like to thank the Bay Area Glass Institute (BAGI), San Jose State University, The Tech Museum of Innovation, The Corning Museum of Glass Hot Glass Roadshow, and TechShop San Jose for creating the great venues for our demonstrations. Conference co-chairs Steven Aldrich, Susan Longini, Cassandra Straubing, and Demetra Theofanous did a fantastic job organizing the event. Honorary co-chair Dorothy Saxe and her late husband George, were honored at a tribute dinner that raised money for the newly endowed Saxe Emerging Artists Lecture Fund. Thank you to all who worked hard to make this event a success! Looking ahead to the 2016, the conference at the Corning Museum of Glass, Creating Context: Glass in a New Light, promises to be an event you can’t miss. I cannot tell you who is

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

not coming next June. The lecturers and demonstrators schedules are being set and it promises to be the conference of the decade. Many of my friends have told me they have already booked their rooms. The new Contemporary Art + Design Wing is a must see, and did I mention that Laura Donefer will be there to put on her inspired Glass Fashion Show? The Glass Art Society is financially sound and with the Corning conference in 2016 and the Norfolk conference set for 2017, the Glass Art Society is now drilling down on new creative ideas for its future. I have been honored to serve as your President and am excited to announce our new executive team going forward. Cassandra Straubing will take over as our new President, with Kim Harty and Natali Rodrigues as Co-Vice Presidents, I will serve as Treasurer and Tracy Kirchmann as Secretary. Stay tuned for more great news to come.

Roger MacPherson GAS President 2014 - 2015

San Jose Co-Chair Letter By Steven Aldrich, Susan Longini, Dorothy Saxe (Honorary Co-Chair), Cassandra Straubing, Demetra Theofanous

Steven Aldrich

Susan Longini

We were thrilled that the entire Bay Area glass community welcomed you to the 2015 GAS conference. The conference lived up to its billing as an interface between glass, art, and technology, and the theme was carried further than we had thought it could go. Art and glass institutions from across the Bay Area – California College of the Arts, San Jose State University, Bay Area Glass Institute, Public Glass, the de Young Museum, Bullseye Glass, and the San Jose Museum of Art – teamed up for this incredible event. Technology organizations also put themselves into the mix: Corning Incorporated had a large group attend the conference, in addition to folks from The Corning Museum of Glass; The Tech Museum of Innovation opened its doors to the glass community as did TechShop San Jose. Adding to the local flavor, dozens of coldworkers, flameworkers and hot glass artists all contributed their time, ideas, and techniques to build a mesh of teaching and learning throughout the event. Many of the artists presenting at the conference were local, giving the Bay Area another chance to show the glass world the quality of the work being done in California. Many attendees and presenters also came long distances to share and demonstrate that glass people are innovative and collaborative. Technology was showcased in many of the demonstrations and lectures, as the glass world continues to move forward, from computerized controllers on furnaces, annealers, and kilns to water-jet cutters, 3D printers, and CNC routers.

Dorothy Saxe (Honorary Co-Chair)

Cassandra Straubing

Starting on the opening day, we saw many old friends and made new ones; we hope you did as well. There were over 1,000 artists, educators, collectors, and students who converged in San Jose to bring the spirit of glass to the heart of Silicon Valley. Some of the moments we wanted to highlight included the Lifetime Achievement Award for Paul Stankard, the Bay Area’s own Mary B. White receiving the Lifetime Membership Award, the announcement of the first Technology Advancing Glass (TAG) awardees, walking along the First Friday Gallery Hop, crashing the SubZero Festival, watching the Museum of Glass team from Tacoma bring a girl’s House in the Sky design to life at BAGI, CMoG’s mobile hot shop staff in the Plaza de César Chávez demonstrating the crazy qualities of glass (including Prince Rupert’s drops), to the audience, the tribute to George and Dorothy Saxe that brought out artists and collectors to raise significant money for emerging artists, the Glass Olympics, and finally – as usual – a fun Closing Night Party. The impact of the event continues to live on. Local collectors and artists who attended the conference said they were amazed watching the demos. They had eureka moments and applying those ideas will keep them engaged in glass art and spur them to try their own new concepts. The bonds formed in putting the event together have strengthened our community here – thank you for giving us the chance to pull together. We heard positive comments about San Jose and the accessibility of the different venues. Add in the area’s perfect weather and

Demetra Theofanous

the locals you may have connected with who offered you a place to stay when you visit, and we expect we’ll see many of you back soon! The San Jose conference team also had the opportunity to look to the future and met with the Corning and Norfolk teams who will host the next two GAS conferences. Those groups will create unique, spectacular events, and we hope to see you at both of them. Thanks,

Steven Aldrich

Susan Longini

Dorothy Saxe (Honorary Co-Chair)

Cassandra Straubing

Demetra Theofanous

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

GL ASS ART SOCIE T Y AWARDS

Mary B. White accepting the Lifetime Membership Award from GAS President Roger MacPherson.

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

LIFE T IME ACHIE V E M E N T AWA RD

Yes, a Career in Glass Ain’t Easy By Paul J. Stankard

Paul Stankard. Photo: Lauren Garcia

Paul Stankard was unable to attend the 2015 GAS conference in San Jose. His longtime friend, Shane Fero, accepted the award on his behalf and gave a presentation in which he shared stories about Paul, highlighted his accomplishments, and showed his artwork. Thank you, Glass Art Society, for the Lifetime Achievement Award. This award has touched my heart, and I’m proud and honored to have received this high honor. I’m especially appreciative to my longtime friend, Shane Fero, who presented on my behalf and received this Lifetime Achievement Award in my name. Shane exemplifies the best in our beautiful glass community, which I’m blessed to be a part of. When teaching at Salem Community College’s glass program, and when I write, I often share many of the standard axioms about succeeding as an artist such as “perseverance,” “make it personal,” “educate yourself to what you care about,” “solve one technical problem after another,” “know your field and who is doing quality work,” and “respect the process.” In this essay, I’m going contrary to my mother’s grammatical advice and will describe the uphill struggle of an artist by summing it up with the word “ain’t.” Being an artist and living through the demands of our profession ain’t easy, but it ain’t bad either.

Paul Stankard working as a scientific glassblower to build a vacuum system in 1970.

Here is my litany of ain’ts… • A career as a studio glass artist ain’t a piece of cake – it’s a struggle. • A career as a professional artist ain’t comfortable and it often causes emotional pain. • A career as an artist ain’t going to bring in steady money, but some artists get rich. • A career as an artist ain’t bad if you can take rejection. I should push back from the negative ain’ts that we all know. Art is a respected and valued profession in society and artists are able to grow in courage. I don’t know about other professions, but as an artist, you’re in a constant emotional tug-of-war. The creative feelings in your head demand to be expressed and as these feelings pulsate, they’ll pull you down if not articulated. When you add it all up it’s a life-affirming spiritual journey that overshadows the torment, and I thank God daily for my life as an artist. I’ve educated myself to, as the ancient Greeks would say, know thyself, and I’ve worked to reach my full potential as I look back over my adult life. The creative high is often blissful, but after the high, coming down is an emotional thud. Because of my obsessive nature I often start a new design and try push to new level of expression and use my cumulative knowledge

to discover new things. In my case, I fight low self-esteem and generally think nothing is ever good enough. You can be both financially and artistically uncomfortable. There are times when you should be able to save money, but other times when you have to borrow to keep the wolves away from the studio door. Even in this stage of my career, I still owe money on the studio’s line of credit. In no way am I a starving artist, but to have a semblance of a stable art business (and art is a bad business), a line of credit has been essential. But here is the irony: I continually thank God, and have been daily throughout my career, for giving me courage and a path to travel on the creative side. It was a risky move and a change that required total support from my wife Patricia, who stood by my decision to leave a secure and lucrative job as a scientific glassblower to make paperweights for a living.

Who could have guessed? In the studio my emotions vacillate between positive and negative, but most of the time they are negative. They are positive when finding a particular solution that solves an aesthetic problem and negative when feeling it wasn’t good enough. In truth, when taking the work out of the oven 80% of the time I think it could be better, and on occasion it’s a real downer.

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

The good thing is after 40 plus years on the creative side, I take heart knowing how much the failures have contributed to my success. Now I divide my time between working in the studio and teaching and writing. This has been my way of sharing my professional experiences. I take pride in the publication of my autobiography, No Green Berries or Leaves – The Creative Journey of an Artist in Glass (2007), and an international survey of 12 respected artists who take advantage of the flameworking process, Spark the Creative Flame, Making the Journey from Art to Craft (2013). I am now completing a third book, Craft as Career, a book that visually sums up my personal philosophy as an artist/artisan while surveying the American Craft landscape. Over the decades, I have been blessed with the privilege of interacting with a beautiful community of extremely talented people. I’ve been invited to teach and lecture not only at my home base of Salem Community College, but at international venues, sharing my flameworking techniques.

Paul Stankard, Golden Orb Column Photo: John Healey

Paul Stankard, Honeybee Swarming a Floral Hive Cluster, 2010 Photo: Ron Farina

The honors I’ve received, such as this one, have been a source of pride to not only me but my family. I am still actively involved, creating, and sharing. It’s a wonderful feeling, and the issues I am confronting find their way into my creative expression. These issues include my current old-man problems. I am embracing these challenges in a way that will be expressed through my glass. For me, this is the essence of being a creative person. Live it and express it. For those of you who are reading this: most likely you’re hurting like the rest of us. Being a creative person in these economic times demands a major commitment. Overcoming problems and setbacks and having the courage to confront them is an essential part of the creative experience. This is life. In an abstract way, I own and embrace my problems and grow from them. I pray that you can embrace the creative life cycle and take courage from it. Yes, a career in glass ain’t easy.

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

__________________________________ Paul J. Stankard is an internationally acclaimed glass artist and is considered to be a living master in the art of flameworking. He is known for his small-scale botanical themes encapsulated in clear glass. His work is represented in over 60 museums around the world. Stankard has received two honorary doctorate degrees and numerous awards such as the Masters of the Medium from The James Renwick Alliance, The American Craft Council College of Fellows class of 2000, and Honorary Professor/Artistin-Resident at Salem Community College in southern New Jersey. He is the author of two books; an autobiography titled, No Green Berries or Leaves: The Creative Journey of an Artist in Glass and, most recently, an educational resource titled, Spark the Creative Flame – Making the Journey from Craft to Art.

LIFE T IME MEMBERS HI P AWA RD

The Power of Community By Mary B. White

Mary B. White, Ireland, 2009

Acceptance Speech It was truly a surprise, and then a delight, to learn that I was a 2015 GAS Lifetime Membership Awardee. Thank you GAS Board and hardworking staff! I send a thank you to all of my teachers, my cherished glass related colleagues from California and around the world, and most importantly, my students, for this honor. Thank you Susan Stinsmuehlen Amend, for the intro. It is a privilege to share the stage with the first woman president of GAS! I extend a warm welcome to all GAS members who have come from far and near to be with us in San Jose and Silicon Valley. The first silicon chips, of melted pure silicon, transformed digital communication using new interfaces. SiO2, our favorite medium, adds two oxygen molecules to silicon and transforms dense conductive matter into transparency. May we enjoy the metaphor of mixing molecules and adding oxygen to create transformation as we enjoy this GAS conference together. GAS San Jose is about the interface of art, glass, and technology. I think one of the most extraordinary aspects of GAS gatherings is the interface of human contact and actions, and the magic that happens! I have a few quick stories to illustrate how GAS has intervened in amazing ways in the course of my life. I think many attendees may also have stories to tell.

In the late 1960s I studied glass at CCA in Oakland with Marvin Lipofsky and Ruth Tamura and I heard discussion about the exciting formation of GAS. I was determined to make my career in this new field, and enamored with the extraordinary list of international visitors Lipofsky brought through the Great California Glass Symposium. Once out of school, teaching, I craved more. GAS offered a vibrant new forum and opportunity for international exchange. If I remember correctly, the first GAS conference I actually attended was in 1976 at Corning, with a work exchange pass. I remember being thrilled to be stuffing tote bags with Sylvia Vigelleti and Audrey Handler, my new glass role models. Another GAS interface shifted my career course. In 1978 I was working half-time in the mornings as the art teacher for Oakland High School and all afternoon and early evening working in a Berkeley glass hotshop I shared with Michael Cohn and Randy Strong. I was blowing glass-drinking tumblers, hundreds of them, as part of an initiative to make beautiful functional ware that would highlight portable water. I attended the 1978 Asilomar GAS conference, which featured Narcissus Quagliata in one of the first stained glass sessions. At GAS I learned about a week-long workshop Narcissus was giving soon after, and I signed up

immediately. It was a transformative experience and I immediately made up my mind to go back to grad school in glass and resign from teaching high school and running a production glass shop, all of which I did the following year. GAS teaches community building. Little did I realize when I agreed to be on the GAS Board in the early 1990s that I would be asked to be a co-chair of the 1994 Oakland GAS conference with John Leighton. The local committee had to do most of the groundwork since (I think) Alice Rooney was the only GAS staff at the time. Artists from all over the Bay area pitched in to help, find projectors, arrange the blues band, monitor the presentations, and organize the tours. It was an incredible time that taught me the power of the glass community. We worked with glass artists from all over California to make the conference happen. Out of that work evolved my passion to highlight California artists and over 24 schools and organizations that have advocated for the glass arts in California. Later I transferred my Oakland GAS organizing skills to organize two California Glass Exchanges. In 2002, Susan Longini and I organized a CGE at San Jose State and Ohlone College. In 2012, Michelle Knox and I organized a CGE at The Crucible in Oakland, in conjunction with 50 years of studio glass celebrations, both GAS-inspired. I continue to learn the rich fiber of collaboration. Mary B. White, Dwelling on East Bay Foreclosures

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY â&#x20AC;˘ 2015 JOURNAL â&#x20AC;˘ SAN JOSE, CA

Chance miracles happen at GAS. In 2008, I attended the Portland GAS conference party, and two former students came up and told me about receiving Fulbright grants. I thought to myself, “Why don’t I apply? I’ve retired from SJSU, this is perfect timing.” At the same GAS party I saw Caroline Madden, a visiting Irish glass educator, and she suggested that I might come to Ireland to help her teach an experimental seminar for ceramics, glass, and metals to grad students, if we could find the funding. We cooked up a plan at the closing party picnic table. The following year I was spending a miraculous and marvelous nine months teaching with Caroline at National College of Art and Design in Dublin, Ireland on a Fulbright Scholar grant. I cherish my international connections, and the Irish connections are continuing through GAS. We are very lucky this year at GAS San Jose to host two extraordinary Irish glass artists – Róisín de Builtleur and Fred Curtis – who will be demonstrating on Sunday morning at San Jose State University. Please come. They will be talking about the future of glass in Ireland and envisioning Waterford as the glass city. Glenn Adamson says “craft” is an action word. As he sees it, craft, practiced by “a person with deep knowledge and commitment to the production process, who applies that by hand to a purposeful result,” provides the “connective tissue” between art and design. We, as artists using glass, are fortunate to be in this interface, to use our craft to communicate about issues important to us. We live in a time when glass materials, skills, and technique are available. It is time for us to craft art that speaks to the current conditions of the world we live in. Green energy and youth programs are directions particularly important to me; I frankly think the future of our glass community lies in these two arenas! At the 1994 GAS conference in Oakland, we had the one of the first recycled glass presentations. Now, the Green Panel is a regular feature of every conference. It has been a delight to meet with other Green Panel supporters at GAS and continue the green energy dialogue throughout the year with BioGlass founder, Julie Conway of bioglass.org, Hugh Jenkins, Charlie Correll, Garret Wheeler, Eddie Bernard and other Green Panel members. On Sunday, Christian Thornton’s Oaxaca comprehensive holistic project will be presented by

Salvador Pulido Arroyo. Don’t miss it. The youth panel is thriving, expanding, and giving more youth an opportunity to come to our gatherings. As a member of the local exhibition committee, I want to encourage all of you to go to as many gallery exhibitions as possible tonight on the Gallery Hop. Our community has made an extraordinary effort to mount 14 exhibitions in San Jose and seven in the larger Bay Area. If you have a chance, take the shuttle bus on San Salvadore and 2nd to the Japantown galleries and San Jose City College, (buses organized by the local committee) and check out the California glass history timeline exhibit I co-curated at San Jose City College; and enjoy whomever you meet on the bus! Last, I want to thank all of you again, particularly all of the wonderful students I have had over the years, many who have often become my teachers. Once a student told me she wanted to be the “best,” which made me realize that to be the “best” is to be the “best oneself can be.” Onward! __________________________________ Mary B. White is a Bay Area sculptor and arts educator. From 1985 to 2005, she was head of San Jose State University’s glass program in the School of Art and Design and is currently an adjunct instructor at St. Mary’s College and Chair of the Board of WEAD: Women Environmental Artists Directory. She was co-chair of the Oakland GAS conference in 1994 and co-organized two California Glass Exchanges in 2002 and 2012. From 2009-2010, she was a Fulbright Scholar at the National College of Art and Design in Dublin, Ireland, leading an experimental two-semester seminar for graduate students as well as Crafts Council of Ireland participants in glass, ceramics, and metals. In 2011, she completed the 18-foot high Flood Level Marker on Boulder Creek, in Boulder, Colorado. From 2002-2013 she was co-head of the glass program at the Crucible in Oakland, California. White has taught workshops at many schools including California College of the Arts, Cal Poly, Cal State Fullerton, The Studio of The Corning Museum of Glass, and Pilchuck Glass School. She earned a BFA in ceramics and an MFA in glass from CCA in Oakland.

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

Mary B. White, Kenosis and Immigration

Mary B. White, Pollination

International Student Exhibition Awards We extend our appreciation to the exhibition jurors: Tina Oldknow, Dorothy Saxe, and Mary B. White. We are also grateful to the institutions and companies who generously contributed a combined value of $3,500 toward the awards.

FIRST PLACE Teri Bailey, Untitled, University of Wisconsin - Stevens Point

SECOND PLACE Zac Weinberg, Objects to be found 3/100, Ohio State University

THIRD PLACE Ryland Gulbrandsen, Aggregate, University of Wisconsin - Stevens Point

HONORABLE MENTIONS James Akers, Mobile Neon Manifold Promo, Alfred University Tereza Anderlová, Hot Glass... Taste Fragile, Tomas Bata University Amber Guerin, If you comb your hair 1,000 times it will grow long and beautiful, San Jose State University Anna Lehner, Disturbance, University of Wisconsin - Stevens Point Elina Peduzzi, A Stitch in Time Saves Nine…if not in Time, Design!, San Jose State University Kat Skinner, Untitled, University of Wisconsin - Stevens Point Leana Quade, Coulage, Alfred University

2015 International Student Award Winners.

INTERNATIONAL STUDENT EXHIBITION AWARD DONORS $1,000 or more: The Corning Museum of Glass $500-$999: Pittsburgh Glass Center, GOTT Steamer Glass Shaping System, Steinert Industries, Inc. Up to $500: Glass Art Society, Jim Moore Tools for Glass, Salusa Glassworks, Inc.

GAS 2015 Student Scholarships We thank jurors Shane Fero, Corey Hampson, and Kirstie Rea for evaluating all of the entries in the student scholarship competition.

Becky Winship Flameworking Scholarship - $1,000 Generously funded by David Winship of Glasscraft, Inc. Meredith Lopez, Rochester Institute of Technology

General Student Scholarships - $1,000 each Ryland Gulbrandsen, University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point Su-yeon Kim, Southern Illinois University Carbondale James Labold, Ball State University Anna Mlasowsky, University of Washington Jin Qu, University of Sunderland Each year, the Glass Art Society recognizes the achievements and potential of those members currently enrolled as fulltime students in under-graduate and graduate programs. Applications are evaluated by a professional jury, and selected students are awarded scholarships so that they may attend the annual GAS conference in order to learn, connect, and grow as artists. 14

Meredith Lopez, Bind, 2015, powered glass, blown glass, wood, mixed media, 16 x 16 x 51” Photo: Matt Wittmeyer

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

INTERFACE: GL ASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

Shane Fero accepts the Lifetime Achievement Award on behalf of Paul Stankard.

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

K E Y N OT E LEC T U RE

Interface: Glass, Art, and Technology By Steven Aldrich Moderator: Steven Aldrich Panelists: Dale Dougherty and Dr. Jeffrey Evenson Our discussion brought together two leading thinkers and doers, who sit at the intersection of glass, art, and technology, to talk through trends in Art and Technology and the commercial, educational, and experimental impacts of that interface. Dale Dougherty is the CEO of Maker Media which runs Maker Faires and publishes Make: magazine, both of which he founded. He is a catalyst for the Maker Movement where everyone is invited to become a maker and integrate their creative goals with their technical skills. Dale sits at the intersection of technology, art, and science, and he shared photos and emotions – mainly delight – that come from attending a Maker Faire either as a creator or as a spectator. In his opening remarks, Dale advocated for getting everyone to be a creator, and you can see an example of what the Maker Faire is in a video of the Kinetic Steam Works exhibit at a recent Faire, which can be found online. Dr. Jeff Evenson is a senior vice president and operations chief of staff at Corning Incorporated, the world leader and innovator in materials science and specialty glass and ceramics. Prior to joining Corning, Jeff spent seven years at the investment research firm of Sanford C. Bernstein as a senior vice president and senior analyst. Dr. Evenson has a serious science pedigree, with a PhD in physics, and is a Trustee of The Corning Museum of Glass and the Corning Incorporated Foundation. Jeff shared some background on Corning’s continued pursuit to apply glass in many commercial and domestic arenas. He played the video, A Day Made of Glass, which can be found on Corning’s website. Steven Aldrich talked about how his dayto-day life connects the worlds of glass, art, and technology. His day job is as a senior leader at GoDaddy helping people start, run, and grow their ventures. He is also president of the board of directors at the Bay Area Glass Institute in San Jose, which provides accessible, hands-on glass experiences that educate and inspire current and future generations of patrons, students, and artists.

After those introductions, Jeff talked about how his broad background – physics PhD, consultant, analyst, chief of staff and Board member of The Corning Museum of Glass – puts him squarely in the center of Corning’s intersection of glass, art, and technology. Jeff also highlighted that Corning has funded a number of museum, studio, research, and traveling programs, connecting the company’s commercial success to the glass arts. Dale talked about the ecosystem of individuals creating and doing, and the many Maker Faires now held around the globe. He said that while technology can be a catalyst for ideas, there is no requirement that innovation and creativity need to be grounded in software or hardware. The Steampunk engine that was showcased at the San Mateo Maker Faire is a great example of creating with centuries-old tools. At the same time, there are a number of ways to use new, low-cost technology like Arduino boards that costs $20 and are a complete programmable computer that can enable experimentation. Dale also talked about how the Maker Movement creates a new context for art and technology where a shared technology experience is a form of expression. We had a discussion about the focus on STEM (science, technology, engineering, math) in education and the importance of not losing creativity in the drive to improve learning outcomes, driven by test standards. There was not agreement about STEAM (“A” standing for art and design) being better than STEM, just the perspective that when art and music are not part of a core curriculum, our kids lose out on opportunities. We were specifically concerned about kids having the opporunity to try something that does not have a right answer. The fearless desire to create needs to be fostered. The Tech Museum was right down the street and we brought up their Tech Challenge, which encourages kids to take on difficult projects and iterate over and over on their ideas. We hoped that more energy and time would be devoted to spurring kids’ creative sides. All of us start off with no fear and a desire to learn new skills without embarrassment. Finding ways to keep this alive as long as possible should be encouraged.

The panel then shifted from kids to adults to ask how to broaden participation in the arts and encourage more people to create. Dale commented that he sensed huge potential sitting in the garages around America and encouraged people to “just do it.” There is a community of online resources available through Maker Faire, TechShop, and other local organizations. We also noted that glass is a really difficult media in which to become an expert, with thousands of hours of practice required to become a master. Exposing people to the concept of working in glass is part of Corning’s mission and having The Studio do so many demos, in Corning, on the road, and even Dailey onDan ships, does encourage people to try glass even if they have day jobs. We had a few minutes for questions from the audience. One of the observations made was about the intersection in the history of Silicon Valley between glass and technology. Back in 1955, William Shockley founded a lab to use silicon mixed with other materials to create the first transistors at Shockley Semiconductor Laboratories in Santa Clara, just a few miles from where the conference was held in San Jose. This initial innovation in transistor design is still powering the technology industry today, just as silicon is still the primary ingredient in glass. Another question was asked about how small amounts of the materials that Corning creates could be made available for artists to experiment. Jeff said that was a great idea and he would think about a way to take proposals for how to move from an industrial scale to an individual artist scale. And, while that is not possible today, he exchanged contact information with the person who asked that question after the talk. We finished the panel by sharing the last thing our panelists had made. Dale said that he spends so much of his time advocating for others to make and share that he has not built something in awhile. Jeff converted an old closet in his home into a wine cellar.

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

Steven Aldrich leads Business Applications for GoDaddy, helping business owners focus on delighting their customers. His team is delivering a key part of GoDaddy’s mission to radically shift the global economy toward small businesses. Aldrich spent over a decade at Intuit and has been an entrepreneur multiple times. His first start-up was an online marketplace that simplified shopping for insurance. Aldrich earned an MBA from Stanford and a BA in physics from the University of North Carolina. After hours, he helps educational and arts non-profits like the Bay Area Glass Institute, and enjoys spending time with his wife, Allison and their son, Jackson, at many sports and arts events.

Dale Dougherty is the founder and executive chairman of Maker Media, Inc. Maker Media launched Make: magazine in 2005 and Maker Faire, which held its first event in the San Francisco Bay Area, in 2006. Dougherty’s vision and mission continue to be the guiding force for the family of brands. As executive chairman, Dougherty is involved in editorial and content strategy, and both business and product development. As part of this process, he forges strategic partnerships in support of maker education and global, cultural, and economic initiatives. Make: began at O’Reilly Media where Dougherty was a co-founder and the first editor of their computing trade books. When not in the office, Dougherty can be found making award-winning wines with his family in Sebastopol, CA.

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

Dr. Jeffrey Evenson has served as senior vice president and operations chief of staff at Corning since June 2011. Evenson leads the process to create Corning’s annual operating priorities and oversees a variety of strategic programs and growth initiatives across the company’s diverse businesses. Prior to joining Corning, Evenson spent seven years at Sanford C. Bernstein as a senior vice president and senior analyst. In this role, he formulated investment recommendations for data networking companies. Previously, he was a partner at McKinsey & Company, where he led technology and market assessments for early-stage technologies. Evenson has a Ph.D. in physics from Harvard University and a BS in physics from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He is a trustee of The Corning Museum of Glass and the Corning Incorporated Foundation. He is also a member of the board of directors for View, Inc.

WIL L SON LEC T U RE

Looking Through Both Sides of the Window By Mildred Howard along with the somewhat lesser-known To Be Looked At From Both Sides of The Glass…, take their cue from the role of glass in modernist architecture and the capitalist system of exchange: namely, as an agent of separation. Glass divides the turbulence of the street – the homelessness, the discarded trash, the chaos of life – from the neat, clean, orderly goods and services on the other side of the window; it is the unfeeling protector of the sanctity of the material world, and in his work Duchamp uses glass’s suggestion of division and emotional coldness to great effect. But the medium itself is not inherently divisive: like any medium, it can be deployed for a variety of purposes. The people in the world seem to be becoming increasingly disconnected to each other, but that essential sensitivity that

Mildred Howard, The House that Cannot Pass for Any Color than It’s Own, 2011 sculpture, aubergine pourpre, laminated hand-blown glass, mirrored text, painted red steel 9’ 10” x 14’ 10” x 12’ 4”, Collection of the Sacramento International Airport

My work has evolved out of a desire to communicate and remember in a world that regularly forces silence and amnesia upon large groups of people – especially people of color – and in which both actors and spectators are numb to the pain of the other side. My use of found objects and images is an indirect appeal to something beyond the material even as it acknowledges that the material world has supplanted our shared history and has eclipsed myth, or even religion, as a repository for belief and an arbiter of truth. My use of glass is informed by the same principles. I do not use glass exclusively; to be honest, it is just another medium to me, a letter in the alphabet of signs and symbols presented by the material world. Glass does have unique properties, of course, which I first investigated 18

in depth while creating an integrated art and science curriculum at San Francisco’s Exploratorium, where I used glass bottles to develop experiments for teachers demonstrating the physics of light and color. I became captivated by the interaction of light with glass objects – how it reflects and refracts, how the shadows change over time, and the myriad shades and colors of shadow cast by colored glass. At the same time, I am continually reminded of the use of glass by one of my most persistent artistic inspirations, Marcel Duchamp. His critical recontextualization of objects and witty questioning of the boundaries of the material world remain as sharp as when he was making art in the early 20th century. Duchamp’s two major glass works, The Bride Stripped Bare By Her Bachelors Even (aka The Large Glass)

Mildred Howard, Hook With a Ho, 2007, mixed-media assemblage, 40 x 10 x 10”, Private Collection

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

Mildred Howard, Blackbird in a Red Sky AKA Fall of the Blood House, 2011 installation, laminated ruby red glass, 400 hand blown glass apples, ipe wood, house: 13’ x 11’ x 8”; pool: 20’ x 114”

is sometimes lost when considering other people is still available through the manipulation of objects. My works in glass, like my work in other mediums, operate in this uniquely human and invisible realm of aura, history, and memory as evoked by the visible world of objects. I still believe in the potential for people to be connected rather than divided by the experience of my work. Whether using glass to create a home-like structure embodying safety and interiority, as in the Memory Garden series of structures or Blackbird in a Red Sky (aka Fall of the Blood House), or to crystallize and suspend in time the invisible emotional cues of language, as in Parenthetically Speaking, It’s Only a Figure of Speech, I have sought to capitalize on the unique physical characteristics of the medium, in the hope that some truth or understanding might also be refracted from their surface. As the very shadows of the viewer’s life begin to change color, their perception of the world itself might suddenly be cast in a different light.

__________________________________ Mildred Howard, media and installation artist, draws on a wide range of historical and contemporary experiences in her work. Creating “an architecture for the remainder”, she questions perceptions and addresses misconceptions on how the world is viewed. She is the recipient of numerous awards including an NEA Grant in Sculpture, two Rockefeller Artist Fellowships, the Joan Mitchell Award, and Anonymous Was A Woman Award, among others. This year she was granted the Lee Krasner Lifetime Achievement Award from the Pollock Krasner Foundation in New York. Howard has exhibited throughout the United States and in Latin America, Egypt, Europe, and England. Her large-scale public art can be seen throughout the San Francisco Bay Area. She often uses found or ready-made objects in the work she creates. She has nearly 40 years of historically important exhibitions forged in a background of teaching and thinking about art. She is represented by Gallery Paule Anglim, San Francisco.

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

Mildred Howard, Chasing Beauty II, 2003, assemblage, vintage mirror, doll, cast plaster hand, 28 x 24 x 9”, Private Collection

L AB IN O LEC T U RE PA NE L

Exploring New Possibilities with Science and Art: The Corning Museum of Glass/Corning Incorporated Specialty Glass Residency PANELISTS: Rob Cassetti, Senior Director, Creative Services and Marketing, CMoG Glen Cook, Chief Scientist, CMoG Eric Meek, Manager, Hot Glass Programs, CMoG Tina Oldknow, Senior Curator, Modern and Contemporary Glass, CMoG Albert Paley, Charlotte Fredericks Mowris Professorship in Contemporary Crafts at the School for American Crafts, College of Imaging Art and Sciences, Rochester Institute of Technology, first Specialty Glass Resident Artist

MODERATOR: Amy Schwartz, Director of The Studio, CMoG

Introduction to the Specialty Glass Residency by Amy Schwartz The Corning Museum of Glass and Corning Incorporated have inaugurated a new artist residency program, which enables artists to explore the adaptation of specialty glass materials for the creation of new work. Corning Incorporated, which has developed and patented more than 150 specialty glass formulations, will provide the resident artist with access to specialty glass, as well as access to staff with technical expertise in glass formulation, melting, and forming. The Corning Museum of Glass will provide access to its extensive resources, including its glassmaking facilities and collection. The resident artist will work closely with the Museum’s glassmakers, research scientists, curators, and other staff to better understand glass and its historical and artistic contexts. Currently, this residency is by invitation only. You can read more about the current artist-in-residence on the CMoG website.

Open Access Glass by Tina Oldknow What does open access glass mean? Encouraging innovative work in glass means that the ways in which the material is traditionally accessed must be broadened. Historically, access to glass has been limited, but to fully understand what glass is capable of, it must be worked hot rather than cold. Until the genesis of the Studio Glass Movement 50 20

The CMoG team, lead by Erick Meek (l), punties one of Paley’s pieces.

years ago, molten glass was only found in commercial glassworks, which were not open to outsiders. Since the 1990s, the availability of glassmakers and studio facilities for hire has increased dramatically. Artists who have ideas for glass, but who do not want to spend years learning how to work the material, can hire a glass studio to produce objects in glass. More recently, designers have begun to realize the potential of such resources. A few glassworks, historically, have invited outside artists and designers to design for them, in the hopes of encouraging innovation in design. In 1940, Steuben Glass in Corning exhibited engraved designs by eminent American and European artists. With the help of the American collector and gallerist Peggy Guggenheim, Egidio Costantini founded a small glassworks in 1950, where he worked with Picasso, Max Ernst, Marc Chagall, and others. The only other Muranese glassworks

that consistently welcomed outside artists and designers was Venini. Studio glass artists also embraced this idea. In the 1970s, Dale Chihuly invited sculptors and painters to experiment with glass at RISD and Pilchuck, where he taught. The Pilchuck artist-in-residence model was adopted by university and arts programs throughout the United States. Today, the interaction between artists skilled at working with glass and artists who have no knowledge of it is common. A small selection of resources includes CIRVA in Marseille, France; GLASSTRESS in Venice, Italy; the Bullseye Glass Company in Portland, Oregon; the Centre International d’Art Verrier in Meisenthal, France; and Glass is Tomorrow, which holds workshops in different locations throughout Europe. Corning’s effort to bringing hot glass to designers began with the Corning Museum’s GlassLab in 2007.

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

Specialty Glasses by Glen Cook The Specialty Glass Residency aims to build bridges between glass art and glass science by encouraging dialog and shared exploratory experiences. For artists to appreciate the opportunities that the Residency might open for them, it is important to understand what exactly is meant by “specialty glass.” Throughout history specialty glass recipes have been discovered that work for specific applications or processes, or to give a particular appearance. From the earliest amulets and inlays colored to mimic precious stones, through the clarity and colors of Renaissance vessels, to modern glasses for optics, chemistry, cooking, and electronics, all new glasses were “special” in the way they enabled new opportunities. Soda lime, Cristallo, optical flint, borosilicates, fused silica, glass-ceramics, aluminosilicates, and more, have each enabled a manufacturer, artist, or engineer to do something previously undoable. Modern studio artists have taken advantage of access to specialty glasses from industry to create new work, such as Harvey Littleton’s Upward Undulating Form made with radiation shielding glasses, and Josepha Gasch-Muche’s 30/06/2007 made with thin, floated borosilicate. Albert Paley, the first resident in the new Specialty Glass Residency, has worked this last year with gaffers from CMoG to use Corning Code 7056, a glass-to-metal sealing glass, to create sculptural forms in combination with his forged pieces of the iron alloy Kovar. Corning Incorporated has over 100 specialty glass formulations with which residents can experiment and explore new avenues of artistic expression enabled by unusual combinations (compared to standard art glass formulations) of attributes such as low COE, high optical clarity, high refractive index, and resistance to fracture. Many of these materials are available in special forms such as extremely flat, thin sheets, and thin, uniform fibers, as well as standard forms like cullet, rod, and patties. Of great value, too, is access to the technical expertise of Corning’s world class technical staff for consultation and its laboratory facilities to push glass and ideas to new limits.

Albert Paley attaches sculpted pieces of Kovar, a compatible metal alloy, to his glass piece.

First Specialty Glass Resident by Albert Paley Over the past year, my involvement with Corning Incorporated as a resident artist has been an engaging, informative, and positive exchange. In my own studio, my primary involvement is with metal sculpture. The foundational process of art making draws from many sources, ultimately resulting in a visual language that reflects the artist’s individual voice. Besides the practice of introspection and one’s own personal dialogue, materials and processes afford a means of expressing an artist’s sensibilities. The broader an artist’s technical base and understanding of logistics coupled with material characteristics, the better that he can realize and manifest his vision. Over the years, my work in metal has focused primarily on the manipulation of the material through heat and pressure – primarily forging and hydraulic bending. Because of this application, the majority of my work reflects an organic vocabulary that deals with gesture, motion, and complexities of transition.

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

Prior to my involvement with Corning, I had worked in several glass studios where my engagement with glass was based on my understanding of plastic organic form. Although metal and glass are seemingly disparate materials, the forms that result via their manipulation with heat are extremely sympathetic. Gesture and motion experienced through the forging of metal or the hot working of glass become stilled and frozen upon cooling. Although these are inorganic materials, they express forms of the organic. Over the past several years I’ve developed a body of work that incorporates forms I have developed in glass, supported with metal structures. As the Specialty Glass Resident at Corning, being exposed to the various industrial glass characteristics, I was drawn specifically to the glass 7056, which has the property of being physically compatible with Kovar. Kovar is an alloy of iron, nickel, and cobalt that has the same thermal expansion characteristics as the glass. Therefore these two materials become totally interdependent during the working process. During the residency I was able to fuse

my prior experience with both glass and metal into a unified language. Corning was incredibly supportive of this research. In addition to scientists and the technicians affording me the knowledge of the working characteristics of the glass, there was also the team of skilled glassworkers with whom I worked directly while developing my individual pieces. My time at Corning was broken into separate individual work sessions. In retrospect these sessions became evolutionary in my understanding and sensitivity to the process. The initial sessions dealt with the fusing of glass and metal, and in the later sessions I was finally able to develop stand-alone objects based on my research. In some of the objects, I would pre-form the Kovar into which the glass was blown and/ or dipped. In other situations, particles of metal were inserted between the various gathers during the blowing process, thereby creating a visual matrix of pattern and interaction. Sometimes, during the working of the glass, hot metal was dripped or poured into the hot glass creating a different type of pattern and fusion. As in all technical research there are bi-products that one would not have understood or considered, which are the result of

Albert Paley uses a torch to apply Kovar pieces to a hot glass form. Glass 7056 is compatible with Klovar, a metal alloy.

the exploration process. The one aspect that I became fascinated with was the entrapment and the development of air through the heating and fusing process of the metal and glass. In these pieces the dialogue then was between the transparency of the glass and the opacity of the metal and the silver mirror-like inclusions of the entrapped air. The air, seemingly evasive, develops patterns of direction through the hot working of the glass, twisting, entrapping, and spiraling. This exploration was limited to the development of form rather than color. In addition to the opportunity afforded to me by Corning Incorporated the experience was extremely enriching and valuable. My understanding of process and form development was enhanced by my engagement with the Corning scientists and the hot glass team.

The resulting body of work that I developed during these sessions is quite unique and afforded me the opportunity to bring my previous artistic understanding of the combination of iron and glass into a new realm â&#x20AC;&#x201C; the unity and harmony of fusion. The process of exploration opened up more opportunities and possibilities than one could have expected. The forum that was created at Corning for the Specialty Glass Resident was enriching, and the experience helped define a visual language in my work that is unique to this collaboration.

A glass piece with Kovar inclusions is sculpted and shaped.

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY â&#x20AC;˘ 2015 JOURNAL â&#x20AC;˘ SAN JOSE, CA

S T R AT T MAN LEC T U RE

The Critical Vacuum By Hyperopia Projects INTRODUCTION

Helen Lee

The work being made by contemporary glass artists over the past decade requires a more sophisticated address of criticality than in previous decades. There are signs of a changing climate for criticality, but many of these high notes are one-off efforts that don’t have a sense of continuity. This presentation responds to the lack of sustained institutionalized efforts to foster criticality; great things happen, and when they’re done, they’re gone. Other groups have addressed this concern, including efforts by the curatorial team Yukanjali and the Facebook group Glass Secessionism. These documented efforts, in addition to a critical mass of formal and informal conversations in the field, point to an overwhelming desire for more robust critical activity in glass. We are asking: What is the place for criticality in this field? Where should it live? The goal of our presentation, and this publication, is to influence the changes we might see in the next five years. GAS serves a gamut of individuals that comprise the glass community. Of this spectrum, we are addressing a specific subset that is interested in increasing the level of criticality in the field. Each person in this community has the capacity to improve the state of criticism and critical thinking in glass via action, awareness, insight, influence, or dollars.

Alex Rosenberg

What Is The Shape Of Criticality In This Field?

Matt Szösz

To talk about criticality, we first have to define it. A dictionary definition of criticality is “the objective analysis and evaluation of an issue in order to form a judgment.” Perhaps a useful starting point for defining what criticality is where we disagree with this definition; attempts at objectivity reliably produce lukewarm, wishy-washy criticism and result in a mere “stating what is there,” approach to looking at art. Criticality necessarily takes a position on its subject, with conviction. In the gloriously messy encounter that is looking at art in an interrogative way, criticality produces something new that is neither the work, nor the experience of it. It is active. It requires interpretation and risk. Criticality is not mere snarkiness. This is a common misconception;

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

we’re not suggesting everyone be more mean. We define criticality as a tool for the measurement of art, similar to peer-review in scientific communities. Greater critical engagement is required in this era of sophisticated material based art, as crossover between contemporary art and material-based art is appearing with increasing frequency. Criticality plays an essential role in strengthening our discipline by demanding rigorous and thoughtful artwork that will in turn encourage sophisticated, interrogative criticism that, in turn, will influence the market and the galleries, collectors, and institutions that support our discipline (fig. 1 and fig. 2). What is the shape of criticality in this field? Where should it live? Where do we expect to find it? In an attempt to answer some of these questions, we have collected the mission statements of the top periodicals in the glass field: GASnews: The Glass Art Society Newsletter, GLASS Quarterly: The UrbanGlass Art Quarterly, Neues Glas, and New Glass Review. • GLASS Quarterly’s mission statement reads, “The UrbanGlass Quarterly, a glossy art magazine published four times a year by UrbanGlass has provided a critical context to the most important artwork being done in the medium of glass for 35 years.” GLASS Quarterly is the only publication that claims to have criticality, and it does, but it is unreasonable to expect a single quarterly publication to accommodate all the criticality our discipline requires. • Neues Glas states that it contains profiles of people who collect art, produce exhibitions and fairs, use glass as a material, and architects. It functions as a bulletin board for exhibitions, events, and opportunities and offers exposure to emerging artists. • The GLASS Quarterly Hot Sheet blog, a program of GLASS Quarterly, contains news, interviews, announcements, and obituaries. The most frequent tagged content is: news, openings, new work, exhibitions, events, artist interviews, and announcements. There is no category for “review;” when an exhibition is written about, it is classified under “exhibition, news, or opening.”

• The GASnews mission statement reads, “GASnews provides an ongoing exchange of ideas and information, and a place for regular communication between glass artists around the world.” The bottom line is GASnews is a newsletter that is only accessible by the GAS membership. Its mission is not to be critical, but there is room for it to be scholarly. It is noteworthy that under the current editor, Kim Harty, there has been a shift in the content, and though it wasn’t originally intended as a vehicle for criticality, some young voices are using it as such. Many glass publications see their purpose as serving the community by increasing awareness, rather than providing editorial, opinionated, or critical content. Often the audience and advertising base for glass publications are the same artists and institutions its writers are reviewing or critiquing, and writings that are perceived to be critical can precipitate backlash. In contrast, New York Magazine, the New York Times, and other large newspapers and magazines employ professional critics who are not beholden to advertisers or the art market. Perhaps it’s not that glass publications are failing to be critical, but that the space for potentially controversial discourse is not provided. If this is the case, where is criticality found? The glass community does have an annual publication with an international reach supported by a well-funded museum, a large research library, and published with the intent and commitment to further the discussion of glass sculpture, craft, and design, and it has been published for the last 35 years: New Glass Review. Since its founding NGR has been a benchmark that students and aspiring glassmakers have sought to be included in and this marker for success carries a lot of weight in our community. NGR’s mission statement reads, “Published by The Corning Museum of Glass, New Glass Review is an annual survey of glass in contemporary art, architecture, craft, and design created in the previous year by emerging and established artists, as well as students. The works are chosen by a changing jury of curators, artists, designers, art dealers, and critics.” The published selection of work is juried, not

curated, and the pool of work is limited to those who submit and self identify as part of the glass community. The publication calls itself a survey, implying an objective “what’s happening” approach, rather than a critical assessment. If we look to NGR for a measurement of an artwork’s critical success, what does the measurement in question actually mean? The only constant in this often opaque mechanism has been Tina Oldknow, CMoG’s former curator of modern and contemporary glass, who has lead NGR for over a decade. This effectively makes Oldknow the end-all-be-all critic in the eyes of much of the glass world. In contrast, the greater art world has several career critics including Jerry Saltz, Paddy Johnson, Roberta Smith, Dave Hickey, Lindsay Pollock, Robin Cembalest, and Christopher Knight, to name a few. Does Oldknow, a single person, comprise the entire critical community? And what does the announcement of Oldknow’s retirement mean for the future of the glass community? In “Confessions of an NGR Reject,” an op-ed in GASnews, Kit McHarty writes, “I already know I loathe the inferior pieces the jurors selected – a sculpted dog, a lump of glass with a light shining through it, a switch axis encalmo bowl – what other trivial objects were deemed the ‘100 most important?’ I try to guess the ludicrous criteria that demanded my sophisticated work being excluded: Is it at least 50% glass? Has this artist applied at least 4 times before? In a row? I imagine the jurors in a plush executive suite in the Corning Museum … as they flip past my masterpiece with barely a glance.” McHarty’s “confession” aptly gives voice to glass artists’ hopes, dreams, fears, and most of all confusion associated with NGR. Is it accurate or appropriate to put so much qualitative weight on this, or any one, publication? In addition to the evidence that glass publications don’t offer much in the way of criticality, critical art publications don’t offer much in the way of glass. By and large, glass is excluded from mainstream art criticism. In the rare instances that a contemporary art critic looks at glass art, the critic all-too-often questions the validity of some Chihuly-esque manifestation,

Figure 1

James Yood

Figure 2

Figure 3

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

as evidenced by the opening line of Sebastian Smee’s 2011 review of a Chihluly exhibition at the Boston Museum of Fine Arts: “Is it unfair to describe the majority of Dale Chihuly’s glassbased work as tasteless?” Alternatively, critics will address contemporary artists who have had their work fabricated in glass, among other materials, but rarely do those same critics address the work currently being made by material-based artists. With regard to addressing criticality, the greater contemporary art world has an entire conference dedicated to “journalism and criticism in the digital age” called Superscript, whereas GAS has a single endowed lecture, the Strattman Lecture, to address criticism in the field. It’s worth noting this year’s Strattman Lecture is comprised of three artists, rather than professional critics. We might sum up the current state of the union by saying: there is a critical vacuum in the glass world, which is struggling to produce critical discourse about work being made in glass. Meanwhile, the contemporary art world rarely takes notice of glass art, but does have models of criticality to offer. Contemporary art has a huge breadth of critical content and vibrant discussions online. In contrast to the mission statements of various glass publications, here are the mission statements of a few well-regarded art blogs: “Art Practical is an online magazine that enriches critical dialogue for the Bay Area visual arts by providing comprehensive analysis of events and exhibitions.” “Art is without a public purpose if it is not tested and understood. To this end, Art F City provides a moderated public forum across comment threads, artist essays, and roundtable criticism... By encouraging a critical and informed audience, our public initiatives fill a critical need for all creative makers. Art must be interrogated.” Conventional journalism platforms, like magazines and blogs, are not the only way to engage criticality; social media, YouTube, and even Yelp can be platforms for both traditional critics and those with self-appointed authority. • In November of 2014, art critic Jerry Saltz launched the 33 day pop-up blog “SEEN” on New York Magazine’s art and culture website, Vulture. Saltz is also

extremely active on social media including Facebook, Twitter, and reddit, and exercises extreme thoroughness responding to reader comments. • You can follow LA Times art critic Christopher Knight’s Twitter feed. • Hennessy Youngman is the hip-hop artcritiquing alter ego of artist Jayson Musson. He broadcasts criticality in a humorous and accessible format while creating satire with his YouTube channel “Art Thoughtz.” • Brian Droitcour has made a name for himself using Yelp as a tool to review art. As Lori Waxman described this project, “he saw the review platform of Yelp and thought, ‘I can squat that space.’”

