Interviews

On Curating Unexpected Pleasures

Design Museum, London, England

December 5, 2012 – March 3, 2013

National Gallery of Victoria, Melbourne, Australia

April 20 – August 26, 2012

 

Susan Cohn has a longstanding career working across the art-craft-design divide. Living in Melbourne, Australia, she has been making artwork for more than 30 years and has exhibited extensively in Australia and overseas. Techno Craft: the work of Susan Cohn 1980–2000 was a major survey exhibition by the National Gallery of Australia that toured nationally. Her solo exhibition Black Intentions was presented by the National Gallery of Victoria in 2003. Cohn’s understanding of design and making has also enabled her to work as a designer for Alessi and as the curator of the international exhibition Unexpected Pleasures—the Art and Design of Contemporary Jewellery, commissioned by the Design Museum. I met her in Munich soon after Unexpected Pleasures was taken down and shipped back to its many participants. It seemed like an opportune moment to ask Susan how she managed that particularly ambitious project.

Ben Lignel: What did you learn during this experience?

Susan Cohn: The first “lesson” I learned from the project is that really not many people in the world know about contemporary jewelry. I realized how important it is that we change the way we engage with people outside the community. On the opening night, for example, about two thirds of the visitors were from the jewelry community. The other third was not, and their reaction—especially if they came from design—was very strong, and often ran along the lines of, “I did not know about this! Why did I not know about this?” This vindicated our working hypothesis that design and contemporary jewelry are like two people at a party. They’ve bumped into one another at the bar a few times, and they think they know one another, but they don’t. And Unexpected Pleasures was a platform to blind date them.

The second and probably most important thing I got out of this project is an overview of the field. The extensive research that went into the selection process meant that I really got a comprehensive glimpse of what is happening in jewelry today. The research for the selection process itself took two years.

How did you select the work for the show?

Susan Cohn: I really wanted a democratic form of application process. To begin with, after conducting some research on who is who and how best to reach the largest number of people, I sent out 3000 emails to makers, universities, associations, and galleries. This first email stated the curatorial premises of the show and asked for interested parties to send in five images of available works.

I received a total of 553 submissions, featuring roughly 2500 pieces, and did a first selection of the work based on the following criteria. First, how well did the work fit in the themes I chose for the exhibition, and then how did the work fit in a design museum exhibition? This second criterion was important. The show was really an attempt to encourage a dialogue between jewelry and design, and this had obvious implications on the selection process. For example, I could not choose work that had too much of a footing in art, such as installations and non-wearable objects.

During this first phase, I would put potential themes next to each submission. In some cases, the “fit” between a piece and a theme was obvious, but in a majority of cases, pieces seemed affiliated to several themes at once. During this initial stage, I managed to winnow the original 2500 submissions to 1000. I had chosen 21 themes for the “Linking Links” clusters in addition to the single theme of wearing for the “Worn Out” section. Considering space and installation constraints, it was decided with the museum to aim for a grand total of about 126 pieces for the clusters and 18 works for “Worn Out.” This meant I had to retain only six works per theme. In some cases, this proved harrowing. About 300 works were earmarked for the theme of “Earthly delights,” for example. This theme was about nature, and a lot of work from Asia and Australia somehow engaged with it. (Very few from Europe or the U.S. did, however.)

Obviously, during this second stage, I was accountable both to the field at large and to the exhibition and how it made sense as a show. The last selection stage was probably more about the show and trying to find a balanced, representative selection for each of the 21 themes. I mostly chose work that represented “opposite” approaches to the same subject.

Were there glaring omissions in the final selection?

Susan Cohn: For several reasons, mostly to do with my reluctance to intrude on or hassle people, I rarely asked for work I knew is out there but had not been submitted—however badly I wanted it for the exhibition. Nor did I call up people, including friends, who had chosen not to submit any work at all. I also wanted to remain true to the democratic nature of the selection process. As a result, some pieces considered seminal in the way they tackle this or that subject were not included. That is a shame, but I decided to stick to this thinking, and not make exceptions.

