Uncategorized

Uncategorized

Designing Control


1 Comment

Update – 3/4/2014 In light of the Snowden revelations, this old post becomes remarkably prescient.

Update  –  6/27/2013     Note:  with the recent “discoveries” of how the government  is spying on the U.S. public using communication companies such as AT&T, Verizon, Google, Yahoo, Apple and others, this post becomes even more important for people to read and consider.  Today I am adding new information to help you understand the issue which will show up at the end of this post.  I tend to feel that truth is often found in unusual places.  I teach my students in college about how cognitive bias serves to narrow our vision and helps to cement a false belief system that is not based on anything real necessarily.  Being able to see beyond our own biases and consider new ideas without necessarily buying into them immediately just because they appeal to us personally, is an important trait in being able to get to the truth I have found. the preposterous idea one day can become mainstream truth the next.  So please read through to the end for the newly added material!

Disclosure:  this article was written first to investigate what was happening with surveillance in the USA and secondly to see if there was a presidential candidate who was addressing issues related to right to privacy as granted in the Constitution.  This was written during a presidential campaign and part of the article points to a candidate who did address these issues. However, the information herein is timely and as recent events have shown with the issue of Snowden releasing information on how the govt has been spying on all Americans has made this piece written a year ago interestingly prescient. 

th

Everything that is made is designed.  Design makes an object useful, perhaps more purposeful.  Normally we think of design as something that is for products like chairs and airplanes, shoes, guns, shirts, houses, communities, and computer systems.  Things that help us live more fulfilled lives.  But what about a surveillance state, a system for control or surveillance?  This is a different kind of animal and I think that when it comes to these things our minds tend to switch into a mode of thinking that ceases being critical and questioning a lot of the time.  It’s up to those in power to figure that out.  They deal with secret information and after all, loose lips sinks ships, right?  But all of these notions are themselves fed into us.  We do not come out of the womb believing that we ought not question how a system for surveiling the public ought not be questioned.  But this IS something that is designed.  With purpose.  For certain results.  What exactly would go into a surveillance state, and why would anyone want to infringe on someone’s right to privacy in the United States? And really, to what end?  It might help to understand what forms of surveillance there are and how information is supposed to be gathered.  Its gone from people listening in over phone networks to much more sophisticated methods as well as means that you might not have even considered is part of the eavesdropping game in these United States.  But first, a little history.

The History of Surveillance

It used to be the eyes on the ground was the neighborhood policeman who walked a beat.  Police were still used to direct traffic, and things were simpler then. The world of electronics was just beginning to come into use.  As with all technology, things were very expensive and bulky at first, which meant that having this form of technology around us was limited to things like computers, some radios, and specialty equipment.  But fueled by an explosion in technology, the types of devices that could communicate wirelessly and increasingly higher wavelengths began to proliferate.  The C.I.A. is created after the second world war and the N.S.A. was created in May of 1949  under the Joint Chiefs of Staff to support intelligence efforts (1)

Since then, along with parallel developments in signal technology and the development of a digital method for encoding and reading information over a broad range of electronic equipment, the technology used for surveillance has broadened. In the mid 80’s the rise of the internet served to be yet another platform for surveillance. By this time, though, much of the  “listening” had become automated with keywords being picked through the vast chaff of signal communications via phone, internet, and even fax transmissions (via image recognition). The world of surveillance has become incredibly sophisticated, costly, and invasive.  It’s an example of something that has been allowed to grow way beyond any reasonable bounds.  Many ignore it since it’s just out of their notice while others are deeply concerned how this infrastructure is going to affect our rights to privacy.  Fed by a wholesale liquidation of many privacy rights and standard procedures such as warrants for wiretapping as well as gathering records on suspects, the surveillance state in the U.S. has grown based on one event that happened on September eleventh in the year two thousand.