What Existing Spaces Might We Be Able To Squat? There is no lack of means to engage in criticality, but perhaps there is a lack of educated voices in our field. A glaring example of this is Glass Secessionism, a Facebook group that purports to “secede from 20th century founded Studio Glass.” The group, moderated by artist Tim Tate and critic William Warmus, among others, has good intentions, but its format is inherently antithetical to criticality. The Facebook group is inclusive, but often caters to the lowest common denominator of conversation. The most prevalent form of built in feedback is the “like” button and the comments can quickly deteriorate into trolling and naval-gazing. There is a great degree of difference between the caliber of discussion in Glass Secessionism and Critical Craft Forum, which is largely due to the work of the moderators, who prevent the dialog from degrading into idle banter and baseless proclamations. CCF often has comment threads in which curators, artists, and writers engage in intelligent conversation about posted articles.

CAUSES Where does the seemingly systemic lack of criticality in the glass community come from? Given that the power of words is central to the discussion of criticality, it is worth beginning with a brief examination of the origins of capital C “Craft.” The formalization of Craft begins with the British Arts and Crafts Exhibition Society, created in direct response to the Royal Academy, which featured only painting,

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

sculpture, and architecture (capital A Art). The Arts and Crafts Movement that followed was as much a philosophical and political movement as an artistic one. Its attitude was decidedly populist, seeking to rank the more working class craftsperson and his or her products with those of artists’. It had success in doing so and raised the social status of artisans working in fibers, metal, clay, and wood. At the same time, however, its methodology formalized the very idea it sought to eradicate: that Art and Craft are fundamentally different spheres. These preservationist origins still inhibit the examination of Craft as Art. Philosophically, the Arts and Crafts Movement upheld the crafts-person and the handcrafted object as a romantic and moral symbol. This aim to preserve specific craft practices and shield them from the vicissitudes of progress was not only perversely conservative but limited innovation, and perhaps more importantly, affected the general public’s expectations of the craftsperson and the crafted object. Functionally, the Craft object is caught between artistic expression and an established rubric of process and form. This can be most clearly seen in the persistence of irrelevant functional forms as contemporary object d’art, culturally tagging those objects within the boundaries of Craft. Ideologically, the creation of a separate category for artisanal Kunsthandwerk within the cultural sphere of Art is an exclusion as much as inclusion, and ensures Craft’s perpetual status as the little brother of Art. Our current critical paradigm is defined by the trajectory of the American Studio Glass Movement and its interaction with art, craft, and the market. The American Studio Glass Movement has a definitive moment of creation: the 1962 Toledo Workshop reintroduced the largely forgotten craft of glass forming to American artists. Artists’ interest in glass was immediate and glass programs sprang up around the country. Experimentation ran rampant; without the codified traditions of Europe, American glassblowers operated in a world without rules. As young artists graduated from the many educational programs formed in the dozen years following the Toledo Workshop, a shift in the ideology of Studio Glass occurred. Whereas Littleton, the leader of the Toledo

Workshop, and most of his immediate students migrated to glass from other disciplines and considered themselves sculptors, new students saw glassmaking at the core of their artistic identity. Students immediately focused on improving their ability to control the material, and the rediscovery of technical skills steered the trajectory of the movement. Paradoxically, improved skills brought with them the codified languages of their traditions, and Studio Glass began to emphasize traditional techniques and vessel making, putting new critical constrains on the output of American glassmakers. This blossoming of technical virtuosity in conjunction with economic climate of the Clinton 90s created a boom in the market, and glass became well-known for vibrant, high finish exuberance. Galleries specializing in glass proliferated and profited. Everyone made money, no-one was interested in rocking the boat, and the medium developed a defined set of aesthetic characteristics, which created a marked separation from mainstream art and craft culture. As a result, the American Studio Glass Movement operates inside a rigidly defined cultural and commercial niche. As well as being on one side of the Art/Craft barrier, Glass shares an uneasy relationship with other disciplines inside the Craft genre. Socially, critically, and economically it is isolated within an isolation. With the economic downturn of the early and mid-aughts many galleries closed, and artists suffered as a result. Surviving glass galleries respond by becoming more conservative and sticking to artists with proven sales. While established artists continued to do well, the funding and attention necessary to support new artists and experimental work disappeared. A lack of new blood lead to stagnation in the marketplace, a loss of energy, and a void of new collectors. With the decline of the glass market machine as a path to commercial success, younger glass artists in an era of abundant technical skills are looking outward in a multitude of directions. Recent graduates and apprentices are again addressing questions of “what to make” rather than “how to make” and are producing work that challenges codified ideas about glass. This work operates between, over, and around labels and divisions, engaging in a dialogue with

contemporary art. It is this work, which is only beginning to gain recognition, that demands a greater critical discourse.

EFFECTS The first and most glaring effect of “the critical vacuum” is a lack of financial and institutional support for progressive, materialbased work. This lack of support drives innovative glass artists elsewhere and established artists from other disciplines who are interested in the material, by logic, follow their lead and also dismiss engaging with our discipline. It is exciting to see the Venice Biennale right now, in which the USA is represented by Joan Jonas who is working specifically with glass and performance. Contemporary artists are receiving international recognition doing what we have been doing well for a long time, but they are doing it outside of glass discourse. The current market is also a critical vacuum meaning that progressive art being made today is not being acknowledged by collectors and galleries, which are gazing at the past, creating an artistic and commercial dead end. We would like to see criticality playing a crucial role in an escape from this stagnation (fig. 3).

SOLUTIONS Our research has shown that there is little space for criticality in the publications in our field. As a result artists, collectors, and critics who value criticality go elsewhere. As artists, we must raise the critical bar collectively to meet the demands of this future. How do we bridge or break down the silo mentality that confines certain artists and their work? How do we support healthy critical discourse in our field?

Create Your Own Critical Platform When institutions fail to create space for the work we want to see, institutional critique should happen. There are many artists turning a critical eye back on existing modes of criticism attempting to create a new space for discourse. One timely example of this practice is Zac Weinberg’s statistical work with NGR in his piece Dissecting the Visual and Non-Visual Attributes of Glasswork Submitted to an Annual Publication for Fun and Profit. In response his rejection from NGR, and the uncertainty surrounding the selection process, Weinberg

went about analyzing the publication in an effort to make a “perfect” submission. “The idea was to break down the New Glass Review into Excel spreadsheets, categorizing each selected image by a series of visual factors. Once assembled it would be a seemingly straightforward task to average everything out and thereby reveal what I should make. What’s more is that once finished, my creations could be assessed for validity by submitting them for review by the very system that brought them about....my project began by breaking down every image selected by the jury since 2001 into spreadsheets. Images were deconstructed into 47 categories, ranging from the submitted information of dimensions, artist gender and nationality, to the visual attributes of symmetry, dominant colors, referential imagery, additional materials and photographic setting.” Ironically, Weinberg’s statistically driven submission was rejected, while his own work was selected for the first time.

Institutional Support Institutions must value and support critical writing. It is common for publications, museums, art centers, and galleries to request articles and gallery talks from artists without paying them a fee, and many published articles are written by volunteers. This literally assigns a zero value to critical discourse in our community. Part of the process of finding support is asking questions about the institutions we work with, finding creative ways to redistribute the funding that already exists, and understanding other ways to compensate artists. Caroline Woolard addresses some of these questions in her 2014 article (Un)doing (Un)compensation, for Art Practical: “The question [How many uncompensated people labor on the piece?] assumes that monetary compensation is the only form of compensation that artists aspire towards and value… What conditions make monetary compensation necessary or desirable for artists, and how might we understand, destabilize, and change these conditions?... If we acknowledge that hundreds of people labor for every project, what forms of compensation can we accept, and when?”

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

WAGE (Working Artists in the Greater Economy) for Work, is a resource we recommend all artists look at and is an example of activism supporting arts-labor. We agree with WAGE, institutions need to pay artists, and artists should demand to be paid for the work they do, even if it doesn’t translate to a sale or profitable return. If the work that contemporary glass artists are making is not being supported by an outdated, commercially-driven market (which it’s not), institutions need to shift the way they think about supporting artists, financial sustainability, and distribution of arts-funding.

Academia Academic contributions to fostering a critical discourse include questioning: • Are we teaching our students critical thinking skills, and are we fostering writing as a crucial tool for thinking in this material? • Are we doing a good job of interdisciplinary cross-pollination and engaging up and coming thinkers in material-based art? Where will we find the next Jennifer Scanlans, Emily Zilbers, Sarah Archers, and Susie Silberts of the world? • Are we maintaining a connection to individuals who move from glass programs to develop powerhouse careers in contemporary art, like Tavares Strachan and Hillary Wiedemann? These artists, among others, have long since departed from the conversations happening in the glass world because these conversations had nothing to offer them. • Are there opportunities to leverage institutions to engage in criticality? A note-worthy model is Art Practical and Daily Serving, online contemporary art publications that began independently in 2006 and 2009, respectively, and are now supported by the California College of the Arts as their fiscal agent and publisher. • Lastly, educators, are your methodologies aligned with, limiting, or expanding the field? Articulate your teaching philosophy and take a stand on what trajectory you take in approaching this material.

Leveling the Field/Destroying the Silo Perhaps the place critical thought about glass should live is the place critical thought already lives – the larger art world. How might conversations merge? Could the establishment of a serious critical platform about glass bring us into the larger art discourse? And if so, can it bring us in as equals? In his series of projects that reference Adolf Loos’ essay Ornament and Crime, Josiah McElheny creates pieces that include all the trapping of craft – advanced technical skill, traditional objects, and themes of historical production – yet his work is never labeled as Craft. He achieves this through titling, critical writing, and a staunch refusal to be engaged as anything other than a contemporary artist. As artists, we can work to find art world acceptance for practices that do not fit categories or that meld genres. Recognize the power of labels to limit. Stop using terms that reinforce separation and subordination of work. Our residency in the glass ghetto is voluntary.

conversation by lending exposure and interconnectedness to otherwise orphaned writings. As a beginning, HP will put out an annual call for papers and HP will act as jurors, editors, and curators of content. In conclusion, we implore you to, please: Give a shit. Do something. __________________________________ Hyperopia Projects is a collaborative identity founded by Helen Lee, Matt Szösz, and Alex Rosenberg in 2010 and works to support an expansive definition of glass practices. Hyperopia is the clinical term for farsightedness; we are invested in a long view of where this discipline is headed by promoting rigor in critical discourse and creating exhibition opportunities for deserving but overlooked work.

Write. Make good work, talk about good work. Invest in the conversation: time, money, or thought. Be uncompromising and insist on higher standards among your community.

Read.

Read what other people write.

What are we doing? In response to our desire to have a stable area for ongoing discussion, Hyperopia Projects has created on ongoing, online archive that functions as an aggregation of critically-engaged writings, activity, and resources in the field of glass. We are launching this archive on our website, www.hyperopiaprojects.com. We have observed there are quite a number of “orphan writings” produced in the glass community that have no central place to live. We are trying to fill the gaps we see amongst existing publications with a durable and moderated platform that can maintain the thread of conversation between discrete one-off efforts. We believe the writing included in this platform offers a real reflection of contemporary material-based practice and helps evolve the

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

LI T T L E TON LEC T U RE

Stories/Contexts By Therman Statom I was greatly honored to be the first awardee of the Harvey Littleton Lecture. Harvey had a catalytic influence on the Studio Glass Movement and, by extension, all artists working with glass today. I originally hail from Washington, D.C., graduated from the Rhode Island School of Design in 1974, and did my MFA study at the Pratt Institute in Brooklyn, New York. While I was at RISD Dale Chihuly was teaching, and it was an incredible experience. He surrounded all of us with his support staff comprised of other professional artists working the field like Jaime Carpenter, Buster Simpson, and Fritz Dreisbach (my first teacher in hot glass). Both teachers and students at RISD were strong foundational influences in my work. I found myself emulating and intentionally copying the work of Toots Zynsky (with her permission, of course), as well as investigating the use of sheet glass, with Bruce Chao’s encouragement. In the summer of 1972 I attended Pilchuck Glass School. In addition to being founded by Chihuly, Simpson set a conceptual tone at the heart of the programming. One of many environmentally centered mandates that Simpson employed was, at the time, all attendees had to make their own house out of recyclable and natural materials. After my time in RISD, while attending Pratt as well as my post-Pratt years, I started creating site-specific installations in non-profit gallery venues. In the early ʼ80s I made the acquaintance of Richard Marquis, who I worked with as a visiting artist at the University of California, Los Angeles glass program. With his help, several of my exhibitions were saved through the clever use of adhesives and paint applied directly to the surface of the glass. Mr. Marquis’s attitude and demeanor gave him a phenomenal presence. He was the first American Studio Glass artist to incorporate traditional Italian techniques into his work. After meeting and working with Marquis I began using more color, paint, and pigments in my work and site-specific installations. These installations utilized a much more collaborative process and involved other artists assisting and influencing the growth and discovery of making the pieces. In the beginning, most of my site-specific installations were temporary, and were removed, 28

Therman Statom, Tampa Wall

recycled, or perhaps they ended up in someone’s garden. A temporary installation at the Toledo Museum of Art, prior to it being recycled, was redefined as a permanent work. One of the reasons the museum made this decision was because the piece had a historically relevant context. The work in Toledo had an educational construct. In general, many of the site-specific works I do are about the process of engaging with an institution and enriching its conceptual mandate and, at times, refining it. After the Toledo acquisition there was a much more commercial interest in the work I had been making out of sheet glass and mixed media. I made it my focus to create studiogenerated work with plate glass and various other materials. My pieces at this period were indicative of this idea. In the mid-ʼ80s I met Jamex and Einar de la Torre who were working out of Long Beach State University. I consider them conceptual mentors because their work addresses controversial issues of politics, social rights, race, and religion head-on. One of the largest installations I’ve ever done was making three chandeliers for the Los Angeles Public Library. Being able to work on pieces that were able to change space on such

a grand scale was a dramatic influence. In an early international installation for Glashütte Gernheim in Germany, Stories of the Weser, a string of accidents and miscommunications nearly led to the collapse of the show itself. However, as a result of these mishaps, we recommitted to the exhibition with a broader perspective and intent in order to change it from an art installation into an experience that had the potential to impact the institution and community at large. I have been afforded many opportunities to work in other countries around the world. The range of activities I’ve been involved in have dealt with very specific cultural issues and new approaches to medicine and art therapy. In the last four years I have taken a stronger interest in how my artwork functions as a source of enrichment and a supportive tool in the social services. Traveling to the plains of the Midwest made me more cognitively aware of the real issues plaguing the Native American community. In conjunction with the Omaha Public Schools system and the Kaneko Foundation I explored ways to help Urban Native American students become more culturally knowledgeable and active by addressing personal, past, and

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

present cultural ideas about their experiences in the school system. It is the intention of this program to foster an understanding of the students’ role in today’s society using their cultural roots as a resource and asset. As a craftsperson I believe the materials and processes we use in our work have a language that more traditional arts such as paintings and sculptures lack. I believe this language gives us aesthetic advantages and a broader language to connect with others. Apart from the material side of making artwork, I definitely have a strong interest in how artwork functions as a tool of advocacy. In 2014 I began working with Children’s Hospital of the King’s Daughters in Norfolk, Virginia with a specific mandate to support children with cancer and blood disorders. One of the results of this project was a collaborative effort between the hospital, the patients, and the Chrysler Museum Glass Studio in making a permanent installation for the hospital lobby. Earlier in the lecture I mentioned Harvey Littleton as a catalytic influence on my own work and the Studio Glass Movement. I think the essence of his primary philosophy was: that we as artisans, craftsmen, and architects – when

Installation detail at the Children’s Hospital King’s Daughters in Norfolk, VA.

we work with hot glass – have the advantage of working with the material directly, regardless of the scopes predetermined by charts, graphs, sketches, and plans. We can play while we

discover new methods and ideas. His philosophy has pervaded everything I do and how I approach installations, the community, and the spaces that I choose to work. __________________________________ Therman Statom has been working as a professional artist, using glass as a material for sculpture and room-size installations, for over thirty years. His works are assembled from objects he makes in the studio such as glass ladders and houses, mirrored chairs, blown glass vessels, and painted images. Statom studied at Pilchuck Glass School during its inaugural year, completing a BFA in 1974 from RISD and later studied at the Pratt Institute of Art & Design. His artwork appears in numerous exhibitions annually, including solo and group shows around the globe.

Therman Statom, Untitled Painting, 2015

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

EMERGIN G AR T I S T PRES E N TAT I ON

The Specter of Sentimentality By Jacci Delaney I grew up watching my father die from cancer; he passed away when I was 11 years old. Through this experience, I learned that the human body is one of the most fragile and beautiful things in the world. I learned how to deal with people who are dying and found that discussing the departed is a good thing. My father dying and my grandparents dying soon after, also from cancer, influenced my artwork more than I expected. I started making work about this experience in 2005, when I made icebergs in glass. I realized, later on, that those pieces were about what it’s like being diagnosed with cancer. After creating the icebergs, I began thinking about animals that have been frozen in ice for thousands of years. I started experimenting with this idea, using glass as a standin for ice, and it took three months of testing before I was able to fuse a fish in glass. I often approach creating artwork like a science experiment, and I never give up till I get it right. I have fused fish, octopus, horseshoe crabs, starfish, and frogs in glass. The intricate bone structure of each creature is beautiful to me, and even though these animals died in a pet store, they get to live on as art.

Jacci Delaney, Bubble Wrapped Child, 2014, hot cast glass, 44 x 16 x 6”

Jacci Delaney, They kept coddling him until he screamed and screamed them off, 2015, laser viewable hologram, 12 x 16 x .5” Made with Dr. Harris Kagan

In graduate school, I worked with the glass casting process. For my first casting I was planning to use a Wal-Mart bag because I used to work in a Wal-Mart distribution center. I liked the texture of the plastic and I wanted to capture it in glass. Then, I saw the bubble wrap in my studio left over from unpacking and decided to use it for my casting because I thought it would be more interesting than the bag. I did my first bubble wrap casting in October of 2011. I really liked the tactile nature of the glass that looked like bubble wrap. I was also interested in how the soft plastic texture became rigid when the bubble wrap became glass. I made a series of bubble wrap cubes, and I was playing with how the colors work together in the glass. The green and clear cubes I completed show this interaction best. These castings had cavities that were the texture of bubble wrap. I noticed that the green glass cubes looked like seaweed in the ocean. The bubble wrap represented all of the plastic in the ocean, particularly garbage circles. The glass bubble wrap combined with the glass seaweed illustrated the hazard of plastic in the ocean and the effect it is having on sea life. I learned hollow core casting at Pilchuck in 2012 and came back to Ohio and started making hollow core hot cast glass. I love working with hot casting because of the teamwork required. I owe many thanks to the Ohio State

University students, teachers, and techs that have helped me make my castings. Bubble wrap is a material for protecting fragile objects, and in thinking about this quality, I made a bubble wrapped fist titled, I’m not as strong as I used to be. I then made a bubble wrapped head titled, I suffered alone for so many years until they found me. It was made with small bubble wrap and the person inside could be a man or woman going through a terrible tragedy. The next head I cast in glass was wrapped with large bubble wrap. This piece was called, The drowning of the sorrow stopped a year later, and then he emerged. This man in the piece lost his wife and drank for a year until his family helped him stop. He is rising out of the bubble wrap and beginning to live again. These works are about people who have gone through a tragic situation and acknowledge how someone can become numb to life after a loss. I made a four-foot casting of a child wrapped in bubble wrap, because I have seen how children can be over protected by their parents. This protection can prevent children from making mistakes and learning from them on their own. This first casting I attempted was not perfect, so I made another casting of a bubble wrapped child. During my final year at OSU I decided to take the holography class. I could not have anticipated how this new technique would change my practice; I was taking the class

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

because I was interested in the science behind it. Then, I realized how much glass was used in holography. I had been working with mirrors in my studio, and now I was working on a table full of curved and flat mirrors. When making a hologram you must be in a dark lab so the film, used to create the image, is not exposed. The table used to expose the hologram has mirrors and glass to reflect and splice the laser beam. Once you put the film out, you have to wait 20-30 minutes before you expose it with the laser, so nothing is moving or vibrating at all. The last hologram we made in the class was a reflection hologram. A 5 x 7 x 1.25â&#x20AC;? stable object can be used to make this type hologram. I made a plaster negative of bubble wrap and used that to make my hologram. When you flip the hologram over it becomes pseudoscopic, meaning you see the reverse of it. In my hologram, you could see the bubble wrap sticking out towards the viewer. After the holography class ended, I took an independent study with Dr. Harris Kagan and we were able to make holograms in the OSU holography lab for my thesis exhibition. I learned from Dr. Kagan, my professor, that the ruby pulse laser hologram could have movement in it because the flash captures everything in one millionth of a second. This hologram is very difficult to make and it takes a team to make it. The ruby pulse laser hologram can only be seen with a laser and the laser hangs above and behind the hologram at a 45-58 degree angle. Many of my holograms are green because the laser is green; if the laser were red or blue, the hologram would be red or blue. Combining a red, green, and blue laser can make white holograms, which is something I am working on. I owe many thanks to Dr. Kagan, his assistants, and the Holocenter in New York, for all of their help. For my thesis exhibition I created, They finally saw her and began tearing her out of it, which showed two people tearing the bubble wrap off of the numb person inside of it. It is amazing how much motion this hologram can capture. Another hologram I created was The Stoic Old Woman. It is about a woman, who lost her husband years ago, but gets up every day and goes out, does things, and lives life to the fullest. I have been working with Dr. Kagan and his assistants making holograms since finishing my MFA. Since graduating, I have made several

Jacci Delaney, The drowning of the sorrow stopped a year later and then he emerged, 2013, hollow core hot cast glass, 16 x 12 x 11â&#x20AC;?

more pulse laser holograms and am now making rainbow transfers from the pulse masters. These holograms can be seen with white light and a mirror behind them to reflect the light back out. I also brought mirrors into one of the holograms and focused on seeing the reflections of the laser beams in the hologram. I created the hologram Precious Bond, which shows a mother, wrapped in bubble wrap, breast-feeding her baby. The hologram They kept coddling him until he screamed and screamed them off, is about an over protected child finally throwing his arms up in frustration and screaming about it. The first year is paper shows two married men and one man is a reverend. PTSD is a soldier holding a broken window in front of her. The last bubble wrap hologram I did is a woman madly tearing bubble wrap off of her. My work will always acknowledge death, but I now focus on the beauty of life and people triumphing over death.

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

__________________________________ Jacci Delaney is an artist working in Columbus, Ohio. She works with glass, holograms, found objects, video, and sculptural materials. Her work focuses on the beauty of life, triumphing over death, and the fragility of the human condition. She works with materials like glass and holograms for their ability to provide layers of imagery that reveal and conceal the individual within her work. She currently teaches at the Columbus College of Art & Design and is a visiting scholar in the Holography Center at The Ohio State University. She has a studio and works at Glass Axis. Delaney received her MFA from Ohio State University in 2014. She earned her BA in art history and BFA in glass from Southern Illinois University Carbondale in 2008.

EMERGIN G AR T I S T PRES E N TAT I ON

Properties of Materials and the Preciousness of Action By Justin Ginsberg I am fascinated by the systems and structures we use for understanding the world around us and bringing context to the unknown and chaotic. These structures include the overlapping fields of philosophy, sociology, anthropology, physics, and many more. Initially, my research and artwork explored the countless methods by which we communicate with one another. These methods of communication go beyond the structures we use and encompass the emotional embodiment of communication. More recently, this has lead me to consider the structure of light and its relationship to time, and how this relationship affects our concepts and perceptions of reality. Calligraphists and painters (like Franz Kline) explore the emotional embodiment of action through the reduction of their palette and a keen awareness of both their mark and the surrounding space. The thousands of bristles on a paintbrush are both individuals and part of an accumulative whole, absorbing and releasing the paint or ink in choreographed motion, resulting in the residual marks of the artist’s motion. In Calligraphic Light, I constructed a painterly mark from its individual components using thousands of clear hand-pulled glass fibers, considering each bristle’s role in the moment. To create the pieces, eight-foot strands of glass fiber were piled and manipulated hot in an architectural scale kiln. The clear glass gesture was hung on a black painted wall and became a seemingly timeless mark of light within the void. Richard Sera’s early works took an entirely different approach to mark making and bridged performance, action, and sculpture, while questioning craft and use of the body. Whether

throwing molten lead at the corner juncture of the wall and floor in a gallery, or performing the repetitive task of trying to catch lead bars, his work celebrates happenstance, allowing materials to engage in authentic interaction with the artist and their surroundings. Thinking about gravity, and its effect on materials, I considered structures that pushed back, resisted, and were resilient. Although I had been working with glass for nearly five years, I had yet to recognize that the glass fibers I was using were flexible, and I began exploring this unusual property in large-scale installation work, utilizing the balance between glass’s tensile and compressive forces. These works remain in the realm of the calligraphic gesture and their forms are shaped by the glass’s complex interaction with gravity, its own weight, and its desire to resist bending, and my desire to hold it up. These constructions of glass fiber embody the imagined qualities of fiber optics, and their role in the massive infrastructure of communication that connects us instantaneously across great distances, through light. Using massive industrial buildings in a run-down area of Dallas, I began exploring these ideas about communication in forgotten spaces. These places, which once were bustling manufacturing hubs, were now pigeon shit filled, decrepit, decaying structures. In contrast, my glass sculptures suggested an action, over distance, over time; a temporary mark, seemingly frozen in the empty space. The gesture, frozen in space, overlaps with the language of contemporary dance and choreography, and resonates with Frank and Lillian Gilbreth’s illuminated studies of motion. The Gilbreths’ work utilized light and slow exposure photography to track repetitive, mundane tasks, like

Justin Ginsberg, Distance over Time – Studies of Motion and Gesture 2, 2010, glass, 50 x 4 x 1’

Justin Ginsberg, Alternating Entropy (front view), 2015, glass, polarized lenses, acrylic, LEDs, 12 x 12 x 4”

folding a handkerchief. To create my sculptures, I perform the repetitive action of pulling nearly invisible strands of glass by walking back and forth, over and over. The glass threads become documentation an action: incessant work, back and forth. This approach to thinking and making became exponentially more relevant in 2009, when I was a passenger in a car accident which took both voice and motion away from someone I love. I witnessed the weeks, months, and years she endured with no voice, no ability to move her hands to point, and without any movement from her chest down. She still, today, struggles to move. Suddenly mark making, walking, and communication took on a whole new meaning, and I recognized there was actually very little I could control, even within my own body. I considered and embraced choas and happenstance by focusing on the interaction of glass and other materials, and the specific forces and properties that can be applied to them. I attempted to cast glass into giant ice molds, allowing the glass to eat away at the mold and trying to preserve the object, which was literally capturing the form of glass melting ice. In the piece Mesophase, I began subverting the structure of glass by casting glass into water molds, reminiscent of coulage – the surrealists attempt to capture the drippiness of matter in its fluid state. Through this process, I once again found myself back to mark making. Although very few objects remain, the residual video documentation presented the action and reaction of the materials. The video of Mesophase illustrated

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

that each ladle pour has a distinct flow and is affected by the ones before it. These works were the beginning of my interest in incorporating video to document and construct artwork, with no requirement that the glass objects survive. Through the use of video, the project allowed molten glass to be glass and water to be water. I confronted my own desire to preserve the ephemeral while making these temporary works. I became more aware of time moving linearly, and my instinct to prevent change, despite its futility. I thought about perceived preservation and perceived archivalness; what truly lasts? The answer is nothing. But we can try to preserve. Maybe it is in this effort to try, that meaning is derived from the work: the conscious effort to preserve a moment, while simultaneously accepting the ephemeral nature of things. I felt as if the structure of my own reality was subject to some questioning, both my conscious and subconscious. There is something amazing about our ability to recognize the two, and how they affect our perceived reality. I thought back to the famous doubleslit experiment, a foundational demonstration in quantum mechanics. I like to think that the conscious creates direct paths from point A to B and the subconscious flows more like ripples and waves, being both point A and B simultaneously. During a five-week residency at Berlin Glas e.V. in Berlin, Germany, I spoke about my process and artwork at the Exceptional Hardware Software Meeting (EHSM) International Conference at the Particle Accelerator in Hamburg, Germany. The conference exposed me, and my processes, to world-renowned scientists and researchers and became the impetus for me to consider how scientific principles and theories relate to my actions, and pushed the ideas in my work further. In 2015, I completed a residency at The Studio of The Corning Museum of Glass in order to study optics, birefringence, and photoelasticy – essentially the visual language of stress in glass. Many people who work with glass are familiar with polariscopes, but I was interested in how they worked, why they worked, and what actually was happening on a molecular level. This knowledge, gained through experimentation, could then be utilized to construct a new body of work.

Justin Ginsberg, Decadare, 2014, glass, 20 x 8 x 8’

Understanding that light and time have a specific relationship to one another, the ability to affect the speed of light suggests an ability to affect time. By creating stress within a sample of glass with a specific shape and thickness, I can manipulate the index of refraction, a molecular phenomenon, and change the speed that specific wavelengths of light travel through the material. I utilized linear, reflective, and circularly polarization, and wave plates to help visualize the effects, and focused on thermal, incompatible, and mechanical processes to induce stresses. These experiments helped guide me as I attempted to construct artworks using a visual phenomenon that was not present during the making and nearly invisible to the naked eye when completed. The phenomenon appeared long after the glass piece was completed, as the disorder and manipulation of molecular structures settled. I was sculpting an invisible material that did not exist yet. Although still in its preliminary stage of exploration, I see potentials for using stress in glass as a means to pursue critical investigation

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

into the connection between light and how we perceive the world. This line of study deepens my interest in perceived structures and their temporary state of being. __________________________________ Justin Ginsberg was born and raised in Dallas, Texas. After college he spent four years traveling the country learning from practicing artists before returning to his home city. He began working for the Art and Art History Department at the University of Texas of Arlington in 2009 while pursuing his MFA. He continues to teach as an assistant professor and head of glass, while also focusing on his own creative practices and research. Ginsberg’s work has been shown nationally and internationally, including in recent exhibitions at Berlin Glas e.V. in Berlin, Germany, at PEEL Gallery in Houston, Texas, and Ro2 Art: Downtown Project Space in Dallas, Texas. He has been included into New Glass Review four times in the last five years, and his work was recently acquired by Museum Kunstpalast in Düsseldorf, Germany, for their permanent collection. 33

EMERGIN G AR T I S T PRES E N TAT I ON

An Arrangement of Skin By Alli Hoag

Alli Hoag, Inhalation (detail), 2012, cast glass, blown glass, mixed media. Photo: Evelyne Leblanc-Roberge

The following is an edited text read during the presentation “An Arrangement of Skin” during the Emerging Artist Lecture Presentations at the 2015 GAS Conference in San Jose. This text was read in conjunction with a PowerPoint presentation of my artwork.

I. We select, we measure, we order, we map. These actions record surface and distance. Our experience is a process of relating to a world outside of ourselves, an other. We form intimacy with foreign bodies by a colliding of skin. Intimacy, while describing a sense of closeness, simultaneously reveals the inescapable condition of distance that is the boundary of one’s own skin. To be human is to be consumed with desire to overcome this distance. I spent many afternoons, when I was young, wandering the aisles of my friend’s father’s antique store. The store was called The Antique Warehouse; it was cavernous and dark, and the aisles were long and windy. My fingers would trace the crevices of the many mysterious objects. I remember their smells, colors, and textures. But most vividly, I remember feeling a sharp craving to understand these objects beyond my physical senses. So I made up stories about them, elaborate fantasies about what they were, what they used for, and who used 34

them. With each story, I transported myself into the object, and the very boundaries between the object and myself became blurred. The experience was nothing short of magic. What is magic? I think of magic as the desire to become closer to the visible world, activated using invisible forces. Originating as incantations, divinations, and the understanding of the world through myth, magic was a way for us to strengthen our relationship with nature, simultaneously delineating our realm as outside of the natural world. My work thus far has been an investigation of this idea of magic, the simultaneous lightness and heaviness that is created when the imagined is labored into the physical realm. The act of making becomes an action of physical wish fulfillment. The physical result becomes a proxy, a body without organs; it exposes our innate drive to connect, yet exposes deficiencies in our physical capabilities to do so. Wound up inside of the perfectly choreographed string of DNA, nestling in each glowing follicle of a laboratory rabbit, residing within every perfectly labeled and named peak and valley in the map of the Moon, magical longing is alive and strong in the realm of the modern world today. In each circumstance, these

Alli Hoag, Disconnect, 2011, 27 x 18 x 45”, one-way mirror, video, table

artifacts become a mirror of our selves, our desires manifest; but as a mirror creates a perfect reflection, one loses sight of the glass and silver that elicit the intriguing apparition, the crude mechanics that effectuate the semblance of the real. I am fascinated by the fact that when we receive stimulus from the outside world, it becomes a pattern of electrical pulses sent to the brain, where the brain then recognizes those patterns and then translates them into what we see. Our perception is an act of creating, blurring the boundary between the real and illusion. The act of perception bridges the self with the other by synthesizing sensory information through the lens of personal experience. When we exchange with the unknown – the unfamiliar other – we feel the rare moment of closeness. The sudden buzz and brush against the skin in the darkness engages your reactive self and the causes imaginative forces of the perception to be most observable, through the delayed arrangement of the invisible assailant into its most believable shape. I create visual chimeras of internal, sensing organs out of the skins of forms; I connect with having an existence entirely alien to mine. By placing half forms on a surface mirror, the viewer actively must complete the form in its entirety.

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

In this space, the form is only realized through the symbiosis of the physical and the illusionary. The form is completed only by the viewer’s participation with it. It is a portrait of how perception functions as an offspring of both the tangible and imagined. The physical process of representation becomes the inverse of perception: Representation is creating a body for our imaginations to reanimate. I identify myself as a representational artist that is influenced by the technology and culture of contemporary society. In this age we live in, representations are working toward the goal of fulfilling our need for intimacy through artificial means. Representations are ubiquitous in our experiential reality. I feel comfortable sculpting from images I mine from the internet, books, or television. I feel satisfaction from taking molds off of found forms, replicating them, and manipulating the authenticity that lies on the surface of the wax. In my artistic practice, glass serves as invisible delineation from the elements, a recreation of the “real.” A pristine world inside of a petri dish, an uncanny stare of the glass eyes of a taxidermic mount, the one-way mirror of the interrogation room, the relationship I have with my iPhone screen as a means of communication. Our coexistence with glass as a material has allowed us to evolve in a divergent manner. We feel connection through mediated experience. We can create new realities through the delineated, hermetically sealed realm inside of a glass form.

II. When arriving in a new place I have always felt a sense of comfort in looking up and seeing a familiar sky while standing on foreign soil. Inspired by my own feelings of feeling distance in a new home, my work became a meditation on how to bring the unknown into familiar territory, looking to the Moon as a muse. The Moon was formed long ago, by an asteroid colliding with a young, still forming Earth. As a result of this impact, the planetoid Earth broke apart and reformed as two bodies, Earth and Moon. At that time the Moon was very close; the character Qfwfq from Italo Calvino’s Cosmicomics stories could remember it well:

“We had her on top of us all the time, that enormous Moon: when she was full-nights as bright as day... it looked as if she were going to crush us; when she was new she rolled around in the sky like a black umbrella blown by the wind; and when she was waxing, she came forward with her horns so low she seemed about to stick into the peak of a promontory and get caught there... The tides, when the Moon swung closer, rose so high nobody could hold them back. There were nights when the Moon was full and very very low, and the tide was so high that the Moon missed a ducking in the sea by a hairs breadth ... Climb up on the Moon? Of course we did. All you had to do was row out to it in a boat and, when you were underneath it, prop a ladder against her and scramble up.” Today, we no longer feel the fervent intensity of the tides, or can climb a ladder to visit the lunar surface. The volatile push and pull of its formative orbital path has sent the Moon spiraling outward into the universe... Could it be that our longing to reach the Moon is from part of our collective memory remembering that closeness that once existed, that the particles of rock and dust were really once part of us? I view abandoned lunar rovers and Mayan hieroglyphs both serving to quench the same hunger: to recuperate that heavenly body from its further transformation into otherness, to weigh down the Moon in order keep it from moving steadily away at a speed that competes with the rate that our fingernails grow. Myth, maps, invention, art – all these act as visible solutions to satisfy the invisible desire to connect. They become the tiny strings crossing that distance, keeping the Moon close, that when at the right angle, in unison, reflect an image of ourselves from a wider perspective. When we look up at the sky, we see the Moon looking back at us. For a moment we can realize from that perspective, the Moon sees us – all humans, animals, rocks, and earth – as one body. The skins that make you, you and me, me become invisible. Through the process of making, I see the forms I create become artifacts of a desire to connect. Forms become vehicles that transform

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

my experience into personal myth. I form with this lexicon of symbols to gain a greater vantage point, a greater perspective and to see the connections that exist between the self and other. As I labor these longings into the physical world, they reveal the hand, that hand that endeavors to manifest creations that can fly on their own, yet to afraid to let a hold of them. References: Calvino, Italo, and William Weaver. “The Distance of the Moon.” In Cosmicomics, 3. San Diego: Harcourt Brace & Co., 1965.

__________________________________ Alli Hoag

Alli Hoag creates installations and sculptures that are influenced by a range of materials, from ancient myth to future technologies, and give insight into how we understand and perceive the world around us. Hoag received her MFA from Alfred University and her BFA from University of Hawaii at Manoa. She has developed her work through international residencies at Cite des Arts International and S12 Galleri og Verksted in Bergen, Norway, where she also worked as workshop manager. She has exhibited both internationally and nationally and is currently full-time instructor and glass area head at Bowling Green State University.

L EC T U R E S

Curator Diane Wright and GAS attendees at a lecture at the City National Civic.

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

LEC T URE

Architectural Quirks: Translating and Realizing Ideas in Glass Through Digital Design and Manufacture by Erin Dickson Following the structure of my lecture, I have split this essay into two distinct sections. The first explores the creative application of digital processes with respect to my PhD research. The second discusses best practice for working with digital manufacturers (albeit a little tongue-in-cheek).

Part I: Research into Translating Architectural Phenomenology Using Digital Processes My recent art practice is articulated in my PhD research, titled The Quirks of Intimate Space: Architectonic Art Practice translated through Digital Technology in Glass. I explore the sensory experience of space, realised through architecturally scaled glass sculpture, installation, and performance. In this study technology is used in three ways: to record invisible phenomena and experience, to analyse and model the site, and to machine glass using digital fabrication. Since 2010, I have been an artist working primarily in glass, using the concept and personal context of home as a source of inspiration. During my undergraduate degree in architecture, I began to consider how architectural phenomenology molds how we interpret the environment that surrounds us. I studied the emotional effect of space on the user, realising that the perception of “pleasant” or “unpleasant” architecture depends on one’s cultural, emotional, and social background. Contemporary philosopher Alain de Botton, who also collaborates with Grayson Perry and MVRDV among others on the Living Architecture project, believes that the home can be “an airport or a library, a garden or a motorway diner.” The artworks produced during my research are inspired by my personal context; the place where I worked and spent most of my time (Emotional Leak, 2011/2014); the architecture that best represents my cultural heritage (Tyne Tunnel, 2012); a view that reminds me of who I am and what I am worth (Window series, 2011-present); and a site of respite that is universally understood but also unique to the individual (Bed Project, 2014). Photography, digital modelling, and machining are employed to capture data, and render and realise the forms of my sculptural

Erin Dickson, Emotional Leak, 2011-14, glass, steel and rubber, 140 x 140 x 400 cm Photo: Colin Davison

Erin Dickson, Emotional Leak (detail), 2011-14, glass, steel and rubber, 140 x 140 x 400 cm Photo: David Williams

objects. A collaboration with Jeffrey Sarmiento, Emotional Leak, is a 13-foot high glass monolith made from over 400 stacked sheets of water jet cut grey float glass. Inspired by the leaking roof of National Glass Centre in Sunderland, the photographs of a growing puddle are lofted into a Rhino model and converted into contours for cutting glass. More recently I have developed a new, innovative process in the Window series. While the modelling/manufacturing techniques are the same, the result is drastically different. By water jet cutting highly detailed thin layers of glass and kilnforming them on edge into a single undulating surface, I utilize the color depth of transparent glass to create photographic imagery. This process can be seen as a contribution to the field of glass, as it had not been applied prior to my PhD research. My practice also takes me beyond object making and into the use of glass to create experiences, in which I work with photographers

and electronics experts to produce timebased installations and performances. [Tyne] Tunnel uses numerical data taken from a defunct 1950s pedestrian and cycling tunnel to sequence a series of vibrating mirrors, which rattle and buzz loudly, mirroring the sound of the inner working of the tunnel. The most personal of the four artworks, Bed explores the connection to my most intimate space. This time-based performance involved sleeping on a glass bed for a week, recorded through photography from underneath, capturing the distorted flesh on the hard and cold surface. My sleep-deprived ramblings from the following mornings were recorded. However, my dictation software did not understand my northern British accent. This produced a sort of freeform poem that echoes my state of mind during the process. In this written format, with a word count 38,600 words shorter than my PhD, I have not been able to go into depth describing individual

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

artworks or the philosophy that inspired their existence. However, I hope this gives a taste of my artistic process, which is grounded in digital production.

Part II: A Dummy’s Guide To Loving Your Digital Technician (And For Them To Love You Back) The life of a digital facilitator is fickle. One day you can meticulously produce a high-precision design, and the next a client will stretch their arms and pronounce “about this big” as you mistakenly reach in for an awkward hug. I am a digital manufacturing facilitator, or more specifically, a water jet technician. I work for artists, craftspeople, designers, architects, engineers, and all those in between. My key role is to interpret a client’s needs, no matter how vague or seemingly impossible, and to deliver an outcome with which they are happy. This may seem straightforward. Yet to accommodate each client’s range of skills and knowledge, I try to develop a relationship so I can understand his or her individual needs. In light of this, I have decided to make a “Dummy’s Guide” in the hope that some other fabricator out there gets one fewer scribbled pencil drawing on the back of an envelope that’s “about this size,” and so that you, the client, can save a bit of time, money, and confusion. • It’s not what you say, it’s how you say it Be precise. Your digital technician generally uses machines that are accurate to the tenth of a millimeter. Don’t say something is “around” a size; give us exact measurements so we feel confident in interpreting your idea. • Don’t be afraid of commitment Try to make your drawing as clear as possible. If you are hand-drawing your design, think more Julian Opie than Piranesi. Artists tend to make scratchy pencil sketches that are awful for the technician to interpret. Solid black lines are preferred, no photographs! • Stalking isn’t advised If you want to watch your technician work, that’s fine! The machines and process can be fascinating the first time. Beyond this, realise that you might be slowing

the job down and costing yourself more money. Imagine someone looking over your shoulder all day while you work. Pretty distracting, right?

Erin Dickson

• The “proverbial” happens One project was so complicated I smashed eleven 3.5 x 7 ft. sheets of mirror before getting one right. Machines like the water jet are meant for cutting the same shape over and over. Cutting a glass masterpiece (you’re welcome) is a different ball game. Be prepared for your glass to break at least once. This is a worst-case scenario, but always bring at least double the material needed for the job. • Talk about your feelings Communication is the only way we know how you feel about an outcome. How many times have you walked out of the hairdresser’s with a bad haircut and not said anything? If you dislike the way something is made tell us so we can improve the next time. And always give the technician a second chance. • Make sure they know that you appreciate them Your technician has trained for years to take your drawing and make it physical with digital processes. They will make it look easy, and great ones try to complete the work as quickly as possible to keep your budget low. In many cases you are not part of their normal schedule, so they have likely taken time out of a straightforward job to work with you. Be nice. • It’s all about the chemistry If you feel you aren’t clicking with your technician, that they are misinterpreting your ideas, or you feel that either of you aren’t enjoying the process as much as you could, find another fabricator. As with anything in life, working with the right person can make all the difference to the outcome.

Erin Dickson was born in North East England and studied at the Architectural Association, London, gaining her RIBA Part I in 2009. Funded by the Arts and Humanities Research Council, her PhD research, The Quirks of Intimate Space: Architectonic Art Practice translated through Digital Technology in Glass, is due to be completed at the University of Sunderland. From 2010-15, Dickson served as water jet technician at National Glass Centre. She now works as Manufacturing and Design Technician at the University of Sunderland’s Fab Lab. Dickson was awarded an inaugural Technology Advancing Glass grant from the Glass Art Society in 2014 for her Window series. Her work has been exhibited worldwide, and can currently be seen in the UK, Germany, Sweden, and the USA and in GLASSTRESS Gotika, as part of the 2015 Venice Biennale.

