Glass Art society Journal

Transcription

the Glass Art Society journal
chicago, illinois
2014
43rd Annual Conference
Strengthening Community, Collaboration, Forging New Bonds
Chicago, Illinois, March 19-22, 2014
C h icag o
GAS Board of Directors 2013-2014
President: Jutta- Annette Page
Vice President: Jay Macdonell
Treasurer: Roger MacPherson
Alex BernsteinEd Kirshner
Chris Clarke
Jeff Lindsay
Lance Friedman Peter Layton
Kim Harty Jiyong Lee
Geoff Isles
Cassandra Straubing
B J Katz
David Willis
Shannon Piette/Jon Rees, Student Representatives
Staff
Pamela Figenshow Koss, Executive Director
Patty Cokus, Executive Assistant
Kristin Galioto, Communications Manager
Lily Raabe, Membership & Development Associate
Kim Harty, GAS Journal Editor*
Ted Cotrotsos, Graphic Design*
Chrissy Burd, Bookkeeper*
Laurie Streiner, Chicago Conference Event Planner*
*part time /contract
GAS 2014 Chicago Conference Co-Chairs
Deb and John Gross
Trish and Glen Tullman
Angie West
Chicago Conference Jurors & Reviewers
Emerging Artist Jurors: Clare Belfrage and Julie M. Muñiz
Student Scholarship Jurors: Matt Durran, Ruth King, and David McFadden
International Student Exhibition Jurors: Shane Fero, Jutta-Annette Page, and Ken Saunders
Portfolio Reviewers: Eoin Breadon, Brent Cole, Helen Lee, Carmen Lozar, Marc Petrovic,
Angus Powers, Michael Rogers, Jeffrey Sarmiento, Jan Smith, and Diane Wright
Chicago Conference Auction
Auctioneer: Corbin Horn
Committee: Roger MacPherson, Jutta-Annette Page, Alex Bernstein, BJ Katz,
Cassandra Straubing, Pamela Koss
2 0 14
2
Chicago Conference Logo Designer
Dan Dailey
Conference Photographer
Heather Ahrens
GAS Board of Directors 2014-2015
President:
Roger MacPherson
Vice President:
Kim Harty
Vice President:
Cassandra Straubing
Secretary:
Alex Bernstein
Treasurer: Ed Kirshner
Chris Clarke
Marc Petrovic
Matt DurranNatali Rodrigues
Lance Friedman Masahiro Nick Sasaki
B J Katz Jan Smith
Tracy Kirchmann David Willis
Jiyong Lee
Jon Rees/Amanda Wilcox,
Jeff Lindsay
Student Representatives
T h e G l a s s A r t S o ci e t y • 2 0 1 4 J o u r n a l • C h icag o , I l l i n o i s
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 © 2014 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. The 2014 Conference and Glass Art Society Journal (GAS Journal)
were funded, in part, by the Corning Incorporated Foundation.
ISBN: 0692267484
The Glass Art Society newsletter, GASnews, invites the submission of articles, scholarly papers, technical
information, photographs, reviews of major exhibitions, and other materials related to glass art.
Address manuscripts to the Glass Art Society, 6512 23rd Ave NW, Suite 329, Seattle, WA 98117 USA.
No manuscripts will be returned unless accompanied by a self-addressed envelope with sufficient return
postage. 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 2012)
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) Dan Dailey, Forward, blown glass, sandblasted and acid polished, 25 1/2 x 15 x 15 1/2”.
Photo: Bill Truslow. (back) Dan Dailey, Personas, Circus Vase, blown glass, sandblasted and acid
polished. Fabricated, patinated, nickel and gold-plated bronze. Pate de verre and lampworked
glass details, 17 x 14 x 10”. Photo: Bill Truslow
Credits for Photographers of the Artist’s Work
Artists who have taken their own photographs are not listed here.