Currently the surveillance state in the United States costs about 75 billion dollars a year.  This figure is expected to grow as our government continues to  upgrade emergency medical response equipment, install surveillance cameras, set up sophisticated radio networks, and outfit  airport screeners to detect an evolving list of mobile explosives.  Currently the security industry is a growth sector of our economy, and states have benefited from a sudden influx of revenue resulting from business being created in this sector of the economy.  After Columbine, some 10 billion was spent just to outfit schools with security cameras (2).  The business of watching is expensive, and for some a financial boon.  It involves makers, installers and monitors for the equipment or technology being used.  A long list of benefits occur as a result of a security system being put into place in a courthouse, for example, benefits that involve people monitoring equipment, people employed to install as well as manufacture the equipment.  The benefit to a cash strapped local government is that it results in much-needed revenue.  All of that and we have not yet touched on the technology our government (the NSA in particular) is most likely using to tap into video cameras mounted on traffic lights as well as in businesses where they are tied to the internet. Many security cameras now have this as a standard feature, along with motion detection to alert you, from, say, your home, whether anything is moving around your business location or second home, for example.  If it goes over the phone lines, the government can eaves drop on it!  Sound paranoid?  You should read on….

The L.A. Times explains the situation as it stands right now very well in its article about the rise of surveillance and domestic monitoring of its citizenry:

Thanks to new laws and technologies, authorities track and eavesdrop on Americans as they never could before, hauling in billions of bank records, travel receipts and other information. In several cases, they have wiretapped conversations between lawyers and defendants, challenging the legal principle that attorney-client communication is inviolate.

Advocates say the expanded surveillance has helped eliminate vulnerabilities identified after the Sept. 11 attacks. Some critics, unconvinced, say the snooping undermines privacy and civil liberties and leads inevitably to abuse. They argue that the new systems have weakened security by burying investigators in irrelevant information.

“We are caught in the middle of a perfect storm in which every thought we communicate, every step we take, every transaction we enter into is captured in digital data and is subject to government collection,” said Fred H. Cate, a professor at the Indiana University Maurer School of Law who has written extensively on privacy and security.

A robust debate on the intelligence gathering has been impossible, for the simple reason that most of the activity is officially secret. In lawsuits alleging improper eavesdropping, the Justice Department has invoked state secrecy to prevent disclosure of classified information and systems.

In May, two members of the Senate Intelligence Committee said that Americans would be disturbed if they knew about some of the government’s data-gathering procedures. But Sens. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Mark Udall (D-Colo.) said they were prohibited from revealing the facts.

“When the American people find out how their government has secretly interpreted” surveillance law, “they will be stunned and they will be angry,” Wyden said.

The National Security Agency, which eavesdrop on foreign targets, once had to get a court-approved warrant to monitor a U.S. citizen’s communications over wires that traverse the United States. Now the agency is free to vacuum up communications by Americans and foreigners alike, as long as the target of the surveillance is a foreigner. (3)

A Question of Finances

At a time when our nation is stretched to its limit fiscally, there is some question about all of these expenditures.  Some lawmakers don’t worry about WHERE the money comes from as long as their own districts get a piece of the pie, or pork.  The problem, though, is there is no free lunch, and the money comes from somewhere.  If its not being covered by a budget with actual tax revenues, its a form of spending that is called deficit spending and the effect this spending has is the same effect that someone with an unlimited credit card has in their own spending.  Eventually, debt can be raised so high that it erodes the economy and the value of the dollar being used as the vehicle for exchange.  Economists are pointing to this having happened in the face of uncontrolled spending both on the Iraq, Afghanistan, and now (it looks like)  Iranian conflicts.  The country, which has been through a major bursting of its economic bubble (in housing originally), now is slipping not just into recession but what many economists call a recession.  Spending continues, though, all in the name of keeping America safe.

When you look at a peeler in the store, you want to know how well designed it is, how effective its going to be, right?  Its one reason why we test drive cars, why we visit houses and why we try on clothes. We want to make sure that how their designed is for the use intended.  If something doesn’t fit, we don’t buy it.  In the case of government spending, there is a larger lobby going on. Imagine seven people standing outside your dressing room explaining to you WHY you should buy those jeans.  One person walks up to you and slips you a brochure that explains all of the benefits of the jeans you are looking at.  Someone else walks up and explains why buying those jeans isn’t a good idea.  This is the process for how things can be purchased at the government level.  Its all about influence and the art of the sell.  We have been sold on our need to be kept secure by technology.  The problem, however, is that what is meant to keep us secure is actually invading our privacy.