References De Botton, A. (2006) The Architecture of Happiness. London: Penguin Group

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

LEC T URE

Cast Glass and the Environment By John Lewis In 1968, I began my career as a glass artist concurrent with my graduate studies in architecture at the UniversitY of California, Berkeley. At the time, I leased a small building in the west part of Oakland where I built furnaces and ovens, and began exploring blown glass forms. In the early 1970s, as man began exploring the Moon, I produced a series of moon bottles and moon vases which consisted of highly decorated surfaces assembled on simple blown forms. By applying small bits to the glass surface, I created a series of landscapes with horizon lines, moons, clouds, and oceans to create two-dimensional drawing on a three-dimensional canvas. These first objects were shown in craft galleries that were emerging across the United States. These pieces were exhibited as one-of-a-kind hand blown glass objects. In the early ‘80s, following the receipt of a National Endowment for the Arts grant, I began exploring the technique of casting glass and concentrating on solid forms. I experimented with the process of pouring molten glass into molds of various materials. Iron, steel, graphite, and sand were utilized to form the molten material. In 1989, the Loma Prieta earthquake destroyed the buildings that I occupied and the City of Oakland condemned these properties as being too dangerous to inhabit. With the aid of a disaster relief loan from the federal government

John Lewis, Glacier Vessel, 2007, cast glass with yellow gold leaf, 21” x 10” x 23” Photo: Lawrence Huff

John Lewis, Ice Falls, 2006, cast glass and stainless steel, New York, NY Photo: ©Andreas Keller, ©James Carpenter Design Associates

I was able to relocate my studio to the opposite end of town, and I purchased a facility that was originally built by the Corn Nuts Company. After relocating, the new facility was dedicated exclusively to glass casting, and I ceased any involvement in blown glass. My early casting work consisted of a series of cast glass vessels involving contrasts in surface texture, form, and color. These pieces were exhibited in many of the same galleries that initially exhibited my blown work. As the scale began to increase, I began designing and producing cast glass components that became furniture. I developed methods by which cast glass could be cut, ground, and polished with a degree of precision. The process enabled me to assemble components that translated into objects and functional furniture, which were exhibited by a number of galleries throughout the country. As a coriliary to this work, I also began to transition to utilizing cast glass in architecture. One of the first projects in this new architectural direction was a freestanding cast glass wall as part of a water feature for a residence in San Francisco. As the process evolved, my mold material of choice became graphite, which can

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

be manipulated in innumerable shapes to yield a cast glass form. A number of different techniques evolved for forming molten glass according to what shapes where desired. Centrifugal casting, the process of spinning the mold while the molten material is introduced, yields hollow forms that are radially symmetrical. I originally explored this techique to yield centrifugally cast vessels that I produced commercially for the Kohler Company. These pieces were marketed as bathroom sinks and I entered an eight-year agreement to produce them. I was also asked by American Standard to design and produce six designs that became part of their product line in the Porcher division. Several of these designs employed a pressed glass technique whereby graphite components are die pressed to yield a hollow form. This method of pressing was also used to continue my gallery efforts with hollow cast glass vessels and furniture. In 2001 I was asked to collaboratively design and produce the 168 cast glass chairs at the Oklahoma City Memorial with the architects Hans and Torrey Butzer. This project consisted of creating bronze, granite, and cast 39

glass chairs to commemorate the victims who lost their lives at the bombing of the Murra Building in 1995. In subsequent years I have completed a number of projects with James Carpenter Design Associates in New York City and other architects. These projects include a bench installation in Battery Park City – which involved a series of cast glass benches on the shore of the East River – a water feature for the lobby of the Hearst Corporation, a water feature installation in the Israel Museum, Jerusalem, and most recently a glass column installation in Sydney, Australia. The Hearst water cascade, Ice Falls, exists in the lobby of the Norman Foster-designed Hearst corporate headquarters on Eighth Avenue in New York City. James Carpenter was asked to design a water feature that takes water from the mezzanine level down to the ground floor, while allowing three escalators to diagonally function through it. The clear story overhead brings light through cast prismatic forms that allow the water to flow upon its surface. This installation involved over 600 individually cast components. In 2010 we produced cast glass components for another water feature that was permanently installed in the Israel Museum in Jerusalem. This project involved replacing an existing stone weir that transported water across the roof to the Israel Museum. James Carpenter redesigned the feature to include cast glass elements to transport the water, but also create a skylight to illuminate the galleries

John Lewis, Israel Museum Water Feature, 2010, cast glass and stainless steel, expansion of Israel Museum, Jerusalem, Israel Photo: ©Reid Freeman, Architecture Operations D.P.C. ©James Carpenter Design Associates

John Lewis, One Shell Plaza Bollards, 2014, cast glass and stone, Houston, TX Photo: Stuart Campbell

below. The length of this was approximately 350 feet and was composed of approximately 400 graphite molded, cast glass components. In 2011 we were approached by the L A architect, Frank Gehry to provide a cast glass entry piece for the lobby of the Inland Steel building in downtown Chicago. This building was designed by Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP in the early 1950s and was in need of a contemporary installation in the lobby. We created a series of irregular, broken shards of cast glass that suspend two three-inch-thick slabs at 90 degrees to each other. The reception desk is formed by these slabs and is supported by the sculptural glass shards. Critics have termed this installation “Glasshenge” and it was received with some degree of controversy upon installation. In 2012 we were approached by Jacobs Engineering to execute a lens shaped cap for a series of bollards at One Shell Plaza in Houston, Texas. This specific shape bears congruently upon the elliptical metal base. These pieces were cast from an iron mold and pressed with a graphite ram to create a hollow vessel that is illuminated by LEDs internally. The 33 bollards are a welcome feature to the newly renovated headquarters for Shell Oil Company. Our final and most recent project involved creating the cast glass components for 20 Martin Place in Sydney, Australia. The cast glass components were designed to clad eight 40 foot high concrete columns at the entrance to a building that was recently purchased by Fidelity Investments in Boston, Massachusetts. This building was originally constructed in the early 1960s and was completely renovated by the developer. They wanted the glass to

possess the color of champagne and a stone pattern texture in relief. These components surround columns that have a polished stainless steel veneer.

John Lewis, 2015. Photo: Lynn Zboyovsky

John Lewis was introduced to blown glass by professor Marvin Lipofsky as a graduate student in architecture at the University of California, Berkeley. Lewis founded the first private hot glass studio in California and later received his MA in design in 1970. His early work in blown glass led to an interest in glass casting. With the help of an NEA grant, he built an experimental facility to explore the possibilities of cast glass. At his state-of-the-art casting studio in Oakland, California, Lewis designs and produces cast glass sculpture, tables, vessels, and site-specific architectural projects. He has completed numerous commissions for private and corporate clients and is represented internationally by galleries.

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

LEC T URE

Studio Xaquixe: The Facts of a Truly Sustainable Studio By Christian Thornton, presentation given by Salvador Pulido Arroyo Over the past 13 years Studio Xaquixe has created a methodology for micro-industrial sustainability by implementing a wide range of alternative energy technologies corresponding to materials from local waste streams. This sustainable system is able to foster a transdisciplinary group of small businesses that can share knowledge and resources to enrich their immediate communities and economies. The artisans of Mexico are a highly specialized workforce that utilizes multiple materials, designs, and techniques. Striving to be commercially competitive, most artisans meet their energy demands by burning wood or industrial waste. This practice limits their production capacities and is a burden to their business as well as the community and immediate and extended environments. Within Mexico, the artisanal industry represents 8 million jobs and 2% of the country’s GDP. Of those 8 million workers, 70% exist at the poverty level, with 600,000 living in extreme poverty. Seventy-five percent of all glass studios in Mexico have closed. Like other countries, they were cornered about energy costs and foreign competition in the world markets, making them non-viable. Studio Xaquixe has chosen to face this crisis as an opportunity with various technologies such as a multi-fuel combustion systems, and has explored others like multijunction solar cells. The artisanal community is a micro-industry typology. A complete understanding of their practices allows them greater agility in shifting towards sustainable behaviors than larger industries. This flexibility is what has helped the artisanal communities of Mexico survive for hundreds, in some cases, thousands of years. Surprisingly, in Mexico there has been an extreme lack of investigation and research into the development and adaptation to incorporate sustainable technologies and environmentally responsible practices that engage artisans and other micro-industries. Since 2002 Studio Xaquixe has been developing a business model that focuses on the needs and potentials of local communities. The concept and mission of Studio Xaquixe is to create a support network that may grow beyond the limitations of the initial business model, acting as an education and support structure helping to launch satellite projects with emerging technicians coming from the artisanal networks.

Christian Thornton, Arturo Lopez, Eli Barrita, and Jose Ramon Ortigoza, blowing artwork of Christian Thornton using recycled glass and alternative energies. 2014, Oaxaca, Mexico Photo: Salvador Pulido Arroyo

The program will be based on a three-phase plan that includes funding assistance, investigation, and implementation of technologies and support through a studio-based not-for-profit education center. The projects emerging from the program will produce specialized jobs, unique artisanal products, long term sustainability of local economies, and shared specialized knowledge. Studio Xaquixe is located in Oaxaca, Mexico. Oaxaca has the highest concentration of artisans in Mexico and they account for 400,000, or 10% of the state’s population. Oaxaca has a rich international community and a very active cultural life. While its economy depends almost entirely on tourism, it is the second poorest state in Mexico and has one of the highest migration rates to the US. Seventy percent of all the land, rivers, and forests are not privately owned but are administrated by communal authorities. Crafts are one of the biggest tourist attractions, although one of the least empowered by the government. Studio Xaquixe uses waste vegetable oil (WVO) through atomizing combustion systems

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

and anaerobic digestion. One hundred percent of the oil is utilized without additives or manipulation other than the filtering process. Once filtered for combustion, the oil residues are combined with pig manure and captured rain water to produce methane via anaerobic digestion. Solar power is currently being implemented using Concentrated Photovoltaic (CPV) technology and multi-junction solar cells to achieve a completely off-the-grid system. Studio Xaquixe has resulted in: • 260 liters of liquid propane have been omitted from our processes each day. The results are a reduction in emissions of 364 kg of CO2, due to changes in equipment and combustibles. Financial savings amount to 60% of normal energy cost per year. • More than 35 people from marginalized communities have been trained in glassblowing, combustion processes, furnace construction, wiring and electrical connections, welding, and plumbing. • Workers are not paid by the piece but have a steady salary with benefits. Design and production is based on a democratic 41

decision-making process that recognizes the challenges faced in constant production schedules and neck-down-thinking business strategies. • This technology has been transferred to traditional ceramics studios, mezcal distilleries, as well as other glass studios. These advancements are helping to raise the quality of their products as well as reduce emissions up to 80% while incurring 50% less losses in production. • In 2014, more than 800 students from Mexico and the US visited Xaquixe to learn more about the project and its alternative approaches to the challenges of today’s markets. • We collect 600 liters of waste cooking oil every week from 30 restaurants situated in Oaxaca City. Eighty percent of this collected oil is utilized for combustion while the remaining 20% residue is processed through anaerobic digestion. • We save 30% of the energy normally used in glass studios by using recycled glass. • We save 50% on electrical consumption through the use of multi-stage recuperation systems • In Mexico only 10% of glass is typically recycled. Xaquixe currently recycles over 500 lbs of waste glass every week. With the addition of a 5% fluxing mixture we are able to produce a crystal quality glass which is compatible with art glass colors typical to the art glass market. Most of Xaquixe’s work has been based in Oaxaca, but we have recently expanded our scope internationally. Our glass formulations and processes, as well as our multi-fuel combustions systems, are shared with several other eco-based glass studios. We are also involved with various projects in a consultation capacity, such as an exciting project with a Brazilian cooperative (COMVIDA), based in Fortaleza, which has received funding from the EPA and the Appalachian State University of North Carolina. To date, we have been involved in collaborations with six Mexican universities, a national research center, and an international university. As a result of our collaborations and investigations we formed an NGO, Procesos Proambientales Xaquixe, as a proposed solution to the major challenges identified from our 42

experiences. These challenges are synthesized in the areas of innovation, education, and support. The NGO’s mission is to focus on resolving and fortifying these areas, using the “CIES” building as its core. Xaquixe shares a mutual interest with fab labs in working with small-scale fabricators, although fab labs focus on digital fabrication. In emerging countries like Mexico, artisans still make their own prototypes that 3D printers struggle to imitate. Repetition is not a machine like quality, but the slow process of mastering a skill. At Xaquixe the use of CAD, laser cutting, and 3D printing as supporting tools is very common, but a more diverse manner of “physically making” is welcomed to catalyze collaboration and empowerment. Alfredo Harp Helú Fundación, which has invested more than 6 billion pesos in philanthropy to date, is one of our most valued strategic partners. We are currently collaborating with its “Crafts and Traditions” department. Halloran Philanthropies has also been a strategic partner, both with funding and assessment. Our vision is that micro-industries can become dynamic and flexible entities that produce unique goods and services while reducing wastes, cutting energy costs, and creating highly-skilled employees. It is expected that Xaquixe’s team will double its size in the next two years, hiring mostly young professionals (both Mexican and from abroad), creating a highly dynamic interdisciplinary team. Today the team at Xaquixe is composed of expert technicians in combustion and alternative energies. This profile of a highly-valuable, skilled person is what we will replicate in Oaxacan communities through Procesos Proambientales XaQuixe. All technologies should be open to change. Along with constantly enhancing efficiency, their relationship to the user needs reevaluation. Scalability without innovation and evaluation results in failed projects. Physical tools for monitoring progress and prototyping new technologies will be available in the “CIES”. Literacy in these technologies include: operation and construction; understanding of the funding mechanisms for their acquisition; targeting markets willing to buy goods produced using these technologies. Most applied innovation projects are

Studio Xaquixe product designed by Christian Thornton, 10 x 18 inches, Recycled blown glass with Reichenbach color., 2014 Oaxaca, Mexico Photo: Salvador Pulido Arroyo

abandoned or misused because follow up is rarely offered. Without a long-term support strategy for the businesses using these new technologies, it is unlikely for their appropriate operation to take affect. Finally Studio Xaquixe aims to create a model, not only for glass, but for all industries that are willing to reestablish the relationships they maintain with the environment, their workers and clients. How could the value produced in factories exceed monetary income and broaden its spectrum? We invite you all to help us answer this question. __________________________________ Christian Thornton is an investigative artist and sculptor with a background in graphic art, energy technologies, and conservation, as well as various glass techniques. Currently residing in Oaxaca, Mexico, Christian was born in Spokane, Washington and has lived in various parts of the world. He is co-owner of Studio Xaquixe and director of PPX, a not-for-profit investigative center that specializes in demonstrating and teaching sustainable approaches to business, heat treatment processes, and communitybased energy consumption and production behaviors.

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

LEC T URE

Behind-the-Scenes: Installing Large-Scale Public Art By Kana Tanaka From my recent large-scale public art commissions I’ve completed, I selected four projects to share my “behind-the-scenes” dealings. This article focuses mainly on the design development processes and installation strategies using computer software tools and methods. For the first project presented here, I have provided an overview of the entire design process, including its conceptual backdrop, design development, studio assembly, and installation process. For the other projects, I highlight key communications and applications of software that helped resolve installation challenges.

Project 1: of Capturing a Moment, 2005 Solano County Government Center, Fairfield, California In 2004 I was selected as one of three semi-finalists for a commission to create a suspended artwork for the main entry atrium of the Solano County Government Center. I was introduced to the project with a bundle of large architectural drawings, and a site visit to a construction site with just a skeleton of the future building. It was difficult for me to get a sense of the space in the construction site, so I decided to make a physical model of the building. Having

been educated using the metric system (and being a glass artist, instead of an architect), I first had to adjust to the inch/foot scale of the architectural drawings. Making the model of the façade and interior of the atrium space using ¼ inch = 1 foot scale helped me visualize the space. The theme of the project was “Connect the Past, Define the Present, and Envision the Future of Solano County.” It seemed like an overwhelming theme to incorporate into one artwork, however, I was desperately determined and needed to come up with a convincing narrative. After days of researching Solano’s history, one morning, while in the kitchen, I saw a spider’s web and arrived at an “aha” moment: a web defines the spider’s territory. Territorial takeovers were part of Solano’s long history, and I constructed a spider’s web with morning dew as a metaphor for Solano County’s beautiful future. For the scale model, I used small handmade and commercial glass beads with jewelry wires. I also made an actual scale mock-up, framed in steel bars, with hot worked glass and marine cables and parts. My narrative and model worked, and I was awarded the project. As the project began I was required to hire a project manager and an engineer. I personally

drew detailed drawings with layers that showed different glass and metal parts in different sizes. In 2004, I drew with pencil on paper, scanned and enlarged the drawings on the computer, then printed them larger scale and then went in with pencil again. Further modifications were made by adding layers of translucent tracing paper. I carried the large drawing set to a local cable and rigging company to determine the hardware needed to support the weight of the over 2,000 solid glass balls. The engineer designed three connection parts to attach to the building structure behind the walls, including a shock absorber in the event of an earthquake. With the detailed metal parts determined, and glass parts in different sizes being fabricated little by little, I began to assemble the installation in a studio space I rented for the project. On a 50-foot-long platform, I transSteven Ciezki formed my detailed hand drawing from a 2 x 2 inch grid to a 2 x 2 foot (actual scale) grid with colored strings. Eventually the strings were replaced with actual stainless steel cables. As the glass balls got delivered and threaded onto cables, all different kinds of hardware were added. Finally the site installation plan was approved and scheduled, and with more than 10 people on my installation crew, including friends that are artists and designers, on-site installation began. The assembled cables with glass were transported by truck in six separate sections and permanently assembled on the floor, on site. By maneuvering five scissor lifts and a forklift, we managed to lift the heavy net sculpture up to the highest point of 40 feet off the ground. It was a very long day with everyone feeling tense and stressed, but finally the sculpture was set in place. Amazingly, it looked as if it belonged there, feeling airy and floating above the atrium space.

Project 2: Spirit of Camelback, 2009 Scottsdale Center for the Performing Arts, Scottsdale, Arizona

Kana Tanaka marking each piece in Spirit of Camelback.

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

In 2009 I received a commission for the Scottsdale Center for the Performing Arts to create a project for a huge interior space with six long strips of skylights. During a field trip in and around Scottsdale, I could not help noticing Camelback Mountain. I decided to use the shape of the mountain for the project, so I traced the topographic contour lines from 43

a map and then placed my drawing onto the building’s site plan. My proposal consisted of the form of Camelback Mountain, upside-down, suspended under three skylights. The surface of the mountain shape would be formed by hundreds of glass rings, inspired by the saguaro cactus’ cell structure. The icy glass sculpture would catch daylight from the skylight and would be lit by a spotlight at night, casting the dynamic mountain’s shadow on the white wall above the theater entrance. Several weeks later, the theater lighting company informed me of a plan to install hundreds of spotlights along the edges of all the skylights. This made the ceiling area under the skylight no longer available, and the artwork had to be moved to a different location. My suggested changes and moves were not approved, so I decided to hike up Camelback for new inspiration. When I returned, I came up with a new solution using Camelback in a different way. I proposed enhancing a curved wall in the space by intersecting glass elements through the exterior wall and continuing through the interior wall. Utilizing fiber optic technology I could illuminate the pieces by connecting the commercial fiber unit to handmade glass forms. I also changed the form of the pieces to Camelback’s ridgeline. I made a scale model with lampworked glass, shining the light from behind the wall to show how the fiber optics would work. This proposal was accepted.

Inspirational images for the sculpture Spirit of Camelback. An arial photo of Camelback Mountain (1) and a topographic map of Camelback Mountain (2).

Kana Tanaka on scissor lift doing final check of the completed installation Spirit of Camelback.

The communication with the architects and engineer began with architectural plans and drawings. The curved wall appeared to be wide and open, however, in reality the backside was a very tight space housing mechanical stuff and huge air-conditioning ducts and sprinklers. Plus, there was a thick floor line right in the middle of the proposed artwork area. Working with a fiber optics company, I needed to use 18 boxes of illuminators to light up 138 glass stems. Finding the best way to install the illuminator boxes and connect the fibers to each location of glass stems was challenging. Using VectorWorks software made this planning a bit easier (at least doable). Within VectorWorks I was able to move the boxes around and draw each line of fiber and take its measurements. The software also facilitated communication between team members. In the end, I pre-ordered 138 different lengths of optic fibers that were grouped and bundled into 18 harnesses, which would eventually be connected to 18 separate illuminators. After all the planning was set and ready for on-site installation, I transferred the glass stem location design onto the curved wall with a basic 2 x 2

foot grid. A concrete coring company made the holes and the wall was refinished before the installation of the glass stems. It took all week to install 18 illuminators behind the curved wall and to connect all the fibers with the inside end of glass stems.

Project 3: Thinking Globally in Human Scale, 2013 Central Connecticut State University, New Britain CT This proposal involved artwork for a twostory open space at a new academic building at Central Connecticut State University. The theme of the artwork had to integrate across five academic departments: Anthropology, History, Political Science, Sociology, and Geography. I came up with the concept of using the Earth and humans. I decided to fill the two-story open space with thousands of sparkling glass beads. In the midst of the transparent spherical glass atmosphere, a group of tinted blue beads form a six-foot sphere representing the globe. The outline of a human figure appears as a negative space, depicting the long history of mankind inhabiting Earth. I proposed making 10,000

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

hand-made large glass beads. The scale model used small commercial glass beads and I was awarded the project. The final design included 23 rows of 1/32 inch stainless steel cable wire with glass beads, spanning 14 feet. Between 11 and 27 beads were suspended by each stainless steel cable. The placement of each glass bead was staggered randomly, but more condensed towards the center of the composition and expanded towards outside. This was an enormous challenge on a real scale. I spent hours on the computer, positioning each glass bead. The position of the beads to create the silhouette of the human form had to be at a different height for each row, so that the human silhouette descended across the 14-foot depth of the artwork. Using VectorWorks I was able to draw everything in detail, calling out all the interval dimensions, so that anyone could build this sculpture.

Project 4: Cascade, 2013 Washington State University, Spokane WA This project was for a pharmaceutical and biomedical science building. I chose to create an installation for the ceiling above the three continuous grand stairways by the glass curtain wall on the north side of the building. Inspired by the ever-changing flow of the cascading Spokane River, and the buildingâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s architecture, my design comprised of over 2,000 handformed glass water drops, spanning over 130 feet from the first to the fourth floor. I recreated three unique moments of splashes of water with handmade clear glass. At its highest point on the fourth floor, the surface of the glass has a crackled texture, representing icy water. As the sculpture streams downward, the glass gradually contains more and more bubbles, moving from clear spring water to white, churning water. Scattered throughout the suspended sculpture are occasional pieces of colorful dichroic glass, with shapes inspired by a suggestion of native fish, spring flower petals, and falling autumn leaves as accents depicting the seasonal journey of water in the Spokane River. I made a physical model of the building with suspended glass beads and dichroic sheet cutouts. The proposal was approved and I began working with a team of architects and engineers.

Kana Tanaka

My original idea was to suspend splashes of glass over the stairway, so that people coming down the stairway would experience the artwork from below. However, I was informed that there were radiant ceiling panels by the window area, making it unusable for supporting the sculpture. Plus, there were other obstacles in the ceiling infrastructure that would interrupt the continuous flow of the river-like design. Compromising, I moved my sculpture area from over the stairway to just covering the edge of the stairway, and shifted the installation design area according to the obstacles and suggested a modification of the ceiling panel design to make my installation more workable. I communicated with the architect, engineer, ceiling panel manufacturer, and installer to work out all of the needed adjustments â&#x20AC;&#x201C; a process that took many months. Using VectorWorks made this communication doable for me. In the end, 439 cable connection points were finalized and supported by 78 different ceiling panels with reinforced backer panels. Each of the 439 wires has a unique length between two and 17 feet, supporting total of over 2,000 glass pieces. I utilized VectorWorks and Excel to organize length of wires, number and size of glass splashes, and dichroic glass accents. With this organizing system I was able to minimize materials and time for on-site installation.

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

__________________________________ Kana Tanaka seeks to inspire curiosity and exploration through glass and light. While studying at Aichi University of Education in Japan, she became captivated by the molten qualities of glass, leading her to specialize in glassblowing. She continued to study glass as a medium for emphasizing experiences of light at Rhode Island School of Design. Tanaka is now based in the San Francisco Bay Area. She has received several artist grants and has exhibited her work at galleries and theaters since 2002. In recent years, she completed large-scale public art installations in California, Arizona, Connecticut, and Washington.

LEC T URE

Creating Problems By Nikolas Weinstein The design of my installations is driven by an interest in sculptural forms and how they relate to architectural space. Technology has nonetheless become a principal element in my work. I take what I see in my head and figure out how to make it rather than looking at the available tools and deciding what to make with them. Tools are things that I develop to solve problems rather than parameters that define what I think I can do. Of course, I can’t just make anything that I want to, without regard for real physical and logistical constraints. I do have a vague idea of what is possible and an attendant “gut feeling.” But I start the process of designing projects in an aspirational mode. The balance of my time on projects is spent in a highly iterative and experimental search for solutions to building an original design. While this would seem to be a somewhat backward approach (why not design based on what you know you can build?), it ensures for me innovation in methodology and, consequently, an evolution in aesthetics. When I face problems with no clear roadmap, I experiment. Most of the time it doesn’t work. But one out of

Nikolas Weinstein, Courtyard Sha Tin Installation, Hong Kong, 2012, hot-formed borosilicate glass tubing “fabric,” 29 x 176 x 28’ Photo: Michael Weber

Nikolas Weinstein, Bar Agricole Installation, Singapore hotel ballroom, 2010, hot-formed borosilicate glass tubing “fabric,” triptych, each piece 7.5 x 5 x 7’ Photo: Bruce Damonte

every ten times, I see something unexpected and compelling that sparks an idea. I end up building tools and machines with different functions than I originally intended. This forces my work to change, and it allows me to dream of possibilities that are different and more complex than I would have previously imagined. My first big project came when I was 26. I was very green and had only made blown pieces no bigger than myself. The commission was wildly outsized for where I was in my career but it was one that you just don’t pass up, an installation for the main public space in a Frank O. Gehry building at the center of Berlin, next to the Brandenburg Gate. I had no idea what I was doing and spent nearly five years flailing. It was grueling and filled with moments of extreme doubt and deep despair, but I would never trade it in. The sculpture was comprised of 36 glass elements the size of small cars that flew through the public atrium of a bank headquarters in three groups. It was about a year into the project when I realized that the scale and complexity of the project was way beyond my ability. I had proposed a cellular matrix of glass tubes as the sculptural material. To build this,

we ultimately arrived at a process that required laying individual tubes in parallel on a flat kiln floor and firing them to a temperature hot enough to weld them together, but cool enough to prevent them from collapsing. This yielded a final assembly with structural integrity and a high strength to weight ratio. Once the matrix was fused and annealed, it then had to be shaped over a large mold during a second kiln cycle. When the project began, I hadn’t appreciated that the process would require two separate cycles, nor that the fused tubes would be such a fragile assembly, highly prone to failure during the second heating. Even if we had built two kilns instead of one and figured out how to protect the panels in their interim fragile state, the molds were a problem unto themselves. The panels were massive and each one uniquely shaped. I couldn’t even get my head around how to build and store 36 molds the size of cars! In what was to be the first of many unforeseen and insurmountable-feeling problems, I sought refuge at home with pasta and wine. Lost in an inebriated reverie, I found myself recalling the coffee-table novelty pin molds

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

that I could remotely pull the glass via cables that ran over weighted pulley systems on the kiln’s exterior. It is only as I approach the completion of a project that I finally appreciate how to really build it. The majority of the project time is spent making mistakes and learning, and the actual fabrication of the work represents only a small fraction of the effort. The solution gives me new ideas. A completed project is an opportunity to see what has been made possible by the new technology. And so the aspirational cycle begins again, and I design new problems to solve. __________________________________ Nikolas Weinstein, Capella Installation, 2009, (Singapore hotel ballroom designed by Norman Foster) assembled borosilicate glass tubing “fabric,” 27’ in diameter Photo: Michael Weber

of the 70s – small, perforated boards filled with pins. When you pushed your hand against one side, it would mold the impression on the reverse. It was a shot in the dark, but I sketched a concept for a kiln bed constructed in a similar manner. My team quickly made a small version to proof-test the idea before fabricating the final kiln, which arrived in a dedicated 18-wheeler. The kiln had a motorized undercarriage that could be programmed and raised to introduce a stippled topography on the interior floor. This allowed us to collapse two kiln cycles into one: beginning with a flat floor and pins unraised, the tubes could be arranged and fused together; then the floor could be actuated to incrementally introduce a mold form at the

same rate the glass was bending, such that it was continuously supported in its fragile state. Additionally, it allowed us to dispense with inefficient and ungainly molds in favor of an infinitely programmable floor with no thermal mass. Even though I hadn’t conceived of the kiln before I began the Berlin project, it became its primary tool. Now that I had a kiln with a dynamic and programmable bed, I started to come up with new sculptural shapes that leveraged this technology. When I felt that the kiln was no longer enabling ideas but limiting creativity, I started to hack my hack. To solve other problems that my newer designs introduced, I began drilling holes all over the kiln so

Proof of concept dynamic pin-molding bed from small test kiln (1998). Photo: Jeff Benroth

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

Nikolas Weinstein was born in New York City in 1968 and established his sculpture studio in San Francisco in 1991. His site-specific installations lie at the intersection of art, architecture, and the natural world, leveraging new technologies to build works in glass. The sculptures respond sympathetically to the definition of architectural space and range in scale from small and intimate to very large works. His aesthetic derives from a longstanding interest in the natural world. The influence of organic forms in his work dates to a young age, established during internships at The American Museum of Natural History and The Scripps Institution of Oceanography. After graduating college with a degree in comparative literature, he moved to San Francisco, where he briefly worked as an assistant to a prominent graphic designer before founding his studio.

Nikolas Weinstein (l) and Guido Gerlitz (r) rolling out the motorized bed of the full-scale custom kiln (1998).

D E M O N S T R AT I O N S

Nancy Callan putting a punty on her piece during her demo, Brain on Cane.

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

HO T G L AS S DEMO

Combining Techniques: Casting into Mold-Blown Layers By Dean Allison

(l-r) Fred Birkhill with camera, Ché Rhodes at bench, Ben Wright, Dean Allison, and Shane Fero. Photo: Joe Upham

The portrait has been a defining subject in my practice for about eight years, and I am interested in the ways that we perceive each other, our roles in the community, and our relationships with one another. My work is about people and the physical details that help us describe and understand each other. By capturing the subtleties of physical appearances, my work documents life and time, and evokes an understanding of others through portraiture. In my demonstration for the 2015 GAS conference at San Jose State University’s hotshop, I focused on one suggestive aspect of the human form: skin. My goal was to experiment with both color and clear glass applications to create depth and translucency in the surface of the glass, and enhance the suggestion of skin and project the quality of age. For the demonstration, I worked with a team to blow two layers of colored glass into the mold, and then ladle glass into the mold to fill up the cavity. Combining several techniques, we worked together and brought these hot processes together in a precisely timed and choreographed fashion. Color selection was an important part of the preparations for this process. To achieve a skin tone that has depth, I referred to one of my heroes in painting,

Lucian Freud. Specifically, I looked at the painterly, tonal qualities he was able to achieve. Prior to the demonstration, I experimented with colors and created a palette for this portrait; I selected two colors for the two layers that would be blown consecutively in the mold, a tonal range that would be applied as a cane drawing on the second of these layers, and powder that would be sifted into the mold during the final step of ladling. Prior to the conference, I prepared two plaster silica molds of life-size human busts through a lost wax process. The subjects were my 12-year-old nephew and my mother, and I drove the molds cross-country from North Carolina to California for the demonstration. I arrived in San Jose a day early to preheat the molds and bring them up to temperature. The molds had steel jackets to contain them and a strong mold recipe that allowed them to make the trip across the country and hold up to being moved out of the kiln at top temperature. The demonstration began with a general description of my process, my plans for this particular experiment, and ended with an open question and answer session. During the introduction, the team started two bubbles with color overlays and shaped them to be

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

blown into the hot mold. Shane Fero did a cane drawing on the second bubble, which was gaffed by Ché Rhodes. The colors for the cane drawing were chosen to resemble bruising and blushing and would blow out to add abstract detail to the final portrait. Jasen Johnsen, Ben Wright, Mary Catherine Richardson, and Aaron Baigelman were involved in gaffing, working doors, torching, and helping lift the mold. After the bubbles were ready, the hot mold was lifted out of the kiln. The colored layers were blown into the mold at specific times, and we cut the excess glass from the bubble with a hot torch. After the second blown layer was in the mold and cut off, we ladled clear hot glass and sifted powder color into the mold. The pieces were then returned to the kiln to anneal for about four weeks. After they cool, I will be able to retrieve them, divest them, and see the quality of what we achieved. Very exciting! The hot shop had a limited viewing area, and there was a full house, so many viewers watched from the hallway outside. This demo exemplified the importance of set up, communication, teamwork, and timing. One of the great joys of making my work is getting to work and experiment with others. Our team had a blast experimenting together, pushing the capability of artistic glass, and reaching to achieve a more sophisticated portrait in glass.

Dean Allison, And I’m sorry I could not travel both, 2014, glass Photo: Mercedes Jelinek

This demonstration required a talented team to support this ambitious process. A big thank you to Shane Fero, Ché Rhodes, Jasen Johnsen, Ben Wright, Mary Catherine Richardson, and Aaron Baigelman for making this demonstration such a fantastic experience. I am also grateful to Cassandra and Tim Straubing at San Jose State University for facilitating this demo. Thanks, also, to GAS for inviting me to demonstrate this small window of my process. __________________________________ Dean Allison lives and works in Penland, North Carolina. He received his Master of Art, Visual Arts in glass from The Australian National University in Canberra in 2010 and a BS in studio arts from Illinois State University in 2001. He has studied, worked, and taught at many craft schools nationally and abroad, including The Glass Furnace in Istanbul, Turkey, the Northlands Creative Glass Center in Scotland, and the Pittsburgh Glass Center in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. He is currently a three-year resident artist at Penland School of Crafts.

(l-r) Mary Catherine Richardson, Ben Wright, Dean Allison Photo: Joe Upham

Dean Allison, What would the earth look like if all the shadows disappeared, 2014, glass Photo: Mercedes Jelinek

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

HO T G L AS S DEMO

Brain on Cane Demo by Nancy Callan / Text by Katherine Gray Nancy Callan and I have been friends for a long time; we’ve worked together, taught together, traveled and vacationed together, but I still always jump at the chance to help her in the hotshop. Watching or helping her make a piece is an amazing experience, but the reality is, in a single piece, you only witness a very small part of the totality that makes her such a skilled glassblower and exceptional artist. For her demonstration in San Jose, Nancy brought some pre-made straight cane – some were hard white, and some had amber over the hard white. She laid the cane out in a semirandom pattern, or maybe it was completely random, I’m not sure. She then started a clear bubble, to which she added a transparent orange body wrap longitudinally around the bubble. She melted the orange color in, gathered over it, picked up the cane, and twisted everything in a clockwise direction. She blew the bubble up a bit, puntied it, and made it into a cup that we put into the pick up oven. She then did this same process all over again, although the second time, she added a color overlay (transparent yellow, maybe saffron?) underneath the body wrap, and twisted the piece counter-clockwise. I then puntied the first cup, took it out of the pick up oven, flashed it, and then Nancy stuffed the cup with her bubble, after taking a skinny, fresh gather.

Nancy Callan making a Stinger, 2014. Also pictured: Jason Christian and Darin Denison.

I’m not trying to make the process sound blasé and pedestrian, but I think it’s easy to take for granted seeing such skillful glass working done so extremely well, especially when it seems effortless. There are a lot of glassblowers

Nancy at the bench, 2014.

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

doing incredible things with cane that were unthinkable even 10 years ago. Sure, a lot of that has to do with Lino Tagliapietra and his influence, but it also has a lot to do with artists like Nancy who use cane in all kinds of novel and inventive ways. She is constantly experimenting with patterns, techniques, color combinations, and most importantly, she incorporates these designs into blown forms in ways that make sense for sculptural objects. Her body of work has developed in series, or rather as a series of series, each one with a unique look. Some of her work references fabrics and textiles, with forms that look like pillows or stocking caps; others mine the natural world for inspiration- the Cactus series comes to mind. Her Clouds are more fanciful, using the iconic, lobed forms as a canvas for color and pattern explorations. Some of her work is more obviously referential, some evoke daydreamy visions. The orbs are perhaps the most straightforward of her repertoire of shapes, but they retain a playful spirit that infuses so much of her work. They walk a line between jaunty and purposeful. Once all of the color and cane prep, known as “the start,” was done, Nancy proceeded to make a good sized orb, maybe 14 or 15 inches 51

Nancy Callan, Azure Filigree Cloud, blown glass, 12 x 15.5 x 6.5” Photo: Russell Johnson

in diameter, with a small, offset flat spot for the bottom. The next day, when I saw it out of the annealer, sitting at the front of the CMoG Hot Glass Roadshow, it looked like it could have been an interpretative model of the sun, swirling but not disorganized, bold but not homogenous, and absolutely luminous.

Nancy Callan, Unravel Orb, 2015, blown glass, 15.5 x 15.5 x 15.5” Photo: Russell Johnson

__________________________________ Nancy Callan’s voice as a glass sculptor reflects her high-level technical training and artistic talents. Callan received her BFA from Massachusetts College of Art in 1996 and lives in Seattle, Washington where she is part of the vibrant Northwest glass community. Callan’s numerous awards include the Creative Glass Center of America Fellowship and residencies at the Museum of Glass in Tacoma, Washington, The Toledo Museum of Art in Toledo, Ohio, and the Pittsburgh Glass Center in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, and the Chrysler Museum of Art in Norfolk, Virginia. She is also a key member of maestro Lino Tagliapietra’s glassblowing team. Nancy Callan is represented by galleries throughout North America, including Traver Gallery in Washington, Schantz Galleries in Massachusetts, and Blue Rain Galleries in New Mexico and Arizona. Her artwork is held in the permanent collections of the Museum of Glass, Tacoma, Washington; the Museum of Glass, Corning, New York; the Muskegon Museum of Art, Muskegon, Michigan; Museum of Northwest Art, La Connor, Washington; the Shanghai Museum of Glass, Shanghai, China; and in numerous prominent private collections.

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

HO T G L AS S DEMO

Demo? No Problemo. Call Paul, Y’all!* By Paul DeSomma Paul DeSomma, Optical Effects, 2014, glass and granite Photo: Paul Schraub

works. This work made me wonder about two possible scenarios: 1. My ideas from 25 years ago are still valid to me, and they merit further exploration. 2. I haven’t progressed much since then! I prefer the first scenario, and I will continue to explore these ideas about optical glass using various techniques and approaches. I’d like to thank Dean Bensen, Kala Kirkman, and CMoG’s Eric Meek who assisted with the demo. I’d also like to thank the GAS staff and Board of Directors for the opportunity to have such a great time at the San Jose conference. *I assisted our hired builders while our hotshop was under construction; however, it quickly became obvious that my skills in the building trade were more geared towards demolition. As a result, the phrase “Demo? No Problemo. Call Paul, y’all,” was spoken often and with enthusiasm. The chance to apply this signature phrase to my glassmaking demonstration was impossible to resist. __________________________________

The pieces I made during my demo at the 2015 GAS conference in San Jose are the most recent in a series of explorations in clear glass. The aim of these pieces was to highlight the basic nature of the material and emphasize what glass does well, simply by being glass. I have always been interested in clear, optical glass, and I have worked with many techniques to achieve optical effects in the hot shop, rather than cutting and polishing. There is a grand history of cut and cast glass in optics, but to my knowledge there are only a few glass workers who have devoted themselves to creating optical effects in clear, hot glass. The vocabulary I bring to the work includes clarity, light transmission, refraction and optical effects, fluid movement of the molten material, and minimal tooling or manipulation. In addition, I address scale, mass as a contributor to optics and depth, and pure abstraction and non-representational form.

As I engage with this vocabulary, I try to keep in mind these meaningful quotes from some of the finest and most influential glass artists. They are rare individuals who I consider friends, and are masters with whom I’ve had the great pleasure of working. “Light exists as the specific quality of the material…the overriding characteristic.” – Stanislav Libensky and Jaroslava Brychtová “Sculpture and glass develop together, without having to imitate other materials.” – Stanislav Libensky and Jaroslava Brychtová “I hope to be true to myself. To be true to the material.” – Lino Tagliapietra I recently rediscovered some pieces I had made about 25 years ago, in my early days of working with solid glass. I was struck by the philosophical similarities to my most recent

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

Paul DeSomma is a glassmaker based in Santa Cruz, California. Long affiliated with the Seattle glass community, he is a veteran of William Morris’s team (1986-1991), Team Chihuly (ongoing), Mace-Kirkpatrick (1989-1999) and has worked with many other A-listers and Seattle glass royalty. Paul emphasizes solid sculpture and has been influenced by his extensive study with Maestro Pino Signoretto. DeSomma and his wife, Marsha Blaker, own and operate Blaker/DeSomma Glass, founded in 2000. 53

HO T G L AS S DEMO

Pointillism on the Blowpipe By David Patchen

David Patchen, Bloom, 2014, blown and hot-sculpted glass, 23 x 17 x 12”

I was honored by the invitation to demonstrate my glass blowing process at the 2015 GAS conference in San Jose. Since the conference was close to my home base of San Francisco, it was easy to have my regular assistant Ian Whitt (a skilled glassblower in his own right), assist me on The Corning Museum of Glass Hot Glass Roadshow stage. It was also great to have the extra hands of he CMoG staff members who helped me negotiate the new studio space. Since my work primarily involves highly patterned murrine, there is a great deal of prep work required before blowing a final sculpture or a vessel. Creating my work begins with careful planning and designing of colors and patterns. To create different effects in the final murrine, I pull a great deal of veiled cane that is eventually integrated as line and dot patterns; I also use large overlays or stuffed cups to create rings and borders, in addition to other manipulations of layered hot glass. A variety of colored elements are combined hot to create a new compound murrine, and once it is cooled it is sliced, exposing the patterns contained within the cross-section. Once I have a couple hundred pieces of completed murrine, I carefully compose 54

these elements to design the pattern for the final work, days prior to blowing it. I enjoy this process of thoughtful and patient creativity and the contrast to the urgency of executing precise

work in the hotshop, where the limited window to shape molten glass requires split-second judgment. The dichotomy of designing the work cold and executing the complex forms hot satisfies both the artist and the craftsman in me, and I continually find it exciting to create a piece I’ve poured over for days, watching it come to life in the hotshop. Since my approach is hot, cold, hot, cold, hot, across a number of days, my demonstrations are usually limited to just the final step: fusing the large murrine composition in the glory hole, rolling it up onto a blowpipe, and creating a finished piece. For those interested in more detail, there is a comprehensive series of photo essays on the various steps in the process on my website, www.davidpatchen.com. My current work is a result of an ongoing exploration of color and transparency to create carefully considered patterns. While varied in composition, I most often create series of graceful forms that I consider three-dimensional canvases. The diversity in my compositions reflects my desire to constantly experiment and explore a variety of ideas simultaneously. Some recurring themes in my work include windows into or through a piece, things hidden and revealed, and extreme detail. The piece made at the 2015 GAS conference was from my Foglio series and was composed

David Patchen creating one of his Bloom sculptures from hot glass in July of 2013. Photo: Ryan Heffernan

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

David Patchen, Sphere, 2015, blown glass, murrine, 15 x 14 x 14”

of a honeycomb pattern murrine with hundreds of fine white rings, each containing dozens of tiny threads of mixed colors over white. A back-of-the-envelope calculation estimated twelve thousand lines in the finished piece. It was a pleasure to share this part of my process and my work with conference attendees and to put so many faces with names after the demonstration.

David Patchen, Foglio, 2014, blown glass, murrine, 25 x 15 x 3.5”

__________________________________ David Patchen is known for his colorful and intricately patterned blown and hot sculpted glass. His mastery of murrine and cane techniques and use of vibrant colors results in large-scale works that are detailed, precise, and exciting. Primarily self-taught, Patchen studied informally with Afro Celotto (former assistant to Lino Tagliapietra) and was awarded a scholarship for artistic merit to attend Pilchuck Glass School. Patchen’s work has been exhibited nationally and internationally and is in many well-known private collections. His book David Patchen: Glass, is in the permanent collection of Fondazione Giorgio Cini, Glass Study Center Library in Venice, Italy and the Rakow Library at The Corning Museum of Glass. David is actively involved in the glass arts community as Chairman Emeritus of the Board of Directors at Public Glass in San Francisco, California, member of the Pilchuck Leadership Council, and former member of the Board of Directors, Glass Alliance of Northern California.

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

HO T G L AS S DEMO

Why Me?

By Nate Watson

GAS attendees hold up a closed fist if they have “seen or heard something in the news recently that concerned inequities and issues of violence that they wished they could do something about.”

They say that to have a successful career in the art world, you have to make something that everyone recognizes as yours. After nearly 20 years, I’ve not made any such object or series of work that would compel someone to say, “Hey! That’s a Nate Watson.” This is why I was somewhat surprised when Pamina Traylor approached me about doing a hot glass demonstration at the 2015 GAS conference in San Jose. I explained to Pamina, a member of the local organizing committee, that she had just invited an artist who rarely repeats forms, and who doesn’t even always use glass, to do a very public demonstration. “Why me?” I asked. I said, “No one even knows what I do.” Her reply was “I have no idea what you’ve been making either, but you’re a pretty interesting guy and it’ll be great!” I figured that with time I would come up with something, so I just said “yes” and went about my business as the director of Public Glass in San Francisco, managing programs and preparing our youth for an exhibition that would open during the conference. Before long, I had committed to give a presentation at another conference and to producing some work for 56

a show, and sure enough, to my horror, June finally arrived. My big hot glass demonstration was upon me and I had nothing that I felt would compare to demonstrations by the likes of Jim Mongrain, the de la Torres, Petr Novotny and his team, and Nancy Callan. These folks are the very best at what they do and were invited to perform the things that they have come to be known for. I was invited to perform... what I’m not known for? This was going to be a tough one. In addition to being challenged and intimidated, I couldn’t come to terms with transforming my social practice into a very public demonstration. When pressed, I tend to break problems down into smaller pieces that I might then be able to connect with more intimately. I knew for certain that we were all going to be drawn to San Jose by a concern for one of many issues related to glass. The San Jose conference proclaimed a focus on technology and new approaches, and so I wondered, how does one embrace these ideas on a glassblowing truck for a two-hour block of time? What possible benefit or enlightenment could one hope to gain by coming to see a demo by Nate Watson?