When looking at submissions from people I knew well, I also realized that makers went through a process of self-editing. The work submitted was not always the most representative or the best work from that artist for this exhibition. In some cases, I think this happened in response to the design element of the curatorial statement. People were sending work they thought might fit in a design museum.

The hardest thing, the very hardest thing in this whole project, was to commit to a final selection. I don’t think you can understand how hard it was to get down from 2500 works by 553 makers to 186 pieces from 126 jewelers. It was emotionally draining because, in effect, my curatorial position was defined as much by what I kept as by what I did not keep.

During opening night, I wore a bulletproof vest. I wanted to acknowledge the fact that some people not included in the show might be pissed off, and I wanted to make fun of the situation. (As ornamental messages go, this one was a complete flop. Most people thought I was wearing some weird back-straightening jacket.) It was also a way of saying I was ready for a fight, or at least criticism, but this never happened.

Did you get any negative feedback on the exhibition?

Susan Cohn: Not yet, no. Jewelers mostly acknowledged the massive amount of work that went into the project as well as the importance of the show. Otto Künzli and Paul Derrez, for example, said to me quite frankly that they did not agree with my curatorial choices, but that it was a seminal exhibition because of the context in which it was shown and the exposure it gave jewelry outside its usual audience. There was some criticism about the showcases and some about the book cover. I do regret that jewelry had to be shown inside showcases, but there is simply no way around that in museums.

What about your institutional partners, the Design Museum and the National Gallery of Victoria—what was their reaction to the show?

Susan Cohn: In Melbourne, the show had approximately 398,000 visits over four months. This is an extraordinary amount for any museum. I think several factors explain our Australian success. For starters, it was a free show, so many visited several times. It was also located in a strategic area of the museum. A lot of people would pass it on their way to something else and naturally wander in. And then, word-of-mouth snowballed, and people ended up coming that had very little obvious connection to the world of jewelry. A telling example is having a group of footballers sign up for a tour of the show. 

London was different. There was an entry fee. The visitors’ demographics were narrower. I think it was mostly the design community that responded to the show. But Deyan Sudjic, the museum’s director, was very pleased with the overall response to the exhibition.

What did you plan, at the beginning, in order to engage visitors?

Susan Cohn: In Melbourne, a series of public programs happened during the exhibition. At one event, five jewelers who had works in the exhibition led floor talks of the show. We also hosted a party. Katie Scott, director of Gallery Funaki and I invited people to come and try on work from our collections. (It couldn’t be work from the exhibition, however, as that would have interfered with logistics.) The setup was quite simple. Visitors walked along a glass-walled corridor and could see the selection of available pieces through the glass. They then picked up a ticket and waited for their turn to wear the piece they selected. Their photographs were taken and then projected on a wall for the audience to see. (A selection of these photos was later shown in London.) This project involved a certain amount of role-playing—people tended to go for the more extravagant work—but in general, people were quite easy about it. It gave everyone a chance to see jewelry pieces on a range of different people.

Is visitor participation a way of breaking the ‘vertical ceiling’ – the glass that separates visitors from cultural artefacts?

Susan Cohn: Due to security and insurance constraints, most works in museums are displayed in showcases, which is difficult in the case of contemporary jewelry. Jewelry is about people. It talks for people, so the wearing is an integral part of the experience. Jewelry in a showcase is a “jewelry object,” so photography and visitor participation events are ways to bring the object alive. There is always the curiosity of how jewelry is worn, especially for someone unfamiliar with contemporary jewelry. This opportunity helped to move the object out of the showcase and onto people. It also introduced an element of play to the exhibition, countering the seriousness of work normally featured in museum showcases.

Unexpected Pleasures was an attempt to take contemporary jewelry to a new audience, a design-orientated audience, who by the nature of their interests could understand the language of contemporary jewelry. Visitor participation was an integral part of this experience. At the same time, the intention of the exhibition was to encourage the contemporary jewelry community to look further afield and consider the nature of design in their ways of working.