So what are the actual numbers on the National Security letters, which are those unconstitutional methods for getting information without a warrant?  There have been 192,500 National Security Letters issued between 2003 and 2006, according to an audit by the Justice Department inspector general. The numbers have dropped sharply since then, but the FBI issued 24,287 National Security Letters last year for data on 14,212 Americans. That’s up from a few thousand letters a year before 2001(4).

What is happening in the U.S. is the government now can get information about ordinary citizens from public sources such as Google, Facebook, Amazon, and other online sources.  Facebook simply provided the intelligence community carte blanch access to their network after getting tired of responding to thousands of requests a day to provide them with user logs and user input on their network.  Effectively, they gave them a backdoor access without ever telling anyone about it.  Your viewing habits on Netflix can be known with ease as these records are available to “third-party affiliates” which means in their disclosure agreement in their Terms of Use as meaning anyone who the company chooses to sell your information to.  Facebook, which uses a sophisticated form of biometric tracking can now recognize your face in all of the photos of you on their network where you are and are not tagged.  The government doesn’t NEED to spy on you since you have agreed to their “Terms of Use” and because this is considered public domain information.  This is one reason why Google requires that you upload a photograph of you.  Not an image of your home or the product you are selling or a cartoon character.  It’s because they are using biometrics, a means of turning your facial features into datapoints that make it possible to recognize you in other pictures in the future.  In a number of States this technology is being used for driver licenses.  Your data is out there!

In this new take on how privacy is being eroded as fast as you can imagine, our own government doesn’t NEED to keep extensive networks tracking people.  As more and more people grow  dependent on the internet, its easier to simply track people.  When you blog the software may ask you where you are.  On Facebook, there is the same option. While on the one hand this is to help companies get a sense of the habits of their public and what they want and need in an effort to anticipate future buying behavior, it is also a weird Big Brother activity that pushes technology way beyond anything that we are used to or even want.  I am asked what my phone number is when I buy lumber.  I get a club card at my local grocery which teams my buying up with who I am, my age, my sex and my address.  On the one hand it provides information to the company in exchange for specials to me, but it also is an intelligence gathering device that can be used by other entities such as the government.  Did you read a book on terrorism last month?  Did you watch the movie “Spare Change” which questions the official story of 9/11 or do you support a presidential candidate such as Ron Paul who is calling for dismantling all of these intrusions into our privacy?  For some, it doesn’t matter. for others, though, its seen as a gross misuse of the public funds for a spectrum of activity that has not caught a single terrorist seeking to board a plane to blow it up since 9/11.  in fact, it seems that the best our government can do is to encourage would-be terrorists to build bombs and then arrest them later for doing so (yes this has happened)

So is all of this surveillance paying off?  Are we safer as the rise of this surveillance state?  Now that its such big business, will we be able to wean ourselves off of it?  To read more about what’s happening, go here.

Have we stopped any planes?  Have we been able to stop domestic terror like Columbine, or Virginia Tech? If all of this technology is supposed to make us safer, could it be that we simply conceived the priorities all wrong?

If you think that the Obama administration is the champion of freedom, materially, nothing has changed from one administration to the next.

Bush gave the NSA the authority to eavesdrop on Americans communicating with foreigners abroad without first obtaining a FISA warrant, deeming the process too slow. As a U.S. senator, Obama condemned the so-called wireless wiretapping after the New York Times made it public in 2005. But when he ran for president in 2008, Obama voted for legislation that granted retroactive legal immunity to telecommunications companies that had secretly helped the government eavesdrop.The law also retroactively legalized other forms of surveillance, former intelligence officials say, including “bulk” monitoring that allows the government to intercept all email traffic between America and a range of suspect email addresses in, say,Pakistan.