I simply couldn’t figure out what I had to offer within the format of a demonstration so why should anyone else be interested? In the moment that I was going to be given a platform to do or say something meaningful, no object or process came to my mind – only the current state of our group, the Glass Art Society. Who are we, and what do we care about and stand for? What’s the point of coming together and what do we hope to take away? During the conference, while I moved diligently from venue to venue speaking to people with so many different views and concerns, some wondering if we should even be spending time and money working with glass, I reaffirmed a very personal belief for myself: the objects that we make are always going to be the remnant of a more important happening. The studio, stage, gallery, and the demo are all just platforms used to share with one another; what I could do on The Corning Museum of Glass Hot Glass Roadshow in the middle of a park in downtown San Jose was share something of myself with members of the Glass Art Society. Inspired by the infamous 1968 Olympic protest salute orchestrated by Tommy Smith, a former San Jose State University student, I realized that the platform that I’d been given could be a meaningful statement about what we as artists choose to do with our moments. The subject of my demonstration was to be an acknowledgement of why we as artists are compelled to make and why people gather to see glassmakers conjure a collective vision. These questions, and forming action in response, are in line with my everyday practice; why should my demonstration be about anything other than that? My plan to engage the San Jose audience in a participatory moment of collective concern was set, but I remained reluctant and nervous about sharing too much or making anyone feel uncomfortable. My reluctance went away after I parked my car along the downtown park where my demo was to take place. As I carried my glass tools and two blowpipes across the lawn, a strange feeling came over me and I considered for a moment that I might look as though I’m carrying a rifle or some kind of weapon. I got really nervous and I wanted to stop, put my pipes down and find a friend who wasn’t black like me to carry my tools. I paused, took a breath, and nervously hurried to the

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

CMoG truck. A few yards felt like a mile, and as I passed a playground with children playing I began to wonder if people were thinking that I was part of a glass conference and that it was perfectly normal that I would be approaching with two long steel rods and a suitcase full of oddities. If a police officer were to see me in this moment, would I even have a chance to explain? I’ll not forget the moment when I asked the audience in San Jose to close their eyes and raise their hands if they believed that all people have the potential to make positive impacts in their communities and that all peoples’ lives have value. I then asked that each person close their raised hand and make a fist if they had seen or heard something in the news recently that concerned inequities and issues of violence that they wished they could do something about. Everyone closed their hands to make a fist. With hands raised we opened our eyes to witness a rare moment of consensus on that Sunday afternoon in San Jose. We reaffirmed that the Glass Art Society is a diverse and ever changing entity that continues to make space

for new voices and expression. We learned that we all care about one another and we care what happens around us. We also learned that the relationships and moments we share create the conversations that contain the most incredible gestures of creation and the “things”, the “objects” that are realized just help us to remember. I’ve been involved with glass for nearly two decades and even in my own shop strangers will stop to explain to me how interesting glass is and how difficult it can be to learn. No one ever assumes that I’m there to work or that I may even be there to teach. Do people look at me and assume I don’t swim, ski, or blow glass? How far do these assumptions go, and what can I possibly do to get people to see me as I am and not imagine me through their own lens? I used my 2015 GAS conference demonstration to acknowledge the potential of our collective group to address real issues by listening to the voices and perspectives that come from behind the objects that we make. The object as a memory and relic of our time together is my truth, and the moment of creation, the activation of our team, our family, and our

community is the art that we make. So why me? I’m unsure that I’m the person to answer that question, but I do know that someplace there’s a black glass rocket with a fist for a nose cone from the day we attempted to discover why. __________________________________ Nate Watson joined the San Francisco arts non-profit, Public Glass, as executive director in May 2012 after overseeing the glass program at San Francisco State University for five years. A graduate of Centre College and the California College of the Arts, and a current practicing artist, designer and educator, Watson has worked and taught across the United States and has made community engagement and youth outreach the focus of his most recent work. His practice now moves intuitively between facilitating gatherings and art making, as a way to examine how creative potential is tied to the challenges of community building and the process of actively seeking new voices.

Nate Watson models a fist while sculpting a piece of glass for his demo.

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

C O LDWORK I N G DEM O

Fred Curtis and Róisín de Buitléar: Glass Cutting from Waterford The Glass City, Ireland by Róisín de Buitléar

Fred Curtis demos traditional Irish glass cutting while Róisín de Buitléar answers questions.

Fred Curtis and I demonstrated coldworking for the 2015 GAS conference in San Jose at San Jose State University, and we were pleased to be introduced by Mary White, the 2015 recipient of the GAS Lifetime Membership Award. While on her Fulbright Fellowship to Ireland in 2009 Mary White witnessed, first hand, the impact on the local population in Waterford when Waterford Crystal went into receivership and 2,000 jobs were lost. Since then, she has been an advocate for preserving Ireland’s glassmaking tradition, and we thank her for supporting us on this journey to San Jose. The demo started with a short visual overview of our work including the collaborative exhibition, CAUTION! Fragile – Tradition in Transition, shown at the Museum of Glass in Tacoma, Washington and Waterford the Glass City, a series of glass-focused events supported by the city of Waterford, aimed at fostering an awareness of the importance of glass to the city’s future regeneration. The exhibitions in Waterford the Glass City include Refract, an international contemporary exhibition in Waterford City Hall, Masters of the Glass, the first-ever exhibition of local masterpieces in the history of the city at the Museum of Treasures, and the Future Legacies Symposium, which was held at the Waterford 58

Institute of Technology September 18-19, 2015. I am the project director and curator of these events, which are helping to bring about change and a new optimism in the city. The future of glassmaking is at a critical point in Ireland, and there are only two remaining factories blowing and cutting crystal, both on a very small scale, in the entire country. To put this situation into context, glass has been made in Waterford City since 1783 and in recent years Waterford Crystal employed 4,000 people blowing and cutting glass in four different plants around the city. The percieved value of Waterford Crystal was once so great, that shares in the company were more valuable than those of Coca-Cola. With the closure of the hot glass furnace at the National College of Art and Design in Dublin last year, there is now nowhere in Ireland to get a degree specializing in hot glass, and no open access studios that qualified glassmakers can utilize on a regular basis. The House of Waterford Crystal, a factory and retail showroom, has just been sold to a Finnish company. As a result of all these losses, there are currently hundreds of skilled glass workers in the city, without employment. Fred Curtis is undoubtedly the most versatile crystal sculptor and cutter working independently in Ireland today. He was trained

at the famous Waterford Crystal factory, starting as an apprentice at age 16. He has become one of the most celebrated and sought after crystal sculptors in contemporary commercial production. Recipients of his work are a who’s who list of political and social celebrities, from US presidents to the Queen of England. He regaled the San Jose audience with stories of visiting Buckingham Palace last year, playing with the corgis, and taking tea with the Queen. Fred demonstrated stone wheel cutting by first trueing up the stone wheels with a homemade tool made of metal strapping from a packing case, stacked and tied, to sharpen and shape the profile of the wheel. In the small workshop space of San Jose State University, it created a piercing noise, which illustrated how a warehouse of 400 cutters may have sounded in the height of Waterford’s factory production. Next, he explained how to ‘mark up’ the shallow bowl he was cutting and then guided the wheel from one line to another, cutting a geometric pattern in a typical style of Irish crystal cutting. As the pattern emerged, insights unfolded about his work and life as an industrially trained glassmaker. Intermittently, he resharpened the wheel to keep the cutting lines clear and sharp. He then showed how, carving from a solid block of crystal, he can achieve sculpted figures such as a horse with softened curves and delicate prancing limbs. He showed how he maps out the form in profile and then carves into the block, removing sections at a time.

Fred Curtis’s demo piece shows how he uses sharpie to map on intricate pattern for cutting.

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

On a taza shaped piece, I demonstrated diamond point engraving using a flexible drive. I have worked for many years on a series of pieces inspired by lace making traditions of unnamed craftswomen. By interpreting the stitches of Irish lace makers, I pay homage to the toil, patience, and intricacies of their work, while capturing the the delicacies of shadow and light inherent in glass. I had marked up the glass piece with an indelible pen before arriving, as it takes many hours of drawing and refining the lines before actually engraving the image. I refine each line with a dampened wooden cocktail stick to improve the shape, so that when I am working with the flexible drive it flows easily. The repetition of line and meditative quality of the movement adds to the overall rhythm of the image and is important to the harmony of the finished piece. My demonstration included tips and advice on the use of various bits and shafts, as well as my approach to design and my free drawing style, which, in this case, is based on the actual stitches of the original lace pattern. Planning where to engrave a piece takes me far longer than the actual engraving, which is a long, slow process. I advise that what you leave out is more important than what you put in, and it is this sensibility that gives life to the engraving. We were heartened that so many people were interested in learning from us. We were amazed that the room was so full and everyone wanted to linger far longer than our allocated slot. Coming to San Jose, we wanted to share our story and to open new possibilities by showing what kind of skill base is available in glass cutting in our country. There are skilled workers and teachers ready to work. Seeing new possibilities for these skills is the key to making a better future for glassmaking in Waterford. International support, whether through learning, commissioning, visiting, sharing, or technically supporting us, is critical to the survival of this knowledge base. Witnessing the support in San Jose gave us much needed energy to keep trying to connect the world to the huge resource we have laying idle in Ireland. It encourages us to continue to show the international glass community how they can become involved and engaged in our conversation. In September, we look forward to welcoming Treg Silkwood, based

in San Jose, who will lead a workshop and give a presentation at our symposium in Waterford. If you wish to find out more or join in our conversation, please look at Waterford the Glass City on Facebook and CAUTION Fragile. Every view, like, or share actually makes a contribution to our efforts. A special thanks to Mary White, Cassandra Straubing, Rich Samsel, Candace Martin, Treg Silkwood, and Kim Webster for helping to supply necessary tools and information. __________________________________ Róisín de Buitléar is a visual artist, educator and curator, and an alumna of the National College of Art and Design, Dublin in 1983. She has completed many site-specific installations of blown, cast, and architectural glass work, drawing her inspiration from her cultural heritage. Working with many forms of glass making, her artwork is represented in national collections in Ireland, Britain, Japan, China, and the US and in public buildings all over Ireland. She teaches internationally and is recognized as an ambassador for Ireland’s glass community. She is currently the director of Waterford the Glass City 2015 projects as part of the Year of Design in Ireland, aimed at building awareness of the importance of glass heritage in the future of Waterford City. Fred Curtis is an internationally renowned cold glass sculptor from Wexford, Ireland. Industrially trained at the world famous Waterford Crystal Factory from the age of 16, his glassmaking knowledge and his ability in confectioning shapes out of glass on the wheel is legendary. Much of his skill is self taught and refined after many years of finding solutions to commission demands during his 30 years working in the Waterford Crystal sculpting department. Sought after by connoisseurs and collectors worldwide, Fred has designed presentation pieces for public figures such as Her Royal Highness Queen Elizabeth, US Presidents Barack Obama, Bill Clinton, and Ronald Reagan, and Mother Teresa of Calcutta. He was recently an artist in residence at Museum of Glass in Tacoma, Washington and co-taught with Roísín de Buitléar at Pichuck Glass School 2014.

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

Róisín de Buitléar

Fred Curtis

C O LDWORK I N G DEM O

Surface Tension by Mel Douglas

I was delighted to have the opportunity to discuss and demonstrate some of my key mark making and cold working methods at the 2015 GAS conference in San Jose. My current body of work explores the relationship between drawing and glass, and references the spatial and formal qualities of line, surface, and form. In my practice, I have been investigating the connection between different processes and techniques specific to both glass and drawing. My aim is to expand the understanding and application of both disciplines and create work where the drawn line and the glass form are fully integrated. Objects and drawings are often thought of as two separate entities, but my intention is to interweave and explore the creative possibilities of a hybrid space where the glass form is not just a canvas, and drawing has an active role in the work and is not merely surface decoration. In my demonstration, Surface Tension, I covered various construction and coldworking techniques including shaping, priming, and grinding surfaces. I also showed a myriad of mark making techniques, using a variety of tools, including engraving and non-traditional mark-making applications. Two techniques I covered particularly in depth were the drawn line and the constructed

Selection of drawings and sketchbooks.

Mel Douglas Photo: Charles Higgins

line. The drawn line introduced tools such as the pneumatic engravers, Shuner, stippling, diamond files, hand pads, enamels, and pencils to explore form through the trace of the hand.

I used the drawn line to look at ways in which line and mark making can be used in response to an object. By showing various ways to draw with, or on glass by tracing, contouring, shading, and outlining, I demonstrated how line provides an opportunity to highlight, exaggerate, or play with space within a three dimensional surface. The constructed line illustrated the use of glass as drawing material. Using the edge and junctions of sheet glass, stringers, trails, and the space between two planes I looked at ways of using glass as a means for linear exploration. I explained that the constructed line does not sit on the surface, instead it is integrated into the fabric of the object like a weaving, or built into the objects using threads and layers of glass. Using repetition, deviations in line quality, variations in the rhythm, combined with heat and viscosity, glass can be used as a threedimensional drawing material. By exploring the unique qualities of the glass and the rich potential of mark making, my demonstration examined the synergies between two traditionally distinct fields, form and drawing. The GAS conference is always a wonderful forum for sharing new ideas and ways of working with glass. It was my pleasure to be an active participant in the 2015 San Jose conference.

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY â&#x20AC;˘ 2015 JOURNAL â&#x20AC;˘ SAN JOSE, CA

Mel Douglas, base, body, rim, 2014, blown, coldworked, and engraved glass, 8.75 x 8.85 x 8”, 9.5 x 9.5 x 9.5”, 8.25 x 8.75 x 8.75” Private collection Photo: Stuart Hay

Mel Douglas, Drawn to a point, 2010, kilnformed and coldworked glass, 45 x 120” Private collection Photo: Stuart Hay

Mel Douglas is a graduate of the Australian National University School of Art Glass Workshop. Douglas has exhibited in many group and solo exhibitions both nationally and internationally in United States of America, Singapore, and Italy, among others. Douglas has been featured in numerous publications, and her work is held in permanent collections including the National Gallery of Australia and The Corning Museum of Glass. Her delicate, subtle work comes from the slow and considered process of engraved mark making. This process of mark making is influenced by an object’s physical and linear relationships. Douglas’ mastery of her craft is highly regarded and she has earned many awards including the 2014 Tom Malone Prize, the 2007 International Young Glass Award, and the 2002 Ranamok Glass Prize. Her artwork can be found on her website www.meldouglasglass.com.

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

Mel Douglas, Turning tide, 2011, blown, cold worked and engraved glass, 20.5 x 15.7 x 15.7” The Corning Museum of Glass Photo: Stuart Hay

C O LDWORK I N G DEM O

The Chipping of Glass by Vladimir Klein The reason I started using a chisel and hammer to chisel, split, and chip glass in its cold state was purely economic. In the late 70s, Kamenický Šenov Glass Works manufactured optical glass with strict quality criteria, and large blocks of glass that did not meet the strict quality requirements were readily available for the artist. Diamond grinding tools were not yet widely used and the discs of traditional silicon carbidebased and corundum grinders were an option, but it did not have the same hardness and durability as diamond ones. Diamond saws were not widespread at the time, and so an easy way to remove unwanted material was to chisel it off using a chisel made of hard metal. This method came in handy when I was invited to Japan for my first solo exhibition in 1993, and I was confronted with the task to fill the large spaces of Yokohama Museum with my glass sculptures. Sculptures of larger sizes are possible to create by gluing smaller pieces together or forming large blocks of optical glass, which were available at that time in Japan. My method of carving big glass blocks,

similar to creating a stone statue, aroused an interest in my Japanese students. This process excited even me, and I sensed adventure and concern about a successful outcome. Initially, chiseling was an efficient shaping method, prior to subsequent grinding and polishing. Being in Japan in new and often bizarre conditions, with new ideas and new experiences, brought new aesthetic perceptions. It seemed suitable to leave the rough, chipped surface to counterbalance the perfectly prepared and polished form. This approach can be seen in the pieces Tsunami, Water Planet, Planet Ice Planet Fire, Spiral, and Maru-Circle. Guillaume Apollinaires‘s creative principle of preferring a clear and conscious form, which is assumed in the Czech Republic, was realized in Japan on the basis of new natural, climatic, and social influences and dynamic principles inspired by the process itself, by randomness and improvising. The surfaces of the already large sculptures are partly chipped, covered by many small, equally sized “shells,” and then partly polished for insight into the mass of the object.

Vladimir Klein demonstrating his glass chipping technique at the 2015 GAS conference.

Examples of this approach include Funamori, Moonship, Fish, Magma, Eruption, and Twins. If my previous work in polished sculpture is the result of rational and technical conditions, this new method prefers more personality, handwriting, and an emotional approach by the creator. It is less easy to imitate, because it is based on confidence and even the loss of respect for the material, but simultaneously builds on the rich experience of daily contact with glass and my love for this material. Wet jet cutting is a new, economically motivated way of coldforming for me. The cut off “waste” can still be used for the smaller art objects, which is helpful since the availability of the optical material is no longer the same today as it was in the seventies. The water jet serves me well, severing the interior of the block, whose surface is later covered with engraved textures as seen in pieces like From the Bottom of the Sea and Tourou Lamp. My presentation represents economically advantageous and unique ways of expressionistic coldforming combined together.

Vladimir Klein grinding his piece during his demo at the 2015 GAS conference.

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

__________________________________ Vladimir Klein has been working with glass for fifty years. He studied at Kamenicky Senov and at the Academy of Applied Arts, Prague, under Stanislav Libenský. Klein has taught at the glass making school in Kamenický Šenov, Toyama City Institute of Glass Art, IKA Mechelen, The Glass Furnace, Bildwerk Frauenau, and The Studio of The Corning Museum of Glass. He also worked as a chief designer in Crystalex Nový Bor. Klein’s coldworking sculptures have received many awards, including Coburger Glaspreis, Kristalnacht Project Philadelphia, the International Exhibition of Glass Kanazawa, and Glasplastik und Garten Munster. His pieces are in many public collections, such as The Corning Museum of Glass, Kunst Palast Museum Düsseldorf, MUDAC Lausane, Suntory Museum Tokyo, Glass Museum Notojima, Koganezaki Glass Museum, Museum of Applied Arts, Prague, and many others. His work can be found at www.vladimirklein.cz.

Vladimir Klein, Night Flower

Vladimir Klein, Twins, 2008, 26 x 45 x 26 cm

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

C O LDWORK I N G DEM O

Secret Teachings of the Coldshop By Johnathon Turner

Johnathon Turner’s demo piece from his demonstration Secret Teachings of the Coldshop. Vittorio Costantini, Starfish

My name is Johnathon Turner (formerly Schmuck) officially and legally as of June 15, 2015 and I am the author of The Joy of Coldworking. I am honored to present at the 44th annual GAS conference in San Jose, and I wish to thank Alex Bernstein for inviting me and Cassandra Straubing for answering my endless questions about the present-day San Jose State University coldshop. As a side note, I got my start in glassmaking in the very room where the SJSU coldshop now resides; it was the classroom at the time when I attended at San Jose State in the late 1980s with Mary White. I recognize some of the machines as ones I used 27 years ago; there is a short blurb in my book, on page 19, that references some of these old friends. I owe much gratitude to the Glass Art Society for a San Jose conference and a special appreciation to all my coldworking mentors: Mary White, Michael Taylor, Jiří Harcuba, Stephen Procter, Mark Thiele, Klaus Moje, and Rich Samsel of Glasslight of Santa Cruz, who attended the demonstration. The title of the demo, Secret Teachings of the Coldshop, might sound a bit occult, but it describes the little esoteric and unknown bits of knowledge that can transform coldworking from an endless slog to an ecstatic dance. Whenever I teach or demo coldworking, I always emphasize safety first. Safety should 64

not be a secret teaching, yet it is often addressed only after an injury. For example, a friend of mine was working alone in the studio while overly tired. Her long hair got wrapped around the lathe spindle, and she was quickly scalped. There was no easy access to a shut off switch and no one else in the studio. Fortunately, others in the building heard the distress and came to the rescue and without their help, my friend would not be alive today. Afterwards, all the proper safety procedures – not working when tired or alone, tying back long hair, and an easily accessible off switch – were implemented. Let’s not ever repeat this; please, safety always comes first in the coldshop. Always think: personal safety, the safety of others, the safety of the glass piece and the tools. No piece of glass is worth dying for. With safety in mind, always start with wellannealed glass; anything else might be a bomb waiting to explode. Glass grinding machines are powerful and can be dangerous; safety glasses, dust masks, ear protection, aprons, hair restraints, no loose clothing and/or jewelry, a non skid floor, good lighting, and a work partner nearby are all essential elements in the coldshop. Eye protection is paramount and ear plugs should be worn with machines that make noise. For tools that generate dusty mists, wear a N95 cloth mask or a P100 respirator, or have strong suction on a ventilation system near the

tool. Lighting is also key, so that tools and glass can be seen clearly. Other key safety precautions include: having adequate space to freely move around; mopping wet floors to avoid becoming slippery; wearing waterproof close-toed shoes; wearing form fitting clothes with short sleeves to avoid getting tangled in machines; and having someone within earshot. Coldworking is a meditative and mindful process, and your focus needs to be on the task at hand, not elsewhere. And, most importantly, always seek out proper instruction before using a new tool. Without proper guidance and good instruction, it’s easy to spend countless hours working the wrong way and jeopardizing your health and safety. Cleanliness goes hand in hand with safety, and should not be a secret teaching. Clean tools and work areas help minimize the spread of silica dust and helps protect from accidental glass splinters. Clean all table top work areas before starting work and after finishing. Have a clean, flat surface covered with newsprint paper to lay your piece on while working; there’s nothing good about scratching a work in progress with a stray piece of abrasive or glass. With those two significant concerns addressed, I can get down to the nitty gritty of the secret teachings. So much of coldworking can be improved with a few accessories, a proper knowledge base, and good practices. Secret Teachings – It’s best to do a practice piece first, before working on the final piece. Diamond hand pads do a wonderful job working on edges, lips, corners, and small spots where a piece hit the glory hole door. A light touch may be all that is needed, rather than going onto a machine. Silicon carbide loose grit (size 100-600 grit) has many useful applications. To hand grind, Silicon carbide grit is mixed with water to create a slurry, which is put on a plate of glass while another piece of glass is ground flat against it. Hand grinding can help get rid of bevels in the bottom of a piece and is also useful in prepping a surface for polishing by getting rid of any outstanding scratches; and it goes surprisingly fast. For grinding a larger surface, a muller (a flat pestle for grinding enamel powders) is an essential item. A 400 silicon carbide finish is truly something to behold.

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

Black, wet/dry sandpaper is another worthwhile material for coldworking. Discarded belts from the belt sander can be cut up and utilized for grinding difficult to reach surfaces, and inner curves can be ground with a belt is backed up by a wooden dowel. A silicon carbide dressing stick from the hardware store can be abraded on the cutting edge of a sintered rim saw blade to help to keep the blade sharp and glaze free. To avoid blowing out the bottom of your piece while drilling, always support the bottom surface of your glass. Have some glass underneath for a seamless transition or drill half way from one side and then half way from the other. Cratex abrasive burrs work well for smoothing out rough grinding on the handheld Dremel or Foredom tools. Use a spherical diamond bit for signing work. As far as surface finishes go, an old Italian tradition is to rub pine oil into the rough surface of a piece. It’s a light and aromatic oil that penetrates the nooks and crannies and actually helps to keep the abraded surface clean. You can find pine oil in health food stores and where massage oil is available. Some folks use Armor All or Rain X to make a rough surface appear smoother.

Johnathon Turner discussing how to use a lathe.

Sharpie brand pens are great markers for coldworking, but beware. Sharpies are great for ground surfaces, but will not stay on a smooth glass surface when there’s water running over it. To keep the Sharpie markings in place, use a china marker or grease pencil over the sharpie marks. The china marker will be transparent enough to see the Sharpie lines and will dry to be an impermeable coating. A broad tipped paint pen is a suitable tool for covering a surface that needs to be coldworked. When working with stone wheels, it’s very important to be careful what marker is used to avoid getting the stone surface gummed up. Graphite pencils work best. Dish racks can store glass at odd angles that allow for complete draining. Hand dry the glass before putting it in the rack to finish its drying. Use soft washable cloths for drying glass. They are absorbent and reusable, so there will be less paper towel trash (and less expense). Absorbent cloth towels can be hung to dry and thrown in to the laundry. A banding wheel, a turntable used in ceramics, helps to center and establish a true vertical orientation of a piece since any wobbles in the form are easily seen as the piece spins. A bullseye level and a small carpenters

level can be used on the tops of pieces when grinding a flat surface. If the lip is not level when the piece is being ground, then the piece will not stand straight. Keeping an eye on the level while grinding can assure a straighter piece. Good lighting. It’s paramount to be able to see the piece, the tool, and the contact between the two when working, and it’s also important to be able to view what has been accomplished while grinding. Fluorescent lights are not enough; have a halogen, bright LED, or sunlight to inspect the work. Be sure that the glass is clean and dry when checking on the progress of coldworking. Rinse the piece off with some running water or have a dunk bucket for a quick water bath. Wash the glass with soap if necessary, or use a Waterpik or low pressure compressed air to blow out all bubbles or creases that may have filled with grit or grinding dust. Towel dry the piece or use low pressure compressed air to remove any residual moisture. Only with a totally dry surface, and good lighting, can the exact nature of the coldworked surface be scrutinized. A magnifying lens can help as well – particularly as our eyesight matures over the years. Clean water is another secret that is often overlooked. How many folks have a tile saw with a tray of murky water that recirculates as the

Johnathon Turner discussing the flat wheel.

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

glass is being sawed? In this age of drought, fresh water is a precious thing, so it’s important not to waste it while coldworking. One of the best systems to save water is cascading settling buckets. This consists of a bucket, to catch the water/slurry mix draining from a tool or machine, with a hole near the top that empties into another bucket. Clean, clear water will drain through the hole in the top of first bucket into the next. With two or three buckets in a series, and a pump in the last one, this self-cleansing cascading water settling system can provide clean water within a closed loop. The nice thing about this system is that when a bucket begins to fill up with debris, it’s easy to remove it from the loop, let it dry out, and then scoop out the dust (while wearing proper breathing protection) and dispose of the debris with a plastic bag. Finishing a piece requires an understanding of some basics. Always remember to put a small chamfer in all sharp corners to avoid chipping. It’s best to do all of this at once. Don’t polish one edge while the adjacent surface is waiting to be sandblasted. Always check progress before moving to the next step, and know that grinding for a little bit longer may just get the next step done faster.

It’s also okay to skip in-between steps here if a unique surface is being sought. A rough grind that is finished off with pumice on a brush wheel can be a very intriguing finish. Remember, it’s okay to mix it up. I’ve seen very nice smooth finishes deliberately scratched up with a few pieces of grit in a green dish scrubbie; it gave the piece a quality of age. I’ve seen a rough battuto smoothed over with a 600 belt on the top ridges of the battuto, and an inciso surface cut into with a radius wheel. Many examples of mixed surfaces by talented artists can be found. Think about firepolishing if possible; it saves time and some steps, and will add intrigue and adventure to the hotshop. Do a practice piece first. Remember, the piece is done whenever you say it is. As I mentioned earlier, I encourage you to get coldworking instruction from expert teachers. It’s almost impossible to fully learn the processes and nuances of coldworking glass from a book, particularly when just starting out. A book can add to the knowledge base, but hand skills need the instruction, watchfulness, and dialogue from a knowledgeable teacher. Hands on instruction can make your time in the coldshop easier, more effective, and safe.

__________________________________ Johnathon Turner was awarded the first Fulbright Scholarship to attend the Canberra School of Art in Australia, where he completed his postgraduate studies with Stephen Procter and Jane Bruce, and received a Master of Visual Arts (MVA) degree in 2000. Turner was fortunate enough to work with Klaus Moje while the roll-up technique for blowing kilnformed Bullseye glass was being perfected at the Glass Workshop in Canberra, Australia. He was also blessed with the chance to learn coldworking from maestro Stephen Procter before his passing, and subsequently wrote The Joy of Coldworking, a book about grinding, smoothing, and polishing blown and fused glass. Turner has a studio in Santa Cruz, California, and has taught at The Studio of The Corning Museum of Glass; Espace VERRE in Montreal, Québec, Canada; Weisser Glass Studios in Kensington, Maryland; Escuela del Vidrio in la Granja, Spain; and throughout the US. He has been running the kilnforming and coldworking programs at the Bay Area Glass Institute in San Jose, California, since 2008.

Johnathon Turner discussing the diamond saw.

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

F L A ME WORK IN G DE MO

Kinetic Construction Techniques By Bandhu Dunham For my demonstration at the 2015 GAS conference in San Jose, I presented a work in progress. Some time ago, I got it in my head to create a robotic structure based on the Strandbeests of the Dutch artist, Theo Jansen. Jansen makes large wind-powered constructions that walk elegantly along the beaches where he sets them loose to roam autonomously. They have been the subject of a TED talk and even a car commercial. What fascinated me about the Strandbeests was the intricate and clever mechanism of the legs and their coordinated movement. Having experimented with kinetic glass sculpture for many years, I had the techniques at my disposal to make a glass version of the Strandbeest a reality. Jansen’s design relies on a particular geometry, which incorporates what he calls the 11 Holy Numbers. These numbers are the result of many hours of complex computer simulation, and determine the critical proportions of the different members of each leg to generate the required movement to gracefully lift the Strandbeest and move it forward. I obtained a commercially-available plastic model of a Strandbeest and reverse-engineered the proportions of the leg parts. A more precisionoriented person might have carefully transposed the actual Holy Numbers from the available literature, but what would be the fun of that? I have found there are two ways to engineer kinetic sculptures in glass: precisely or imprecisely. This seems obvious, but what I mean is that one must either be extremely precise or one must apply a measured amount of looseness to the mechanism. A properly trained scientific glassblower might be inclined to make all parts of a device like this very exact – I say more power to them! There is a fine example of a fully functional model steam engine by Michal Zahradnik of the Czech Republic, made in 2008, which exemplifies this level of precision. My own style of kinetic sculpture has been assiduously funky. My machines are meant to have a human quality and to be effective yet accessible. They are quirky, warm, and charming – decidedly not sterile or impersonal. While I respect the use of technology for design purposes, I do not use computers to plan out my pieces (except, perhaps, second-hand). My typical projects incorporate a wide margin of error so that stresses within the working INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

Glass loops were formed around a 3/8” diameter steel tube to keep the size consistent. The glass rods are 6 mm in diameter.

A hand torch was used to weld the components together. My favorite hand torch is the Meco “Midget” with the N7 tip.

Small sections of the loops were removed to finish the assembly.

mechanism are diffused throughout the system to prevent breakage. There is a bit of an art to this approach, I have learned. Insufficient play in the linkages between my handmade parts can cause binding, and too much play will leave the mechanism ineffective. This being said, the general rule is that the longer the chain of motion in a mechanism, or the more moving parts it has, the smaller the margin of error becomes. My robotic creature will have 12 legs, all operating off of a single crankshaft with six arms. To create these legs using techniques I have developed, I fabricated some jigs out of a mullite kiln shelf and some stainless steel tubing. These jigs are based on the Holy Numbers (as approximated by me) and ensure that each leg of my walking robot is quite similar, if not identical. This is important because there are twelve legs, which must behave consistently, on the device. A certain margin of error is appropriate in the moving parts, but I will have to be careful not to exceed it, or I could endanger the whole construction. For my demonstration at the conference, I showed how I use a jig to construct one of the leg sections for my robotic creature. After forming some simple loops from a 6 mm diameter rod, I adjusted their hole size using a 3/8” steel tube as a mandrel. (figure 1) After trimming the handle, each loop ended up with a measured section of rod projecting off of it. These sub-assemblies were placed in an aligned position within my jig, and additional rod sections were welded in place to complete the leg part. (figures 2-4) At my demo, I also had a completed pair of legs on a crankshaft on hand to demonstrate the intended function. Audience members could turn the crank forward and backward to study the eerily naturalistic walking motion of one leg pair. (figure 5) While I am happy with my prototype legs, I won’t be able to fully test them until I have a functioning crankshaft with six arms, not just one. I have taken a couple of stabs at making this complicated crankshaft, but have not been happy with the precision of all the alignments. It has exceeded the safe funkiness parameter. I may have reached the limits of my equipment as well, and at the time of writing this article, this issue has not been resolved. I am confident I will work it out, and I look forward to having 68

A prototype leg pair.

a functioning walking creature in the not-toodistant future. Nonetheless, the movement of the legs is accurate and very satisfying to play with. They mimic the graceful steps of a living creature, but assert their mechanical and vitreous nature at the same time, creating the kind of paradox I like to have in my art. I want to thank the Glass Art Society for hosting this demo, and I hope it provides information that will be valuable to other glassworkers.

__________________________________ Bandhu Dunham began to teach himself lampwork technique in 1975, while still in high school. An internationally respected glass artist, author, and teacher, his work is in the permanent collections of numerous museums in the US and abroad, including The Corning Museum of Glass, the Museum of Arts and Design, Museum für Glaskunst, Niijima Glass Art Center, and Osaka University of Arts. Dunham’s Contemporary Lampworking books are the authoritative, standard instructional texts in his field. He regularly teaches workshops at craft schools and private studios around the United States and internationally. Some of his contraptions can be seen on his website at www.bandhu.info.

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

Nikolas Weinstein, Bar Agricole Installation, Singapore hotel ballroom, 2010, hot-formed borosilicate glass tubing “fabric,” triptych, each piece 7.5 x 5 x 7’ Photo: Bruce Damonte

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

David Patchen, Foglio, 2014, blown glass, murrine, 25 x 15 x 3.5”

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

Rui Sasaki, Subtle Intimacy (detail), 2013, glass, ash from plants and seaweed in Awashima, LEDs, 180 x 194 x 198 cm

Demetra Theofanous, YesterdayÊ¼s Reflections, 2010

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

Mildred Howard, The House that Cannot Pass for Any Color than Its Own, 2011, sculpture, aubergine pourpre, laminated hand-blown glass, mirrored text, painted red steel 9’ 10” x 14’ 10” x 12’ 4”, Collection of the Sacramento International Airport

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

Paul Stankard, Flowers, Fruit and Nuts, 2014, flameworked glass, 2010 Photo: Ron Farina

Vladimir Klein, Twins, 2008, 26 x 45 x 26 cm

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

Erin Dickson, Emotional Leak, 2011-14, glass, steel and rubber, 140 x 140 x 400 cm Photo: Colin Davison

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

Justin Ginsberg, Between a Lullaby and Dreaming, 2013, glass, 12 x 10 x 4â&#x20AC;&#x2122;

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

John Lewis, Glacier Vessel, 2007, cast glass with yellow gold leaf, 21” x 10” x 23” Photo: Lawrence Huff

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

FL A M E WORK IN G DE M O

Sculptural Bird Bead By Kim Fields The 2015 GAS conference in San Jose marks the first time I have demonstrated at a GAS conference, and it was a great experience. I saw a lot of old friends, made some new ones, and was able to attend several informative and inspiring demonstrations. I live in Michigan, which is quite a long way from San Jose, but it’s not as far as my career in television production was from my current life of a full-time flameworker. Art, in some form, has always been an important part of my life, but I really began to find my artistic voice after taking a beginner flameworking class in 1999. A year later, I found that working with glass was so fulfilling, I left my 20-year corporate career behind and completely devoted myself to flameworking and jewelry design. The natural world had always informed my work in art, as it does in glass. I strive for artistic realism, attempting to replicate each subject as faithfully as I can. At first, my focus was encased florals and surface-embellished beads. As my technical skills improved, I began creating sculptural birds, butterflies, and three-dimensional flower beads, and eventually progressed to combining these forms to create small sculptures. For my demo at GAS, I chose to make a stylized Great Horned Owl bead. The owl gave me the opportunity to demonstrate a variety of sculptural techniques, color overlays, and detail work. In order to save some time, I prepared several different specialty “feather” canes and stringers prior to the demonstration.

Kim Fields, Fiery Billed Aracai, 2012, flameworked and sculpted soda lime glass, 3 x 1.25 x 0.75”

Vittorio Costantini, Starfish

My process begins by extensively researching each subject, long before I sit down at the torch. I invest a lot of time studying every aspect of a subject’s form, structure, and color. I have a broad collection of field guides, which I use (in addition to other printed material and the internet) for multiple perspectives, detailed descriptions, and the common habitat of each subject. Generally, I’ll use some or all of these materials as reference while I’m working on the piece, and then archive them when the project

is finished. On some occasions, I will make preliminary sketches of a piece, but I prefer to let the work develop spontaneously at the torch. My research, combined with my spontaneous sculpting style, helps make the finished piece both detailed and coherent.

Kim Fields, Little Green Heron (detail)

Kim Fields graduated from Michigan State University with BA in advertising. She went on to build a career in television production, winning three Emmy Awards while at Chicago’s superstation, WGN-TV. She continues to explore numerous outlets for expressing her passion for the arts. INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

FL A M E WORK IN G DE M O

Sculpting Natural Forms in Boro By Demetra Theofanous and Beau Tsai Introduction

Beau Tsai, Kingfisher on Branch

by Demetra Theofanous I was honored to be invited to do a demonstration at the 2015 GAS conference in San Jose, where I have my roots. Since my pieces require a lengthy process to complete – up to three months for a large piece – I was grateful to have Beau Tsai as a collaborative artist for this demonstration. We created an assembled nature scene of a bird’s nest with eggs, sitting on a branch, with a bird perched on the branch. We made some component parts ahead of time, while others were created during the demonstration. We did not discuss our plan in detail before the demonstration, which made for a spontaneous and exciting collaboration. My nests start from a single rod, and individual threads are pulled and welded to this main starting point with a torch. The form is built outward much like a bird would truly weave a nest. The technique I developed for weaving glass works contrary to the traditional rules of heat management for borosilicate glass, and it is a tenuous process. For this reason, I made part of the nest ahead of time and completed it during the demonstration, along with blown eggs. Beau made the branches, leaves, and bird, which comprised the rest of the sculpture. The collaborative process adds a level of interaction that is often missing from my solitary time creating flameworked and cast sculpture. It was an honor to create a piece with Beau and exciting to see the final piece take shape. Thank you to GAS for this opportunity and to everyone who worked to make this conference happen.

Branch Tutorial by Beau Tsai I have been flameworking for over 40 years, and I know that I will be retiring some time soon. It is important to me to pass on my techniques to others before that happens. My birds take a very long time to create, so I made this part ahead of time. I made branches during the demonstration, and have put together a brief tutorial to explain how they were made. Thank you for this chance to do a demonstration at the GAS Conference in San Jose. (continued on page 79)

Demetra Theofanous, Yesterdays Reflections, 2010

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

Demetra Theofanous, Habatat Spirit, 2014

Materials: 1 clear boro rod, 12mm, 12” long 2 clear boro rod, 7mm, 12” long 1 clear boro rod, 5mm, 12” long Butterscotch powder Amazon Bronze medium frit, 38 mesh Butterscotch large frit 1. Start with the largest clear rod and roll it in Butterscotch powder, coating well. Start at one end of the rod and work your way to the other end, heating and melting in the powder as you go. 2. Use the same method to cover the layer of Butterscotch Powder with the Amazon Bronze frit. Melt it in well, so there are no undercuts. 3. Use the same method to cover the layer of Amazon Bronze frit with the Butterscotch large frit. Again, go from one end of the rod to the other, covering it in frit, and make sure it is melted in well. 4. Use this technique to color all of your clear rods, so you have many sizes to choose from when you make your final sculpture. 5. Anneal. 6. Sketch a basic form for your branch. 7. It is time to assemble. Start with the 12 mm rod; this is the main branch of your sculpture. Add sections of the 7mm rod to it. You can bend and shape if you like. You should have a smooth seal with no undercuts every time you join the two rods. 8. Once you have added sections of 7mm rod along your central large branch, it is time to add even smaller branches. Take the 5mm rod and attach sections of it to the 7mm rod. Do this throughout the piece. 9. You should now have a detailed branch with a large central branch and smaller and smaller branches coming off of it. Test it to make sure it sits balanced on a table, and make adjustments if needed. 10. Anneal. 11. Sandblast your piece. 12. Coat your branch with a medium after you sandblast it to show the true colors and protect the piece.

Demetra Theofanous discovered glass in 2004. Building upon a bead workshop, a short internship in borosilicate glass, and a casting class by pâte de verre masters, the Higuchis, she developed her techniques through years of experimentation in casting and flameworking. These years gave rise to the glass flowers, branches, and bird nests that are her signature forms. She has received international recognition for her sculpture, including a Juror’s Choice Award from collector Dorothy Saxe at the 2012 BAGI auction. She has a private studio in San Francisco, teaches nationally, and is president of the Glass Alliance of Northern California. Her work has been exhibited in a number of museum exhibitions nationally and internationally and is included in numerous private collections.

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

Beau Tsai has been creating borosilicate sculpture for over 30 years. He is well known for his meticulous attention to detail and has received many awards through the years. He grew up in Taiwan and discovered his passion for the arts at a young age. When he immigrated to the United States, Tsai started to consider art as a career. After watching a glass blowing demonstration, he quickly picked it up on his own, and it grew from a hobby to a full-time career.

FL A M E WORK IN G DE M O

Torchworking on the Lathe By Jay Musler

Jay Musler demonstrating how to make a wineglass on a lathe at the 2015Costantini, GAS conference. Vittorio StarfishPhoto: Joan Kruckewitt

Working on the glass lathe has been one of my favorite ways to work with glass for over 25 years. The glass spins perfectly on an axis and at a consistent speed. Working on the lathe is like having a second pair of hands. My interest in art began in high school when I took a ceramics class in the mid-1960s. After high school, I went to California College of the Arts, where I studied with Marvin Lipofsky. Thereafter, I got a job as a glassblower in Marin County, and over time, I began experimenting with glass in my garage. Eventually, I left my job and became a full time artist, ultimately setting up a studio in Berkeley, California in a building that was owned by Marvin Lipofsky. I began working with the lathe quite by accident. Around 1986, I was in my studio when a man drove up in a van looking for Marvin Lipofsky, who lived nearby. At that time he was traveling in Europe. This man was selling a glass lathe for $500. I didn’t know anything about glass lathes, but I had seen them being used in scientific glass companies, and I was interested in them. I bought the lathe, and a friend and I set it up. Adams & Chittenden Scientific Glass, a company that used lathes to manufacture laboratory glassware, was a few blocks from my studio. I visited them to see the lathes in use. One of their employees came to my studio and 80

taught me how to work with borosilicate “Pyrex” glass on my lathe as well as other tips specific to the lathe. The main function of the lathe is to hold and rotate glass tubing or rods, and it’s different from a machine or wood lathe in that both the headstock and tailstock are driven synchronously. The tail stock moves on rails and this maintains accurate alignment with the head stock. The head stock stays in a fixed position, and the tail stock can move towards or away from the head stock to gather or take away glass during the fabrication process. I began to experiment with the lathe. My bench working skills did not easily translate to the lathe because the glass acts differently; you have to master the concepts of both centrifugal force and gravity. It was difficult to coordinate the speed of the spinning glass tube that was held in the chucks with the strength of the torches in the middle of the lathe while blowing through the rubber hose. In the beginning, I suffered a few minor burns during the process. After much practice, I realized that the lathe was very helpful for making parts. At that point in my career, I began making sculptured wineglasses and I wanted to make objects to hang from them. The lathe would hold the parts steady and rotate them, which made tasks easier. I make cups, champagne glasses, wineglasses, feet, flowers, and decorative objects

on the lathe. I usually have some lathe-worked glass on my wall pieces as well. Later, I bought a Litton lathe, one that was twice the size of my first lathe. I brought this Litton lathe to the GAS conference and was invited to demonstrate how to take glass tubes and manipulate them to make a small drinking cup and a wineglass. My Litton lathe is my largest piece of equipment in my studio, a 1,000-square-foot space in the American Steel building in West Oakland where a number of painters, sculptors, welders, and creative thinkers have studios. I actually have my office inside a cargo container and have coldworking equipment, torches, and kilns in my studio. My daily schedule is to arrive at my studio and look at photos or listen to music to get inspired. Then, I organize parts, and I’ll start working on a project – gluing, painting, and sandblasting. I never do the same thing twice. Initially, I visualize what I am making, and then it changes as I work on the piece. I have many ideas and I never come up with an exact plan beforehand; I change things throughout the process. Sometimes, I let pieces sit awhile and think about them. I make multiple parts

The top of a champagne glass made by Jay Musler on the lathe.

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

Cactus cups made on the lathe.

Jay Musler. Photo: Joan Kruckewitt

Jay Musler is a glass sculptor who lives in San Francisco, California. Musler studied with Marvin Lipofsky at the California College of Arts and Crafts in the late 1960s, and worked as a glassblower for nearly a decade. He has developed his distinctive approach to glass through lampworking, cutting, assembling, and then painting his pieces, saturating the surfaces with rich, varied colors. He been awarded two fellowships by the National Endowment for the Arts, and in 1990 he received a fellowship from the California Arts Council. Musler’s work can be found in The Corning Museum of Glass, the Los Angeles County Museum of Art, the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York, the Renwick Gallery of American Art at the Smithsonian Institute in Washington, D.C., the Montreal Museum of Fine Arts in Montreal, Canada, the Musée de Design et d’Arts Appliqués Contemporains in Lausanne, Switzerland, the United States Embassy in Istanbul, Turkey, the Kitano Museum in Tokyo, Japan, and the Hokkaido Museum of Modern Art in Sapporo, Japan. His work can be seen at www.jaymusler.com.

and interchange pieces. Sometimes, I change colors. I experiment; I find a balance in my work that way. Whenever I get stuck, I return to the lathe and make a few parts, and that always inspires me again.

Jay Musler, Blue Bunny, 2007, glass, sandblasted and painted with oil

Jay Musler, Blue, wall piece with flowers made on the lathe, sandblasted and painted with oil paint

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

FL A M E WORK IN G DE M O

It’s Not Serious! How to Have Fun Flameworking as a Team! By Karina Guévin and Cédric Ginart Somehow, in our practice, we ended up creating a body of work together. The creative process wasn’t easy at first; a scientific glassblower and a crazy pink lady have very different ideas on life and how glass should be made! It was fascinating for us to learn from each other’s different backgrounds and aesthetics. This process gave us a lot of technical challenges; it really worked our brains, but we ended up with exciting ways to develop new work! During the 2015 GAS conference in San Jose we demonstrated the process we use to create pieces with one another. We made a borosilicate goblet using traditional Venetian techniques, with a twist. We chose a silly theme to illustrate our working method and used an extravagant Captain Nemo postcard sent to us by Laura Donefer as our inspiration! Why this image? Well, why not?! Anything is inspirational after all. As artists we all have to keep our eyes and minds open to the crazy ideas that pop up every day. A few nice words written by a friend on an amazing postcard could be an inspiration – and it was! We took our Captain Nemo postcard theme and extrapolated it, explaining each step in the process to the crowd. We agreed that the cup would be a submarine, the stem would be a squid, and the foot would have waves. The

Karina Guévin and Cédric Ginart demonstrating their collaborative process.

demo went well, and the goblet looked exactly like the drawing we proposed to the public. It was humorous with a steam-punk twist to it! During the demo we talked a lot about technique and the technical problems that people can have working with borosilicate glass. It was very interactive and informative

for us to help people with their own work. We discussed how scientific glassblowing influences Cedric’s artwork and how Karina adds a crazy colorful touch to it. We complete each other’s work! It’s Not Serious! expresses our belief that working with glass can be as expressive as it is challenging. This is what we teach during summer intensive classes. We try to push our students’ creativity with crazy projects, while giving them a solid technical background and the ability to express new ideas. Inspiration can come from anywhere. Every artist has to challenge themselves and open their eyes to the world. __________________________________ Cédric Ginart and Karina Guévin are glass artists based in Montreal, Québec, Canada. They work both separately and collaboratively. Guévin has a BFA in fine art and perfected her glassblowing skills at Espace VERRE in Montreal. Ginart’s path started with scientific glassblowing in Paris and has evolved to artistic pursuits. They are both part of the faculty at Espace VERRE and have taught flameworking classes at The Studio of The Corning Museum of Glass, Pilchuck Glass School, and the Niijima Glass Festival. Their work is shown in galleries and is part of many private and public collections.