James M. Via (Harvey K. Littleton, 1997); Bill Truslow (Dan Daily, Imagist, Birds with Red Cubes,
Oak Man, Wind, Light Stage, Madeleine); Mary Vogel (Shane Fero, Spruce Pine, Celadon & Blue);
Kavi Gupta Gallery (Theaster Gates); Chuck Lysen (Albert Paley working at the Tacoma Museum of
Glass); Will Styer (Karen Donnellan, Working through..., Vortex); Brian Gulick (JCDA, Suspended Glass
Tower); Andreas Keller (JCDA, Ice Falls); Rod Morris (Matt Durran); Bruce Miller (Albert Paley, Opus);
Russell Johnson (Ethan Stern, Coastal Shelf, Green Coastline; Dante Marioni and Preston
Singletary, Box Drum ); Chris Sisco (Ethan Stern carving a blown form...); Dan Volk (Angus M. Powers
working as ancient furnace...);
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.
South Loop River View ©City of Chicago
The GAS Journal is sponsored, in part, by the Corning Incorporated Foundation.
Without their support, this publication would not have been possible.
s t r e n gt h e n i n g c o mm u n it y , c o l l ab o r ati o n , f o r gi n g n e w b o n d s 3
C o n t e n t s
R e fle ctio n s
President’s Message by Jutta-Annette Page . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Reflections from the GAS Conference Co-Chairs by Trish and Glen Tullman, Deb and John Gross, and Angie West . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Memorial Tribute to Jiří Harcuba by April Surgent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Memorial Tribute to Ed Hoy by Eric Suevel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Memorial Tribute to Harvey Littleton by Joan Falconer Byrd . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Memorial Tribute to Carlo Doná by Robert Doná . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
7
8
10
11
12
13
G lass Art S ocie ty A wards
Lifetime Achievement Award: Illustrating With a Glass Palette by Dan Dailey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Lifetime Membership Award: Meet Me in Chicago by Shane Fero . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
International Student Exhibition Awards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
GAS Student Scholarship Awards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
15
21
22
22
Strengthening Community, Collaboration, Forging New Bonds
Keynote Address: Collections, Craft, and Care by Theaster Gates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Willson Lecture: A Sympathy of Opposites by Albert Paley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Labino Lecture: Digital Playground: The Power of CAD and 3D Printing by Sophie Kahn & Norwood Viviano . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Strattman Lecture: W(h)ither Glass? by James Yood . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Emerging Artist Presentation: Sweet Spot by Steven Ciezki . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Emerging Artist Presentation: The Intangible in Practice by Karen Donnellan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Emerging Artist Presentation: Exploring the Space Between Self and Other by Charlotte Potter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Technology Advancing Glass Lecture: Light in the Public Realm by James Carpenter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
24
26
28
31
33
35
37
39
L e ctu re s
Successful Collaborations: Going Beyond the Limits of Your Own Studio Space by Robert DuGrenier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
Face Saving by Matt Durran . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
Glass Mold Innovation Through Collaborative Research by Gayle Matthias with Tavs Jorgensen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
D e m o nstratio n s
Hot Glass
Flameworking the Figure Fantastic by Shane Fero . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The Fast and the Curious by Joe Cariati . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Pressed Into Service: Pressing Studio Glass Art in the US, UK, and China by Mark Hursty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Material Hybridity: A Fluid Negotiation with Glass & Metals by Miles Van Rensselaer with Angus Powers and J.J. Riviello . . . . . . . . . . . .