Privacy advocates say the government should acknowledge how many Americans have had their communications intercepted in recent years. But after Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee requested that information, the Obama administration responded in July that it was “not reasonably possible to identify the number.” (5)

The question is, is this new car in our drive way making life better for us, or is it infringing on our freedom, our right to privacy?  On new years’ day Obama signed the NDAA (the National Defense Authorization Act)  a piece of legislation providing our government the carte blanche it needs (and wants apparently) to call any citizen a terrorist, arrest them and execute them all without any observation of the writ of Habius Corpus, or due process.  Such individuals do not have a right to an attorney and can be held indefinitely.  The problem is that abuses will happen as individuals who are inconvenient to a political party are “rendered” in this unconstitutional way by those individuals who have the power to say so.  At this point it’s no longer up to a judge to serve a warrant for police to look in your apartment.  Abuse can and will happen as the past has shown.  It’s very much the very same thing that happened in Salem Massachusetts when someone called another a witch.  They were drowned for a perceived or feared evil (when all along it might just have been that one woman was jealous of another woman and how all the men take notice of her, for example).  Or, perhaps, in the same way that Senator Joseph McCarthy did back during his tenure in office, he sought to spread fear where there was no real reason for being fearful.  Perhaps what is happening is the same thing, a means to change and erode our freedoms on such a massive scale that its mind-boggling.  Most people do not seem to care or notice.  And its true, as long as it doesn’t affect them, or as long as they don’t notice, it just isn’t a big deal, right?  And yet, the problem is, it affects all of us.

Has there been abuse as a result of all of this?  There has. To read more about the problems go here. There have been huge abuses of the money spent.  One such instance involved over 500,000 dollars in funding going to a North Pole outfit for search and rescue equipment (a creative way to get much-needed equipment probably) as well as lapel pins and phone cards in the state legislature of West Virginia.  There are areas that are given equipment that they aren’t even sure they need.  There hasn’t even been a threat assessment done, just what appears to be a guess based on what some feel could be a threat. One state legislator describes the spending as being as random and out of control as his mother headed out the door with the charge card.  The ACLU has a good series of articles outlining their biggest concerns about the Patriot Act and how it should be reformed here.  Do you know where your Congressional leaders stand on the issue of the Patriot Act, the surveillance state and the flow of your information across networks without your knowledge or even consent?  There is only one presidential hopeful running today who even brings up the issue of privacy rights, and liberty.  It seems that for as much concern as there has been over this issue, there are precious few who are bucking the establishment trend and fighting for freedom from such intrusions.  I include some links to this candidate and some of what he says and is about.

Because all of this is public, we all bear responsibility to change something if we do not feel its working.  The purpose was to make us safe, and yet the numbers involved in this entire enterprise is specious at best.  In the March issue, 2011, Harper’s Index expressed the point this way: “Number of American civilians who died worldwide in terrorist attacks last year: 8 — Minimum number who died after being struck by lightning: 29.”  

As a final note, as mentioned in the article “The rise and cost of American Surveillance” the author includes these points to consider about abuse and how the Patriot Act has been used to abuse and rewrite the Bill of Rights:

  • The FBI admitted in a recent report to the President’s Intelligence Oversight Board that it violated the law at least 800 times on national security letters, going well beyond even the loose safeguards in the original provision. According to the report the FBI “may have violated the law or government policy as many as 3,000 times” between 2003 and 2007, according to the Justice Department Inspector General, while collecting bank, phone and credit card records using NSLs.
  • As Adam Sewer of the American Prospect notes: “It’s no secret that the FBI’s use of NSLs – a surveillance tool that allows the FBI to gather reams of information on Americans from third-party entities (like your bank) without a warrant or without suspecting you of a crime – have resulted in widespread abuses. All that the FBI needs to demand your private information from a third-party entity is an assertion that such information is “relevant” to a national security investigation — and the NSLs come with an accompanying gag order that’s almost impossible to challenge in court.”
  • NSLs were used by the Bush administration after the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks to demand that libraries turn over the names of books that people had checked out. In fact, there were at least 545 libraries that received such demands in the year following passage of the Patriot Act alone.
  • The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) uncovered “indications that the FBI may have committed upwards of 40,000 possible intelligence violations in the 9 years since 9/11.” It said it could find no records of whether anyone was disciplined for the infractions.
  • Under the Bush Administration, the FBI used the Patriot Act to target liberal groups, particularly anti-war, environment, and anti-globalization, during the years between 2001 and 2006 in particular.
  • According to a recent report by the ACLU, there have been 111 incidents of illegal domestic political surveillance since 9/11 in 33 states and the District of Columbia. The report shows that law enforcement and federal officials work closely to monitor the political activity of individuals deemed suspicious, an activity common during the Cold War – including protests, religious activities and other rights protected by the first amendment. The report also noted how the FBI monitors peaceful protest groups and in some cases attempted to prevent protest activities.
  • According to a July 2009 report from the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, only three of the 763 “sneak-and-peek” requests in fiscal year 2008 involved terrorism cases. Sixty-five percent were drug related.

We need things that make our lives better. Good design is about that.  This, however, is a gross waste of much-needed resources and also serves to destroy America as we know it.  The coup isn’t that someone flew planes into buildings, it’s that it allowed the powerful an entrée into our lives, all of our lives, in a wholesale erosion of basic rights that were fought for and paid for in the blood of Patriots (such as the Revolutionary War).

We are in an election year and as I look more closely at what the Democrats end Republicans are saying about the challenges we face with a debt crisis, multiple wars and a swiftly growing surveillance state, I do not see anyone who is championing this cause, except for one candidate.  I do note that this one candidate predicted the housing bubble, as well as our current debt crisis.  Increasingly popular, he has been ignored by most media except that he continues to show growing popularity in his run for the nomination.  I think given how he has been ignored by the mainstream, its worthwhile for people to have a more honest and clear-eyed view at a man who has had twelve terms  in Congress and whose record has been consistently on the side of the Constitution.  It just might be that we need more people who will respect the rule of the Constitution rather than eroding basic human rights and freedoms granted by our Constitution.  This is Congressman Ron Paul.  Here are a few links to him and what his philosophy is:

Video Of Ron Paul In Congress

Ron Paul Campaign Site

Myth VS Fact

On a personal note, I am all for freedom.  As an artist, freedom of speech and liberty is incredibly important to the most basic of activities.  I am not wanting to see my country reduced to a police state, which is actively happening right now.  As people are distracted and waving away any suggestion that there is anything untoward happening, I know that threats to our liberty can happen right here, at home.  The war on Terror has turned out to be a war on our rights and liberties as well as a reason to go into other countries to steal oil wealth (I presume) or line the pockets of the military industrial complex.  There is no one else in the field who is standing up against this wholesale sell off of our rights except Ron Paul, so yes, I support him, and yes, I think you should take a look at him aside from all the press that has sought to demonize and make him seem like a kook (lets admit it; its worked) and yet when I look at the facts on the ground, I do not find freedom kooky at all.  Gold standard?  That requires doing some research into monetary policy and how currencies tend to be destroyed through overspending (look at the you tube video Money Masters which explains the history of money as a form of exchange and why having a Central Bank may not be a good way to have the show run).  Sometimes we have to go looking for the facts absent others’ conflations or spin.  While I offer up a man in a brazen and obvious way, I am not telling you what to think.  Ultimately you must come to your own conclusions. We are all in this together!