Intricate goblets created on the torch by Karina Guévin and Cédric Ginart.

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

MO L D MAK I N G DEM O

Mold Making and Lost Wax Kilncasting By Mark Abildgaard I have been making molds for kilncasting glass in my own studio since 1986. For the majority of that time, I was making open-face molds using a commercially prepared investment mix; however, over the past six years I have developed my own investment mixes specifically for the lost-wax casting process. I was forced to change my approach to creating investment molds simply because my earlier methods were no longer working. I spent two years testing various mold mixes before settling on the ones that I use today, and the process I have developed through my trial and error process has been working for me, in my studio, with my kilns. Please remember that the information I am sharing here may not work in every situation, and there is no single solution for all of the problems involved in making molds for kilncasting glass. I want to share this information with anyone who is interested in kilncasting glass because creating artwork is enough of a struggle without the added burden of having technical issues that can impede the process.

Mold Process I use a multi-layer mold-making process that involves building up even layers of investment over the surface of a wax model, and I use two completely different mixes in this process. The first mix is a “splash coat” that is used to capture texture and detail from the surface of the wax. The second is a “jacket coat” that provides a resilient structure to support the mold when moving it around and during firing.

Handbuilding the mold in layers around the shape of the wax allows me to keep the thickness of the mold fairly uniform, even with very irregular forms. I developed this method to avoid cracks, which usually occur because of an uneven thickness in the mold. One advantage to this layered mold technique is that if a crack develops in the splash coat during the firing it will be stopped by the surrounding jacket coat. Conversely, if a crack develops in a single layer or poured block mold, it can run throughout the entire mold and open to the point where glass is leaking out into the kiln during the firing.

Splash Coat For the splash coat I use a ratio of 55% silica to 45% pottery plaster. I add 3% E.P.K. (Edgar Plastic Kaolin) to the combined plaster/ silica in order to improve the splash coat adhering to the wax surface. You could use a 50% plaster 50% silica ratio with no E.P.K. and achieve similar results. I weigh out the dry ingredients and pre-mix them thoroughly before adding water to them. To figure out the correct amount of water to mix, I use a plaster/silica mix chart that provides a ratio of 1:1.75 water to plaster/silica. The plaster/silica mix sheet is available from bullseyeglass.com in “Tip Sheet #5: Bullseye Box Casting.” When mixed properly, the splash coat will have the consistency of thick cream. When I apply to material, I try to get an even coating over the surface of the wax between 1/4 and 1/2 inch thick. I have been using small polyester bristle paint brushes

A large steamer after a mold has been steamed out. All the red wax has floated to the top of the water to be reclaimed.

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

Cooking pots adapted to be small wax steamers.

along with rubber spatulas to help apply the splash coat. This is a technique that you just have to practice to get the desired results. I have found that for complex forms it is better to mix several smaller batches of the splash coat rather than one large batch that might set up before it can all be used. I try to finish all of the splash coating in one session so that the layers will bond together when they cure. After the splash coat is applied, I keep the mold wrapped in plastic until I can apply final layers of jacket coat.

Moving a large mold with a hoist.

I like the way I can form these longer fibers over irregular shaped forms when applying the jacket coat, and these fibers are longer and thinner than what is available as chopped fiber. The jacket coat mix is made by measuring each part by volume and the the dry mix is added to water and mixed by feel, instead of using a calculated ratio. I generally use a one quart container for the unit of measure for the dry ingredients. I mix all of the dry ingredients before adding to water. I mix the plaster and silica first, and then add the Pearlite and then the fiber. Once mixed with water, it will have the consistency of a very thick milk shake. Jacket Coat ingredients measured by volume and mixed to a thick milk shake consistency by hand Silica – 200 mesh: White Hydrocal Plaster: Pearlite: Fiber glass:

3 parts 3 parts 2 parts 1 part

and produce steam. Each unit holds one gallon of water and will run for around 90 minutes before needing to be refilled. I modify the steamers by cutting off the fitting at the end of the hose and inserting a 3/8-inch copper tube that is around 15 inches long. The copper tubing is then fixed to the side of the vessel and bent 90 degrees so that the steam will be directed under the molds sitting on the rack. The steam does not need to be directed into the molds; by filling the vessel with steam, the molds will be saturated with heat and all of the wax will melt out. I use several layers of heavy-duty aluminum foil to cover the top of the vessel and contain the steam. Placing blankets or towels over the foil can add additional insulation. Depending on the amount of wax and depth of the molds the steam out can take from 1- 3 hours.

Wax Steam Out

Mark Abildgaard, Uroboros Totem, kilncast glass, 2013, 73 x 18 x 14”

Splash Coat – ingredients measured by weight and mixed with water in a 1:1.75 ratio Silica – 200 mesh: 55% Pottery plaster: 45% E.P.K. (Edgar Plastic Kaolin): 3% of total above

Jacket Coat For the jacket coat mix I use white hydrocal plaster because it is much stronger than the pottery plaster used in the splash coat. I also add industrial grade Pearlite and fiberglass strands to the jacket coat mix. Pearlite is a mineral that has been heated until it puffs up like popcorn, so it takes up space in the mix and helps to make the molds lighter. The fiberglass gives the mold strength by creating a matrix of interlocking fibers throughout the jacket coat. I use fiberglass that comes as a mat, and I comb out the individual fibers to separate them. 84

In the process of teaching lost wax kilncasting workshops in studios around the country, I have found a wide variety of set-ups used to remove the wax from molds. Most of them are inefficient, messy, and slow. I have come up with a standard approach to build a wax steamer using a range of off-the-shelf products. You can use any vessel to hold the molds as long as it is resistant to heat and can hold water, metal often works best. Aluminum or stainless steel cooking pots, galvanized wash tubs, or livestock tanks all make excellent vessels for wax steamers. Depending on the volume of the space you are going to heat you can add as many steamers as needed. A 30-quart cooking pot needs only one steamer; a 24-inch diameter wash tub could use two; a six-foot-long livestock tank needs five. I place an elevated metal rack on the bottom of the vessel to hold the molds. Depending on the size of the molds and depth of the vessel, the rack can be adjusted so that there is around 6 -12 inches of space below the molds. I fill the bottom of the vessel with two inches of water. As the wax melts out of the molds, it will float to the top of the water where it can be reclaimed. To create steam I use Wagner 705 Power Steamers, which are made for wallpaper removal. These steamers have electric heating elements inside to heat water

Mark Abildgaard with Uroboros Totem

Mark Abildgaard received a BA in art from San Francisco State University in 1979 and a MFA. from the University of Hawaii in 1984. After graduating from the University of Hawaii, Mark worked as an artist-in-residence at the Tokyo Glass Art Institute in Japan and at Sculpture Space in Utica, New York. Mark was awarded a five-month fellowship at the Creative Glass Center of America in Millville, New Jersey in 1985. Since 1986 he has worked in his Northern California studio creating kiln cast sculptures. His sculptures are included in the collections of The Corning Museum of Glass, the Oakland Museum of Art in Oakland, California, the Richmond Museum of Art in Richmond, Virginia, the Crocker Museum in Sacramento, California, and the Triton Museum in Santa Clara, California.

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

L EC - M O S

The Crucible team competes in the Glass Olympics at BAGI.

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

LEC -MO

Bridging the Gap from Digital to Hand: Using CAD/CAM to Create a New Language of Form within the Traditions of the Handmade By Daniel Cutrone

A rendering in Desk Proto.

A CNC milled graphite mold for hot casting.

Hot cast glass in a digitally fabricated graphite mold.

Manipulating hot glass formed from digitally fabricated graphite mold.

During my lec-mo at the 2015 GAS conference I presented my research on how to use computer-aided design (CAD) and computer aided manufacturing (CAM) with traditional glassmaking methodologies. The purpose of this discussion was to move the conversation past the typical “click and print” approach to 3D technologies and begin approaching these technologies as tools that can be used in an adaptive process. The initial questions I posed were: why would we want to use these new technologies at all? What are their capabilities? How do they advance the creation of form, and specifically, how do they relate to the craft of glass? As artists, it is our job to use data (digital or not) in ways that allow our ideas to be better understood and experienced. I would say CAD is ultimately about the specificity of data, which in turn gives rise to a new specificity of form. CAD also allows makers to think in a new space, one 86

that is quickly iterative and malleable. Data is not simple, cold facts, it is interpretable, and how we give form to that information can alter the conceptual significance and meaning of that information. As an example of the interpretive power of the artist, I showed two images of a frog. One was a true-to-life photograph of a frog and the other was a drawing of a flat, skinned frog. While both images represent a complete frog, and speak a scientific truth, their differences go beyond experiencing 2D vs. 3D representation, and evoke something more emotional for the viewer. I began working with CAD in my own work because I had a desire to use mountains, specific mountains that are from the real world. Initially, I began modeling Mt. Everest and Mt. Fuji, using CAD, by gathering large swathes of geospatial data that I sliced and diced in various ways in order to explore their aesthetics. After I completed a rendered model in CAD, the next

step was deciding how I would fabricate these data models and introduce them into the glass studio. I decided to use graphite as a material, because it has a history in glass making and is a material that I could, with reasonable ease, mill on a CNC. Another question was, “do I need the positive or the negative form of the mountain?” I came up with a few different strategies that would use both versions of the form. Once you have a positive form in Rhino (the CAD software I was using), it is very easy to create the negative mold from that positive. When you decide to physically create the form you have rendered, there are two general methods in CAM. There are additive methods, like 3D printing and there are reductive methods, like milling away material. One of the considerations, when 3D printing or milling, is toolpathing. In some ways, tool-pathing is similar to the idea of resolution, but it is also a means of adding surface design to your model. With a

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

Daniel Cutrone, Object of Desire: Two, 2014, blown glass, marble, steel, PLA digital print, 99 x 21 x 10â&#x20AC;? Photo: Matthew Hollerbush

mill you have to decide what size and shape bit you will use, the space between the tool paths, and finally the pattern the bit will travel over your model. These patterns can be anything from simple parallel lines to a continuous spiral or crisscross, among many other options. I was also interested in taking advantage of these surface designs conceptually. I wanted these patterns to be a visual residue of the 3D CAM process. For this I used Desk Proto, a program that exports your model from Rhino into G-code. The G-code is a command system in x, y, and z

coordinates, which basically tells your mill where to go and what to do. After my time spent making mountains, I had gained some insight into the potential of CAD/CAM. What did I perceive as a next step in my digital evolution? It was to step away from my original directive of using these technologies adaptively in the glass studio and keep them within the CAD/ CAM context. I designed a bird in CAD, which I then printed in translucent polylactic acid, a bio plastic know as PLA. This digitally printed bird was then placed on a glass blown branch that hangs above a mysterious reflective glass pool. This work became a conversation between the digital print and its handmade environment. In many ways, what I have done with these new 3D technologies is to make new tools that I can adapt to traditional glassmaking methodologies. For me, glassmaking must always contain an element of dance. In my eyes, the physicality of glassmaking makes it impossible for technology to replace traditional glass processes, rather I want technology to

add to the potential of glassmaking. I am interested in exploring a new vocabulary of form conceived through digital technologies. As the digital technologies become more native and fabrication technologies are easily available to makers, what roles will we allow these technologies to have within our creative process? I look to the hybridization of the new and the old. If you are uncertain how to use these digital technologies, donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t forget you can always go old school. You can mill a plaster silica block into a kilncasting mold or you can make a rubber mold of your digitally rendered form to pull waxes from a lost wax casting. I argue for the need to not have a click-and-print solution, but to have new tools that are adaptive and give rise to new creative thought inside the traditions of glassmaking.

Daniel Cutrone is an artist and educator living and working in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. He is an assistant professor in the glass program at Tyler School of Art at Temple University. He has received a number of prestigious awards and grants, and his work is held in private and public collections across the county. Among his many awards and honors, he received a Creative Glass Center of America Fellowship at Wheaton Arts and Cultural Center, and an Artist Grant from the Pennsylvania Council on the Arts. His solo exhibition Objects of Desire was recently shown at The Delaware Center for the Contemporary Arts. Daniel Cutrone, using a digitally fabricated graphic mold to form blown glass

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

LEC -MO

Poured, Plopped, Splashed, and Smeared! By Matthew Day Perez For this mold making marathon, I attempted to make as many molds as possible using a battery of techniques and kung fu-like agility. During my hour-and-a-half lec-mo it was my hope to deliver meaningful and thoughtful information and give the audience a rich understanding of my approach to creating molds for casting glass. When making molds, I employ a broad range of techniques and materials that are collated to create a final casting. This process of arranging various materials against one another – plaster, refractory cements, and wax – is guided by my overarching desire to create the mold and the model simultaneously. This process subverts the typical procedure of creating a one-to-one casting in which the model is created first, then the mold, and finally, a casting. An example of a one-to-one mold process would be: a bottle is made from wax, the wax bottle is sheathed in a refractory material, the wax is drained, and the void is replaced with molten glass; the final object is a glass bottle. The molds I create layer various refractory materials and wax. Where I want space, I use plaster, and where I want glass, I use wax. Each material becomes a placeholder for a future material, space and glass.

This approach was demonstrated through the four common tactics I utilize while creating molds. These tactics include the Car Park, Drill, Poured, and Refractory Cement methods. These techniques are often used in tandem with one another, further subverting any attempt to stabilize and solidify the process. The molds are frequently made in one direction, turned on edge, additions are made, and finally cast with glass; the “switch access” of casting glass.

Wax is poured into coddles and sprue wax is placed into the form. (Car Park Mold)

Coddles are set up and tipped at an angle to achieve a wedge shape. (Car Park Mold)

Car Park This method, or rather design, for mold construction was developed in the winter of 2009. It was the first time I considered creating mold and model simultaneously. This desire was born out of a larger yearning to subvert the process of casting and deny conscious aesthetics. However, as I have practiced this subversive process, another set of aesthetic decisions has become problematic. I now know how the components fit together, and therefore I am making more and more considered aesthetic decisions in the mold making process. Very simply, the Car Park mold is created by layering hot wax impregnated with wax posts and Ransom and Randolph 910. The R&R 910 is mixed with one part water to three parts

R&R 910 (1:3). Coddles are then used to determine the shape and boundary of the final casting. I am careful to measure the thickness of each layer, aiming to create as much uniformity as possible. This assists in the cooling of the final object. Once the initial layering is completed, it looks much like a layer cake of brown wax and green refractory material. The R&R 910 is then scored and keyed so that the mother mold locks onto the individual layers of refractory. I have found that the keys need to be deep, because the plaster/silica expands very gently as it sets and, if not keyed deeply enough, the planes may slip. The layered block is then set on edge onto a thickness of clay that acts as a reservoir for glass known as a sprue. The entire block is then sheathed in plaster/silica. The ratio of the mold mix is one part water to 1.75 parts plaster/silica that has been mixed 50/50 by weight (1:1.75). The last layer of the mold is a refractory cement mixture consisting of KS-4 cement, plaster, silica, and water. KS-4 cement is a refractory material utilized in kiln and furnace building. The recipe for this layer is 0.5 parts water to two parts KS-4 to one part both plaster and silica (0.5:2:1:1). This can be modulated depending on aridness of the dry

A completed Car Park mold in the kiln. The interior layer is plaster silica, and the exterior is refractory cement. (Car Park Mold)

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

Matthew Day Perez, Filtering Light, 2010, cast and coldworked glass

ingredients. I will discuss KS-4 further in the Refractory Cement section of this article.

Drill Much like Car Park, this mold is constructed in a layered method, but rather than building vertically, this mold is constructed horizontally. Invested plaster/silica cores are poured and have a softer mix ratio; 60% silica to 40% plaster. This creates a softer yielding material for the glass to compress against. Once the initial core is poured, it is shaped and wrapped with wax, creating a large wax ring around the core. I then use coddles to determine the form and outside parameter of each subsequent shape, or ring. Wax is then placed in the void to create another ring, and the soft core is poured into the shape created by the coddles. The process is repeated until I arrive at the final form. The large block is then steamed to remove all the wax, and each of the soft cores are dislodged. The freed cores are drilled into, creating channels that the glass will flow though. When the mold is reassembled, the spaces that were drilled will connect the rings where the wax had been. Once the cores have been drilled, they are arranged back into place, keyed, and wax is replaced to hold the space where the glass will flow as the mother mold is made around all components. The mother mold is made in a similar method to Car Park, with the first layer consisting of plaster and silica, then a final layer of refractory cement. Again, the wax and refractory materials are simply placeholders for glass and space.

Poured I rarely pour molds because they are a homogeneous mixture, which means that if a crack develops in the mold during the firing process, it is most likely to spread and become problematic. A hand built mold, built with several layers, is less likely to crack completely through because each layer is independent of the next. With that said, there are good reasons for a poured mold. During the production of my Chain Mail series I needed a material that

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

I could pour over a fragile network of wax, that was strong enough to not crack during firing process, but was easily excavated after the casting was complete. I determined I could cut the R&R 910 with even parts plaster and silica to create an ideal mold material for this task. This mixture is measured by feel, rather than by weight. Water is placed in a bucket and even, uniform, cups of R&R 910, plaster, and silica are placed into the bucket one by one, until a dry even mound is formed. The bucket, when tilted, should feel dense. The material is mixed and poured into dammed coddles and, due to the fragility of the model, it is poured into the corner rather than directly over the wax. The R&R 910 has de-bubbler built into the formula, so as the material envelops the model bubbles will naturally be sloughed from the surface of the wax. Note: Ransom and Randolph 910 needs to be brought up to casting temperature slowly or it will crack.

Refractory Cement Several times within this entry I have brought up the use of refractory cements, like KS-4. This material is utilized in the final layer of many of my molds and has replaced the use of a grog layer. The traditional grog layer is mixed

Matthew Day Perez, Sending Light, 2010, cast and cold worked glass

with even parts plaster, silica, water, and grog. This yields a fairly strong outer shell, but as the mold is scaled up, the grog is simply not strong enough to contain larger castings with more head pressure. In the past, I would use several layers of plaster/silica mixture and then a grog layer. This method yields a larger, heavier, and wetter mold. Refractory cement, on the other hand, is stronger than grog and also requires less material, making the final mold thinner. I use refractory cement in two variations, a straight uncut version and a version that contains plaster and silica. The former is incredibly hard and can withstand tremendous head pressure and a great deal of static pressure caused by the glass pushing against the walls of the mold. The uncut recipe is roughly one part water to seven parts KS-4 (1:7), but the draw back of this recipe is that it must be cut away from the mold with a diamond saw. To circumnavigate this problem, I created a softer recipe of 0.5 part water, 2 parts KS-4, 1 part of each plaster and silica (0.5:2:1:1). This jacket is not as strong as the uncut 1:7 recipe, so it can only be scaled so far, however, after it is fired, it can be pried away from the mold with a screwdriver. Note: All KS-4 recipes must be brought up to casting temperature slowly or it will crack.

Matthew Day Perez, Weaving Light, 2007, cast and coldworked glass Photo: Rachel Smith

__________________________________ Matthew Day Perez received his BFA from Illinois State University and his MFA from the Rhode Island School of Design. Continuously experimenting with the potential of combining, subverting, and exploiting materials, Day Perez works with a diverse set of media: glass, printed matter, digital media, and installation. Day Perez has received many awards including the Fulbright Fellowship, the John Rena National Endowment for the Arts Scholarship, a U.S. State Department Grant for new works, a Lois Roth Grant, as well as residencies at The Corning Museum of Glass, The Creative Glass Center of America, and Pilchuck Glass School. He has lectured at several academic and creative institutions both domestically and abroad in addition to numerous exhibitions in the United States, Australia, Asia, and New Zealand.

After the mold dissembled channels are drilled into the secondary core so that glass can flow between connecting planes and rings. (Ring Mold)

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY â&#x20AC;˘ 2015 JOURNAL â&#x20AC;˘ SAN JOSE, CA

LEC -MO

The History of Photosensitive Materials and their Potential for Artists Working with Glass By Kristin Deady

Kristin Deady, Single Point Perspective (first view, installation shot), 2013, mirrored glass, and paint, 12 x 10 x 12’

In my investigations of the science and history of optics – glass and mirror, lenses, illusion, and photography – I am exploring the relationship between vision and knowledge. Our eyes are mere mediators that interface with the world; we use them to see, but what are we really seeing? We construct our idea of self internally, aided by external images, but our perspective is necessarily distorted, uniquely situated, and completely individual. The way in which we construct our conception of the world, and in turn our unique notion of self, is an amazingly complex process influenced by history and bound by physiology. To begin my lec-mo, I presented a brief history of the projected image and the development of chemical photography. The invention of photography is dated to 1839, though the seeds were planted earlier. It is incredible how quickly photographic images have come to saturate our contemporary world less than 200 years since their invention. I also noted that glass and photography have a technological, historical, physical, and conceptual relationship. The development of each has radically influenced the way that we see the world. Photography, as well as glass, has given us the ability to see what our eyes cannot naturally perceive by taking in the world from vantage points that are impossible for the human eye to inhabit without

the aid of technology. Within my own research and creative work I have been utilizing physical and chemical photographic principles that reference the historical technologies used to project and capture images, to see and record the world; in other words, I use photographic technologies to delve into the history of vision. I am interested in how photography informs and distorts our ideas about the world and, subsequently, our conception of self. For instance, memories are recorded in photos, but can still become transformed and distorted. An image can record and represent a moment so accurately, yet it lacks just as much information as it reveals. In my practice I enjoy playing the role of avid researcher and experimenter, and following through with the question, “I wonder what would happen if...?” Photography and glass are both processes of magic, and there is always something

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

new to see and play with; surprise and discovery are not uncommon. In my recent work I have been experimenting with unconventional ways of capturing images and playing with the idea of the photograph as a construction. I have made my own cameras, experimented with a variety of chemicals, and continue to find numerous ways to capture images. The subsequent distortion and disruption of an image that occurs in the studio holds more interest to me than a straight photograph from a conventional camera. One of my ongoing projects is The Dinner Party Project. For this project, I invite glassblowers to dinner and ask them to provide me with a glass cup that they have made. The design and construction of each attendees’ cup happens independent from me. I create a cup as well. Each cup is then coated with a liquid photographic emulsion and placed in a pinhole camera constructed with four equally spaced holes, giving the camera a 360-degree

Kristin Deady, Reba, 2015, image taken with box camera, a chain made of glass was inserted in the camera prior to the image being taken, 14.5 x 10”

view, which is projected onto the cup. Each cup camera is placed within each guests’ place setting on the table. When we sit for our meal together all of the pinholes on the cup cameras are opened and are covered back up upon completion of the meal. The resulting “glass cup negatives” are used to make prints in the darkroom. The independent experience and visual remnants of making the cup is overlaid with the situational, and relational, experience of the dinner. In another project, I explore the physical construction of an image as well as the history of image making in the installation Site Lines. 4,500 feet of cotton line crisscross a space with over 850 images hanging from the line, each attached with a clothespin. I have collected the images by sourcing them from history and by capturing them myself. The strategies for this are numerous. I have used as many techniques (ways of seeing) as I can come up with to capture the images. When the viewer looks into the mirror on the wall opposing the field of hanging photographs, the viewer sees himself or herself standing in front of a single image composed through the alignment of every image in the space.

Kristin Deady, Studio in a Cup, 2013, glass cup negative exposed in a pinhole camera and resulting print created from cup

Cyanotypes on Glass The Chemistry The cyanotype process is known as a nonsilver process, while traditional black and white photography is a silver process. The chemistry is reactive due to the iron salts in the solution. There are two chemicals needed: ferric ammonium citrate, which is the light-sensitive component containing the iron salts, and potassium ferricyanide. The color created from the reaction between these chemicals produces what we know as Prussian blue. The process was invented by Sir John Herschel, who was looking for a way to efficiently make copies of his scientific notes. The cyanotype chemistry is ultraviolet (UV) light sensitive. This means that you can mix chemical and coat your paper indoors, away from sunlight, but do not need to find or make a darkroom. However, once you get your solution mixed and coating complete, it is still a good idea to expose as soon as possible or put your prepared work away from all light sources until you are ready to do your exposing. 92

Kristin Deady, My Cup, from the Dinner Party Project, 2013-ongoing, black and white print made from a glass cup negative

Materials: • Bostick and Sullivan Cyanotype Printing Kit • Container for mixing solution • Metal container for a hot water bath • Hot water • Glass rod for stirring • Foam brush • Knox unflavored Gelatin • Newspaper or paper towels for covering your work surface • Glass! You will definitely be able to get a nice print on sheet, but the process will work on shapes as well. To get a good result you want the image or negative you are printing with to be laid over the sensitized surface as closely as possible. • Arm and Hammer Washing Soda • Tray for rinsing

Directions: 1. Make sure to clean all of your glass well before coating. 2. Measure and mix a solution of equal parts A and B of the cyanotype chemistry. 3. Sprinkle gelatin onto the surface of your cyanotype solution. I have found that a teaspoon of gelatin per every 25 ml of solution works well, but I am always trying to get away with less. 4. Allow solution to “swell” (aka, sit there) for a minimum of five minutes. 5. Place the container you have mixed your chemicals in into a warm bath. Stir, dissolving the gelatin completely. 6. Hold your glass flat, like a waiter, and pour a generous amount of solution into the center of the plate. Slightly tip plate towards

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

Kristin Deady, Site Lines, 2014, installation view, handmade convex glass mirror in wooden frame, 4500’ of cotton line, over 850 images, clothespins, 15’ x 28’ x 28’ Photo: John Carlano

one corner to move the solution around the surface; try not to let it flow over the edge. Continue tilting the plate to each corner in succession until the plate is completely coated with the chemistry. Dump remaining chemistry back into the container of your prepared solution. 7. Allow plate to dry completely. 8. Place your negative (or whatever you have chosen to print from) onto the glass. Put another piece of glass on top, effectively creating a negative sandwich.

Kristin Deady, Cyanotype tests, 2014, assorted images on plates and blown objects.

9. Expose. 10. Run plate through your tray filled with cold water. No more than 10 seconds. You will not wash away all the unexposed material in this step. 11. Dry completely leaning upright. This initial drying of your exposed image will help to harden the gelatin and keep it on the glass. 12. Rinse again, being sure to remove all of the unexposed solution (green). 13. Dry completely. Notes: • It is possible to tone cyanotype images. A few drops of hydrogen peroxide in water will make your blue more vibrant and saturated. Other possibilities include tea, coffee, and wine. • You can place objects over your plates to make a photogram or you can create your own photographic negatives by printing on transparencies. Graphic black and white images work really well. Even better, if you have a color printer, is to create a CMYK color mask of 0% cyan, 55% magenta, 55% yellow, and 0% black. • The glass has to be clean! I use Arm and Hammer Washing Soda and it seems to do a great job. My hands seem to be really sensitive to it, so I wear nitrile gloves while cleaning.

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

Kristin Deady, Site Lines (mirror detail), 2014, installation view, 15 x 28 x 28’

__________________________________ Kristin Deady’s work investigates the constructed nature of human perception. The perspective of each individual is relational, situational, and limited, as our senses are mere mediators between the outside world and our inner mind. Deady’s work freely crosses mediums and is more tightly bound to her investigations than to a specific material, though her ideas are often provoked and informed by her relationship with glass. Kristin received an AA from Salem Community College in 2005, a BFA from the Rochester Institute of Technology in 2010, and completed her MFA at the Tyler School of Art in 2014. Deady is currently the glass technician at Tyler and teaches in the glass departments at Tyler and the University of the Arts in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Her artwork can be found at www.kristinleedeady.com.

LEC -MO

3D Printing Meets Glass By Mark A. Ganter A kiln cast glass head from a 3D scanned and mold was 3D printed model.

With all the news articles and social media attention that 3D printing has been receiving over the past several years, it is about time that we take a look at how 3D printing can be applied to a variety of activities associated with glass.

What is 3D printing? 3D printing: (noun) a process for making a physical object from a three-dimensional digital model, typically by laying down many successive thin layers of a material. 3D printing is not a new technology. In fact, 3D printing is about 30 years old, and one of the earliest commercial systems became available in the mid-1980s. Originally 3D printing was called “rapid prototyping,” and generally, rapid prototyping was used in industrial or research processes. The cost of systems ran well into hundreds of thousands of dollars. Many things have changed since rapid prototyping’s introduction; the most significant change being its massive reduction in cost. Today, many systems are available for less than $2,000 and there are some very acceptable systems in the $700 range. Material costs have fallen too, and today filament costs about $15-25 per pound. Social media has played a large part in shaping the current trends in 3D printing, including its name change from rapid prototyping. To learn about the latest trends in 3D printing, one only has to open their favorite web browser and start reading. I am encouraging each one of you to engage 3D printing like any other disruptive technology – learn, try, explore and visit your nearest makerspace or hackerspace.

The 3D printing process requires a 3D computer model of what you wish to build. Because of the technical knowledge needed to create a 3D model, this can be a challenging issue for many people in the art community. There are many different 3D modeling systems for many different market segments. You might look at local community colleges or tech-schools for training in computer-aided design (CAD) software. You or one of your team members will need to spend some significant time becoming proficient with CAD software;

it’s an important skill, like any other skill. Once you have a digital 3D design, then 3D printing becomes possible. One example is a simple ruffle bowl, pictured in this article, that has been designed, copied and mirrored in a virtual modeling system, and 3D printed. There are seven major categories of 3D printing:1 binder jetting, direct energy deposition, material extrusion, material jetting, powder bed fusion, sheet lamination, and vat photopolymerization. The descriptions and details of all of these methods are beyond the scope Far left: A digital CAD model of a torus. Left: A sliced digital CAD model of a torus.

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

PLA out of the investment mold at 400-500°F in a kiln, and use a removable drip pan under the mold. You will need to remove the drip pan and then do a burnout firing at 700-800°F. Once the mold is clear of PLA, you can cast glass via your favorite process.

Direct 3D printing

A 3D powder printer printing glass. Multiple objects are being printed all at the same time.

of this article, but two of these processes are directly adaptable to our needs as glass artists – material extrusion and binder jetting. Briefly, plastic material extrusion is a process that is fundamentally a hot glue gun on a threeaxis gantry and is often referred to as filament printing. Melting filament and extruding it in cross-sections on successive layers creates a 3D object. Filament printing is what most people envision when anyone is discussing 3D printing, due to its ubiquity on social media. Currently filament printing is the most common and accessible form of 3D printing and the least expensive. The binder jetting process produces a 3D object by spreading successive layers of fine powder and selectively printing binder on each layer, causing powder to adhere in the area of the desired design. This process is commonly called 3D powder printing. 3D powder printing is one of the more versatile processes because almost any material that can be finely powdered is a potential printing material.2, 3

Adapting 3D Printing to Glass With all the hype about 3D printing, the real question is “What’s in it for me?” There are two main processes in which you can directly employ 3D printing to support and supplement the production of glass artwork.

New Lost-Wax Process Since the early days of rapid prototyping, there has been interest in the production of molds and patterns by the foundry sector. It should not be a surprise that the production of master positives for lost-wax casting is an area of direct interest for the glass community. The process of lost-wax glass casting is perhaps the most natural area for the use of 3D printing. It is a direct path from CAD model to lost-wax positive. Filament printing easily allows for the production of 3D positives in a variety of plastic materials and once you have your 3D CAD model, you have the choice to add your sprues and venting systems either manually or within the CAD system. I encourage you to experiment with both and to mix wax and printed objects. We will focus on polylactic acid or PLA plastic, because it is the most common plastic used for 3D printing. PLA is a biodegradable plastic made from plant starch; therefore it can safely melted and burnt out of an investment mold. PLA and most waxes play together nicely in the lost-wax process. In fact, wax can be used to amend the surface detail of a 3D printed part (a difficult process in 3D CAD systems). Once your positive form is 3D printed, only a few modifications to the process are required to use a PLA instead of wax. (Similar processes and materials will allow metal casting for tooling or sculpture). You will need to melt the

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

If you have access to a 3D powder printer, then printing glass objects directly becomes a new possibility. You will need to confer with the 3D printer owner/operator to ask if they would consider printing powdered glass and if so, you will also need to ask about the details of changing printing materials. The printer will need to be cleaned of all previous powder. You will find information about the glass 3D printing process on Open3DP.4 Glass printing powder is a mixture of 200 mesh powdered glass (finer is better), malto-dextrin, and extra-fine powder sugar in a ratio of 10:1:1 by weight .5 This powder will completely fill the build space, as it is used for both the printed part and unbound support. You will likely need to mix about 15-20 pounds. Once you have your design in the computer, then you can simply print it in glass using the 3D powder printer. The 3D powder-printing process generates 3D objects which are about 40% porous (it is an artifact of printing in powder) and the unfired objects are a bit fragile. After printing, you should let your printed objects dry naturally in a bed of the unbound mixture powder (this may require special accommodations from the 3D printer operator). Drying time might last from overnight to a few days depending on your object’s thickness. After the printed objects are dry, you can start the de-powdering process – the removal of all unbound powder surrounding the object. It is suggested to gently brush the print with a one or two-inch paintbrush to remove the majority of the loose powder. Then you should use compressed air to remove the remaining powder from your object, using a glove box with a HEPA vacuum for your safety. Next, you will want to kiln fire your objects because the glass is only bound by the sugar after it is printed. Like a thin porcelain ceramic object, your 3D printed glass part will need to be fired within a bed of support material (something that doesn’t melt or stick to glass during firing), like talc, kaolin, EPK, alumina, or grog. 95

Firing consists of two main phases: an organic burn-off segment and a fusing segment. The organic burn-off occurs at 700°F for one to three hours, depending on part thickness. The fusing segment occurs at 1175°-1275°F (for COE96 glass) for 20 minutes to several hours, depending on part thickness. There is no annealing required since the object is composed of finely fused glass particles! Simply turn off the kiln. Lastly, remove the object from its fusing support material, and post-process as necessary using glass enamels or paints. The final fused objects can become translucent but are not likely to become completely transparent, and may look similar to a fine powder pâte de verre. The process of 3D powder printing glass is an exciting development that continues to reinforce the amazing versatility of glass as a medium.

Conclusion Overall, I hope that I’ve piqued your interest in exploring the possibilities of 3D printing being merged into your studio practices. 3D printing and CAD can bring an exciting set of new tools to your practice.

References 1. Standard, A.S.T.M. “F2792. 2012 Standard terminology for additive manufacturing technologies.” West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM International. See www.astm.org. (doi: 10.1520/F2792-12) (2012). 2. Utela, Ben, Duane Storti, Rhonda Anderson, and Mark Ganter. “A review of process development steps for new material systems in three dimensional printing (3DP).” Journal of Manufacturing Processes 10, no. 2 (2008): 96-104. 3. Utela, Ben R., Duane Storti, Rhonda L. Anderson, and Mark Ganter. “Development process for custom three-dimensional printing (3DP) material systems.” Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering 132, no. 1 (2010): 011008. 4. “Glass 3DP…”, by admin, Sept. 2009 @ http://depts. washington.edu/open3dp/2009/09/glass-3dp/ 5. “3DP Glass Recipe V2” by admin, Oct. 2009 @ http://depts.washington.edu/open3dp/2009/10/ 3dp-glass-recipe-v2/

__________________________________ Mark A. Ganter PhD graduated from the University of Wisconsin in 1985. He is a professor of mechanical engineering at the University of Washington. Professor Ganter’s main research activities focus on the application of computational techniques to art, architecture, and engineering design/manufacturing problems. His current work focuses on the development of new materials and processes for 3D printing and 3D printing systems including ceramic and glass printing materials.

3D printed portrait of Mark Ganter

3D printed CAD models of a ruffle bowl were made in Rhino3D and printed via Plastic Material Extrusion.

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

LEC -MO

Through the Looking Glass Zoetrope By David King In 1873, Étienne-Jules Marey, a French physiologist, wrote La Machine Animale in which he claimed that all four of a horse’s hooves leave the ground during a gallop.1 It was Leland Stanford, former California Governor and railroad magnate, who took up the challenge of proving Marey’s theory. Stanford commissioned Eadweard James Muybridge to attempt to capture a clear image of a horse’s gallop. Muybridge was an accomplished photographer, mostly known for his artistic compositions of the American West and Central America. Stanford had previously commissioned Muybridge to produce a panoramic photograph of San Francisco from his property on Nob Hill, however, Muybridge was simply a hired technician for Stanford and had never before produced clear images of moving animals.2 To capture serial images of a running horse, Muybridge set up a battery of cameras along a horse racetrack and designed an electromagnetic shutter system to limit each camera’s light exposure to only one-one thousandth of a second. The cameras’ shutters were triggered by a series of strings struck by the horse as it ran past. Muybridge later claimed the critical shutter invention as his own, although there is evidence that it was actually the idea of a young engineer named John D. Isaacs. Muybridge’s major contribution to the process was his application of an ammoniac developer, which made the collodion effectively more sensitive to light and enabled him to develop photographs with extremely short exposures. These images were also re-touched by Muybridge allowing the silhouette of the horse and rider to be clearly delineated.3 The project received much public attention. Muybridge, a consummate businessman and self-promoter, upon understanding the artistic and scientific significance of this series of photographs, left on a lecture tour across the United States and Europe.4 During this series of lectures, Muybridge claimed far more of the credit for both the inception and technical innovation of the photographs than he really deserved. One of the locations for Muybridge’s lectures was Marey’s home in Paris, in 1880.5 Along with the documentation of Stanford’s galloping horse, Sallie Gardner, Muybridge demonstrated his moving image invention, the zoopraxiscope, which some considered to be the first movie projector.6 The zoopraxiscope projected images

Eadweard Muybridge, The Horse in Motion, 1878

David King, Sisypuss (Glass Zoetrope), 2015, blown glass, steel, wood, electronics, 18 x 22 x 25”

from rotating glass disks in rapid succession to give the impression of motion.7 By all accounts the lecture and demonstration by Muybridge for Marey was a success. As a result, Marey commissioned Muybridge to produce images of birds in flight. Unfortunately, he found Muybridge’s attempt insufficient for his scientific purposes. Marey found that Muybridge’s battery of cameras method was often prone to inaccuracy, and required all images to be taken from the same perspective. As a result, Marey, who had first inspired the animal locomotion photography of Muybridge and Stanford, was in turn inspired by Muybridge to develop his own technology. Having learned about Muybridge’s dry-plate collodion development process, Marey adapted that information for his own photographic process, which he called “chronophotography.”8 Marey’s chrono-

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

photography focused on proving or disproving popular notions surrounding animal motion, like the idea that a cat always lands on its feet.9 Muybridge went on to publish his seminal work, Animal Locomotion: an Electro-Photographic Investigation of Connective Phases of Animal Movements (1887)10 and his work remain influential to artists; however, he lost the interest of most scientists.11 Marcel Duchamp stated Marey’s influence on his work in an interview with museum curator, Katherine Kuh about his painting Nude Descending a Staircase No. 2. “In 1912 ... the idea of describing the movement of a nude coming downstairs while still retaining static visual means to do this, particularly interested me. The fact that I had seen chronophotographs of fencers in action and horse galloping gave 97

me the idea for the Nude. It doesn’t mean that I copied these photographs. The Futurists were also interested in somewhat the same idea, though I was never a Futurist. And of course the motion picture with its cinematic techniques was developing then too. The whole idea of movement, of speed, was in the air.” 12 I first became compelled to develop my own animation device when I saw a GIF of a small kitten attempting to run up a plastic slide only to endlessly slip, and thus remain in the same position, as if on a treadmill. I immediately recognized a direct reference to the animal locomotion photography of Muybridge and Marey. I also saw a reference to the plight of Sisyphus. In Greek Mythology, Zeus punishes Sisyphus for his chronic deceitfulness by compelling him to roll an immense boulder up a hill, only to watch it roll back down, thus repeating this action forever.13 I believe Sisyphus’s plight, as well at the kitten’s, is an appropriate metaphor for the creative process. I was also drawn to the absurdity of building a pre-cinematic device to translate and display a GIF, the most ubiquitous of contemporary

Marcel Duchamp, Nude Descending a Staircase, No.2, 1912, oil paint, 4’ 10” x 2’ 11”

Cat on Slide still from a sourced GIF.

internet video formats. GIF stands for Graphics Interchange Format and was it first introduced by CompuServe in 1987 and remains a popular platform for short animations on the internet. The prevailing GIF content of short, cyclical animations of a lowbrow nature seemed in perfect parallel to the typical content of zoetropes of the Victorian era.14 While designing the device to translate the cat GIF, I looked specifically at the zoetrope. Created in 1834 by the British mathematician William George Horner, the basic form of the zoetrope is a revolving drum with viewing slits placed between a sequence of images on the inside of the drum. Horner called his device the “daedaleum,” in reference to the Greek myth of Daedalus. The zoetrope became popular in the 1860s when a version was developed with the viewing slits placed above the pictures, allowing the strips of images to be easily interchangeable. This “philosophical toy” was patented and marketed by both English and American makers, including Milton Bradley. It was the American inventor William F. Lincoln who coined the name “zoetrope” for his version, meaning “wheel of life.”15 My main design contribution to the form of the zoetrope is the addition of the large central glass lens. I have been making sculptural installations with lenses generated from blown glass spheres and water for several years. My familiarity with the specific properties of these objects led me to consider how a water lens might distort and magnify imagery. By placing the lens in the center of the cylindrical drum, the animation will appear in the reflection on the bottom plane of glass, flipped vertically.

Because I am using glass for the drum of the zoetrope, light became the obvious choice for resolving the static images into a moving one. From the YouTube tutorial titled Make a High Tech Zoetrope I learned about a way to use a strobe LED to create the illusion of animation, rather than the traditional approach of cutting viewing slits across from the images. The gentleman from the tutorial activated the strobe light by placing magnets on the underside of the rotating disc at the same interval as the images. The magnets triggered an LED by passing over a magnetic reed switch at one specific location.16 The result is that the light strobes precisely at each frame no matter what speed the rotation happens to be. My technologically savvy friend, Bryan Kekst Brown assisted in programming an Arduino, an open source microcontroller, to control the burst rate of the LED strobe and insert a slight delay. This allowed for more leeway in the exact positioning of the glass drum relative to the strobe light. The project and research presented constitutes an examination of the history of the moving image through several layers of historical precedent, most prominently, the work of Marey and Muybridge and the development of the GIF. Incorporating the blown glass lens is my way to acknowledging the significance of being a maker in a technologically sophisticated society. My experience of looking at the world through glass changed the orientation of my perspective from one where objects and images are taken at face value to one where images, both still and moving, are understood as projections of fabricated value systems. I would like to thank the Glass Art Society

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

for inviting me to present on this topic. The constraints of the lec-mo format helped to formalize the information that I have been collecting for many years, and the result has been a more focused and fully-realized project. I would also like to thank Pilchuck Glass School, which awarded me an Emerging Artist in Residency in 2014. Without the time and financial support provided through the EAiR program, this project most likely would not have been possible.

Bryan Kekst Brown helping to program an Arduino to control the burst rate and timing for the strobe light.

1. Marta Braun, Eadweard Muybridge, Reaktion Books Ltd., London, 2010, 133 2. Ibid., 134-138 3. Ibid., 139-140 4. Ibid., 147-150 5. Ibid., 172 6. Ibid., 166 7. “Zoopraxiscope”, Wikipedia, last modified on 4 June 2015, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoopraxiscope 8. Marta Braun, Eadweard Muybridge, Reaktion Books Ltd., London, 2010, 173-175 9. “Ètienne-Jules_Marey”, Wikipedia, last modified on 14 May 2015 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Ètienne-Jules_Marey 10. Marta Braun, Eadweard Muybridge, Reaktion Books Ltd., London, 2010, 182 11. Ibid., 173 12. “Nude Descending a Staircase, No. 2”, Wikipedia, last modified on 11 June 2015, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nude_ Descending_a_Staircase,_No._2 13. “Sisyphus”, Wikipedia, last modified on 16 May 2015, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sisyphus 14. “GIF”, Wikipedia, last modified on 25 June 2015, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GIF 15. “Zoetrope”, Wikipedia, last modified on 2 June 2015, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoetrope 16. “Make a High Tech Zoetrope” https://www.youtube. com/watch?v=JccZQk-4OW4

David King

__________________________________

Wiring the electronic components together for the zoetrope.

David King makes objects, installations, and drawings that address the transiency of human perception. After earning an MFA from Tyler School of Art in 2011, King presented an Emerging Artist Lecture at the 2012 Glass Art Society Conference in Toledo, Ohio and was awarded a Creative Glass Center of America Fellowship at WheatonArts in Millville, New Jersey. He was recently an Emerging Artist in Residence at the Pilchuck Glass School and Resident Artist at the University of Sunderland and the National Glass Centre in Sunderland, UK. King has taught at Tyler School of Art, Ohio State University, and Pilchuck Glass School. His work has been shown internationally and is represented in New Glass Review 32, 34, and 35. He currently teaches at the University of the Arts in Philadelphia and lives in Richmond, VA.

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

LEC -MO

Mastering the Void By Joanna Manousis During my lecture and demonstration at the 2015 Glass Arts Society conference in San Jose, I presented two distinct refractory mold-making methods to achieve residual details within solid, kilncast glass. As a starting point, I highlighted various sculptural objects and installations from my own portfolio that had been fabricated using “core” molding strategies, namely, “hanging-core” and “surface-core” molds. Core molds are fabricated by installing a positive refractory form (the detail that you wish to imprint as a negative space), inside a refractory mold that has the volume and shape of the final glass casting. These mold processes require a cast refractory core, taken from a rubber mother mold. The core is incased inside a hollow wax form (for hanging-core) or clay form (for surfacecore); glass will eventually take on the volume of the clay or wax. When the refractory core is suspended within either of these two mediums, the positive is sprued, vented, and treated in the same way an object would be prepared for a traditional hand built refractory mold. Ultimately, glass is cast into the mold, circulating around the refractory core but not penetrating it. Once cast, the refractory core is carefully removed using forged metal tools and a dental Waterpik, thus leaving a void within the glass that is fully revealed when the surface of the glass is polished.

The Specifics of the Hanging-Core Mold Process The hanging-core method is essential for large castings and for cores that have a height that exceeds its width. Also, refractory cores that have protruding surface details (like a birds beak) should be handled using the hangingcore technique. If you are new to this process, I would suggest selecting an object for a refractory core that is simple, without slender details that may snap off when removing the core from its rubber mother mold. Refractory material is extremely brittle, and thin details with undercuts may not withstand the removal process from their rubber mother mold. Wax, in contrast, has elasticity and shrinks slightly upon cooling, making it considerably easier to remove from a rubber mold. The removal of the refractory core after the casting process should also be considered. 100

Joanna Manousis, Distilled Portrait I, 2012, cast crystal, mirror, stainless steel, taxidermy magpie, 16 x 6 x 6” Cast using hanging core refractory mold.