Meeting of the Minds by Julia and Robin Rogers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Avian Roll-up by Marc Petrovic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Coldworking
How to Mirror Glass with Silver, Gold, Copper, and Galena by Sarah King . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Coldworking Beyond Tradition by Ethan Stern . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
A Unique Way of Cutting Glass by Yusuke Takemura . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Flameworking
An Endless Love and Passion for Nature ...and Lampworking by Vittorio Costantini . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4
49
50
51
54
56
58
59
61
63
73
L e c- M os
A New Vision in Glass: Low Relief by Omur and Fatih Duruerk and Lucio Bubacco . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
Powder Printing by Stacy Lynn Smith . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
Collisions of Style: Printmaking with Glass by Kathryn Wightman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
P a n els
At-Risk Youth Glass – Moderator: Andrew Page
Panelists: Debbie Bradley, Jerry Catania, Pearl Dick, Jaime Guerrero, Jason Mouer, Tracy Kirchmann, Nick Letson, Joel Ryser . . . . . . . 83
Green Forum: Chicago 2014 – A roundtable discussion moderated by Chris Clarke and Julie Conway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
Glass Pipe Art: A Critical Discussion of a Maturing Field – Moderator: Jim Baker
Panelists: Chris Carlson, Micah Evans, David Francis, Robert Mickelsen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
Glass 2014: Conference Events & Program
43rd Annual GAS Conference Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Presenter Abstracts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Pre-Conference and Post-Conference Workshops and Events . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Special Exhibitions and Gallery Hop . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Special Events and Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Vendors in the Technical Display . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
90
92
95
95
96
97
G A S 2 014 Ac k n owl e dgemen ts
Conference Committee, Donors, and Volunteers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Glass Art Society Upper-Level Members . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
GAS International Student Exhibition Award Donors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Past Award Recipients, Conferences, Board Members, and Editors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
GAS Membership Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Back Issues of the GAS Journal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
100
103
107
108
109
110
A d v ertis ers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
GAS in San Jose: 2015 Conference preview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
r e f l e cti o n s
Debora Moore, Karen Willenbrink-Johnsen, and Pearl Dick at the Pre-Conference Reception hosted by Ignite.
6
President’s Message
By Jutta-Annette Page
Jutta-Annette Page
The Chicago conference was a remarkable
conference with many “firsts.” Not only was
it the first time the Glass Art Society met in
the city of Chicago – long overdue, its vibrant
and unreservedly committed glass community
might argue – but it also had the highest
attendance of students of any conference in
recent history. Harvey Littleton, the American
Studio Glass Movement’s effective inventor
and early mentor, who regrettably had passed
away four months earlier, would have felt
pleased and ever more vindicated of his
initial convictions.
Never a modish new medium due to its
inherent technical difficulties, glass design
and sculptural practice not only continues
to hold its institutional ground in college art
departments world-wide, but also continues
to expand with new programs and collaborations despite the unquestionably significant
commitment of resources required. The
well-attended International Student Exhibition
at the 2014 conference showed that students
backload their art with an even greater range
of references that are evolving in scope beyond
hoisting the traditional intellectual battle flags.
The emerging artists presentations proved
that not repeating yourself and finding your
own trajectory is key to an invigorated and
sustained art practice. The 2014 GAS honorees and keynote speakers – accessible,
inspiring, resilient, and innovative – thoughtfully demonstrated the importance of setting
the bar high, always.
The Chicago conference also marked a
bitter-sweet moment for me personally: the
end of my 10-year service on the GAS Board.
I feel privileged and honored for having had
this opportunity and I will cherish the many
friendships around the world I have made during this time. GAS is still the most far reaching,
international organization dedicated to glass
as a medium of artistic expression, proving
that work on the Board is vital, effective, and
necessary. As a curator and art administrator,
however, let me assure you that making is
superior to talking, so you who are art
practitioners have the better end of the deal.
Cheers,
Jutta-Annette Page
__________________________________
Jutta-Annette Page, President, is Curator of
Glass and Curator of Decorative Arts at the
Toledo Museum of Art. She was the Curator of
European Glass at The Corning Museum
of Glass from 1993 to 2003. Jutta completed
the equivalent of an MA in visual arts in
Germany, studied jewelry design at San Diego
State University, and went on to receive an
MAE in jewelry/metalsmithing at the Rhode
Island School of Design. A few years later,
Dr. Page earned her MA and PhD in the history
of art and architecture from Brown University.
A respected author in her field, she has
completed numerous publications and lectured
extensively. She has served as Secretary and
Chair of the International Council of Museums’
(ICOM) Glass Committee, and on the Board
of the Creative Glass Center of America at
Wheaton Village.
Chicago River ©Cesar Russ Photography
Reflections on the 2014 GAS Conference
By Trish and Glen Tullman, Co-Owners Ignite Glass Studios, Co-Chairs, 2014 GAS Conference
The 2014 GAS Conference in Chicago,
Strengthening Community, Collaboration,
Forging New Bonds exceeded all our expectations. It was a privilege to support this extraordinary endeavor and learn from it.
Our primary goal for the 2014 GAS
conference was to offer a platform to spark the
creative imagination of conference attendees,
to continue to build the Chicago glass arts
community, and to provide an opportunity
to strengthen connections and build new
partnerships within the glass art community.