6/27/2013 UPDATE:  included is some additional information to help readers have more information and make a more informed decision about how they participate in the datagathering efforts now underway by companies and governments.  Alex Jones is a real trip and I don’t buy into all of the fear that comes up on his site but he does have an important interview with the founders of Startpage, one of the few, perhaps only truly private search engine on the internet.  Getting past the fear mongering that Jones gets into, though, you can gain a clearer picture of what efforts there are out there in helping people maintain their privacy online.   Once you watch the interview I think you will come away with a better understanding of how your information can be used without your consent or knowledge for a host of purposes, some of which may be in “customizing” your internet experience (which the founders of Startpage have found may not be the case entirely, but also an effort at molding your own sense of what your choices really are….).  Watch the video and decide for yourself:

This is the link on youtube.  The link beneath it will open a new window for you to view the interview.  The meat of the interview  begins about 4 minutes into the program for those who would like to skip the introductory material.

Jones with Startpage Founders

©Parker Stafford

Sources

(1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Agency

(2)http://www.community-matters.org/news/press-releases/  (see the article “Ten Years after Columbine” available as a pdf)

(3) http://articles.latimes.com/2011/aug/29/nation/la-na-911-homeland-security-surveillance-20110830

(4)http://consumercal.blogspot.com/2011/08/rise-and-costs-of-american-surveillance.html

(5)http://consumercal.blogspot.com/2011/08/rise-and-costs-of-american-surveillance.html

Art and Design, Uncategorized

The Exquisite Object


No Comments

Nested Yin Form, Parker StaffordI’d like to take a moment and explain a little about this blog, what its about, what the thinking is that is behind it, and why yet another blog and why a blog about Stafford Art Glass.  First off, I am an artist, artisan, designer, and educator.  I write a good bit, having a 620 page manuscript in the works (which looks like if I can get a big enough crowbar could be turned into three books), have written some as-yet unpublished children stories and am working on a second book related to the first (this might be that crowbar I was looking for).  I also write two other blogs on other subjects related to nonduality and I run a studio in the Alleghany mountains of Virginia.  I am a father of two and my life has been turned around recently in such a way that I have begun to look at creativity very differently than I did before. Maybe I should say my thinking has blossomed a little more.  While my interests are broad, I am keeping the focus pretty tight on this blog.

We very much need good things to help reflect our values in life.  Everyone has different ideas, philosophies, and approaches.  All of them are valid, of course, all have merit, and even if by looking over our shoulder at our neighbor we have trouble understanding some of them.  The truth is, there is a tendency we as humans have that serves to lock out whole worlds of possibilities, and it doesn’t just happen in art and fashion.  Our brains are designed to see the patterns in the chaos, and because of that, we like to hold onto those patterns, and often deify them much to our limit.  We become biased and this bias closes us to the possibilities.  This has a broad application in life, and this principle is anathema to being innovative or creative in my opinion.  I very much love taking the most obvious idea or form and think how I can turn it on its head, turn it inside out, change it, reform and recreate it.  This is part of the very essence of the creative, and its necessary if you are going to attempt to think differently, and have a chance at creating something new.  By being able to innovate, we as creators and innovators can bring to market those products that matter and that tell the story in an entirely new way.  Sometimes new is very very good, but new often is built upon the old in such a way that it changes the conversation, the very content of the past so that it can speak to a new generation.  All great innovation is built upon this precept.

It might be a little silly for me to be titling this post “The Exquisite Object” because the truth is, one person’s exquisite is another person’s eeeew!  However, I think that the better we can innovate and create the New, the better we are able to insert something into the dialog of our lives that has some meaning.  Many strokes for many folks!

I am a glassblower, artist, as well as sculptor.  When I think of glass, though,  I tend to think of it as a sculptural medium, even though I often make very functional items.  Glass can be a material that we instantly have certain assumptions about.  Its a perfect example of how we can crowd out a world of possibility, as well as innovation and creativity by keeping our horizon limited.  The techniques I use to make my work set it apart from the usual run of the mill glass that you might think you know.   A lot of what I do, like most good designers and artists do, is seek ways to set myself apart from the pack.  I also do what matters to me.  If I did what sold, I’d still be making those god awful ornaments I took to New Jersey that one time that were, I thought, horrible color combinations and sold within the first hour of the Artfair!  What I know is that I am looking for the right person for my work, and this falls entirely outside the design process and becomes a marketing issue, but it is a basic philosophical precept to how I operate.  If I seek to please everyone, I wind up not pleasing myself, and asking just what on earth I am doing.  So I stick to what I believe and out of that comes something of consequence to me and my customers. I do not look at the materials I use in a limited light; they are just that, materials, and can become anything.  Sometimes the greatest ideas are waiting to be discovered and they are right in front of us.  I don’t bring to my glass work any of the same biases that I found once I got into the medium.