It is difficult to extract a core that has a height that exceeds your average forged metal or wood tool. Sometimes the maker has to be inventive, creating tools out of bent steel wire that will reach a particular crevice or angle to remove the investment material from the glass. I create refractory hanging-cores using a two-part rubber mother mold. Before pouring the refractory into the rubber mold, I add lengths of threaded metal rod or kiln wire inside the cavity. These metal armatures ultimately help anchor the hanging core to the final refractory mold and help stabilize the core when the mold undergoes the wax steaming process. The refractory core is installed within a wax shell that has the formation that will eventually be solid glass. I cast the hollow wax by means of a multi-part rubber or hydrated plaster refractory mold. Molten wax is poured into the mother mold and left to cool for approximately 10-15 minutes. The remaining hot wax is then poured out, leaving a wax sleeve inside the mold.

After the wax shell has cooled completely, a window is cut out of the shell to provide visual access when installing the hanging-core inside the wax form. I support the core inside the hollow wax with surplus wax strips. When I am happy with the situation of the core, I adhere it to the wax strips by applying slightly cooled wax around the core. Once the core is set, the wax window cut-out can be replaced and adhered with a heated metal tool. The cavity of the hollow wax is filled with surplus wax to ensure that the core will not dislodge during the handbuilding mold making process. I suspend the hollow wax shell in a bucket of cold water while I pour in hot wax to fill up the cavity around the core. The water expedites the cooling process and prevents a blow out, should any wax escape from the seamlines around the wax window. Once the solid wax is completely cooled, the form can be vented and sprued, as you would set up a regular wax form for a refractory mold. I hand build my mold with three layers of refractory. The first two layers are comprised of 1:1:1, water, plaster, silica and a few tablespoons of fiberglass strands. If my wax form exceeds a width of five inches, I wrap the second layer in chicken wire before then applying a final coat of refractory, mixed with the addition of coarse grog. I aim to have a wall thickness of at least two inches on my larger molds. After the mold material has cured, the wax must be steamed out immediately. Following steaming, I pre-fire my molds and bring them slowly up to a temperature of 1100 °F to remove physical and chemical water before I charge the glass for casting. This helps to prevent veiling between billets. I fire the molds with an annealing schedule that includes the thickness of the glass and core. For example, if my core is three inches and the thickness of glass surrounding it is two inches, I set a seven inch annealing program.

The Specifics of the Surface-Core Mold Process Surface-core molds are best utilized for refractory cores that have a width that exceeds its height and for negative details that are simple, with no protruding details. For example, Demeter’s Rose is a multi-part wall installation comprised of crystal segments that were cast using surface-core molds. The negative spaces

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

of wheat kernels and spherical formations are shallow and wide. The surface-core method requires a rubber mother mold that contains the details of both the core and the bottom surface of what will be the refractory mold. A mix of 1:1:1, plaster, silica, and water with the addition of chopped fiberglass strands are poured into the rubber mother mold. Once set and removed, clay (rather than wax) is formed around the refractory core, in the volume and shape of the final glass casting. A clay sprue is then applied to the clay volume surrounding the core. This will act as a reservoir for the glass during the casting process. A release agent, such as Vaseline, is applied to the perimeter of the refractory mold, surrounding the clay. A handbuilt refractory mold is made in one thick layer around the clay’s volume. Once set, the two sides of the mold are split apart, the clay is removed and the mold is cleaned of any clay residue. Finally, the two halves of the mold are put together again, and a mix of refractory with a high fiberglass strand content is applied around the seam line of the molds two halves, thus sealing them together and making them ready for firing. Core molds provide a beautiful satin-like surface within cast glass, which is fully revealed when the exterior of the piece is optically

Joanna Manousis, Demeter’s Rose, 2015, cast crystal, steel, stainless steel, 58 x 58 x 4” Cast using surface-core refractory molds.

polished. Ultimately, the cast surface within the glass reflects light, giving the residual textures an ambient glow. The optics of the negative details created from the core can be transformed aesthetically by the way that the glass is ground and polished. For example, grinding a concave lens will visually contract the negative space, whereas a convex surface will enlarge the details of the core.

__________________________________ Joanna Manousis was born in Britain and lives and works in the US creating works in glass and mixed media that speak of human emotion, memory, and the passage of time. She holds an MFA in sculpture from Alfred University and a first class honors degree in glass from the University of Wolverhampton, England. Manousis has worked, studied and taught in Japan, the United Kingdom, and the US. Manousis’ work can be seen in permanent collections at the Glass Museum Ebeltoft, Denmark, the Coburg Glass Museum, Germany, and the Cafesjian Center for the Arts, Armenia. Clay bed with a diameter that allows for the core, thickness of glass, and the mold wall.

After the refractory is poured, cured, and removed from the rubber mold, clay is modeled around the core details. This will ultimately be the shape of the cast glass.

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

101

LEC -MO

Illuminating Glass in Architecture: The Residue of Space By Rui Sasaki During my lecture and demonstration at the 2015 Glass Arts Society Conference in San Jose, I presented a lec-mo on how to integrate light and glass into architecture and other environments using LEDs and self-illuminated glass. The presentation was based on my projects and research. Before I started talking about the technical aspects of LEDs and self-illuminated glass, I stated that it is crucial to consider how one can harmonize and merge concepts, technologies, and materials together. My work is about the exploration and discovery of subtle intimacy in extremely unfamiliar and familiar spaces. Finding intimacy in a space depends on how my body reads that the specific environment. I use my body as a tool to define and reframe intimacy, physically and psychologically.

LEDs (Light Emitting Diode) LEDs are fascinating lighting devices for people, including me, who do not have extensive knowledge about electricity. I introduced LEDs by showing the audience five advantages of them, especially tape LEDs, which I used in my project, Subtle Intimacy. There are five advantages of LEDs you should consider that make them worthy of use in a glass project: almost no heat, various types of shapes, many colors, little energy required and very long lasting, and easy to customize to do simple projects. However, LEDs are a little expensive to purchase. Because LEDs emit almost no heat, you do not need to worry about heat problems in your projects. Actually, LEDs do produce a little

Rui Sasaki, Subtle Intimacy (detail), 2013, glass, ash from plants and seaweed in Awashima, LEDs, 180 x 194 x 198 cm

heat; however, you can use them with glass in closed, small spaces without worrying about fire hazards or the glass breaking from the heat from the light. LEDs have various types of shapes and configurations. There are two main types: flat, chip LEDs and round, dome-shaped ones. Those basic lights can be arranged in many different ways to create small devices like LED light bulbs or tape LEDs. Many colors are available in LEDs. LEDs also create subtly different colors. I recommend that you buy them in stores and place different colors next to each other; it is almost like choosing pigments. LEDs also have different colors of bases, such as black and white. You

Working with students from Department of Electric Systems Engineering at Kagawa National College of Technology in the installation venue.

102

can select a base color depending on your project. Also, UV LEDs are available. LEDs are long lasting and need little energy. they last 35-50 times longer than fluorescent lights. Therefore, although I mentioned that LEDs are a little expensive, they are a much cheaper product than fluorescent light if you use them for a long time. Low energy consumption means you can expand your use of light to many different places and environments. Being easy to customize without exclusive knowledge opens new doors for projects with light. I would like to introduce tape LEDs, which are especially easy to customize, based on my project, Subtle Intimacy. What is great about tape LEDs is that they

Installation of LEDs.

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY â&#x20AC;˘ 2015 JOURNAL â&#x20AC;˘ SAN JOSE, CA

Rui Sasaki, Weather Project No.2, 2015, self-illuminated glass in the dark.

are flexible, adhesive (the tape LED is backed with double-sided tape), bright, and easy to cut and connect. In general, they are used for car lights. You need consider five topics when you select tape LEDs: the size of the chip, the number of chips, waterproof or not, light color, and the base color. All of the information for tape LEDs is written on a package, so it is easy to figure out what you need when you go to the store. Tape LEDs are composed of LED chips. There are three main sizes of chips: 1206, 3528, and 5050. They are each a different width and length. 1206 is the narrowest and 5050 is widest. The size of the chips is one factor related to brightness of tape LEDs. 1206 is darkest and 5050 is brightest. LED chips usually light up on the top surface, but there are side-light tape LEDs, too. The number of chips is another factor related to the brightness of tape LEDs. You need to consider about how many chips are within five meters. More chips are brighter. Also, there are single, double, and triple lines of tape LEDs. Tape LEDs are usually covered with silicon to make them waterproof. You can directly attach your glass to tape LEDs with silicon glue. However, be aware that the chips will be damaged if your glass piece is too heavy. Tape LEDs can be cut and connected with a little knowledge of wiring. This is the most exciting part of tape LEDs. You can cut tape LEDs with scissors, peel the silicon off (if it is waterproof), and re-solder electrical wires together. The primary knowledge that you should have to connect the electrical wires is not to mistake plus and minus. After you connect with electrical wire, you have to attach it to an adaptor and connect the strip to an outlet. Standard tape LEDs are usually 12 volts or 24 volts. There is a formula to select an adaptor for your tape LEDs: watts ÷ 12 = amperes. Watts is usually written on a package. Once you know how many amperes you need for your tape LEDs, you can buy an appropriate adaptor for it. Lastly, I strongly recommend purchasing tape LEDs from the same company if you want to use a lot of them. In my experience, different

companies make different shades of white. In my project, Subtle Intimacy, tape LEDs were the perfect lighting devices because of their small energy consumption, flexibility, brightness, and being easy to cut and connect. As I mentioned before, I am not a specialist in electricity. How did I find tape LEDs? I asked for help from Professor Misaki in the Department of Electric Systems Engineering at Kagawa National College of Technology. He told me that tape LEDs were the only light devices that could meet all of my specifications. I installed my work, Subtle Intimacy, in an abandoned house and could not use a lot of electricity because of the wiring in the old and traditional Japanese house. All of the glass panes in my work were very thin, just six millimeters thick, and all the readymade Japanese traditional wooden dividers that I used were thin as well. All of them were different sizes. The most important feature of the tape LEDs is that I could install them by myself. I had a lot of help from Professor Misaki and his students; however, I can customize tape LEDs by myself for my projects.

Self-Illuminated Glass Self-illuminated glass absorbs light and glows in the dark. I have been using self-illuminated glass products by the Dalian Luminglight Co., Ltd. in China since 2014 when I started Weather Projects, which is inspired by the unstable weather in Toyama, Japan. The selfilluminated glass absorbs light for ten minutes on a sunny day and glows in the dark for many hours. The product is safe and can be used repeatedly.The company makes a variety of industrial self-illuminated products, such as fibers, glass, and ceramics; however, their products are not typically used for artwork. Therefore, I have been exploring how I can apply this material to create my artwork. In the basic information about self-illuminated glass by the Dalian Luminglight Co., Ltd. is that the COE is 97, strain point is 986°F, anneal point is 950°F, and softening point is 112°F. They offer three different sizes of glass: powder, frits, and rough frits.

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

For glassblowing I use A-suki (COE is 100), a Japanese furnace batch. For my project, I would like to apply the self-illuminated glass to glassblowing. Therefore, almost all of my research about self-illuminated glass is based on blowing with A-suki. Both powder and rough frit are not compatible with A-suki glass. The frit is seemingly compatible so far, and I can apply it to make venetian goblets, canes, and solid, big, thick work as the same way as I would use normal frit. I can tell there is a lot of stress in glass with my bare eyes and polarized lenses, but after one year, none of the glass has broken. The self-illuminated glass is still new to me, and I will keep experimenting to open new doors for my projects.

Rui Sasaki is a Japanese artist and educator, mainly using transparent materials such as glass. She received her MFA in glass from the Rhode Island School of Design in 2010 and her BA in industrial, interior, and craft design at Musashino Art University in Tokyo, Japan in 2006. She taught glass and contemporary art at Rhode Island School of Design, Worcester State University, and Kyoto University of Art and Design in Japan. She has been invited to many artist-in-residence programs and has participated in exhibitions around the world. Recently, she was awarded the Jutta Cuny-Franz Memorial Award in Germany and received fellowships to develop her recent projects from the Nomura Foundation and The Satoh Artcraft Research & Scholarship Foundation in Japan. Currently, she is working as a member of Toyama Institute of Glass Art in Toyama, Japan. Generous financial support for my research and for participating in the GAS conference was provided by the Nomura Foundation and The Satoh Artcraft Research & Scholarship Foundation. 103

LEC -MO

Water Jet Cutting: Tips, Tricks and Applications By Shaun Griffiths and Stephen Jacklyn pressure water without abrasive can shatter the glass. You can increase your success by lowering the pressure during the pierce and using a vacuum assist system that ensures a consistent mix of abrasive in the initial stream, but each additional pierce on a single pane of glass introduces more risk. Many operators will perform all their pierces first ensuring that the riskiest procedures are complete before proceeding with the rest of the cutting.

Taper and Lag

Shaun Griffiths, Bound to Be, 2009, water jet cut glass and rope, 72” tall Photo: David Williams

Water jet cutting is actually quite old. Miners have been using high-pressure jets to erode material since the early 19th century. What has changed, and continues to change, is the technology involved. Modern water jet cutters use streams of water moving near the speed of sound, with diameters measured in fractions of a millimeter. High tolerance control arms linked to sophisticated software guides the cut, and optimizes the speed and efficiency. A water jet cutter’s speed, combined with its ability to cut a wide variety of materials without the need to change any tooling, have made it an increasingly necessary tool for profitable machine shops. The ubiquity of the machine has increased access for artists and has provided many new avenues for innovation in glass art.

Types of Water Jet Cutters First, an important distinction is that there are two types of water jet cutters: a “pure” water jet and an “abrasive” water jet. The same machine can often perform both functions with some minor adjustments. A pure water jet uses only water and is widely used in industry to cut soft materials like food, textiles, and rubber. A general rule is that any material you can cut with scissors can be cut using only water. One possible application of a pure water jet for glass artists would be cutting ceramic fiber paper or blankets. The process is relatively clean and can maximize the use of material, not to mention 104

allow for far more complex shapes. Also, the speed of the water jet is such that almost zero moisture is transferred to the cut material. Harder materials necessitate the addition of an abrasive to the water stream. Garnet, often used for sandpaper, is the most common abrasive. In fact, the stream of a water jet cutter is essentially liquid sandpaper: a high-pressure stream of water mixed with garnet. The term water jet cutting is somewhat misleading; the machine actually rapidly erodes the material. Because the abrasive is delivered by water, the cutting stream introduces very little heat to the cut material, and even though the pressure of the water stream is high, the mechanical force exerted on the material is very low. This makes the water jet cutter ideal for cutting glass, with the exception of tempered glass and certain laminates.

There are two main limitations of water jet cutting: taper and lag. If a pierce is stopped before it fully penetrates the glass, it will reveal a tapered hole, wide at the entrance and narrow at the exit. The thicker the material, the slower the cut must be in order to minimize taper. Another limitation is stream lag. A water jet operates most efficiently while making straight cuts and it must slow down when making curved cuts, proportionately to the tightness of the radius of the cut. If the stream is moving too quickly into a turn, the nozzle and the stream will lose alignment causing an inconsistent cut through the material. Both taper and lag are resolved by decreasing cut speed, which increases cut time and thereby cost.

The Pierce The riskiest operation when cutting glass with a water jet is the initial cut, the “pierce.” A cut that enters the glass from the edge is ideal. However, a pierce is required in order to remove a circle from the center of an intact square panel, for instance, because the cut must begin inside the perimeter of the sheet. One issue is that when a water jet machine starts, a vacuum created in the nozzle draws the abrasive into the water stream, as a result the initial stream may lack abrasive. That high-

Shaun Griffiths, Bound to Be (detail), 2009, water jet cut glass and rope, 72” tall Photo: David Williams

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

Shaun Griffiths, Being There, 2009, enameled and fused water jet cut glass, 14.5 x 11.5â&#x20AC;? Photo: David Williams

complex patterns now available in glass tiles for bathrooms and kitchens to get a sense of what is now possible. The technology has also dramatically changed the way architects can utilize glass, allowing for infinitely more complex configurations, using novel shapes that would be impossible to achieve without water jet technology. __________________________________ Shaun Griffiths received his BFA from San Jose State University in 2008. In 2009, he received a MA in glass from the University of Sunderland in the United Kingdom after being granted a Postgraduate Fulbright Award. In 2014, he received his MFA from Alfred University in New York where he taught as an adjunct the following year. Griffiths recently joined Sam Houston State University where he will teach photography, video, and performance art as an adjunct professor. Stephen Jacklyn earned his BFA in crafts from the College for Creative Studies in Detroit, Michigan. Since graduating, he has continued his investigation of glass in studio and production settings. Jacklyn spent four years working with master glassblowers at Greenfield Village at the Henry Ford Museum, and has worked in glass shops throughout the country including those in Michigan, Louisiana, Oregon, Missouri, Ohio, and California, where he currently resides.

While taper and lag are undesirable in industry, artists could potentially use them for aesthetic effects.

Tolerances and Mixing Tubes One of the advantages of water jet cutting, often touted by manufacturers, is the extremely narrow kerfs, or cut widths. Tolerances within 0.18 mm can be achieved, but are difficult to maintain. Many variables within a system can affect the tolerance of the cut. One of the main issues in maintaining a high tolerance is the nozzle. The water and abrasive are mixed in the nozzle head and this slurry rapidly erodes the mixing chamber inside the nozzle. These mixing tubes have lifespans measured in hours. High quality tubes only last around 150 hours and accuracy of the cut is diminished as the chamber deteriorates. A considerable portion of the expendable cost of running an abrasive water jet cutter is the mixing tube, second only to the cost of the garnet abrasive. Accuracy and tolerance is also affected by the gearing inside the control arm; any slop within the system can inhibit the ability of the nozzle to repeatedly reach exact specified coordinates.

The Future While pump technology is still advancing and increasing the power and speed of cutting, the benefits of this advancement are tempered by the fact that higher operating pressures also increase wear and tear on the machines. Five axis machines, which allow the nozzle to move in new and complex ways, have been introduced and the limits of this machine are not in the mechanics, but in the software. It will be the innovative use of software that will ultimately determine the limits of water jet technologyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s use by artists and designers. As evidenced by the growing number of glass projects that involve water jet cut glass, many glass artists have overcome the technical issues of water jet cutting, or simply do not require particularly high levels of precision. The technology allows glass artists, particularly stained glass artists, to achieve shapes impossible by any other method. Complex shapes can be cut and slotted together. Warm glass artists have been fusing with slotted glass components on a variety of scales from tabletop bowls and plates to large-scale public art projects. One need only look to the staggering variety of

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

Shaun Griffiths, Being There (detail), 2009, enameled and fused water jet cut glass, 14.5 x 11.5â&#x20AC;? Photo: David Williams

105

PA N E L S

Keynote panelists Steven Aldrich, Dale Dougherty, and Dr. Jeffrey Evenson discuss the interface between art and technology.

106

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

PA N EL

At-Risk Youth Forum: Serving Underserved Youth: Exploring best practices of top “at-risk” glassblowing programs Moderator: Andrew Page Panelists: Pearl Dick, Kit Evans, Barbara Keisler, Tracy Kirchmann, Jessi Moore, Robert Minkoff

Audience members talk about ideas during a break-out session.

On June 6, 2015, during the 2015 Glass Art Society conference, a panel discussion titled Serving Underserved Youth: Exploring best practices of top “at-risk” glassblowing programs brought together directors of programs from cities around the U.S. Moderated by Andrew Page, editor of GLASS: The UrbanGlass Art Quarterly and director of the Robert M. Minkoff Foundation, the panel discussion brought together Pearl Dick, director of the Glassworks program at Ignite Glass Studios, Chicago, Illinois; Kit Evans, executive director of Hilltop Artists in Residency in Tacoma, Washington; Barbara Heisler, executive director of GlassRoots in Newark, New Jersey; Tracy Kirchmann, educational programs manager at Ignite Glass Studios, Chicago; and Jessi Moore, special projects team leader at The Studio of The Corning Museum of Glass. Robert Minkoff, managing trustee of the Robert M. Minkoff Foundation of Potomac, Maryland, which sponsored the panel, also appeared to discuss how relationships develop between private funders and educational programs. To make the most of the limited time available for the panel discussion, the program included a break-out session, when those in the

audience could choose which of the presenters they wanted to hear, and join a smaller discussion. After a brief introduction, where each panelist described her program, small break-out sessions took place around the room. Afterwards, the panelists reconvened to share the results of the conversation. What follows are summaries of each of the break-out sessions, as reported by the panelist leading them. Hilltop Artists in Residence executive director Kit Evans presented on the basic programs and mission of Hilltop Artists, which celebrated its 20th year in 2014. Their mission is “Using Glass Art to Connect Young People from Diverse Cultural and Economic Backgrounds to Better Futures,” which is accomplished through nine programs in three schools, including one for girls in the juvenile justice system and another for advanced glass students up to age 20. Evans shared that despite the barriers faced by the youth Hilltop serves,100-percent of the advanced artists had graduated on time for the past three years. In the breakout session, she was joined by Hilltop teaching artist, Tony Sorgenfrei, who manages the programs housed at Wilson High School and was himself a Hilltop Artist

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

student for six years. Participants were deeply interested in how to cultivate community support, what funding sources were available, and what were successful approaches to funders. In response Evans talked about the importance of thoughtful management systems, respected names on the board (while avoiding stars who only lend their name), input from stakeholders, and a clearly articulated mission with outcomes based on research (ie: findings) regarding the value of arts education and arts as an intervention. The conversation then went into all of the wonderful things that occur while youth are engaged in glassblowing and glass arts – teamwork, self-discovery, and creative decisionmaking, to name a few. Examples of leadership development and the growth of social and academic skills were shared. Critical questions were asked – and discussed – about how to reach the youth most in need, how to address issues of equity, disenfranchisement, location, and stakeholder input to program creation. GlassRoots executive director Barbara Heisler discussed her program’s longstanding goals to invite youth to discover the “coolness” of glass art as an alternative to less productive and more dangerous activities. The GlassRoots arts education program is complemented by a business and entrepreneurship curriculum that uses a students’ collection of unique glass artwork as an example of a viable business venture, providing a real-life dimension to the workshops that spur youth to understanding vital economic principles. Recognizing the potential in its programming, GlassRoots moved to connect graduates of its programs and other young people without an apparent direction in life with apprenticeship training and a structured work experience. The programs now facilitate effective transitions by youth to high-skill, high-wage employment in glass-based labor demand occupations, providing a meaningful training program leading to work while focusing on building accountability, self-esteem, and other important interpersonal and social skills. Heisler talked about how urban youth unemployment rates approaching 50 percent continue to plague Newark and surrounding cities. Young people aged 18-22 are at a particularly fragile point as the supports they 107

At-Risk Youth Panelists speaking to the audience.

have relied upon for their entire lives – teachers, coaches, foster families – begin to fall away. At this point, they start supporting themselves and often their children. Young people experience a lack of employment opportunities and a limited world view. As a result, non-living wage, dead-end work (i.e. fast-food or retail) becomes their aspiration. GlassRoots is working to break this cycle by strengthening workforce development platforms, including expanding the Scientific Glassblowing Program piloted in 2014. In its first year, four young adults were introduced to scientific glassware manufacturing, an industry with livable entry-level wages of $12 per hour and projected growth of 8-14 percent over the next several years. Instructors were drawn from the trade, and time was spent to ensure that graduates had the job readiness skills necessary for success in the workplace. The largest concentration of scientific glass manufacturers in the nation is in Southern New Jersey because of high levels of borosilicate glass, the major component of scientific glassware. Many of these companies are running three shifts to meet the demand for the manufacture and repair of this specialized glassware. Currently, Salem Community College is the only institution in the nation offering a two-year post-secondary degree in scientific glassblowing. GlassRoots’s Varis Scientific Glassblowing Training program offers a 12-week program to prepare at-risk young adults for entry-level jobs in this field. Despite the presence of the largest pharmaceutical compa-

108

Audience members form small discussion groups during the break-out session.

nies in the world and many research universities in New Jersey, scientific glassware manufacturing and the career opportunities it can provide is largely unknown in urban New Jersey. Through the GlassRoots program, young people with high school diplomas can compete for positions in the STEM fields with entry-level compensation beginning at $12 per hour. The Varis Scientific Glassblowing Training Program is an extraordinary partnership between GlassRoots, the American Scientific Glassblowing Society; Essex County College, Salem Community College’s Glass Education center, employers, and community service providers, who together offer academic, hard skills, internships, and workplace readiness training. Graduates of the Scientific Glass program are measured by a number of competencies including the ability to: • Measure, cut, and manipulate borosilicate glass according to a schematic • Operate equipment, tools, materials, and fuels • Demonstrate ‘shop sense’ and responsible behavior with respect to co-workers and safety • Make scientific glassware with specific seals and bends • Read blueprints and draft simple equipment drawings • Use Computer Aided Design software • Understand employer expectations and how to be an effective, productive, and value- adding employee • Demonstrate appropriate workplace etiquette • Establish and maintain a healthy lifestyle focused on wellness and prevention

• Create a personal budget • Understand credit cards, credit scores, and other financial tools The goal for the scientific glass training program is an 80 percent completion rate and 80 percent placement rate. From July 1, 2015, GlassRoots plans to double the number of graduates and work with the NJDOL Talent Networks to place them. It will also implement a Craft Entrepreneurship Program for women 18-22 to generate supplemental income through retail and wholesale sales of glass art while developing life and business skills; and work toward expanding its footprint by creating a Maker’s Space in Newark for graduates, area artists, and the local community while establishing an independent revenue stream for GlassRoots (with a goal of opening this space by 2019). All of the programs include skills training, website development, operating space and equipment, and innovative artisan-scale production contracts. Pearl Dick, director of the Glassworks program at Ignite Glass Studios, Chicago provided an in-depth overview of Project FIRE: an Urban Health Initiative research grant project to study the impact of glassblowing as therapy for youth who have been victims of violence on Chicago’s South Side. Several of the participants in the break-out session work with youth in urban areas and they were interested in details of how the partnership between Ignition Community Glass, Ignite Glass Studios, and the University of Chicago was formed and how they collaborated to write the grant proposal.

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

They discussed the significance of outreach to community partners who are looking for alternative therapies for a specific demographic of clients as funding sources for glass art-based programs. They also discussed methods of data collection: community surveys, control group interviews, and documentation of progress for the youth involved as a means to compile research-based evidence of the efficacy of this type of program. All agreed that a proven, positive outcome that can be backed up by data could aid in securing continued funding for programs and other studies related to glass art as therapy. Finally, they outlined plans to share the outcomes of Project FIRE with the glass community, particularly those working with at-risk youth. Tracy Kirchmann, education director at Ignite Glass Studios, and executive director of STEAM STUDIOS, Chicago led a break-out session that focused on opportunities for students from undeserved communities after high school. While the glassblowing instructor at the Chicago public school Little Black Pearl, she constantly ran into a road block: students would graduate from high school with glass being a huge part of their success, only to no longer have access to the material following graduation. Kirchmann would get calls from graduates often, but there was no programming available for their continued mentorship. The breakout session focused on the importance of continued mentorship for young people between 18-24, and discussed the possibility of a new form of the apprenticeship system, as well as job creation and the possibility of the glass industry producing its own products to support such causes. The session also discussed how we could create inroads to college and universities through glass programming by fostering mutually beneficial programs. Jessi Moore, special projects team leader at The Studio at the Corning Museum of Glass focused on the question of “What skills do we look to foster in an at-risk program?” Key points discussed included: • The importance of involving family members. • The importance of partnerships. • The importance of self-teaching and peer-to- peer instruction. Often instructors have run into students who have family that do not immediately see how glass education is of value. Glass teaches many “soft skills” that are needed in life, but are not necessarily as quantifiable as testable skills like math, science, etc. Capstone events that involve parents (final shows, exhibitions, performances) are mentioned as an excellent

way to show off what students have learned and involve parents. The idea of partnership was also brought up as a key to success. Partnerships between community organizations, like Public Glass’s partnership with College Track, are beneficial both to find and work with underserved students as well as to provide support in navigating the bumps in the road that many organizations experience. Partnerships between educational institutions and private or public donors are another part of the equation. The Studio at the Corning Museum of Glass’s partnership with the Robert M. Minkoff Foundation to offer the Expanding Horizon’s program in the summer of 2015 at CMoG is an excellent example of such partnership. Programming that promotes self-teaching and peer to peer instruction was a topic as well. The empowerment that students gain in situations where they are given space and time to instruct other students was brought up. Additionally, teaching students to teach themselves as well as other students was an important skill set that can have both micro and macro impacts on student’s lives. Robert Minkoff, managing trustee of the Robert M. Minkoff Foundation, led a breakout session discussing how organizations can connect with individual funders, discussing the evolution of his relationship with Salem County Community College, a post-secondary educational institution where Minkoff funds two scholarships for students. He spoke about the advantages of community colleges as a way to reach at-risk students, citing the low tuition and fees, availability of grants, high faculty-tostudent ratios, synergistic student interaction, the ability to obtain a broader academic education beyond glass, and how these institutions work as feeders to four-year programs. __________________________________ Pearl Dick has been working with glass for 15 years and is represented in galleries and private collections nationally and worldwide. She has worked with youth from Chicago’s South Side and West Side since 2006 and is the director of the Glassworks Program, an after-school glass art program that combines art-making with community art projects and public works. Dick is currently studying art therapy at The School of the Art Institute of Chicago and is partnering with the University of Chicago, Comer Children’s Hospital, and Healing Hurt People Chicago on a research project that explores the therapeutic benefits of working with glass for youth who have been victims of violence on Chicago’s South Side.

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

Kit Evans has been the executive director for Hilltop Artists since 2006 and Evans is a passionate supporter of the arts as central to the well-being of our community, and as a core element of cognitive, social, and academic learning for youth of all cultures and economic backgrounds. Integrated deeply into this work has been the power of glass arts to transcend issues of equity, social justice, and academic opportunity. Barbara Heisler served as the interim ED for one year at GlassRoots, then became the third executive director in 2014. Her professional background includes extensive experience in non-profit, education, and government management. With a strong work history in arts education institutions, having been on staff at both Parsons School of Design and the New England Conservatory, Heisler has made the arts a centerpiece of her work in community development and community building, seeing the arts as a pathway for innovation, equity, and excellence. Robert M. Minkoff is the managing trustee of the Robert M. Minkoff Foundation, which supports the advancement of glass art, in addition to its work funding health and human services organizations. He is an active donor, whose foundation has initiated artist residencies, symposiums, and programs to support at-risk youth organizations. Jessi Moore serves as special projects team leader at The Studio of The Corning Museum of Glass. She has been the recipient of numerous awards, including scholarships to study at Pilchuck Glass School, Penland School of Crafts, and The Studio. Moore served as student representative on the Glass Art Society Board of Directors in 2011-2012. In her personal work, Moore’s art is primarily an investigation into the fallibility and distortion of human memory, and can be seen at www.jessimooreglass.com. Andrew Page is the director of the Robert M. Minkoff Foundation, a nonprofit organization supporting glass art as well as health and human services programs. He also serves as the editor in chief of GLASS: The UrbanGlass Art Quarterly.

109

PA N EL

Green Forum: Simple Green Moderator: Tracy Kirchmann Panelists: Julie Conway, Hugh Jenkins, Timm Muth, Dan Schwoerer Introduction by Julie Conway Since 2007, GAS has hosted a “green panel,” a themed panel discussion with a focus on how to use less energy and to save money in our fuel-intensive industry. At the 2015 San Jose conference, where the focus was on technology, new innovations in glassmaking were featured. As the founder of BioGlass.org, I sat on the panel with Timm Muth of Jackson County Green Energy Park, Hugh Jenkins of Big Island Glass, and Dan Schwoerer of Bullseye Glass. Tracy Kirchmann of Ignite Glass Studios in Chicago acted as the moderator and served as the the liaison between GAS and the panel. The most influential argument I can make is that no matter where you are, joining a community is the most efficient method of making glass. Sharing carbon footprints, building materials, tools, fuel costs, equipment, and building and maintenance responsibilities produce massive savings. Communities are able to create interdependent relationships between artists, assistants, and technicians, and can utilize the hotshop or casting studio to its maximum capacity by filling time slots with multiple users. Seeking out a community is the first step to eco-efficiency, and the benefits are similar to that of public transit. Glassmakers now must learn about the area where they live to find the best way to cut energy costs. Prices of fuel and electricity can vary greatly from state to state and globally. That will determine the best solution for your furnace, your largest cost of operations. Will an electric system cost more or will gas recuperation be more efficient? Doing your research and knowing your energy costs is an essential knowledge to the contemporary glassblower. In my remarks, I offered a global view of how action is being taken around the world to save energy and keep innovating new ways to practice glassmaking. In Africa, the Kitengela Glass studio is burning used car oil with steam to melt glass, and the Shanga River House art center operates with sunflower oil and forced air. The use of recycled glass is becoming more popular and effective. For instance Ngwenya Glass in South Africa sells recycled glass objects with the proceeds going to the conservation of endangered animals in the region. Developing countries are resourceful and innovative, since 110

Green panelists sit down for lunch together after their presentation.

they do not have easy access to fuel like the more wealthy countries. In Europe, there has been a resurgence of Roman-built furnaces and glass festivals in Belgium, the Czech Republic, and England. Solar operations off-set systems such as the ones at Worcester Glass in Maui, Hawaii and the Crucible in Oakland, California are becoming more accessible and helping studios cut high energy costs as public utility services are assisting owners in buying into the solar program.

GAS Presentation Synopsis by Hugh Jenkins Over the last 15 years there has been an increasing awareness of energy costs for the fire arts, glass blowing in particular; however, the discussion actually goes back much further. In the 1970s Dudley Giberson was talking about energy efficiency, not from a cost perspective, but because he thought there would someday be a fuel shortage. Several very inventive heat recovery ideas were reported in the Hot Glass Information Exchange of 1981. By 1985 Charlie Correll had created the first available recuperated burner for glass studios use. I was part of installing these burners at Penland School of Crafts and Punahou School in 1990. Costs and impact on budget were the

main considerations. Both Dudley and Charlie had a big influence on my awareness that equipment development and studio practices play a big role in the cost of glass shop operation. In 2001, I started my own private studio. The events of September 11, 2001 initiated a sharp increase in oil prices and a drop in the visitor market in Hawaii. Within that year propane prices jumped 50%, from $1.25 to $1.85 per gallon, and continued to rise steadily for the next eight years up to $5 by 2009. My fuel consumption was a fairly reasonable: 900-950 gallons per month just about evenly split between the furnace and glory hole. Knowing most about furnace recuperation, that is where I put my efforts. By 2004 I had committed to the recuperation of my glory hole, even though the results seemed less certain. The combined results reduced my consumption by about 60% to 320-350 gallons per month depending on the number of melts and the total hours of active studio use. I continue to consider what my energy costs would have been for 900 gallons at $5, which continues to be the price in Hawaii, even though prices have gone down on the mainland. From 2001 to 2012 our electric rate has risen from $0.23 to $0.43 per KWH, averaging about $450 per month. Hawaii is a prime

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

location for solar electric generation. With net metering we, and other Big Island and Maui studios, are meeting 90% or more of our electric costs through solar power. I have had real success with the use of waste vegetable oil as a fuel, but up until now only for the furnace. The infrastructure of tanks, filtering, plumbing, and metering has been demanding. Contamination, spoilage, and general maintenance are continuous considerations in addition to having a reliable supply of vegetable oil. For these reasons, vegetable oil is not for everyone, however its low cost was a major factor in allowing our studio to survive and be profitable. Different locations have very different energy access and cost factors. Electricity is very affordable in some areas, but is a major cost for others. Fuels like propane, natural gas, and utility gas vary hugely in supply and cost from place to place. I strongly encourage creative thinking about energy use, since it plays such a major part in the operational cost of a glass studio. We are living in a time when the impact we make on resources and the environment has to be taken into consideration. I hope with the help of more technically savvy members of the glass community new methods of combustion control and equipment development will make all of our ideas more easily accessible and understood. I appreciate the collaborative approach I have experienced with many studios across the country.

The Cost of Doing Business? by Timm Muth On the whole, hot glass work is one of – if not the – most expensive forms of traditional artwork. The largest expense? Energy costs! It is not unusual for even small-to-medium shops to use $1,000 to as much as $3,000 worth of fuel in a single month! And with that level of energy costs, it’s no wonder that so many shops can’t make it. There are several wise, experienced folks doing an excellent job of making recuperators and other efficiency-improvement systems to reduce fuel costs. Likewise, a number of equipment suppliers are constantly experimenting with better refractories, or improved glory hole designs, or multi-use stations, all in the name of lowering energy costs. But it’s the other end of that supply chain that is just starting to garner some interest – namely, finding alternative fuel sources that can reduce both the cost and carbon footprint of glassblowing operations. Bio-methane harvested from landfills has proven to be a simple

substitute for propane or natural gas. It is a waste product that burns hot and offers significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. Operations at the Green Energy Park in western North Carolina have reached temperatures nearing 2,400° F using purely landfill gas. While proximity to a landfill can be a limiting factor, a new generation of small, simple anaerobic digesters – fed on food scraps, yard waste, or animal manure – can provide a continuous supply of bio-methane nearly anywhere in the world. Waste vegetable oil is also gaining recognition as a viable, sustainable fuel for glass operations. With similar energy content to gasoline, WVO offers a safe, biodegradable alternative. Even wood – the original glass furnace fuel – is staging a comeback, as evidenced by several of the Roman-style furnaces recently constructed. Remember, energy is all around us. The trick is to recognize that a pile of used wooden pallets, a nasty swine lagoon, or a dumpster full of food scraps is just energy in a different form! Recuperation of fuel has been making massive strides and savings for many, thanks to the equipment builders and our fearless leaders in the green glass industry. Durk Valkema, Eddie Bernard, Charlie Correll, Doug Ohm, Hugh Jenkins, and others have been leading the way and offering their expertise to our community. __________________________________ Julie Conway is a glass artist and owner/ designer of Illuminata Art Glass Design LLC, a studio dedicated to the creation of functional and sculptural art glass lighting. She has refined her practice to combine traditional techniques with a contemporary design aesthetic. Conway incorporates reclaimed steel, recycled glass, and energy-efficient LED lighting in her finished lighting installations. She is founder of BioGlass.org and an environmental leader in the “green glass” community. An active member of GAS for over 13 years, Conway appreciates being part of the global glass collective. Hugh Jenkins has blown glass since 1969. From 1972 to 1998, he led the glass program at Punahou School in Honolulu, Hawaii. While teaching at Penland School of Crafts in 1990, he helped build their first recuperated furnace, and that same year he added recuperation to the studio at Punahou. His interest in recuperation and fuel saving has carried over into his own personal studio operation since 2001, and to operating his furnace on vegetable oil since 2006. Now, with a photovoltaic (PV) system to offset of electric costs, his studio continues to

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

operate at lower cost than any previous year. Evaluation of the cost returns and retrofitting to existing equipment are of particular interest to him. He has helped many glass blowers modify or build equipment with recuperation. Currently the emphasis is on developing a DIY installation kit for recuperation. Aside from cost savings, the atmosphere and resource preservation are of great concern to him as well. Tracy Kirchmann was born and raised in Chicago. She is currently the educational program manager for Ignite Glass Studios and Ignition Community Glass. For the previous four years, she was the founding glass studio instructor and art department lead at the Little Black Pearl Art and Design Academy where she taught high school glass and sculpture classes to youth from Chicago’s South Side. Kirchmann graduated with a BFA in glass from Southern Illinois University in Carbondale and an MFA in sculpture from Western Carolina. As a graduate student, she focused on the research and development of the Jackson County Green Energy Park, where she helped build a green glass studio powered by the methane from the park’s landfill gas. Kirchmann served as student representative to the Board in 2009-2010 and joined the Glass Art Society Board of Directors in March 2014. Timm Muth has worked on energy projects since 1980, from nuclear power plant construction to making methane from horse manure. In 2006, he began leading construction of one of the world’s only landfill gas-fired art complexes: the Jackson County Green Energy Park. Now, as the director of JCGEP, Muth has the opportunity to open minds and expand the boundaries of how we define, create, and use the energy resources around us. Muth has worked as an engineer, a sensei, a mountain bike tour guide, a writer, a tiger handler, and a mad scientist. But being Dad is the job he loves best. Daniel Schwoerer is a founder and owner of Bullseye Glass Co., which developed and tested compatible colored glass and methods for kiln forming. He is a graduate of the University of Wisconsin (BS, civil engineering; MS, engineering mechanics), where he also worked in the art department as a graduate assistant to Professor Harvey Littleton from 1968-69. After graduation, Schwoerer moved to Portland, where he founded Bullseye Glass Company with partners Ray Ahlgren and Boyce Lundstrom. In addition to serving as Bullseye’s CEO, Schwoerer works with the company’s Research & Education team to investigate leading-edge issues in kiln forming.

111

Presenter Abstracts Career Panel

What does it take to foster and build a contemporary practice? The career panel questions are focused on the practical mechanics of how to build a career in the field of glass. Discussion points included: teaching, making, administrating, delegating, marketing, social media and gallery etiquette. The Career Panel was comprised of a fascinating cross section of artists and art administrators at various stages of their career from around the world including: Ben Cobb, artist and studio manager, Museum of Glass, Tacoma, Washington; Mel Douglas, artist and educator, Canberra, Australia; Sarah Dragovich, communications and development associate, San Jose ICA, San Jose, California; Benji Kikkert, artist, fabricator and educator, Toronto, Ontario; Allyson Reza, glass and metal fabricator, Chicago, Illinois; Moderated by Charlotte Potter, artist, glass studio manager and programming director, Chrysler Museum Glass Studio, Norfolk, Virginia. Sponsored by Southern Illinois University, Glass Program.

Eusheen Goines

Demo: Flame - Fillacello The Fillacello is a twist on the technique known as the Reticello. The Reticello is used as a base pattern, and then it is filled in with colored glass.

Jeff Heath

Demo: Flame - Fabricating an Environmental Consciousness Focusing on the use of form and multiples, Jeff Heath will demonstrate how to create symbols of environmental infrastructure with glass. This demonstration will cover the flameworking techniques used to create glass components in mixed media sculpture.

Daniel Salazar

Demo: Flame - California Style Torch Work Daniel Salazar will demonstrate California style torch work using various colored rods, milliefiore, and clear cane. He will show how torch working and manipulating glass rods can be used to decorate paperweights, vases, and glass objects. This technique was developed at Neauvos Glass, then to become Lundberg Studios.

Robert Snodgrass

Demo: Flame - Bob Snodgrass’ Tricks with Silver and Gold Snodgrass will demonstrate how to make marbles and pendants with fumed images encased. He will also use the boro technique of mushroom marble and create some assorted vessels. His original coloring discovery began with silver; he softened it, filed it, and then 112

blended it into clear glass, producing color rods. This innovation lead him to the thin film, whole metal deposition technique that is now called fuming. He then combined fuming with a miniaturization of off-hand techniques into lampworking to produce his unique style of work.

Jim Mongrain

Loren Stump

Demo: Flame - Murrine for the Masses Loren Stump will create a commemorative “GAS 2015” murrini depicting the Mission San Jose. Everyone gets a slice!

Demo: Hot - Graphite Mold Approaches with Hot Glass A demonstration of hot glass blowing and casting techniques for solid and felted graphite molds.

Marc Barreda

Matthew Szösz

Demo: Hot - My View Has Become Distorted, Can I Get a Little More Light? Barreda will be demonstrating some of the ways he is incorporating light and optical distortion into his work. Part performance and part experiment, the demo will not be limited to hot glass alone.

Jon de Wit

Demo: Hot - Object Maker De Wit will create an object that reflects his interest in the reimagined vessel, using a variety of methods that he has adapted and perfected in his 38 years of working with glass.

Museum of Glass Hot Shop Team

Demo: Hot - Kids Design Glass™ Artists: Benjamin Cobb, Gabe Feenan, Niko Dimitrijevic, Sarah Gilbert The Kids Design Glass™ Program at the Museum of Glass (MOG) invites children age 12 and younger to submit drawings that are then interpreted as sculpture by the Museum’s resident Hot Shop Team. Once every month, one drawing is selected and the child artist and their family are invited to the Museum to see their drawing brought to life. This extremely popular program encourages children to imagine, be creative, dream, and play. MOG will select a drawing from the children in the San Jose school district or an art therapy program in the San Jose area and interpret the drawing as a glass sculpture at the GAS conference, with the child artist and their family present.

Jaime Guerrero & Watts Youth Group

Demo: Hot - The Hunt: Hot Sculpting Techniques Jaime Guerrero will hot sculpt a deer skull and antlers with the help of his Watts Youth Group students. This will coincide with his latest work, currently on display at MACLA (Movimiento de Arte y Cultura Latino Americana) in San Jose. This event is sponsored by the Clay and Glass Arts Foundation.

Demo: Hot - Venetian Glass Techniques This demonstration will consist of various Venetian techniques for making goblets and vessels.

Ché Rhodes

Demo: Hot - The Attraction of Opposites Matthew Szösz will be demonstrating his glass lace making apparatus, producing unlikely and fragile hybrids of glass and fiber traditions.

Alexander Abajian & J. Lin-Hsien Kung

Demo: Hot - Gesture Reflection Projection The Creature series began as an exploration of movement. Abajian and Kung wanted to use glass as a recording medium. The sleek forms and fluid shapes produced from this process interact with each another in herd-like groupings. They are thought bubbles, gestures in motion, ideas in conflict, and dialogues in progress. The mirrored series pull in light and the environment around them. These distortions represent perception. The dark series are the long shadows creeping out as light retreats into the horizon. They are unfinished thoughts, specters, and ideas waiting to be realized.

Einar and Jamex de la Torre

Demo: Hot - El Camino Real The de la Torre brothers will construct a sculpture using direct pickups of color on the marver with techniques that they have developed over the last couple of years, including drawing patterns by scratching a thin layer of color powder and additive bit-working sculpting.

Petr Novotny, Jiří Pačinek & Rob Stern

Demo: Hot - Czech This Out! Novotny, Pačinek and Stern will be showcasing various techniques unique to the Czech style in a teamworking demonstration to create a large, complex blown and sculpted piece.

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

REMEMBRANCES

Marvin Lipofsky, 1972.

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

113

I N M EMORIAM

Marvin Lipofsky (1938-2016) By Fritz Dreisbach, Henry Halem, Michael Taylor, and Audrey Handler On January 15, 2016 the Glass Art Society lost one of our own. Marvin Lipofsky, a pioneer of studio glass and a founder of the Glass Art Society, passed away at his home in Berkeley. He was 77 years old. The San Francisco Chronicle notes that, “Marvin’s work was prized for its rhythmic forms and complex concave and convex shapes, which suggested both abstract and organic sources. Glass was his chosen medium of artistic expression. A consummate colorist, and fine artist, Mr. Lipofsky took great advantage of the chromatic possibilities of working with hot glass. He was dedicated to honoring the artists who worked with him and the places where he made his work.” Marvin Lipofsky was born and raised in Barrington, Illinois, a suburb of Chicago, where his parents Henry and Mildred Lipofsky owned a small department store. In 1962 he earned his BFA in industrial design, at the University of Illinois, Champaign-Urbana, followed by an MS and MFA in sculpture in 1964 at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. At the University of Wisconsin-Madison, Lipofsky was among the first students to work with Harvey Littleton, the celebrated founder   of the American Studio Glass Movement. Immediately upon graduating with his MFA, Lipofsky was hired by the University of

Marvin Lipofsky and Dale Chihuly at CCAC for the Great California Glass Symposium.