On Curating Unexpected Pleasures Read More »

Sienna Gallery, Lenox, Massachusetts, USA

Sienna Patti Lauren Fensterstock, Installation at John Michael Kohler Art Center (detail), 2013, sculpture/installation, paper; 4.27 x 6.1 x 4.27 m, photo: John Michael Kohler Art Center Sondra Sherman, Installation of Anthrophobia, SOFA Chicago, 2008, photo: Sienna Gallery Lauren Kalman, Spectacular, 2012, video/photograph, C-print on aluminum, 38.1 x 25.4 cm, photo by artist Work with

Sienna Gallery, Lenox, Massachusetts, USA Read More »

Ken Bova

Ken Bova Gravers Lane Gallery in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, is showing the work of Montana-born jeweler Ken Bova. Ken is currently a professor at the very active East Carolina University in Greenville, North Carolina. This exhibition gave me a chance to find out a bit more about Ken and his work as a jeweler, an enamellist, and unexpectedly as it turns out, a reader.

Susan Cummins: Ken, can you tell me the story of how you became a jeweler?

Ken Bova: Interestingly (at least to me anyway) while in high school I bought a set of jewelry tools (pliers, a saw frame and a few hammers). I tried to teach myself how to make silver rings and bangle bracelets (without much success I might add) but abandoned it after entering college to study art.  The stage was set before university, but I just needed the right nudge and opportunity.

I was working on my BFA with a major in painting and drawing when a professor hired me to help hang wallboard in a studio he was building. Part of this studio was dedicated to a small jewelry making space. In exchange for the help,

I was paid in part with six weeks of jewelry casting lessons. I was hooked. I was only a semester away from getting my degree when I decided that this was it—THE discipline I wanted to pursue as an artist. Because the school had no program in metals, I finished the degree in painting and then transferred to the University of Houston. I studied for a year of post-baccalaureate work with Val Link and Sandie Zilker before applying to graduate schools. 

I was convinced I wanted to be a smith and concentrated on raising and forming processes. In graduate school, however, I found myself inexplicably drawn to the wearable—perhaps because of its intimate scale or maybe because working with the brooch format was comfortable and echoed my experience in painting. In any case, I gravitated towards jewelry, and there I’ve stayed.

By the way, I still have the very first piece of jewelry I cast, a sterling silver and tumbled jade stone ring.

Ken Bova Read More »

Barbara Heinrich: Ribbons of Gold

Barbara Heinrich is a delightful example of one of the best production studio jewelers working in America today. Her current show at de novo in Palo Alto, California, gives us an occasion to ask her a few questions about her background and her attitude toward making jewelry. Barbara’s ability to turn a dilemma into an opportunity is one of her great strengths, and the energy she brings into the studio each day can’t be ignored as a key to her success.

Susan Cummins: Barbara, what is your background, and how did you decide to become a jeweler?

Barbara Heinrich: I grew up on a vineyard in Germany and always made jewelry from the time I was little. When it was time to decide on a field of study, I thought I should study something “harder,” such as architecture or product design, but my father convinced me to pursue what was most natural to me, making jewelry.

Barbara Heinrich: Ribbons of Gold Read More »

Jamie Bennett: Jewelry and Drawings

Jamie Bennett Starting in May, American jeweler Jamie Bennett has a delightful show at Antonella Villanova contemporary jewelry and design gallery in Florence, Italy. It is an unexpected place for Jamie to exhibit his enamels given the rarity of Americans showing in European galleries. I applaud both Antonella and Jamie for making it work. Jamie has answered my numerous questions with thoughtfulness, and although I have known him for many years, I learned a lot from this interview. Enjoy.

Susan Cummins: Jamie, can you tell me the story of how you became a jeweler?