Perhaps as a result of this orientation, I don’t have much of a purist heart in me because it is that “purity” that I also know in another language also means “bias” and bias is also a way of limiting yourself. On the one hand, you need FOCUS when doing art or design, but I have always sought a range of different sensibilities that have all informed one another or told different parts of a much larger tale.   For sure, I am interested in certain kinds of design, don’t get me wrong, but I am restlessly creative, and this is evidenced in my enormous writing output over the last year as well as my going into teaching sculpture at the local university.  Its more like I can’t tell the whole story in English, and I need four more languages with which to explain everything!  This flies in the face of everything my teachers tried to convey to me early on, and yet, just like our need to find objects that are well designed and made that help  express our OWN sense of style and design, so too must I range across a multilingual landscape in order to tell my own story! Besides, who is living this life, me or my teachers from long ago?  Sometimes it also means sticking to your guns and not being afraid to believe in something.

Pino Signoretto at Eugene Glass School

I can remember a number of years ago when I attended a workshop by the well-known sculptural glass artist Pino Signoretto. That’s him at the bench with all the guys crowded around him.   It was a demonstration workshop, which meant we all watched.  I filmed the whole thing, hoping to learn as many tricks as I could from this great master.  As I sat with camera in hand an attendee and I began to chat.  He asked what I did in my work and we had a nice exchange that was pretty cordial until he found out that I also made these little sculptural pieces I call Andromeda Geodes and Inscape Geodes.  For lack of a better name, these would be referred to as paperweights. With a change in his body language and a roll of his eyes, he said to me that he REFUSED to do paperweights and quickly ceased any conversation with me.  He had, at that point, decided I was one of THOSE glass artists, and quite suddenly, I was beneath him.  I remember being a bit surprised by the arrogance that was being leveled at me, but also a little happy at the same time.  I thought that this was one less person to have to compete against, and how nice it was that I wasn’t so closed-minded about what glass could and could NOT be, or what was good or NOT good.

Since then, I have run across a number of glass artists who look at the subject of making sculptural glass the same way.  Its largely from a place of ignorance, and thus bias, and the fact that “paperweights” are thought of as easy to make by those who have dabbled in them, which they can be, the act of bias, a very subjective activity in itself, closes off any intellectual or creative curiosity for some people.  Its when we make assumptions about what we THINK we know that we can miss a world of possibility.  In fact, many of the great discoveries were accidents that forced people into thinking about a given phenomenon, technology, in a different way. So often, we just get STUCK in what we believe is possible, or not worthwhile.  Often, by turning something on its head, we can peel off entire layers of new material and possibility just by NOT assuming we know all there is to know.  Truth is, we really know very little, but that ego of ours sure doesn’t want us to believe or be mindful of that!