114

Early GAS conference, Fenton Factory, Williamstown, WV.

California, Berkeley to build and direct its glass program, where he taught until 1972. He then moved to teaching full-time and developing the glass program at the California College of Arts and Crafts (now the California College of the Arts) in Oakland, where he remained until 1987. Then, he left to work fulltime in his studio in Berkeley, where he worked until his death. In 2003 he was the subject of a retrospective exhibition, Marvin Lipofsky: A Glass Odyssey, at the Oakland Museum of California. Lipofsky helped found the Glass Art Society and he sat on the Board of Directors from 1973-1980 and again from 1982-1985. He organized the 1978 GAS conference in Asilomar, CA and according his friend and contemporary, Fritz Dreisbach, the conference was a favorite for everyone! Lipofsky’s contributions to the organization are immeasurable and he wore many hats to establish GAS conferences as a venue for artists across the world to exchange ideas and foster excellence. He first reprised the GAS newsletter (now GASnews) and then founded the GAS Journal. Marvin was the president of GAS (19781980) as well as the GAS newsletter editor (1976, 1977, & 1987), GAS Journal editor (1979, 1980) and conference site co-director (1976, 1978, 1979, 1980, 1982). Lipofsky was twice honored by GAS. In 1986 he received

the Honorary Lifetime Membership Award for his service to the organization, and in 2009 he was presented The Lifetime Achievement Award for his outstanding achievements in glass. Parts of this memorial are taken from the obituary written by James Yood in the San Francisco Chronicle published on Jan. 18, 2016. A few of his contemporaries remember Marvin Lipofsky:

Fritz Dreisbach

Some of my best memories of Marvin Lipofsky are centered on our involvement with the Glass Art Society. He saw the need for passing information – communication – throughout our nascent glass world. Always the teacher, Marvin promoted the passing of information back and forth among all the folks working with glass. He introduced us to many, many global glass artists. His numerous visits to glass sites around the world set him up for creating the most gigantic glass workshop series ever conceived: “The Great California Glass Symposium.” The GFGS was an inspiration to everyone. Truly a great legacy. But there is a little known story about Lipofsky’s contribution to the origins of GAS. The National Council on Education in the Ceramic Arts (NCECA) asked Marvin to organize a glass presentation for their 1970 Oakland

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

Conference. The glass panel included Mark Peiser, who was based in North Carolina, Marvin, from Califonia, and me, from Seattle. At this panel, we all saw the interest and respect generated for the glass techniques of those artists on the other side of the country. (Another example of the “Grass-is-Greener-onthe-Other-Side-of-the-Fence” phenomena.) Peiser remarked, casually, “Hey, we should get together more often!” And the Glass Art Society, starting in April 1971, has followed the lead from NCECA ever since. Thanks Marvin for putting us together – Fritz

Audrey Handler

Marvin was our “go to guy”. He knew everyone and was an encyclopedia of information on all things glass, worldwide. Although crusty and irascible, Marvin had a softer side. We somehow loved him just the same and tried to forgive him his foibles. Sometimes it was hard, but he made me strive to be the best in my life and work. I remember him calling me at 2 am with ideas for our upcoming fledgling GAS conference. “Marvin it’s 2 am in Madison,” I would complain. “I know,” he says, “but I just got back from a party here in LA and I have this great idea for GAS. I need your input.” We oldsters thought we would all go on together forever. We miss him and know his influence will go on forever.

a visionary who pushed the parameters of convention. Thanks in part to him, glass programs stood apart from other craft programs with large visiting artists agendas, worldwide connections for glass experiences, and an open mindedness to commercial and academic achievement.

Michael E. Taylor

Henry Halem

Marvin Lipofsky was always one of the first people I contacted to do a workshop/lecture in all four of the university art positions I held. He would come in and stir things up: give his perspective on art and the universe, challenge students’ beliefs, and break laws of conformity. He was riding on the attitude of pop art and the West Coast brashness of funk, pushing bright colors and rowdy honesty in your face. He was highly influenced by the funk art movement in the bay area in the 60s and 70s. This is obvious in his California Loop Series with their sexual overtones and gaudy carnival colors. He developed a very unconventional approach to this time honored material – no concern for its history or tradition. His work was his gut reaction to the material. It was a leap of faith from a take-a-chance platform and it worked. For Marvin, the balancing act was to keep this rebellious and refreshing attitude of Psychedelic Furs and maintain respect as a teacher in an art college. Despite this conflict, his teaching became a model of modern glass education programs. Some of his ideas about glass education set it apart from the status quo of crafts programs and elevated it into a more sophisticated philosophical position. Marvin was

GAS Board of Directors 1978-80 at the Asilomar conference. Left to right: Dan Dailey, Marvin Lipofsky, John Clark, Henry Halem, Audrey Handler, Michael Taylor, and Sylvia Vigiletti.

I guess I first met Marvin 46 years ago at GAS II in Penland. Our bonding was immediate. Marvin’s passing saddens me as I’ve lost a friend and Marvin was like no other friend that I ever had. Marvin was one of a kind – a mentor to many, a moral compass for others, and a guy that could bring you to tears. Marvin had an opinion about everything and never ever hesitated to let you know what that opinion was. On so many occasions his words were cutting, but on reflection, many were right on the mark. Hanging with him could be, and often was, a trial. Oh, there were occasions when I swore I would never ever speak to the S.O.B. again, but a week or two later the phone would ring and Marvin would ask “Howz it goin Hank?” like nothing had happened. Time, and in no small way Marvin himself, always healed the wounds of unkind words. With real friendships there are wonderful moments of sharing and understanding of what drew us together. Over his creative life he traveled throughout the world making art and friends wherever he went. Everyone knew Marvin - and Marvin knew everyone. His art was colorful and filled with the breath of those that made his work and at shows and lectures Marvin always

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

gave credit to those that fabricated the work. He came to my school on numerous occasions giving workshops and showing slides of his pieces and recounting his adventures to my students and me. His slide collection was the envy of us all. Those slides tell the story of the life Marvin lived and joy that was his life. I have to believe that the language barrier he experienced when he traveled saved him from his “tell it like it is” problem that we all knew. His grand opus was the Asilomar GAS conference that he organized in 1978. There we were sitting on his grand deck with the sling back chairs and the California sun beating down, drinking beer, the jokes, laughter, and the banter. I can still see us sitting there full of mountains yet to climb in our lives and new worlds to conquer. Audrey Handler walking through the door asking, “Did I miss anything?” and Marvin quipping “Oh Audrey you’re always late, sit down, relax”. Life moved at a different pace when you were with Marvin in California. I envied his studio, the shelves lined with work, the work in progress, and the finished pieces waiting for the next exhibition. The quiet street and the coffee house down the block. I can still see him in my mind and always will with his wispy hair, big mustache and broad smile and oh, that laugh still ringing in my ears. He was a proud man that lived life the only way he knew how, and I bet he was still making plans for his next trip. There are very few, if any, addresses of friends that I have committed to memory, but Marvin’s is one that I do know by heart: 1012 Pardee. I won’t forget it, or Marvin. 115

I N M EMORIAM

Susan Holland-Reed (1954-2015) By Joseph Rossano Susan Holland-Reed served on the Glass Art Society Board of Directors from 2006 to 2008 and chaired the Education Committee. When we know that our end is near, we are often able to speak clearly and freely about the greatest and most impactful moments in our lives. Those who surround us then have an opportunity to glean insight into our souls. Susan Holland Reed did not wait until the end to share her passions with others. It seems she was destined from an early age to help us see the world, striving to enlighten others all through her artwork. Susan would like for us to remember her as an artist who exhibited nationally and internationally in such venues as: The Slovack Glass Museum (Lednické Rovné, Slovakia), Museum of American Glass (Millville, NJ), Tucson Museum of Art (Tucson, AZ), MIT Museum (Cambridge, MA), Newport Art Museum (Newport, RI), and The Slovack Republic Embassy (Vienna, Austria), among others. She remains an artist first, fusing idea and material seamlessly into her sculpture. Her works span the gamut of beauty and concept, each incorporating a unique foray into the use of this super-cooled liquid, sharing thought and narrative with the viewer. While her exhibitions and the works she displayed were important within the context of glass as a developing art form, one is compelled to dig deeper. Susan’s memory bank of ideas consumed reams upon reams of paper. She filled towers of sketchbooks with thoughts – forty years worth – right up until her last moments. The volume of exploration would quite literally be impossible for one artist to realize in a single lifetime. Susan was a thoughtful artist, and was giving of her time and energy. While much of the art world existed on a superficial level – a veritable sea of self-importance palpitating with a vast array of egos – Susan shone like a beacon of light. She was a source of guidance and encouragement that selflessly aided many on their journeys as artists. It is likely that Susan’s crowning achievement as an artist has yet to come to fruition, for she has planted within many of us, ideas, seeds that will grow, ultimately blossoming into fully realized artistic expressions. For Susan, family was not simply a birthright or contract between loving individuals. Her definition of family encapsulated community, place, close friends, and much more. She saw the world as a place full of ever-evolving possibilities. Amidst 116

this aesthetic life, she raised a son and daughter, Sam Holland and Vanessa Petrarca, who gave her three grandchildren, David, Izzy, and, Lela. Their lives were forever influenced by their mother and grandmother’s boundless energy and unique perception of the world. Susan‘s maiden name was Bane, she was the oldest of six siblings: two brothers Paul and George, and three sisters Karen, Ellen and Janine, with a total of twelve nieces and nephews. She is also survived by her parents, Harlan and Janet Bane, who live in the Chicago area. During her high school years, Susan attended art classes at the Chicago Art Institute. It was there that Susan discovered glass, happening upon a glassblowing demonstration by Fritz Dreisbach. From that moment her fate as a lavaholic was sealed. She enrolled in Fritz’s class and began what was to be a lifelong pursuit of the possibilities of glass. Next to her family and friends, Susan’s love for glass was only matched by the places that fostered her exploration of the material, The Rhode Island School of Design and The Pilchuck Glass School. In Susan’s 61 years on this planet, she devoted more than 16 of those years to these two institutions. Their effect on her was profound. As an undergraduate at RISD, Susan met Dale Chihuly, Jamie Carpenter, Therman Statom, and other luminaries, all the while sharing a dorm suite with Ronnie Horn. Her years as an undergrad were exciting times indeed, and for a variety of reasons. John Reed, her second husband, was a student at the time; they were quite literally two ships passing in the night, saying little more than “hello” to one another. Thirty years would pass before fate intervened. With Susan a widow and John a divorcé, the two were afforded the serendipitous opportunity to fall in love and ultimately marry. Still on the East Coast, as graduate student in glass at RISD, Susan furthered her command of the medium and her expression through it with the guidance of a pivotal two mentors, Bruce Chao and Dan Clayman. Bruce shaped how she developed ideas, urging her to isolate areas of focused effort, without reigning in too much of the wonder that propelled her through life. With an MFA from RISD, Susan went on to teach glass sculpture, glassblowing, and studio seminar at the Massachusetts College of Art, as well as courses as a visiting artist instructor at her alma mater. In all aspects of her affiliation with these

Susan Holland-Reed

institutions, as a student, teacher, and matriarch, Susan worked consistently to integrate glass into her work while providing the insight and direction for others to do the same. Pilchuck and RISD provided a framework and context for much of her personal and professional life. The people she encountered and ideas explored at each place followed her, guiding her through life. Throughout much of this time, with her first husband and father to their children, Herby Holland, Susan also put her acute sense of form and design to use in their Providence, Rhode Island millwork company, producing custom cabinets, frames, and more. RISD has played a significant role in the formation of Pilchuck. Founder of RISD’s glass program and Pilchuck, Dale Chihuly, and noted RISD grads and affiliates created an enclave of RISD expatriates in the Pacific Northwest. In 2004, while teaching a kilncasting class at the Pilchuck Glass School, the two ships that were Susan and John, collided. Just as Susan had found a sense of purpose and place at RISD, she also found a welcoming home at Pilchuck. In their cabin hangs a photo of four feet, John and Susan’s, wrapped together in a blanket, sheltering and uniting them, the moment of their wedding. This union, presided over by Nuu-chah-nulth artist Joe David, was a tying of many knots. For ten years, Susan and John lived on the Pilchuck campus in Stanwood, Washington, making the gatehouse their home. This was one of the great benefits that her husband’s job as Director of Campus Operations afforded them. Being a full-time occupant and part of the fabric that is Pilchuck, a year-round immersion in the material, community, and the friendships it fosters, made Susan supremely happy. Susan and John chose to marry knowing that time was short; she had been diagnosed with cancer. The community will forever keep her wrapped neatly in its blanket and cherish all she has given to so many.

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

I N M EMORIAM

Yoriko Mizuta (1955-2015) By Susanne Frantz and Helmut Ricke Although not unexpected, the message was a shock: Yoriko Mizuta, longtime curator at the Hokkaido Museum of Modern Art in Sapporo, Japan passed away on August 3, 2015 at the age of 59. It was much too young for this accom-plished and internationally respected colleague, who would have continued as a key figure in the field of glass art for many years to come. She was born as Yoriko Sasaki in Rumoi, Hokkaido, Japan on September 10, 1955. As a young woman, she was an accomplished tennis player and classical pianist. In 1980, she graduated from the Department of Aesthetics and Art Theory of the Doshisha University in Kyoto. That same year, she joined the Hokkaido Museum of Modern Art, where she was named chief curator in 2011 and deputy director in 2012. That span of 32 years was interrupted only by the three years that she spent as deputy director of the Hokkaido Asahikawa Museum of Art (2006-2009). While she worked successfully in other fields of art history, her main professional interest was the development of art in glass – contemporary as well as historical. Yoriko Mizuta’s name will forever be associated with the five World Glass Now exhibitions and catalogs from 1982 to 1994. Those presentations played an important role in advancing public interest in, and the growth of, glass art in Japan. It was a groundbreaking effort, and

Yoriko Mizuta, photo courtesy of Helmut Ricke.

the series helped to shape the identity of the Hokkaido Museum of Modern Art and brought it to the forefront of Japanese and foreign institutions focusing on studio glass. In 1997, Mrs. Mizuta was one of the three curators who organized The Glass Skin, a cooperative project of the Hokkaido Museum of Modern Art, The Corning Museum of Glass, and the Museum Kunst Palast in Düsseldorf. That show resonated profoundly in her country and abroad, as did her own 2003 exhibition of contemporary Japanese sculpture in glass, Outspoken Glass. Mrs. Mizuta had an open and inquisitive mind – a critical attribute for a curator – and she also managed to accomplish an incredible amount of work in a very short time. Her mastery of foreign languages formed the basis of wide-ranging international connections that enabled her to organize numerous important exhibitions from foreign collections, including 2000 Years of Glass Art in Europe (1987), Glass: Art Nouveau and Art Déco (1991), Lyricism of Modern Design: Swedish Glass, 1900-1970 (1992), Italian Glass: Murano, Milan (1998), and Emile Gallé (2000). Her presentations from 2011 focused on glass from

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

Russia and Finland, and her last exhibition, Art Nouveau Glass: The Gerda Koepff Collection, opened just weeks before her death. She served on the jury for many awards, and as a member of the Experts Committees for the Council of Cultural Affairs in Japan. Her lectures around the world, and especially at the Toyama City Institute of Glass Art, were highly regarded, as were her extensive publications. Those who were fortunate enough to know her learned quickly that Mrs. Mizuta’s softspoken approach and nuanced interpretations stemmed from her devotion to high standards, original research, and meticulous detail. Through her exhibitions, writing, and teaching, she added immeasurably to the development and documentation of glass history. She was an innovator and a leader, yet always modest and reluctant to draw attention to herself. The friends and colleagues of Yoriko Mizuta mourn her passing and celebrate her many contributions to the field of glass art and far beyond. Published with permission from The Corning Museum of Glass.

117

CONFERENCE EVENTS & PROGRAM

2015 conference co-chairs, Steven Aldrich, Susan Longini, Demetra Theofanous, and Cassandra Straubing.

118

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

George and Dorothy Saxe: A Visionary Partnership By Kim Harty Dorothy and George Saxe began collecting glass in 1980 because they were looking for an activity to enjoy together, and over the course of their marriage they built one of the premier collections of contemporary glass in the United States. George remarked that building a collection together “was something that required conversation, discussion, decision making, all those wonderful things. As it has happened, it has literally changed our lives.”1 George Saxe passed away in 2010 and Dorothy continues to pursue their shared passion for glass art. According to George, “as best we could, [we] set a goal of putting together the best collection of contemporary glass that exists.” When they started collecting in 1980 the glass scene was just starting to blossom, but there wasn’t very much written about glass art yet. At the time, George and Dorothy would find new artists by browsing through the 1979 exhibition catalog, New Glass: A Worldwide Survey and traveling the country visiting the artists’ studios. They would get to know the artists, talk to them about their work, and ask them questions about other artists they respected and admired. Beyond collecting, the Saxes served on boards and committees of glass institutions, including Pilchuck Glass School, California College of the Arts, and the American Craft Council. In 1999 they made a generous gift of over 500 artworks to the de Young Fine Arts Museum of San Francisco, which are featured in a gallery that bears their name, making it one the premier collections in the U.S. According to Dorothy, generosity has always been their policy, “from the beginning we have had groups come, thousands if I add it all up.” She adds, “we always knew that we wanted to share the collection with anyone who was interested, that it was unfair to artists to squirrel it away for our own pleasure.” When the Saxes began collecting in the 80s, the artists included in their collection would have been considered “emerging” artists, and as those artists have matured, their collection has developed with them. At the 2015 GAS conference in San Jose, the Glass Art Society honored George and Dorothy with a tribute event that included a seated dinner and auction. The raise-the-paddle from the event created an endowment for The Saxe

David Saxe, Jenn Sockolov, Jerry Saliman, Ellen Saliman, Dorothy Saxe, Shelley Saxe and Loren Saxe.

Emerging Artists Lecture Fund to support future generations of glass artists. Each year educators and museum curators nominate artists who compete to become one of three emerging artists selected to present a lecture at the annual GAS conference. Through these lectures, artists with promising talent are afforded the opportunity to introduce their work to a large audience of established artists, educators, peers, collectors, art historians, and critics. GAS is proud to host this lecture as a tribute to the generous and visionary legacy of the Saxes. The glass community is indebted to these visionary collectors, who have supported artists, galleries and institutions, and have helped give glass a prominence in museums across the country. George described his involvement in the studio glass community as “a treat, a pleasure. It’s been a life changing experience for us. The real reward is the people we met. Our best friends now are collectors, artists, curators, and dealers all over the country.” Dorothy agrees, “We’ve gotten much more out of this than we’ve given. Truly.” 1. All quotes are taken from an interview with Susan Longini published in the Spring 2005 issue of GASnews.

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

119

Glass Art Society’s 44th Annual Conference Program San Jose, California, June 4-7, 2015 Events and Ongoing Activities June 4-7, Registration, Information Table, Technical Display, Education and Professional Resource Center, Corning Incorporated “Glass Age” video screenings, International Student Exhibition. Sponsored by the SJSU Glass Artist Guild students. GAS Collectors Tour: June 2-7, Fly into San Francisco and experience the City by the Bay. Enjoy cocktails at a spectacular private collection; take a private, curator-led tour of the de Young Museum; venture across the Golden Gate to Sausalito; and explore Bay Area private glass collections and studios, including the amazing studio of John Lewis. __________________________________

Thursday, June 4, 2015 San Jose Day of Glass sponsored by the Art Alliance for Contemporary Glass Night of Glass The Tech Museum of Innovation 7 pm - 12 am __________________________________

Friday, June 5, 2015 San Jose State University Vladimir Klein, Demo: Cold - The Chipping of Glass Jaime Guerrero & Watts Youth Group, Demo: Hot - The Hunt: Hot Sculpting Techniques. Sponsored by the Clay and Glass Arts Foundation. Johnathon Turner (formerly Schmuck), Demo: Cold - Secret Teachings from the Coldshop. Sponsored by His Glassworks, Inc.

CMoG Hot Glass Roadshow at Plaza de César Chávez Nancy Callan, Demo: Hot - Brain on Cane, sponsored by Mark Murai David Patchen, Demo: Hot - Pointillism on the Blowpipe

Bay Area Glass Institute John de Wit, Demo: Hot - Object Maker Karina Guévin & Cedric Ginart, Demo: Flame - It’s Not Serious! Alexander Abajian & J. Lin-Hsien Kung, Demo: Hot - Gesture Reflection Projection Bob Snodgrass, Demo: Flame - Bob Snodgrass’ Tricks With Silver and Gold

120

Conference attendees watch a demo on the CMoG Hot Glass Roadshow at Plaza de César Chávez.

The Tech Museum of Innovation Daniel Salazar, Demo: Flame - California Style Torch Work Loren Stump, Demo: Flame - Murrine for the Masses Bandhu Dunham, Demo: Flame - Kinetic Construction Techniques

City National Civic Opening Ceremonies Mary B. White, Lifetime Membership Award Acceptance Shane Fero on behalf of Paul Stankard, Lifetime Achievement Award Acceptance & Lecture - A Backward Glance Mildred Howard, Willson Lecture - Waiting for Humble Objects to Speak Steven Aldrich (moderator), Dale Dougherty, Dr. Jeffrey Evenson, Keynote Panel Glass, Art, and Technology

Parkside Plaza Opening Reception Gallery Hop (various locations) __________________________________

Saturday, June 6, 2015 San Jose State University Matthew Day Perez, Lec-Mo - Poured, Plopped, Splashed and Smeared! Daniel Cutrone, Lec-Mo - Bridging the Gap from Digital to Hand: Using CAD/CAM to create a new language of form within the traditions of the handmade

Mel Douglas, Demo: Cold - Surface Tension Dean Allison, Demo: Hot - Combining Techniques: Casting into Mold Blown Layers Joanna Manousis, Lec-mo - Mastering the Void: Casting Residual Details within Solid Glass Mark Ganter, Lec-mo: Cold - 3D Printing Meets Glass... Matthew Szösz, Demo: Hot - The Attraction of Opposites

CMoG Hot Glass Roadshow at Plaza de César Chávez Petr Novotny, Jiří Pačinek & Rob Stern, Demo: Hot - Czech This Out! Ché Rhodes, Demo: Hot - Graphite Mold Approaches with Hot Glass Paul DeSomma, Demo: Hot - Demo? No Problemo

Bay Area Glass Institute Marc Barreda, Demo: Hot - My View Has Become Distorted, Can I Get a Little More Light? Museum of Glass Hot Shop Team, Demo: Hot - Kids Design Glass™ Eusheen Goines Demo: Flame - Fillacello

The Tech Museum of Innovation Kimberly Fields, Demo: Flame - Sculptural Bird Bead Bill Concannon & Bruce Suba, Demo: Flame - Old Skool Neon: Mystery! Magic! Science! Fun!

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

Glass Olympics: BAGI vs SJSU Glass Olympics: Public Glass vs The Crucible Jay Musler, Demo: Flame - Torchworking on the Lathe. Sponsored by the Association of Clay and Glass Artists of California.

TechShop San Jose Shaun Griffiths & Stephen Jacklyn, Lec-mo - Water Jet - Tips, Tricks and Applications

The Tech Museum of Innovation Jeff Heath, Demo: Flame - Fabricating an Environmental Consciousness

City National Civic

The Glasshouse, the site of the Closing Night Party.

City National Civic At-Risk Youth Forum, Panelists: Andrew Page (moderator), Pearl Dick, Kit Evans, Barbara Heisler, Tracy Kirchmann, Robert Minkoff, Jessi Moore, sponsored by the Robert M. Minkoff Foundation John Lewis, Lecture - Cast Glass and the Environment Corning Residency Panel, Labino Lecture - Exploring New Possibilities with Science and Art: Corning Museum of Glass/ Corning Incorporated Specialty Glass Residency Panelists: Amy Schwartz (moderator), Rob Cassetti, Glen B. Cook Ph.D., Eric Meek, Tina Oldknow, Albert Paley

Montgomery Theater Erin Dickson, Lecture – Architectural Quirks: Translating and Realizing Ideas in Glass through Digital Design and Manufacture

Parkside Hall A Goblet Grab International Student Exhibition. Sponsored by the SJSU Glass Artist Guild students. Portfolio Review

Parkside Hall B GAS Live and Silent Auction

Sainte Claire Hotel Ballroom A Gala Evening in Honor of Dorothy and George Saxe

__________________________________

Green Panel - Simple Green: Demystifying Green Technology for the Glass Artist Panelists: Tracy Kirchmann (moderator), Julie Conway, Timm Muth, Dan Schwoerer, Hugh Jenkins Nikolas Weinstein, Lecture - Engineering Art. Sponsored by the College for Creative Studies | Glass Therman Statom, Littleton Lecture Stories/Contexts

Sunday, June 7, 2015

Montgomery Theater

San Jose State University

Salvador Pulido Arroyo on behlf of Christian Thornton, Lecture - Xaquixe: The Facts of a Truly Sustainable Studio Kana Tanaka, Lecture - Behind-the-Scenes: Installing Large-Scale Public Art

Kristin Deady, Lec-Mo - The History of Photo- sensitive Materials & Their Potential for Artists Working with Glass Rui Sasaki, Lec-Mo - Illuminating Glass in Architecture: The Residue of Space Mark Abildgaard, Demo - Mold Making and Lost Wax Kiln Casting Matthew Szösz, Demo: Hot - The Attraction of Opposites David King, Lec-Mo - Through the Looking Glass Zoetrope Róisín de Buitléar and Fred Curtis, Demo: Cold - Glass Cutting from Waterford the Irish City of Glass - 3 Styles of Glass Cutting, 3 Masters and Millions of Creative Options Dean Allison, Demo: Hot - Combining Techniques: Casting into Mold Blown Layers

CMoG Hot Glass Roadshow at Plaza de César Chávez Einar & Jamex de la Torre, Demo: Hot El Camino Real Jim Mongrain, Demo: Hot - Venetian Glass Techniques Nate Watson, Demo: Hot - The Walk We Take With Friends

Parkside Hall A International Student Exhibition Informal Poster Presentations Q&A Hour Career Panel: Charlotte Potter (moderator), Allyson Reza, Benjamin Kikkert, Mel Douglas, Sarah Dragovich, and Benjamin Cobb. Sponsored by Southern Illinois University, Glass Program

Parkside Hall B GAS Annual Business Meeting and 2016 Preview Emerging Artists Presentations Jacci Delaney, The Specter of Sentimentality Justin Ginsberg, Properties of Materials and the Preciousness of Action Alli Hoag, An Arrangement of Skin Hyperopia Projects: Helen Lee, Matthew Szösz & Alex Rosenberg Strattman Lecture The Critical Vacuum

The GlassHouse Closing Night Party

Bay Area Glass Institute Demetra Theofanous & Beau Tsai, Demo: Flame - Sculpting Natural Forms in Boro. Sponsored by Martha Alderson-Lewellen and John Lewellen

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

121

Pre- and Post-Conference Workshops PRE-CONFERENCE WORKSHOPS

POST -CONFERENCE WORKSHOPS

Energy Efficient Burners with Hugh Jenkins Berkeley Bohemian Glass Studio

Hot Glass Sculpting with Karen WillenbrinkJohnsen and Jasen Johnsen Bay Area Glass Institute Monday, June 8 to Thursday, June 11

BECon 2015 Bullseye Resource Center Bay Area New Surface: Wheel-cutting and Engraving with Ethan Stern California College of the Arts Flameworked Glass Beads: Form, Surface, Details with Amy Lemaire The Crucible Hot Glass Casting with Mitchell Gaudet The Crucible Light Manipulation: Programming and Effects for the Glass Artist with Greg Mowry The Crucible Beginning Mold-making and Pâte de Verre Infuse Glass Studio Parts and Pieces with Carmen Lozar Public Glass Skill Building through Goblets with Jeff Mack Public Glass

Sculpting Natural Forms in Borosilicate with Beau Tsai and Demetra Theofanous Bay Area Glass Institute Monday, June 8 to Thursday, June 11 Creating Dimension with Paul Messink Bay Area Glass Institute Monday, June 8 to Thursday, June 11 2000 Years of Glassblowing with Edward T. Schmid The Crucible Monday, June 8 to Friday, June 12 Enamels on Glass, Glass in Enamel: Exploratory Imagery with Mary Chuduk The Crucible Monday, June 8 to Thursday, June 11 Screening with Ground Glass with Jan Harrell The Crucible Friday, June 12 to Sunday, June 14 Introduction to Pâte de Verre Infuse Glass Studio Monday, June 8 & Wednesday, June 10 (Focused) Experimentation with Carrie Iverson IV Designs Wednesday, June 10 to Friday, June 13 Mega Murrine with Kait Rhoads Public Glass Tuesday, June 9 to Friday, June 12 Kait Rhoads, Vince (Public Glass)

122

Infuse Glass Studio’s Introduction to Pâte de Verre workshop.

Susan Longini, Crosshatch Amphora: Turquoise/Maize (GLANC member exhibition, Where Silica Meets Silicon Valley).

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

Special Exhibitions & Gallery Hop The Gallery Hop took place Friday, June 5, 5 pm - 9 pm throughout downtown San Jose and beyond, in conjunction with San Jose’s South First Fridays art walk.

Anno Domini/ the second coming of Art & Design

The City of Fremont Olive Hyde Gallery

123 Washington Blvd, Fremont, CA 94539 www.olivehydeartguild.org Glass Contemplations On view: May 7 - June 7

Empire Seven Studios

366 S 1st St San Jose, CA 95113 www.galleryad.com Spectrum: An exploration of the never-ending possibilities of an amazing material. Reception: June 5, 7-11 pm On view: May 1 - June 13

525 N 7th St, San Jose, CA 95112 www.streetfusioninc.com Kathleen Elliot Presents: Select contemporary glass sculpture Opening reception: June 5, 5 - 10 pm On view: June 5 - 7, 11 am - 7 pm

Art Ark Gallery

Higher Fire Gallery

1035 S 6th Street San Jose, CA 95112 info@artarkgallery.net Surface Matters: Pattern / Texture / Image: An exploration of mark making processes applied to glass and other media. Opening reception: June 5, 6 - 9 pm

499 S Market St San Jose, CA 95113 www.HigherFireStudios.com Where Silica Meets Silicon Valley On view: June 5 - 7

Art Object Gallery

510 S 1st St San Jose, CA 95113 www.maclaarte.org Breaking Point: Artists Jaime Guerrero and Viviana Paredes explore and critique cultural issues including the effect of over-hunting and the extinction of dialects and customs. Reception: June 5, 7-11 pm On view: June 5 - August 8

592 N 5th St San Jose, CA 95112 wwwartobjectgallery.com Glass: Diverse California glass artist from the San Francisco Bay Area to Monterey Bay who started creating in the 1980s and continues through this decade. Opening reception: June 5, 5- 9 pm On view: June 5-7

Bay Area Glass Institute

401 E Taylor St, Suite 115 San Jose, CA 95112 Naturally Inspired Opening reception: June 5, 5 – 9 pm On view: June 5, 9 am – 10 pm

Carmen Castellano Fine Art Gallery

San Jose City College 2100 Moorpark Ave San Jose, CA 95128 Sparks: California Glass Networks, 1960s to Present, The Glass Movement Catches Fire in California Artist panel and opening reception: May 13, 4 - 7:30 pm Reception: June, 5, 6:30 - 9 pm On view: May 13 - June 9

Chandra Cerrito Contemporary

480 23rd St Oakland, CA 94612 www.chandracerritocontemporary.com Shattered: Defying Expectations in Glass: Artists from Northern California and beyond whose work is aligned with contemporary sculpture or installation. Reception: June 5, 12 - 8 pm On view: June 5 - July 30

MACLA/Movimiento de Arte y Cultura Latino Americana

Phantom Galleries at Pho69

321 S 1st St, San Jose, CA 95113 Star-Crossed Lovers: The work of three artists interacts with the lively and hip downtown Pho restaurant, exploring themes of tragic destinies and doomed lovers. On view through June 20

Public Glass

1750 Armstrong Ave, San Francisco CA 94124 www.publicglass.org Unseen Particulars: Site-specific installation by Katherine Kazlauskas. On view: June 4 - July 5

Richmond Art Center

2540 Barrett Ave, Richmond CA 94804 www.therac.org California Now: Clay, Glass and Enamel Juried Exhibition: A collaboration between the Association of Clay & Glass Artists of CA, Richmond Art Center, and the Center for Enamel Art. Reception: June 13, 5 - 7 pm On view: June 13 - August 21

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

San Jose Institute of Contemporary Art 560 S 1st St San Jose, CA 95113 wwwsjica.org A Fragile Narrative: Cassandra Straubing: exploring a narrative of the working class. Artist led tour & talk: June 5, 7 pm On view: June 5, 10 am - 10 pm

San Jose Museum of Quilts and Textiles

520 S 1st St San Jose, CA 95113 www.sjquiltmuseum.org Textile Conversations in Glass: Artists use glass to reach across mediums. Reception: June 5, 12 - 9 pm On view: May 2 - July 5

Santa Cruz Museum of Art & History

705 Front Street Santa Cruz, CA 95060 santacruzmah.org The Butterfly Effect: An installation by Lea de Wit. On view through November, 2015

South First Billiards

420 S 1st St, San Jose, CA 95112 Clear: With an emphasis on neon signage, four artists celebrate the cultural range of glass by combining the dark, the everyday, and the divine. On view: June 5 - 20

San Jose State University Art Galleries

Art and Industrial Studies Bldg 1 Washington Sq. San Jose, CA 95192 www.sjsu.edu/art/places/studentgalleries/ San Jose State University Student Exhibitions On view: June 5 - 7

San Jose City Hall

200 E. Santa Clara St San Jose, CA 95113 Gathering Glass: Display cases in the lobby featuring local glass artists and technology. On view: May 1 - September 4

Windows at 51 N 5th St

51 N 5th St San Jose 95112 Missing Matter: Visions of Time and Tech: California College of the Arts Glass Seniors. On view: June 5, 5 - 8 pm

Works/San Jose

365 South Market St San Jose, CA 95113 gallery@workssanjose.org Enlightened Glass: Group show of artists using light. Opening reception: June 5, 7-11 pm On view: June 4 & 6, 12 - 4 pm

123

2015 San Jose Conference - Technical Display Exhibitors listed alphabetically ABR Imagery #50 Ross Thackery 3808 W Vernal Pike Bloomington, IN 47404 T 812-339-0147 rossglass@cs.com abrimagery.com

GAS attendees looking at glass color at the Technical Display.

ARTCO #3-4 Malcolm Spann 348 N 15th Street San Jose, CA 95112 T 408-288-7978 sales@artcoinc.com artcoinc.com Bucher Emhart Glass #35 4015 East Peach Ave Owensville, MO 65066 T 1-800-243-0048 webmaster@bucheremhartglass.com bucheremhartglass.com Bullseye Glass Co. #26-27 3722 SE 21st Ave Portland, OR 97202 T 503-232-8887 sales@bullseyeglass.com bullseyeglass.com Canned Heat Glass, LLC #33 Cheyenne Malcolm 1331 NE 46th Ave Portland, OR 97213 T 208-867-9517 vetrovita@gmail.com cannedheatglass.com Charley’s Deadman Switch #36 Charles Friedman 2841 NW 70th St Seattle WA 98117 T 206-781-0608 charlesf@friedmanglassworks.com charleysdeadmanswitch.com Chrysler Museum Glass Studio #37 Charlotte Potter 745 Duke St Norfolk, VA 23510 T 757-333-6299 info@chrysler.org chrysler.org

124

Corning Incorporated #9 (PREMIER SPONSOR) Kelly Smith One Riverfront Plaza Corning, NY 14831 T 607-974-9000 inquiries@corning.com www.corning.com Digitry Company, Inc. #23 Ronald Shapiro 449 Forest Avenue, Ste 9 Portland, ME 04101 T 207-774-0300 info@digitry.com digitry.com East Bay Batch & Color #30 James Meyer 169 S First St Richmond, CA 94804 T 510-233-0708 customerservice@ebbatchcolor.com eastbaycolor.com Euclid Kilns #38 Geoff Farrow 1120 Speers Rd Oakville, ON CANADA L6L 2X4 T 800-296-5456 gfarrow@euclids.com euclidkilns.com Gaffer Glass USA LTD #5 John Leggott & John Croucher 19622 70th Ave S Bay #4 Kent, WA 98032 T 253-395-3361 manager@gafferglassusa.com gafferglassusa.com

Glass Art Society #8 Pamela F. Koss, Executive Director 6512 23rd Ave NW Ste 329 Seattle, WA 98117 T 206-382-1305 info@glassart.org glassart.org The Glass Furnace Foundation #15 Elif Yalcinkaya Koyici cad. 72/a Ogumce Beykoz Istanbul 32729 TURKEY T +90 216-433-3693 elif@glassfurnace.org glassfurnace.org Glasscraft, Inc. #7 David Winship 3844 Janisse St Eugene, OR 97402 T 541-684-6807 dwinship@glasscraftinc.com glasscraftinc.com Hang Your Glass #16 Poppy Mussallem PO Box 4534 Carmel, CA 93921 T 650-353-4642 info@hangyourglass.com HangYourGlass.com His Glassworks, Inc. #20-21-22 Mark Bolick 2000 Riverside Dr, Ste 19 Asheville, NC 28804 T 828-254-2559 support@hisglassworks.com hisglassworks.com

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

Hot Glass Color and Supply #18 Cyrena Stefano 2227 5th Ave Seattle, WA 98121 T 206-448-1199 cyrena@hotglasscolor.com hotglasscolor.com

The Penland School of Crafts #34 Dean Allison PO Box 37 Penland, NC 28765 T 828-765-2359 glass@penland.org penland.org

Jim Moore Tools for Glass #45 Jim & Liz Moore PO Box 1151 Port Townsend, WA 98368 T 360-379-2936 glasstools@olympus.net toolsforglass.com

Pilchuck Glass School #24 1201 316th St NW Stanwood, WA 98292 T 360-445-3111 info@pilchuck.com pilchuck.com

Mobile Glassblowing Studios, LLC #42 Phil Vinson & Chuck Wells 379 E Oglethorpe St Ellaville, GA 31806 T 844-GLAS2GO mobileglassblowingstudios@gmail.com www.mobileglassblowingstudios.com National Torch / Premier Industries #14 Craig Hamernik 1590 99th Lane NE Blaine, MN 55449 T 763-786-4020 c.hamernik@premierind.us nationaltorch.com North Jersey Diamond Wheel #39 Bonnie A. Clark 218 Little Falls Road Cedar Grove, NJ 07009 T 973-239-5805x11 bacnjdw@aol.com www.diamondwheels.com Olympic Color Rods #1-2 Phil Oâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;Reilly 818 John Street Seattle, WA 98109 T 206-343-7336 sales@glasscolor.com glasscolor.com Paragon Industries, L.P. #25 Shelia Collins 2011 S Town East Blvd Mesquite, TX 75149 T 972-288-7557 info@paragonweb.com paragonweb.com

Red Hot Metal /Cutting Edge #10 Jeff Lindsay 24 Bellarmine Ct Chico, CA 95928 T 530-342-1970 info@redhotmetal.net redhotmetal.net SDS Industries #44 Scott Shannon 37 Nobodyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Road Cheshire, MA 01225 T 207-266-9448 scott@kilncontrol.com kilncontrol.com Skutt Kilns #17 Mike Sievers 6441 SE Johnson Creek Blvd Portland, OR 97206 T 503-774-6000 skutt@skutt.com skutt.com Spectrum Glass/System 96 #12 Kate Wilhelmi 24105 Sno-Woodinville Rd Woodinville, WA 98072 T 425-483-6699 hotglass@system96.com system96.com Steinert Industries, Inc. #28-29 John Steinert 1507 Franklin Ave Kent, OH 44240 T 330-678-0028 / 800-727-7473 glasstools@steinertindustries.com steinertindustries.com

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

The Studio of the Corning Museum of Glass #13 Karen Vaughn 1 Museum Way Corning, NY, 14830 T 607-438-5100 thestudio@cmog.org cmog.org Trev/Aim Kiln #31-32 Trev 1528 172nd St NE Marysville, WA 98271 T 360-652-8642 shop@trevsglass.com trevsglass.com Tulsa Glassblowing School #43 Janet Duvall, Executive Director 19 E Matthew Brady Tulsa, OK 74103 T 918-582-4527 janetduvall@tulsaglassblowing.org tulsaglassblowing.org Uroboros Glass #11 Eric Lovell 2139 N Kerby Ave Portland, OR 97227 T 503-284-4900 sales@uroboros.com uroboros.com Wale Apparatus Co., INC #19 Dennis Wargo 400 Front Street Hellertown, PA 18055 T 610-838-7047 dbrucker@waleapparatus.com waleapparatus.com Wet Dog Glass, LLC #6 Eddie Bernard 100C Russell Dr Star, NC 27356 T 910-428-4111 tech@wetdogglass.com wetdogglass.com

125

ACK NOWLEDGEMEN TS

A drawing of a design to be made by the Museum of Glass team.

126

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

The Glass Art Society Thanks and Acknowledges our 2015 Conference Committee, Donors, and Volunteers Thanks to our sponsors, without whose help the conference would not be possible.

2015 PREMIER SPONSOR

Corning Incorporated MAJOR SPONSORS

Knight Foundation Glass Alliance of Northern California DAY OF GLASS SPONSOR

Art Alliance for Contemporary Glass CONFERENCE SPONSORS

Applied Materials Foundation Fleishhacker Foundation MacPherson Construction & Design Ted and Melissa Lagreid PRESENTATION SPONSORS Martha Alderson-Lewellen and John Lewellen – Demetra Theofanous and Beau Tsai Demo Association of Clay and Glass Artists of California – Jay Musler Demo Clay and Glass Arts Foundation - Jaime Guerrero & Watts Youth Group Demo College for Creative Studies | Glass Nikolas Weinstein Lecture His Glassworks, Inc. - Johnathon Turner (formerly Schmuck) Demo Robert M. Minkoff Foundation At-Risk Youth Forum Mark Murai - Nancy Callan Demo Southern Illinois University, Glass Program Career Panel SJSU Glass Artist Guild Students International Student Exhibition VENUE PARTNERS Bay Area Glass Institute The Corning Museum of Glass Hot Glass Road Show San Jose State University The Tech Museum of Innovation The Glass Art Society Journal is supported in part by an award from the National Endowment for the Arts and the Corning Incorporated Foundation.

The GAS Board of Directors, Pamela Koss, and GAS staff would like to thank the conference co-chairs Steven Aldrich, Susan Longini, Cassandra Straubing, and Demetra Theofanous, honorary co-chair Dorothy Saxe, and our venue partners: Bay Area Glass Institute, The Corning Museum of Glass Hot Glass Roadshow, San Jose State University, and The Tech Museum of Innovation. Portfolio Reviewers: Mark Abildgaard, Benjamin Cobb, Einar and Jamex de la Torre, Laura Donefer, Bandhu Dunham, Michael Endo, Katherine Gray, Kari Minnick, David Schnuckel, Pamina Traylor Emerging Artist Jurors: John Drury, Ginny Ruffner, Emma Woffenden Student Scholarship Jurors: Shane Fero, Corey Hampson, Kristie Rea International Student Exhibition Jurors: Tina Oldknow, Dorothy Saxe, Mary B. White Auction Donors: The auction is an important source of support for the annual conference: Alexander Abajian • Mark Abildgaard • Julie Alland • Bergstrom-Mahler Museum of Glass • Sabina Boehm • Morgan Bogart • Bullseye Glass Co • Resource Center Bay Area • Nancy Callan • Deborah Carlson • Bill Concannon • Paul Counts • Daniel Cutrone • Justin Dawn • Einar and Jamex de la Torre • Kristin Deady • Jacci Delaney • Paul DeSomma • Mel Douglas • Bandhu Dunham • Kathleen Elliot • Debra Fenzl • Nicole Fierce • Charles Friedman • Cedric Ginart • Annie Glass • Barbara Grauke • Jaime Guerrero • Karina Guévin • Kim Harty • Alli Hoag • Trevor Huber • Geoff Isles • Jelveh JaFerian • Kristoff Kamrath • David King • Cooper Kirsch • Vladimir Klein • J. Lin-Hsien Kung • Weston Lambert • Jiyong Lee • John Lewis • Jeff Lindsay • Joanna Manousis • Natalie Martin • John Musgrove • Lyn Musgrove • Jay Musler • Kanami Ogata • Elise Ordorica • Steve Parcher • David Patchen • Kit Paulson • Spencer Pittenger • Natali Rodrigues • Daniel Salazar • Jeffrey Sarmiento • Edward Schmid • Treg Silkwood • Paul Stankard • Tom Stanton • Therman Statom • Christopher Stever • Cassandra Straubing • Carrie Strope • Bruce Suba • Jo Ann Syron • Demetra Theofanous • Gregory Thompson • Johnathon Turner (formerly Schmuck) • Sarah Vaughn • Hal Watrous • Mary B. White • Janet Wittenberg • Gina Zetts

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

Goblet Grab Donors: Victoria Ahmadizadeh • Wyatt Amend • Paula Bartron • Paul Counts • Josh DeWall • Juliann Ewing • Theoren Hanks • Michael Hapho • Jeff Heath • Michael Hermann • Trevor Huber • Katrina Hude • Robert Kahl • David King • Cooper Kirsch • Sterling McKee • Trevor McKee • Shannon Morgan • Patrick Mullen • Russell O’Brien • Minami Oya • Steve Parcher • Mathew Porkola • Edward Schmid • John Shoemaker • Miffin SpencerDevlin • Susan Stinsmuehlen-Amend • James Stone • Heather Sutherland • Polly Toombs • Gordon Tyler • Janet Wittenberg • Linnea Wong Presenters Who Donated All or Part of Their Honorariums to GAS: Marc Barreda • Rob Cassetti • Fred Curtis • Jeffrey Evenson • John Lewis • Dan Schwoerer Work Exchange Participants and Volunteers: Kahy Akabryar • Janell Amely • Connie Arellaens • Mary Lou Atkins • Rod Baker • Paula Bartron • Patricia Belsky • Dean Bensen • Kiesha Bolton • Brian Bui • Lynne Carlson • Amanda Chapman • Laurin Chichkanoff • Elin Christopherson • Paul Counts • Stephanie Dickson • Elliott Donlon • Juliann Ewing • Lisa Renee Falk • Gayle Forman • Laurie Fossier-Mills • Mark Fullerton • Trace Galbraith • Grant Garmezy • Marina Hanser • Ken Hinh • Minh Hoang • Emma Howell • Donna Hunt-Dusse • Lynn Kellogg • Mark Kesler • Joan Kruckewitt • Dana Krueger • Cheryl Le • Samantha Lochmandy • Jocelyn Luna • Tina Mai • Patricia Marino • Ashley McDonald • Melinda Moody • Kathryn Murphy • Erin Neff Garmezy • Thuy Vy Nguyen • Tuan Nguyen • Brenda Nishimoto • Brigid O’Malley • Aya Ok • Minami Oya • Kit Paulson • Kevin Pham • Mathew Porkola • Jamie Ragan • Kait Rhoads • Mary Catherine Richardson • Amy Robbins • Carrie Strope • Earnest Glenn Syron • April Tettemer • Taurean Todd • Gregory Tomb • Tuan Ton • Jennie Tran • Amit Tripathi • Anh Vo • Mary B. White

127

GLASS ART SOCIETY FUND DONORS Contributions cover the period from May 1, 2014 to June 30, 2015 The GAS Journal is supported in part by an award from the National Endowment for the Arts and the Corning Incorporated Foundation. Becky Winship Flameworking Scholarship Fund Established in 2002 by David Winship and Lisa Bieber of Winship Designs, with funding currently continued by Glasscraft, Inc. to support conference attendance for students whose work includes flameworking Laura Donefer Akakpo Ediths Michel Marc, Ojadec-Afrique John and Lyn Musgrove, Musgrove Glass Art Max Thomas, Doomsday Glass David Willis and Erika Christian, David Willis Glass David Winship, Glasscraft, Inc.