Jamie Bennett: Once I finished undergraduate school with a business degree from The University of Georgia, I began taking art classes there. I was thrilled with the freedom I sampled by taking painting, ceramics, sculpture, and jewelry. Though I had only taken one class in jewelry, the intimacy, the particular type of making, and these objects all appealed to me. And I realized I already had a connection, which perhaps instigated my interest.

Jamie Bennett: Jewelry and Drawings Read More »

Mia Maljojoki: Life is juicy – How fragile is your day

Mia Maljojoki For once, I had the great good fortune to see one of the shows featured on the blog in person. I wish this were possible for every interview. Mia Maljojoki presented her work with Galerie Spektrum during Schmuck week in Munich, guaranteeing a huge audience. It is important to see her work up close to become aware of the care with which she makes it. Also, there is a very tender feeling that photos do not capture. The necklaces are accompanied by videos of a close examination of skin—again, something that can’t be sensed via this blog. However, Mia’s answers give us an excellent opportunity to understand more.

Susan Cummins: Can you tell me the story of how you became a jeweler, including where you lived and went to school?

Mia Maljojoki: In 1996, after working in fashion for several years in Helsinki, Finland, I went to work at a summer camp in western North Carolina, USA. That summer, in the middle of the woods near Asheville, I started to make jewelry by braiding twigs and lining up stones. Wanting to continue transforming materials into ornament, I attended the Massachusetts College of Art and Design in Boston, studying under Professor Joe Wood. In 2001, I graduated with a bachelor of fine arts in small metals.

Mia Maljojoki: Life is juicy – How fragile is your day Read More »

Sally Marsland: Everything depends on what we would rather do than change

Sally Marsland Jeweler’sWerk Galerie in Washington, DC is having a marvelous exhibition with Australian Sally Marsland this month. Sally’s show has the very long title Everything depends on what we would rather do than change. It is accompanied by a catalog that’s remarkable in its honesty and humor about making work and living life. I was delighted by it and by her answers to my questions.

Susan Cummins: Can you tell me how you came to make jewelry?

Sally Marsland: When I was 12 I obsessively drew house plans and elevations on 5-mm graph paper, carefully placing windows and doors and furniture etc. I decided the logical conclusion was to become an architect. I followed this through to university, and then fell in a huge heap part way through as it dawned on me that perhaps the obsessive drawing had been a symbol of something else. I was studying architecture at RMIT University in Melbourne, and after a year of depression, I started in the jewelry course there. I studied at RMIT for five years and worked with the late Melbourne sculptor Akio Makigawa (husband of jeweler Carlier Makigawa) while I set up my own practice. I studied for two years with Otto Künzli in Munich. Since 2000, I have been back in Melbourne where I work and live with my husband Stephen Bram, an abstract painter, and our two sons.

Sally Marsland: Everything depends on what we would rather do than change Read More »

Lynn Kelly: Central

Lynn Kelly Jewelry has been filled with plant forms from the beginning of its history, and these forms continue to intrigue jewelers from all parts of the world. Fingers Contemporary New Zealand Jewellery was founded in 1974 by a group of jewelers in Auckland. This month, the gallery is featuring a jeweler intrigued with plant forms. In fact, she has a horticultural degree. Lynn Kelly is absorbed more deeply than most by the use of plant forms as inspiration for her work.

Susan Cummins: Can you give us the story of how you became a jeweler? Please include your geographical locations, schools, etc.

Lynn Kelly: My parents emigrated from Northern Ireland. I found myself very interested in jewelry while travelling to Britain in the early 1980s to meet my wider family. I cannot pin down any particular person or event that started my desire to make. Once I returned to New Zealand and attempted to get metal training, I realized that I was too old for an apprenticeship, and at that time there was no other formal method of training in New Zealand.

Lynn Kelly: Central Read More »

Julie Blyfield: Second Nature

Julie Blyfield Julie Blyfield is intrigued with plant forms as many jewelers have been over the millennium. She is looking at Australian plants, and this gives her an edge on unusual shapes and patterns. Second Nature, her show at Gallery Funaki, is a very concise look at how plant patterns translate into silver.