The conference opened doors for Ignite Glass
Studios and our team members in ways we
could not have imagined.
Ignite was launched in October 2012. We
built the state-of-the-art glass facility to expose
and educate Chicago and its surrounding
communities about the transformative nature
of glass art and to inspire and empower underresourced youth through interactive, hands-on
glass art programming. The GAS Conference
helped to make the world more aware of
Ignite and all we do and have to offer. GAS
provided us a great opportunity to expose the
international glass community to our vision of
providing art space that connects, educates,
and enriches and helped us build relationships
with glass artists, educators, facilities, educational institutions, and vendors from around
the world to realize this vision.
Recent examples of how the GAS
Conference benefited Ignite include the
opportunity we had to engage two extraordinary interns this summer from Jon Chapman’s
program at the University of Wisconsin Stevens Point, and the significant donations
of glass equipment and supplies to our studio
by more than one glass artist who attended
the conference. Examples of the ongoing
impact of the conference are the partnerships
we have developing with glass artists and
institutions worldwide.
When we decided to sponsor GAS, it was
a significant commitment for a newly formed
studio, having just invested a substantial
amount in equipment and the building itself,
along with hiring a number of full-time artists.
I know we feel, now that it is over, that the
conference was a valuable investment and one
that we benefitted from. We also know that as
first-timers, we could not have had success as
a new studio and in hosting GAS without the
support – time, wisdom and resources – of
the glass community. It is an honor to be part
of this community.
Thank you for welcoming us the way you
have. As we enter our third year, we are excited
about the opportunities ahead to ignite the
imagination and expand glass art.
Ignite Glass Studios
8
Reflections on the 2014 GAS Conference
By Deb and John Gross, Co-Chairs, 2014 GAS Conference
By Angie West, Co-Chair, 2014 GAS Conference
When we were asked to
co-chair the 2014 Chicago
GAS Conference, it did not
take long for us to accept.
As avid glass collecters, we
anticipated that something
very special would emerge
if we brought GAS to our
home city.
Sure enough, Chicago
caught fire as approximately
1,100 people descended on
the city and the furnaces of
Chicago’s two host studios,
Ignite Studios and West
Deb and John Gross
Supply, which burned overtime with incredible demos showcasing innovation and collaboration.
Chicago is not a stranger to glass. It annually hosts the Sculptural
Objects and Functional Art (SOFA) expo at Navy Pier, which contains
the largest collection of glass art that can be seen in a single venue.
However, when GAS came to town, we were treated to an entirely
new and different experience: meeting and interacting with the
international extended family of artists, collectors, and gallerists who
inhabit the world of glass art. The conference unfolded against the
backdrop of our beautiful city, and its glass skyline proved to be a
perfect stage!
The closing party brought all of the week’s events into focus
under one very special roof – the largest Tiffany stained-glass dome
in the world – at the Chicago Cultural Center. Under the colorful
vaulting glass it seemed that nobody wanted the conference to end.
It was obvious to all who attended that new bonds were formed,
old relationships were strengthened, and much knowledge shared.
Hosting the GAS conference was a truly magical experience,
and it was rewarding to celebrate and embrace the magnitude,
diversity, and universality of interests that fall under the incredible
medium of glass.
We salute the hard work of the presenting artists, host studios,
GAS staff, volunteers, and Chicago locals who made this event an
incredible success.
For a young Chicago
business like West Supply,
co-chairing and venue
sponsoring an event as
ambitious as the Glass Art
Society Conference was
a thrill and an honor.
The conference helped
inform the glass portion of
our foundry, design, and
manufacturing business,
and was an enlightening
introduction to the larger
glass community. The
opportunity to host demos
Angie West
and lec-mos offered us a
platform to meet many amazing, talented, and loyal glass artists,
enthusiasts, and patrons.
Quickly transforming our bustling production shop into a venue
fit for demonstrations and hundreds of guests (and transforming it
back for the following Monday) was no small task, but our dedicated
28 person crew of managers and artisans made it happen. We all
had a great time enjoying the conference and educating visitors
about the unique work we do at West Supply.