John Etter Herb Babcock, Babcock Design Studio Donna Figone Dave Braun Sharon Freas Stephen Cressey, Stematdan Glass Gini and Dora Elia Garcia, Garcia Art Glass, Inc. Laura Donefer Barbara Grauke, Cuesta Glass Sieglinde Friedman Catherine Hamilton, Silver Art Glass Jewelry Heather Hartle, Engraved Inspiration Gillian Hanington, Mafonga Glassworks John and Lyn Musgrove, Musgrove Glass Art Jay Musler and Joan Kruckewitt, Jay Musler Studios Charlie Holden, Charlie Holden Argyle Nugatory, Blue Oak Industries Lori and Jeff Hultman, Hultman Glass Studio Joel O’Dorisio Hugh Jenkins and Stephanie Ross, Pilisa Rainbow Lady, AMusinGlass Hugh Jenkins Glass Studio Natali Rodrigues Christopher Johnson and Martha Alderson Helene Safire, Helene Safire Ltd. Steve Klein, Steve Klein Studio Community Partnership Fund Devora Safran, Designed by Devora Alex Klumac and Lisa Willis Funds special arts-related project or program Dorothy Saxe Betsy Knotts for under-served populations (i.e. at-risk youth, Claudia Lipschultz Judith Schaechter developmentally disabled, minorities, veterans, Dana Smith, Four Winds Studios Kathy Little, klittleglass etc.) in the conference host city Zoe Topsfield, Zoe Topsfield Glass Michele MacFarlane, Contemporary Studio Glass John and Lyn Musgrove, Musgrove Glass Art Ristiina Wigg Natalie Martin and Stacy Harrel, Ethan Stern and Amanda McDonald, Emily Williams, Emily Williams Sculpture Natalie Martin Studios Diamond Life Studio Michael Wilson Bruce McKay, MMXII, LLC James Manshardt Suzanne Mears, SWM Art Hilbert Sosin Fund for Professionalism James Mensching Dominick Labino Lecture Fund in the Glass Arts Joseph Mercurio Established in 1993 by GAS to continue the Established in 1995 by GAS to support educaJohn and Lyn Musgrove, Musgrove Glass Art legacy of Dominick Labino in furthering the tional endeavors within the GAS membership Elliott Rosenstein technical and aesthetic quality of glass art by that benefit the organization as a whole Lorraine Schinelli, Lorraine Schinelli Studios sponsoring a lecture at each conference Herb Babcock, Babcock Design Studio Sherry Selevan Herb Babcock, Babcock Design Studio April Hilton (Thomas-Lang), Hilton Art Glass Doug Sheafor and Joyce Knott, AlBo Glass Sandra Christine and Dale Meyer, Quintal Studio Jon Lickerman Jan Sutton Deborah Ellington, Dragon Fly Studio John and Lyn Musgrove, Musgrove Glass Art Dan Terrible Norman Jacobs Laurel Schultz, Photogenic Manipulations Rebecca Terrible Hugh Jenkins and Stephanie Ross, Brad Turner Littleton Lecture Fund Hugh Jenkins Glass Studio Supports lectures by innovative artists who push Claudia Lipschultz John Webster, Padilla Bay Art Ristiina Wigg Michele MacFarlane, Contemporary Studio Glass the envelope and use their creativity, knowledge, Nimet Yalcinkaya James Manshardt and influence to educate others within the field Carlos Zervigon John and Lyn Musgrove, Musgrove Glass Art of glass His Glassworks, Inc. John Littleton and Kate Vogel, Littleton-Vogel, Inc. GAS International Emergency Relief Fund Zoe Topsfield, Zoe Topsfield Glass Bruce McKay, MMXII, LLC “GAS in CERF” fund is not available to internaGAS in CERF (Craft Emergency Relief Fund) Aids artist-members of GAS faced with career-threatening catastrophe Herb Babcock, Babcock Design Studio Claire Bateman, Running Fox Studio William and Katherine Bernstein, Bernstein Glass Dave Braun Cal Breed, Orbix Hot Glass, Inc. Mary Ellen Buxton-Kutch, Pier Glass Gregory Cap Deborah Carlson, Shooting Star Glass Studio Marty Christy-Burt, Marty Christy Glass Clifton Crofford and Kevin McGehee, SiNaCa Studios Jennifer Detlefsen Miriam Di Fiore Deborah Ellington, Dragon Fly Studio 128

tional members, so under this fund all artistmembers outside of the U.S. are eligible to apply Akakpo Ediths Michel Marc, Ojadec-Afrique Michele MacFarlane, Contemporary Studio Glass John and Lyn Musgrove, Musgrove Glass Art Joel O’Dorisio John Webster, Padilla Bay Art Edris Weis

Robert Willson Fund Established in 2001 with the initial contribution by Mrs. Margaret Pace Wilson for an annual GAS conference lecture addressing sculpture and glass John and Lyn Musgrove, Musgrove Glass Art Herb Babcock, Babcock Design Studio Akakpo Ediths Michel Marc, Ojadec-Afrique Brady Steward, Ice Moon Studios, Inc.

GAS Student Rep Travel Fund Established in 2006 by Eddie Bernard and Angela Bernard of Wet Dog Glass, who have continued funding Eddie Bernard and Angela Bart Bernard

Saxe Emerging Artists Lecture Fund Established in 2015, this fund sponsors a lecture that gives artists with promising talent the opportunity to introduce their work to a large audience of established artists, educators, collectors, art historians, and critics. Steven Aldrich James Baker Eileen Battat

General Student Scholarship Fund Provides support for student members who could not otherwise afford to attend the annual conference

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

Howard Ben Tre Eddie Bernard and Angela Bart Bernard Rob Cassetti, The Corning Museum of Glass Chris Clarke and Heather McElwee, Pittsburgh Glass Center Karen Cleage Kelly Conway, The Corning Museum of Glass Glen Cook, Corning Museum of Glass Catherine Corre and Roland Acra James Della Alan Eusden, The Corning Museum of Glass Linda Fornaciari Susan Glass and Arni Thorsteinson Carol Green John and Deb Gross, Newcastle Properties Ish Harshawatt Geoff Isles Mike Kasperzak, City of Mountain View Susan Longini and Muni Barash Jeff Mack Roger and Nancy MacPherson, MacPherson Construction & Design, LLC Lani McGregor and Daniel Schwoerer, Bullseye Glass Co. Marilyn and Charles Meier Elizabeth Miles John and Lyn Musgrove, Musgrove Glass Art Tina Oldknow and Peter Herzberg Babette and Steven Pinsky Warren and Barbara Poole Charlotte Potter Katherine Pratt Ellen Saliman Dorothy Saxe Loren Saxe Amy Schwartz and William Gudenrath Christine Sharkey, Corning Incorporated Richard Sloan, Precision Glass Bevelling Jenn Sockolov and David Saxe Wayne Strattman, Strattman Design Davira Taragin and Dr. Marvin A. Taragin Pamina Traylor and Andrew Franklin Karol Wight, The Corning Museum of Glass Carol Yorke and Gerard Conn

Takako Sano International Student Scholarship Fund Established in 1999 by GAS to support the attendance of one non-USA student at each annual conference Laura Donefer James Manshardt John and Lyn Musgrove, Musgrove Glass Art Natali Rodrigues, Alberta College of Art and Design Technology Advancing Glass Assists the advancement of the glass arts by providing an annual grant to an artist or group of artists to fund research to advance the field of glass art. Ted and Melissa Lagreid Joseph Mercurio Akakpo Ediths Michel Marc, Ojadec-Afrique Wayne Strattman, Strattman Design

Unrestricted Funds General donations help support the organization wherever it is needed most Dudley and Lisa Anderson Wendy Avery, Dockyard Glassworks Marc Barreda Linda Basden, Stone Bridge Valley Art Center Angela Bart Bernard and Eddie Bernard, Wet Dog Glass, LLC Alex Bernstein, AGB Glass William and Katherine Bernstein Lynn Burgess Molly Cadranell, Glass Roots Gregory Cap Deborah Carlson, Shooting Star Glass Studio Rob Cassetti, The Corning Museum of Glass Sandra Christine Chris Clarke and Heather McElwee Patrick Collentine Fred Curtis, Fred Curtis Crystal Judith Cushman, Judith Cushman & Associates Jeffrey Evenson Miriam di Fiore Louise Erskine, Erskine Glass Works Rif and Joan Freedman Steve Funk Sy Kamens Educational Fund J. Brooke Gardiner, Objet de Glass This fund helps to keep student memberships David Graeber, Graeber Art Glass and conference registration fees low Alex Hamerman Herb Babcock, Babcock Design Studio Catherine Hamilton, Silver Art Glass Jewelry Laura Donefer His Glassworks, Inc. Claudia Lipschultz Geoff Isles John and Lyn Musgrove, Musgrove Glass Art George and Jane Kaiser, George Kaiser & Co. Judith Schaechter Kristin Korn Barbara Leasure Don Leedy, brokenglass studio John Lewis, John Lewis Glass Studio

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

Susan Longini Roger and Nancy MacPherson, MacPherson Construction & Design, LLC Kelly Makuch, Kelly Makuch Studio James Mensching Paul Messink, Paul Messink Glass Art John and Lyn Musgrove, Musgrove Glass Art Joel Philip Myers Elizabeth Netts Ed and Marjorie Oâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;Keefe Jutta-Annette Page David Pfeffer Chris Rifkin Alice Rooney Leslie Rowe-Israelson, Twin Vision Studio Glass Helene Safire Dorothy Saxe Judith Schaechter Lorraine Schinelli, Glass Inspirations Dan Schwoerer and Lani McGregor, Bullseye Glass Co. Morton M. Silverman Arlene and Norman Silvers Jan M. Smith and Scott Valitchka, matching gift from Kimberly-Clark Foundation, Inc. Elaine Sokoloff and Margarete Wells Susan Steinhauser and Daniel Greenberg Christian Thornton, Glass Art Xa-Quixe Dr. Jerry Udelson Joe Upham John Walsh Connie Walsworth, C.M. Jones & Son Ristiina Wigg Roberta Wyde Nimet Yalcinkaya Wayne Strattman Critical Dialogue Lecture Fund Established in 2001 with an initial contribution from Wayne Strattman for a critical dialogue series to bring knowledge, intrigue, and new or controversial viewpoints to GAS conferences Frederick and Jean Birkhill, Frederick Birkhill Studios LLC Kathie Foley-Meyer Peter Houk, Peter Houk Etched Glass Claudia Lipschultz Paula and Richard Mandel James Manshardt Joseph Mercurio John and Lyn Musgrove, Musgrove Glass Art Natali Rodrigues, Alberta College of Art and Design Wayne Strattman, Strattman Designs Carol Yorke and Gerard Conn GAS apologizes to anyone who was incorrectly listed or inadvertently omitted.

129

Glass Art Society Upper-Level Members As of July 2015, the Glass Art Society has 1896 members. The following GAS members contributed upper-level memberships from May 1, 2014 - June 30, 2015. Benefactors ($1000): Chris Rifkin, CLR Design

Patrons ($500):

Dudley and Lisa Anderson Barbara Caraway Sara Jane and William DeHoff Maud Hallin Heather Horton Mark Swaim Gregory Thompson and Kerry Causey, GRT Glass Design Brett Williams, Bear Paw Studios

Corporate Members ($275):

Douglas Auer, Third Degree Glass Factory Wendy Avery, Dockyard Glassworks Richard Barger and David Eichholtz, David Richard Gallery Lisa Bayne, Artful Home Eddie Bernard and Angela Bart Bernard, Wet Dog Glass, LLC David Bernstein, Glass Arts Collaborative Inc. Dan Brucker and Sue Albright, Wale Apparatus Co., Inc. Anna Carlgren, GLASAKADEMIE Clifton Crofford and Kevin McGehee, SiNaCa Studios Anna Curnes, Anna Lou Glass Scott Darlington and Karen Rudd, Pratt Fine Arts Center Mary Dougherty, Carlisle Machine Works, Inc. Dan Drouault, Covington Engineering Helga Friedrich and Peter Lerch, Kugler Colors GmbH Keith Fuselier, Studio LVX Coda Gallery, Coda Gallery Meredith Gill, D&L Art Glass Supply Joe Grant, Starworks Glass Lab Beverly Growden, Canberra Glassworks Damon Gustafson, Bay Area Glass Institute Hallynd Hall and John Croucher, Gaffer Glass USA Ltd Tom Hawk, Hawk Galleries Marti Hunyor and Scott Todd, Ransom & Randolph Paige Ilkhanipour and Susan Callahan, Pittsburgh Glass Center Bergljot Jonsdottir, S12 Gallery and Open Access Studio Kokomo Opalescent Glass Peter Kolliner, Kirra Galleries Rich Lamothe and Sean Healy, Glass Strategies LLC Rachel Lawrence, Bethlehem Burners John Lewis, John Lewis Glass Studio Jeff Lindsay, Red Hot Metal Inc. Tom Littleton and Brenda Wilson, Spruce Pine Batch, Inc. Todd Lokash and Arnold Howard, Paragon Industries, L.P. Eric and Lorna Lovell, Uroboros Glass Studios, Inc. Kier Lugo, The Crucible Lorna MacMillan, North Lands Creative Glass Anthony Marino and Alicia Gionta, Advanced Glass Industries Erin McMillen and Jordan Addison Ford, The Melting Point, LLC Magneco Metrel and Kristie Antosz, Magneco/Metrel Fred Metz and Joe Miller, Spiral Arts, Inc. 130

Conference attendees looking at neon art during First Friday in San Jose

James Meyer, East Bay Batch & Color Robert Minkoff, The Robert M. Minkoff Foundation, Ltd. Niche Modern Jim and Liz Moore, Jim Moore Tools for Glass Maria Moran, Ed Hoy’s International Holly Morrison, Denver Glass Machinery, Inc. William Murphy, Oregon Coast Glassworks Timm Muth, Jackson County Green Energy Park Phil O’Reilly and Mitchell Burdett, Olympic Color Rods Sharon Owens, Inspired Fire Glass Studio & Gallery Matthew Patterson, University of South Alabama Babette and Steven Pinsky Meryl Raiffe, The Glass Underground Glenna Rand, Grand Designs Jim Schantz and Kim Saul, Schantz Galleries Scott Shannon, SDS Industries Ronald Shapiro and Richard Tenney, Digitry Company, Inc. Mike Sievers and Jim Skutt, Skutt Kilns Roger Smith and Kim Gruenloh, Emhart Glass Manufacturing, Inc. Cyrena Stefano and Cliff Goodman, Hot Glass Color & Supply Robert and Margaret Stephan, His Glassworks, Inc. Ethan Stern and Amanda McDonald, Diamond Life Studio Rob Stern, Rob Stern Art Glass Ralf and Jens Teuchert, Farbglashütte Reichenbach GmbH Ross Thackery, ABR Imagery Jackie Truty, Art Clay World USA, Inc. Lawrence Tuber, The Works Phil Walz and Scott Krenitsky, GoggleWorks Center for the Arts Susan Warner, Museum of Glass Charles Wells, Georgia Southwestern State University Cheryl White, Glass Wheel Studio Karol Wight, The Corning Museum of Glass John Williams, Pacific Artglass Corp. David Winship, Glasscraft, Inc. Michael Wolf, Wolfs Gallery Brian Wong Shui, Atlanta Hot Glass Scandia Wood and Bill Aebischer, Spectrum Glass Company Jim and Louise Wunch, Larkin Refractory Solutions

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

Sponsors ($120):

Susan Abanor and Harold Woolley Steve Adams Gary Adcock and Cindy McEwen, Studio 37 Ltd. Donald Albrecht and David Mahon Diane Alfille, Eve J. Alfille Gallery & Studio Judy Allen and James Hummer Lisa Anderson Aaron Baigelman and Heather Ahrens, Baigelman Glass Philip Bailey and Susan Roston Philip Baldwin and Monica Guggisberg Carolyn and Dick Barry Nicholas Beaman, NBGLASS Ellen Beller, Beller Glass Dean Bensen and Demetra Theofanous William and Katherine Bernstein, Bernstein Glass Yvonne Besyk and Richard Baumgarten Frederick and Jean Birkhill, Frederick Birkhill Studios LLC Benjamin Birney and Jerremy Fellows, Global Glassworks Donald and Susan Bittker Francine Blote’-Lofrano Anna Boothe, National Liberty Museum Cortney Boyd and Nate Steinbrink, Flux Studio LLC Debbie and Jody Bradley, Neusole Glassworks Bradley Braun, Chicago Hot Glass, Inc. JJ Brown and Simona Rosasco, Fyreglas Studio Michael Brown, Three Dimensional Visions Thomas and Elisabeth Buckles William E. Burke and Susan Sherman Madeleine Burmester and Ron Murphy Morgan Campbell and Nicolina Hull-Campbell, Morgan and Nicolina’s Flameworked Glass Steve Campbell and Noreen Mitchell Charles Cannon Karl Carter and Holly Madison, Bucks County Community College Sandra Christine and Dale Meyer, Quintal Studio Marna Clark, Marna Clark Glass Cynthia Corio-Poli and Frank Poli, Cynthia Corio-Poli Design Vittorio Costantini and Graziella Giolo Costantini, Costantini Vittorio Lavorazione Del Vetro A Lume Rene and Russ Culler, University of South Alabama Jamex and Einar de la Torre, La Curva Estudios Omur and M. Fatih Duruerk, Karma Design Studio Paul Elyseev and Bonnie Kooklin, Hot Sand Jim Embrescia Valerie Eybsen Lisa Renée Falk and Trace Galbraith, Infuse Glass Studio Debra and Joseph Fenzl, MSR Studio Jan Figa and Migla Bronskiene Shari Flynn and Jim Karan Corinne and Frieda Franco Sharon Freas Joan and Richard Freedman Gini Garcia and Dora Elia Garcia, Garcia Art Glass, Inc. INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

Dennis Gardner and Christina Cimino Erin and Grant Garmezy Jere Gibber, J.G. Harrington Michael Glaser Susan Glass and Arni Thorsteinson Andrew and Michelle Goerdel Colleen and Gary Grebus Carol Green Anthony R. and Susan Grosch John and Deb Gross, Newcastle Properties Slate Grove, Urban Glass Victory Grund, Old Town Artisan Studio Alex Hamerman Bill and Ellen Hamilton Corey Hampson and Aaron Schey, Habatat Galleries Sandra Harris and Monte Becker, Harris Glass Studio Ann Hartmann and Frank Snug Matthew Harvey and Carrie Lewis, Harvey Glass Studios Frederick Heath and Merrily Orsini Myrna Helfenstein Doug Henderson, Thimbleberry Designs Claudia Hernandez and Terry McCormick, Origin Glass, a Division of Elan Technology Virginia and John Hitch David and Heather Hopman, Chaos Glassworks Shari and David Hopper, Paradise & Co. Joey Huang Trevor Huber and Phyllis McKenzie, Trev’s Glass Supply David Huchthausen, Huchthausen Studios John Hutton, Brazee Street School of Glass Nadania Idriss, Berlin Glas Hugh Jenkins and Stephanie Ross, Hugh Jenkins Glass Studio Karen and Daniel Johnese John and Jill Jordan, Jordan Music Services Robert and Sunny Kahl, Robert Kahl Glass Brennan Kasperzak Tom and Kendra Kasten Susie and Scot Kelly Sarah King, AngelGilding.com Tracy and Adam Kirchmann, Ignite Glass Studio Alex Klumac and Lisa Willis Kendall and Roberta Krieger Kathy Laux, Uroboros Glass Studios, Inc. Sophie and Guillaume Le Penher Jeremy Lepisto and Mel George Jon and Judith Liebman Austin Littenberg and Austin Hensley, The Melting Point John Littleton and Kate Vogel, Littleton-Vogel, Inc. Yingwu Liu and Li Hua Anita LoMonico and Urs Affolter, ASL DreamWorks Susan Longini and Muni Barash Jane Lucien-Scholle, Lasata Studio Greg and Andrew Lueck, Firehouse Glass James Manshardt 131

Nives Marcassol and Tiziana Colantuoni, I Vetri di Nives Dante Marioni Patrick Martin and Roberta Eichenberg-Martin, Emporia State University Art Dept. Margie and Julia Mattice Jeff and Timbre Mays, Forward Melting Glass David and Gabriela McCubbrey Heather McElwee and Chris Clarke, Pittsburgh Glass Center Libby and Jack McKee Colin and Pat McKinnon Marilyn and Charles Meier JA and David Meltzer, JA Glass Art Jeffrey Mentuck and John Volpacchio, Salem State University Glassworks Isabell and Gernot Merker Elizabeth G Miller and Juila Packard, The Melting Glass Company Mark Mitsuda and Erin Yuasa, Punahou School Amy Morgan, Morgan Contemporary Glass Gallery Nick and Pauline Mount, Nick Mount Glass John and Lyn Musgrove, Musgrove Glass Art Jay Musler and Joan Kruckewitt, Jay Musler Studios Elizabeth Netts and Charlotte Mitchell, M & M Glass Works, Inc. Christopher Newman, Chris Newman Sculpture Steven Newpol and Amy Gilbert Brenda Nishimoto, VenetianBeadShop Chris Nordin and Scott Wolfson, Glass Academy LLC. Carolyn O’Hearn, O’Hearn & Fielding Art Glass Ed and Marjorie O’Keefe Paul and Elmerina Parkman Doug and Pat Perry Marc Petrovic Carl and Betty Pforzheimer III Benson and Francine Pilloff Spencer Pittenger and Gina Zetts, Oculus Glassworks Jerred Poff and Jim Weaver, Weaver Industries Jenny Pohlman and Sabrina Knowles, Pohlman Knowles David Porter, Fireworks Glass Studios John and Joyce Price Pilisa Rainbow Lady, AMusinGlass Art Reed, Sweetwater Glass Walt and Pat Riehl John and Linda Riepma Dana and Karen Robbins, Robbins Ranch Art Glass Mark and Elizabeth Rogers Karen and Michael Rotenberg Nancy Ruskin, Explorare James A. Russell and Judith L. Raphael Fred Sanders Ken Saunders, Ken Saunders Gallery Amy Schwartz and William Gudenrath, The Studio of The Corning Museum of Glass Bryan and Clair Seckelmann Mike Shelbo, Shelbo Glass Art Morton Silverman and Kineret Jaffe Preston Singletary 132

Stephen Sinotte and Rebecca Stewart, Electroglass David and Julie Sittler Marble Slinger and Terasina Bonanini Gaye and Marty Smith Elaine Sokoloff and Margarete Wells David Stevens Jen Stevenson, Bergstrom-Mahler Museum of Glass James and Sharon Stewart James Stone and Carol Rogers, Stone and Glass Amy and Michael Stonecipher Karl Strahl Robert and Margie Straight Cassandra and Tim Straubing, San Jose State University Glass Department Boyd Sugiki and Lisa Zerkowitz Ruth Summers and Bruce Bowen Jan Suttton Jo Ann and Glenn Syron, Jo Ann Syron Designs Cha-Rie Tang and Bruce Hubbard, Direct Imagination Philip and Hazel Teefy, Rainbow Glass Inc. Caroline Theriault and Matthieu Raikem, In Vitro Sarah Traver, Traver Gallery Pamina Traylor and Andrew Franklin Margy and R. Scott Trumbull Ursula Ullmann Tim Valko and James Moore Micaela van Zwoll and John Green, Micaela Contemporary Projects Brett Vinsant, Live Laugh Love Glass David Vogt, Desert Fire Art Glass Steven Weinberg, Weinberg Glass LTD Mark and Michiko Weiner, Martha’s Vineyard Glassworks Edris Weis William and Dina Weisberger George Weiss Jr and Mary Wilcox Meredith Wenzel and Gary Robinson, Glass City Blews Alan Westby and Dawn Passineau, Bergstrom-Mahler Museum of Glass Don and Carol Wiiken John-Peter Wilhite and Nick Letson, Sonoran Glass School William Worcester, Worcester Glassworks Merrill and Sheila Wynne Jennifer Yates, Glass Impulse Carol Yorke and Gerard Conn Tingting Zhao and Hansong Huang

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

GAS International Student Exhibition Award Donors The Glass Art Society offers sincere appreciation to the following companies who generously provided gifts of $500 or more for the 2015 GAS International Student Exhibition awards.

Gifts of $1,000 or More CORNING MUSEUM OF GLASS Corning, New York, USA www.cmog.org With nearly 50,000 glass objects spanning 3,500 years of glassmaking history, The Corning Museum of Glass houses the world’s most comprehensive collection of glass. In 2015, the museum added the 100,000-square-foot Contemporary Art + Design Wing which is the world’s largest space devoted to contemporary art and design in glass. The Studio of The Corning Museum of Glass offers a variety of courses for the general public, as well as educational, residency, and scholarship programs designed for emerging and established artists and advanced glass students. The Rakow Research Library, located on the museum campus, welcomes both museum guests and glass researchers to utilize its impressive collections. Its mission is to acquire and preserve all informational resources on the art, history, and early science and technology of glass, in all language formats.

Gifts of $500 - $999 GOTT STEAMER Glass Shaping Systems Calgary, Canada www.northernheat.ca GOTT STEAMER© Glass Shaping System, for glassmakers, by glassmakers. Our focus is designing and producing innovative tools and protective clothing for glassmakers. The GOTT STEAMER© Glass Shaping System offers a cleaner, safer, and more productive studio environment. We use the highest quality industrial fabrics. Every design originates in Allan’s studio and is thoroughly tested for practicality and durability. Product development is ongoing, driven by customer needs, material discoveries, and a desire to help lead our community into the future. Visit www.northernheat.ca for new products, updates, and contact information, or call 403-256-6079 for a free catalog.

Jonathan Chapman and GAS student members.

PITTSBURGH GLASS CENTER Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA www.pittsburghglasscenter.org Pittsburgh Glass Center is a public-access school, gallery and state-of-the-art glass studio dedicated to teaching, creating, and promoting glass art. World-renowned glass artists come here to make studio glass art. People interested in learning more about glass come here to take a class, explore the contemporary glass gallery, and watch live hot-glass demonstrations. Pittsburgh Glass Center prides itself on providing exceptional resources and instruction to expand the skills and knowledge of our students and artists. We strive to foster a new generation of glass artists and enthusiasts here in the Pittsburgh region.

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

STEINERT INDUSTRIES, INC. Kent, Ohio, USA www.steinertindustries.com Steinert Industries, founded in 1979, is one of America’s leading international suppliers of glassblowing equipment. Steinert Industries specializes in blowpipes, punty rods, gathering rods, optic molds, and hand tools, which are all available online. Also available are diamond grinders, lap wheel grinders, and polishing machines for your finish work. For the flameworker, Steinert Industries offers a line of Bead optic molds, mini blowpipes, mini punty rods, and mini puffers. These can all be viewed and ordered on line at www.steinertindustries.com. Along with manufacturing the line of tools for the glass industry, Steinert Industries is also the manufacturer for convention and display booths under the name of Flush Nut Truss. Please view our website for more information on these and other products.

133

Past Award Recipients, Conferences, Board Members, and Editors The Glass Art Society honors individuals who have made outstanding contributions to GAS LIFETIME ACHIEVEMENT Established in 1993, this award recognizes exceptional achievement in glass art. 1996 Jaroslava Brychtová 2001 Thomas Buecher (1926-2010) 2003 Dale Chihuly 2014 Dan Dailey 2002 Fritz Dreisbach 1995 Erwin Eisch 1998 Kyohei Fujita (1921-2004) 2008 Henry Halem 2007 Jirí Harcuba (1928-2013) 1994 Itoko Iwata (1922-2008) 2010 Dan Klein (1938-2009) 1993 Dominick Labino (1910-1987) 1996 Stanislav Libenský (1921-2002) 2009 Marvin Lipofsky (1938-2016) 1993 Harvey Littleton (1922-2013) 2002 Finn Lynggaard (1930-2011) 2004 Paul Marioni 2005 Richard Marquis 2000 Klaus Moje 2012 Joel Philip Myers 2010 Mark Peiser 2006 Ann Robinson 1998 Alice Rooney 1999 Ludwig Schaffrath (1924- 2011) 2015 Paul Stankard 1997 Lino Tagliapietra 1994 Sybren Valkema (1916-1996) 2012 Bertil Vallien 2011 Ann Wolff HONORARY LIFETIME MEMBERSHIP IN GAS This award was established in 1977 to recognize outstanding service to GAS. 2011 Scott Benefield 2006 Penny Berk 1980 William H. Blenko, Jr. 1977 William Brown (1923-1992) 1979 Thomas S. Buechner (1926-2010) 2004 Robert Carlson 1984 Andries Copier (1901-1991) 2003 Daniel Crichton (1946-2002) 1998 Dan Dailey 2008 Laura Donefer 1988 Fritz Dreisbach 1982 Erwin Eisch 1977 Frank M. Fenton (1915-2005) 2014 Shane Fero 1997 Susanne Frantz 1988 O.J. Gabbert (1918-1992) 1980 Paul V. Gardner (1908 -1994) 134

Mary B. White accepting the Lifetime Membership Award.

1993 1994 1982 1982 1996 1992 1977 1988 2009 1986 1977 2005 1993 2001 2010 2007 2000 2002 1995 2005 1999 2012 1992 1993 2015

Henry Halem Audrey Handler Frances Higgins (1912-2004) Michael Higgins (1908-1999) David Jacobs (1939-2007) Robert Kehlmann Dominick Labino (1910-1987) Elizabeth “Libby” Labino ( -2008) John Leighton Marvin Lipofsky (1938-2016) Harvey Littleton (1922-2013) Lani McGregor Joel Philip Myers Mark Peiser Tom Philabaum Michael Rogers Ginny Ruffner Takako Sano (1939 - 2006) Jack Schmidt Dan Schwoerer Josh Simpson John Steinert Susan Stinsmuehlen-Amend Sylvia Vigiletti Mary B. White

ANNUAL CONFERENCE (YEAR, SITE, CHAIRS, and SITE COORDINATORS): 2015 San Jose, California: Steven Aldrich, Susan Longini, Cassandra Straubing, Demetra Theofanous, Dorothy Saxe, honorary co-chair. 2014 Chicago, Illinois: Trish & Glen Tullman, Deb and John Gross, Angie West.

2012 Toledo, Ohio: Margy Trumbull, Jack Schmidt, Herb Babcock, Jutta-Annette Page (GAS Board Liaison). 2011 Seattle, Washington: Chuck Lopez, Joanna C. Sikes, Cyrena Stefano, Paula Stokes. 2010 Louisville, Kentucky: Merrily Orsini, Ché Rhodes, J. Page von Roenn, Brook Forrest White, Jr.. 2009 Corning, New York: Rob Cassetti, Nancy Earley, Marshall Hyde. 2008 Portland, Oregon: Jeremy Lepisto, Lani McGregor, Dan Schwoerer. 2007 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: Randi Dauler, Ron Desmett, Karen Johnese, Kathleen Mulcahy. 2006 St. Louis, Missouri: Jessica Cope, Jim McKelvey, Tracy Varley. 2005 Adelaide, Australia: Alison Dunn, Matthew Larwood, Pauline Mount. 2004 New Orleans, Louisiana: Mitchell Gaudet and Mark Rosenbaum. 2003 Seattle, Washington: Penny Berk. 2002 Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Durk Valkema. 2001 Corning, New York: Elizabeth Whitehouse and Peter S. Aldridge. 2000 Brooklyn, New York: John Perreault and Brett Littman. 1999 Tampa, Florida: Susan Gott and Lenn Neff. 1998 Seto, Japan: Takako Sano and Michael Rogers. 1997 Tucson, Arizona: Thomas A. Philabaum and Leah Wingfield.

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

1996 Boston, Massachusetts (Massachusetts College of Art): Alan Klein and Linda Ross. 1995 Asheville, North Carolina: Richard Eckerd and Katherine Vogel. 1994 Oakland, California: Mary B. White and John Leighton. 1993 Toledo, Ohio: Jack A. Schmidt. 1992 Mexico City, Mexico: Ana Thiel. 1991 Corning, New York: Stephen Dee Edwards. 1990 Seattle, Washington: Ginny Ruffner. 1989 Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Daniel Crichton and Laura Donefer. 1988 Kent, Ohio (Kent State University): Henry Halem. 1987 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: William Carlson. 1986 Los Angeles, California: Christine Robbins and Susan Stinsmuehlen-Amend. 1985 New Orleans, Louisiana: Susan Stinsmuehlen-Amend. 1984 Corning, New York: William Warmus. 1983 Tucson, Arizona: Kate Elliott and Susan Stinsmuehlen-Amend. 1982 New York, New York: Dan Dailey. 1981 Seattle, Washington: Walter Lieberman. 1980 Huntington, West Virginia: Marvin Lipofsky and Henry Halem. 1979 Corning, New York: Marvin Lipofsky and Henry Halem. 1978 Asilomar, California: Marvin Lipofsky. 1977 Madison, Wisconsin: Audrey Handler and Fritz Dreisbach. 1976 Corning, New York: Joel Philip Myers and Henry Halem. 1975 Toledo, Ohio: Henry Halem, Joel Philip Myers, Fritz Dreisbach, Jack A. Schmidt. 1974 Marietta, Ohio/Williamstown, West Virginia (Fenton Glass): Henry Halem. 1972 Penland, North Carolina: Fritz Dreisbach, William Brown, William Bernstein, Mark Peiser. PAST PRESIDENTS: (Cassandra Straubing 2015-present) Roger MacPherson 2014-2015 Jutta-Annette Page 2012-2014 Jeremy Lepisto, 2010-2012 Shane Fero, 2006-2010 Anna Boothe, 2004-2006 Michael Rogers, 2002-2004 Scott Benefield, 2001-2002 John Leighton, 1998-2000 Bonnie Biggs, 1996-1998 Robert Carlson, 1994-1996 Josh Simpson, 1992-1994

Stephen Dee Edwards, 1991-1992 Ginny Ruffner, 1990-1991 Susanne K. Frantz, 1988-1990 Richard Harned, 1987-1988 William Carlson, 1986-1987 Susan Stinsmuehlen-Amend, 1984-1986 Fritz Dreisbach, 1982-1984 Dan Dailey, 1980-1982 Marvin Lipofsky, 1978-1980 Fritz Dreisbach, 1976-1978 Joel Philip Myers, 1975 Henry Halem, 1972-1974 PAST MEMBERS of the GAS BOARD OF DIRECTORS: Robert Adamson, Rik Allen, Pat Bako, Paula Bartron, Scott Benefield, Lucy Bergamini, Eddie Bernard, William Bernstein, Bonnie Biggs, Anna Boothe, Robert Carlson, William Carlson, Robin Cass, Jon Clark, Nelly Bly Cogan, Daniel Crichton, Dan Dailey, David Donaldson, Laura Donefer, Fritz Dreisbach, Paulo DuFour, Richard Eckerd, Stephen Dee Edwards, Shirley Elford, Kate Elliott, Shane Fero, Susanne K. Frantz, Lance Friedman, Beth Ann Gerstein, Suzanne Greening, Rudy Gritsch, Bill Gudenrath, Henry Halem, Audrey Handler, Caryl Hansen, Richard Harned, F. G. (Rick) Heath, Henry Hillman, Jr., Susan Holland-Reed, Dinah Hulet, Geoff Isles, Robert Kehlmann, Ki-Ra Kim, Ruth King, Alan Klein, Kim Koga, Thomas Kreager, Barbara Landon, Peter Layton, JiYong Lee, John Leighton, Jeremy Lepisto, David Levi, Robert Levin, Beth Lipman, Marvin Lipofsky, Martha Drexler Lynn, Jay Macdonell, Caroline Madden, Andrew Magdanz, Paul Marioni, Steven Maslach, David McFadden, Robert Mickelsen, R. Craig Miller, Kathleen Mulcahy, Joel Philip Myers, Jutta-Annette Page, Nina Paladino, Mark Peiser, Tom Philabaum, Kirstie Rea, Ché Rhodes, Chris Rifkin, Christine Robbins, Michael Rogers, Alice Rooney, Linda Ross, Susan M. Rossi-Wilcox, Ginny Ruffner, Tommie Rush, Jack Schmidt, Michael Schunke, Daniel Schwoerer, Maura Shenker, Josh Simpson, Susan Stinsmuehlen-Amend, Raquel StolarskiAssael, Wayne Strattman, Joanne Stuhr, Ruth Summers, Elizabeth Swinburne, Michael Taylor, Ana Thiel, Cappy Thompson, Pamina Traylor, Durk Valkema, Peter VanderLaan, Sylvia Vigiletti, Kate Vogel, William Warmus, Jack Wax, Richard Whiteley, Mary B. White, Acquaetta Williams, Tina Yelle, Harumi Yukutake

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

PAST STUDENT REPRESENTATIVES: Amanda Wilcox, 2014-2015; John Rees, 2013-2014; Shannon Piette, 2012-2013; Jessi Moore, 2011-2012; Karen Donnellan, 2010-2011; Tracy Kirchmann, 2009-2010; Drew Smith, 2007-2009; Andrew Erdos, 2006-2007; Shara Burrows, 2005-2006; Susan Clark, 2004-2005; Laura Luttrell, 2003-2004; Benjamin Wright, 2002-2003; Megan Metz, 2001-2002; Eric Dahlberg, 2001; Catherine Hibbits, 2000; Chad Holliday, 1999; Nicole Chesney and Brent Sommerhauser, 1998; Johnathon Schmuck, 1997; Maura Shenker, 1996; Boyd Sugiki, 1995; Robert Gardner, 1994 PAST EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS OF GAS: (Pamela Figenshow Koss, 2004-present) Penny Berk, 1996-2004 Alice Rooney, 1990-1996 Bonnie Startek, 1988-1990 PAST GAS JOURNAL EDITORS: (Kim Harty, 2014-present) Susan M. Rossi-Wilcox, 2008-2012 Susanne K. Frantz, 2002-2007 Tina Oldknow, 1996-2001 Ron Glowen, 1992-1995 Caryl Hansen, 1989-1991 Christiane Robbins, 1984-1988 Robert Kehlmann, 1981-1983 Marvin Lipofsky, 1976-1980 Jan Williams, 1975 PAST GASnews EDITORS: (Kim Harty, 2013-present) Geoff Isles, 2009-2013 Kate Dávila, 2007-2009 Dana Martin, 2006-2007 Shannon Borg, 2005-2006 Tamara Childress, 2003-2005 Peter VanderLaan, 2002-2003 Scott Benefield, 1998-2002 Robert Carlson, 1994-1998 Nelly Bly Cogan, 1993 Marvin Lipofsky, 1976-1989

135

GAS Membership Information Purpose: The Glass Art Society (GAS) is a 501c3, nonprofit, international, organization founded in 1971 whose mission is to encourage excellence, to advance education, to promote the appreciation and development of the glass arts, and to support the worldwide community of artists who work with glass. GAS holds an annual conference, publishes the Glass Art Society Journal, and GASnews, a quarterly online newsletter. Membership: Application for membership is open to anyone interested in glass. Members are entitled to vote, hold office, and enjoy all other rights and privileges as determined by the GAS bylaws. Membership is for one year and includes all GAS publications plus access to members-only pages on the GAS website.

BASIC MEMBERSHIP BENEFITS PACKAGE • Membership for one person with one set of mailed materials • One profile on website (login, bio, contact info, website link and image gallery) • Four issues of the online newsletter, GASnews • Access to all Members’ Only information on the GAS website with personal login • Access to GAS Classifieds & submit your own listings for free • Weekly Digest email

• Access to the searchable GAS Online Member Directory showcasing member profiles • Access to database information and mailing lists • One member eligible to attend annual conference • Eligibility for GAS in CERF Fund or GAS International Emergency Relief Fund • Eligibilty to apply for Technology Advancing Glass grant • Annual Journal • Voting rights

DISCOUNTS • Discount on GLASS Quarterly Magazine,* Glass Art Magazine, and The Flow Magazine subscriptions • Domestic Shipping and Printing discounts with FedEx Office* • LTL Freight Discounts through PartnerShip • Hertz and Alamo Rental Car discounts • Domestic & Travel Insurance benefits* *For US-based members only

The information above reflects 2015 membership benefits. GAS reserves the right to change membership fees or update benefits at any time. The Glass Art Society reserves the right to deny applications for GAS membership, advertising participation, Technical Display, or the conference from anyone for any reason.

MEMBERSHIP LEVELS $40 USD – Student: Basic membership benefits (Must include proof of full-time student status) $70 USD – Individual: Basic membership benefits Below levels provide benefits for two people at the same address/business with one set of mailed materials and two separate member online profiles. $120 USD – Sponsor: Basic Benefits for two people plus: Donation acknowledgement in Journal $275 USD – Corporate/Business: Basic and Sponsor Benefits plus: One free custom mailing list of up to 500 names; 10% off members’ price for one 1/2 column GASnews ad per year; 25% off one annual full-conference pass $500 USD – Patron: Basic, Sponsor, and Corporate Benefits plus: Total 50% off one annual full-conference pass $1,000 USD – Benefactor: All benefits stated at the Patron Level plus: Total of one free annual full-conference pass Office hours: Monday - Friday 9:00 am to 5:00 pm Pacific Standard Time.

Back Issues of the GAS Journal Some issues of the Glass Art Society Journal are available for sale. The Table of Contents of all the issues is available by contacting the GAS office directly. Recent issues (2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2014) are available online in a PDF form for members at www.glassart.org. A GAS Journal order form can be printed from the GAS website or orders can be taken by phone. Payment can be made by check (drawn from a USA bank only), money order, or by Visa or MasterCard. Prices include shipping & handling: A 10% discount is offered when five or more journals are purchased. Members: $23 USD Canada, USA, and Mexico $28 USD All other countries

136

Non-Members: $27 USD Canada, USA, and Mexico $32 USD All other countries GAS Journals available for purchase: 2015 San Jose, CA 2014 Chicago, IL 2012 Toledo, OH 2011 Seattle, WA 2010 Louisville, KY 2009 Corning, NY 2008 Portland, OR 2007 Pittsburgh, PA 2006 St. Louis, MO 2005 Adelaide, SA, Australia 2004 New Orleans, LA 2003 Seattle, WA 2002 Amsterdam, The Netherlands 1999 Tampa, FL 1996 Boston, MA 1995 Asheville, NC 1994 Oakland, CA

1993 Toledo, OH 1992 Mexico City, Mexico 1991 Corning, NY 1990 Seattle, WA 1989 Toronto, ON, Canada 1988 Kent State, OH 1987 Philadelphia, PA 1986 Los Angeles, CA 1985 New Orleans, LA 1983 Tucson, AZ The following GAS Journals are no longer in stock: 1984 Corning; 1997 Tucson; 1998 Seto, Japan; 2000 Brooklyn; and 2001 Corning. For additional information contact: Glass Art Society 6512 23rd Avenue NW, Suite 329 Seattle, Washington, USA 98117 Tel: 206.382.1305 Fax: 206.382.2630 Email: info@glassart.org Web: www.glassart.org

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

Jaime Guerrero and a Watts Youth Group student.

Vladimir Klein and friends at the Opening Reception.

Jiří Pačinek, Rob Stern, and Petr Novotny.

Silent Auction.

Paul DeSomma.

Laura Donefer gives advice to an artist during Portfolio Review.

Marvin Lipofsky and Fritz Dreisbach.

Beth Hylen, Rob Cassetti, George Kennard, Pamela Koss, Taryn Bertolino, Scott Ignaszewski, Kyle Lavery, Dana Krueger, and Alan Eusden.

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

137

James Mongrain.

Matthew Szösz.

Glass Olympics at BAGI.

Nate Watson.

Jay Musler.

Enlightened Glass Show.

Brigid O’Malley, Carrie Strope, and Elizabeth Miles.

138

The de la Torre brothers.

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

John and Deb Gross with Roger MacPherson.

Mark Abildgaard.

Young designer of the piece created for MOG’s Kids Design Glass™ demo.

Charlotte Potter, Tina Oldknow, Virginia Hitch, and Diane Wright.

Live Auction bidders.

Loren Stump.

Nancy Kerr, Dean Allison, Rob Stern, Kait Rhoads and friends at the Closing Night Party.

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

139

140

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

141

142

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

143

A Leader in Glass Studio Systems Since 1996

E-mail: HotStuff @ WetDogGlass.com Phone: (910) 428-4111 Web: www.WetDogGlass.com

144

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

145

146

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA

T HANK YOU The GAS Journal is sponsored, in part, by the National Endowment for the Arts and the Corning Incorporated Foundation. Without their support, this publication would not have been possible.

Thank you for continuing to support the Glass Art Society. We look forward to seeing you in Corning.

INTERFACE: GLASS, ART, AND TECHNOLOGY

147

The Corning Museum of Glass Photo: Gary Hodges

Glass Art Society’s 45th Annual Conference Corning, New York USA June 9-11, 2016 Creating Context: Glass in a New Light

CMoG Amphitheater Hot Shop Photo courtesy of CMoG

The Glass Art Society conference will be returning to Corning, in the Finger Lakes region of upstate New York, for the 2016 conference. The Corning Museum of Glass will host the conference, and participants will experience the museum’s new Contemporary Art + Design Wing which includes a 26,000-square-foot light-filled gallery and the expansive, state-of-the-art Amphitheater Hot Shop.

148

In addition to the excellent content that GAS strives to deliver at all of our conferences, participants will have the opportunity to experience and study the world’s foremost glass collection at the Corning Museum of Glass, explore the extensive holdings of the Rakow Research Library, and enjoy historic Corning’s long tradition of glassmaking. The 2016 GAS conference offers a comprehensive

opportunity to expand your understanding of the story of glass. Create your own context for the future of glassmaking with your fellow artists, collectors, manufacturers, scientists, experts, and students at the 2016 GAS conference in Corning, NY! Thank you for your continued support of the Glass Art Society. We look forward to seeing you in Corning!

THE GLASS ART SOCIETY • 2015 JOURNAL • SAN JOSE, CA