Here is what I mean:  paperweights are normally round, clear, and brilliantly colored.  They are a delicious slice of eye candy. For me, though, I never saw the paperweight as anything with a history.  I didn’t KNOW the history of these things.  I didn’t grow up owning paperweights.  I never saw them made. I didn’t know what you were SUPPOSED to do with them, or any of the traditionalist baggage that could have served to limit me.  I simply came innocently into their grove and like a child, looked anew at what they could become.  I had nothing that told me anything about any of this was bad, or more desirable than any other.  I was a sculptor getting my M.F.A. and I was just taking glass because it was such a cool medium.  I took a beginning glass class that covered the basics, but was so intimidated by the skill and knowledge of the other glassblowers in the program, that I wound up working alone much of the time.  In some ways, it may have been my own loss from a technical stand point, but the flip side was I remained a conceptual vacuum where I didn’t always know what should or could be done.  Normally, this way of working is not one I would even suggest as being productive for my students in sculpture, but I have to admit that it served me in a way that helped me to dream in a different way, in a more unlimited way.   I learned all of my techniques pertaining to solid work entirely on my own.  As a result, I did everything opposite from the way its normally done. Instead of making my “paperweights” clear on the outside, I made them opaque. The design on the outside wasn’t even a design, but a rock-like effect.  Light did not dance across their surfaces, but instead they had a shell that obscured their interiors.  I also didn’t make my pieces round.  They were  lumpy, bumpy, and organic.  I was more interested in real geodes and how their surfaces looked.  I wanted to make the glass NOT even LOOK like glass!  Then, by cutting them open, I  revealed their interiors, which were sparkling worlds and galaxies full of brilliance and crystalline beauty. Everything about these pieces has defied what the assumed definition of a “paperweight” is to the point that I often have trouble even calling them paperweights. People seem to need to have a way to peg them, so they get this categorization.  The truth is, these pieces are hard to make.

Already, have had two artist attempt my designs, one who sought to adapt it to his own color effects and design sense while another has not taken my design very far from the tree from which it was conceived (which bothers me the most since this feels like theft to me).  One of them gave up the work because of some technical problems that I faced in the work but worked through.  It was interesting looking at his derivative work and being able to see that the issues I had worked so hard on to fix were still remaining in his version.  A given type of work can be difficult to make technically, but the user doesn’t want to know about this, they want an object that they can use, and while part of their enjoyment is the “how’d they do that?” factor, it doesn’t matter much since its all just details.  When people go to see a movie very rarely do they want to see a film about HOW the film was made;  they just want to become absorbed in the art, in the story being woven.  Regardless of the level of difficulty (or lack thereof), the bottom line is:  is it exquisite?  Is it finely crafted, thought out, does it have good design, and does it say something in a way that hasn’t been said before? If the answer is yes to all of this, then its a “go for launch.”

In my teaching, I try to get this across to my students.  We talk about what art is, and while its a sticky wicket sometimes, part of what art is about is its ability to take an old conversation and turn it into a new one. Most great artists took what was assumed and turned it inside out.  Duchamp took ordinary objects and said they were art, underscoring how important INTENT was in art making, while at the same time also using everyday mundane objects  in an entirely new way. Sometimes it can also mean starting an entirely new conversation based on new concepts, new forms, and new ideas. Ultimately its about transforming the mundane into the profound, and this is no mean task.  It means thinking different, and it also means not allowing the mundane to trip you up, or to believe that there isn’t some new way to go about making something so that it breathes new life into the artform.  Its about not letting our biases rule the day because just beneath the bias runs the strongest and most powerful current we know; creativity.  It also means stopping before you begin your eye roll when you hear of something you think you already know everything about!  When we can learn to think different, we can also create different. When you can make different, you can come up with new forms, new product, new stories, new ways of seeing and feeling.  This is one of the powerful sides of the human spirit, and that is a great thing to embrace!

So much about design and art is taking established guidelines or forms and creating something new out of it.  Being able to break out of those old molds, modes, and ways of thinking is the essence of innovation, and that means design, too!  To that end, this is in large part what this blog is about; innovation.  As I write, I now have several new lines of work waiting for me to continue to tune and tinker with.  The concept is well fleshed out, but the form needs to follow the function, and the function is the concept.  How well do these two align?  How do I pull on the idea of utility and art to create something new?  What taboos can I break, or old notions can I leave by the wayside in the search for the next big thing?  This is where the rubber meets the roads, my friends, and this is the very meat of what interests me most about what I do. In the posts that follow I will be discussing the processes and ways that have led me to knew work.  The studio is a place of flux.  I am not a factory, although the studio sure looks like one.  It could be one, or it could be an entirely new model based upon a very old one, that of the individual studio artist and artisan creating new work just as they have for millenia.  I might even manage to comment on the state of design in our world, perhaps in small bite sized chunks!

Goodnight Sweet Readers…