Susan Cummins: Can you give us the story of how you became a jeweler?

Julie Blyfield: My passion for jewelry and metal began in 1976. I was training to be a secondary school art teacher at Torrens College of Advanced Education at Underdale, west of Adelaide, in South Australia. (Now it is the University of South Australia, City West.) Carole-Ann Fooks was my jewelry lecturer. She introduced me to working with metal combined with mixed materials, such as bone, shell, and casting.

For many years, I taught jewelry making in secondary schools while making my own pieces at home in my spare time. I lived in regional South Australia when I first started teaching, so I had plenty of spare time to pursue my interest and passion.

Next, I returned to live in Adelaide and went back to night classes at Adelaide College of the Arts and Education to learn a few more skills, including enameling, chasing, and repoussé. In 1985, I enrolled in an associate diploma in jewelry making and joined Gray Street Workshop, a jewelry collective in Adelaide. I began as an access tenant, and then became a partner in the workshop that lasted 23 years.

Julie Blyfield: Second Nature Read More »

Hanna Hedman: Black Bile

Hanna Hedman Platina, Sofia Bjorkman’s gallery in Stockholm, Sweden, has a fascinating program featuring mostly young and thoughtful artists. This month, Hanna Hedman is showing a collection of her work in a mournful exhibition called Black Bile.

Susan Cummins: Can you tell me about your background and how you decided to become a jeweler?

Hanna Hedman: I have always been creative. As a young child, I loved making objects and drawings. My family always encouraged my creativity,  even though they were not artists themselves. I started to dabble in jewelry by breaking my mother’s necklaces and reassembling them into what I believed were better versions. I was also a professional skier at a very young age, and skiing was a major part of my life for a long time. But, I always felt the need to express myself more with my hands. I made my first piece of jewelry while attending the University of Colorado on a skiing scholarship from 1999 to 2001. My work wasn’t very artistic at the start. I was drawn to the many possibilities of shaping metal. This is something that still intrigues me very much. My art life eventually superseded my sports life, and I haven’t stopped making since then. I work with jewelry for many reasons, but one is to explore jewelry’s direct relationship with the body.

Hanna Hedman: Black Bile Read More »

Maya Kini: Silk

Maya Kini Jeweler April Higashi runs Shibumi Gallery in Berkeley, California. She shows mainly local jewelers and American jewelers who make well-designed, wearable work. Her gallery is located in a retail/manufacturing area, and her living quarters are right above the gallery. It is a wonderful space. April has discovered a lovely maker named Maya Kini, who is having her first full-scale solo show, Silk, at the gallery. Maya brings a complex background to her work.

Susan Cummins: Maya, can you tell me about your background? Your place of origin? Your schooling? How you became a jeweler?

Maya Kini: I was born and raised in the Boston area, the fourth of five children by parents from vastly different worlds. My mother is Italian American from New England, and my father emigrated from India in 1957 to get his PhD. He decided to stay in the US after meeting my mother. From a young age, I was given jewelry by visiting Indian relatives—bangles, anklets, and fine gold chains. Adornment begins at a young age in India and evolves into a complex language of beauty, wealth, and status.

I studied sculpture and literature at Reed College and eventually wrote my thesis on the translation of Catholicism and its earliest dispersion into New Spain. I received my degree in Spanish literature in 2000. In 1996, I was introduced to jewelry making in Mexico, and that seed developed into further study, apprenticeships with other jewelers, and eventually an MFA in metalsmithing from Cranbrook Academy of Art. I received my degree in 2007 under the guidance of Gary Griffin (2005–2006) and Iris Eichenberg (2006–2007). Currently, I operate my own small studio that focuses on commissions, multiples, and one-of-a-kind pieces.

Maya Kini: Silk Read More »

Scroll to Top