I hope that we were able to illuminate the ever-expanding role
that blown and cast glass are playing in the world of design and
architecture. It is exciting for us to delve into how old-world processes
can merge with technology and how that fusion can inform innovations in pattern-making, mold-making, and glass-cutting.
West Supply sincerely thanks the GAS staff, Board, and membership for the opportunity to be an integral part of the GAS conference.
It was a pleasure to participate alongside Ignite and the Tullmans, the
Grosses, and the fantastic GAS Board of Directors.
Angie West
Deb and John Gross
mem oria l t ribu te
Jiří Harcuba
By April Surgent
More than a year after his death, we remember
the self described Johnny Appleseed of
engraving, Czech master, Jiří Harcuba. Harcuba
passed away on July 26, 2013 at the age of
85. He dedicated a great deal of his life to
sharing his knowledge of glass engraving
with the world and would frequently exclaim,
“anyone can do it”, in an attempt to revive
the technique he saw was losing popularity.
Although he was classically trained, he
believed that in order to inspire young people
to engrave and carry on the tradition, the old
techniques and teaching methods needed to
be reinvented. In contrast to the years of strict
apprenticeship training Harcuba undertook,
he encouraged students to engrave by
embracing mistakes along with the unknown
and unexpected.
Harcuba was born December 6, 1928 in
the glass making village of Harrachov, (in the
now Czech Republic) into a glass cutting family.
He started his formal apprenticeship at the
Harrachov glassworks when he was fourteen,
however, his education started when he was
just twelve years old and became an assistant
to his father, who was a brilliant glasscutter.
Jiří often recalled, with a laugh, that he would
apply pumice to his father’s polishing wheels
while enviously watching his friends play
football from the window. Who would have
known that this humble young boy would go on
to cut glass for more than seventy years and
inspire hundreds around the world to try their
hand at engraving?
Though he held two separate academic
positions at the Royal Academy of Applied Arts
in Prague (1961-1971 and 1990-1994), he
spent a great deal of time teaching and setting
up engraving studios around the world, many
in the US. Harcuba first visited the US in 1983
when Tom Buechner, then director of Corning
Museum of Glass, invited him and since then
he has been a frequent visitor.
Passionate about teaching the art of
engraving, Harcuba longed to share his
knowledge beyond his academic positions and
short workshops, and in 1997, he started the
Dominik Biman School. This engraving society
and school is dedicated to supporting and
promoting the traditional craft of engraving.
10
GAS Executive Director, Pamela Koss, presents Jiří Harcuba with the 2007 Lifetime Achievement Award at the
Pittsburgh GAS Conference.
The school’s namesake was the 19th century
engraver whose work Harcuba admired as
being the highest example of engraved glass.
To carry on Harcuba’s mission to keep engraving
alive — and with the permission of his wife,
Mrs. Zdenka Harcubova — Pavlina Cambalova,
a Czech engraver and a student of Harcuba’s,
has taken leadership of the school and has
renamed it the School of Jiří Harcuba. The first
year of the School of Jiří Harcuba kicked off
at the Frantisek Glassworks in the Czech
Republic, from September 22-24, 2014.
Harcuba’s dedication to teaching seemed
to inspire rather then impede his own practice.
His work was primarily focused on abstract
portraiture, and was concerned more with
capturing the character of a person rather than
their likeness. A prolific maker, he received
many accolades for his work including the
1995 Corning Rakow Commission and the
2007 GAS Lifetime Achievement Award.
So much can be said about Harcuba’s life
and varied achievements it is hard to know
where to begin or where to stop. For those of
us who had the privilege of knowing him and
learning from him, we remember a humble
and gracious man, intent on making glass
engraving a respected and contemporary art
practice. He was a philosopher and innovator
determined to carry on a vanishing heritage
by encouraging freedom of ideas, expression,
and experimentation. Harcuba considered
himself a student of life and ardently believed
that everyone is a teacher. Even towards
the end of his life when he had long been
considered a ‘master’ he professed that he
still had much to learn. In the wake of his
death is a class of students willingly tasked
with carrying on his legacy and the heritage of
glass engraving. Above all of his accomplishments and achievements, it can be said that
Harcuba lived an inspired life that naturally
and fervently, inspired others.
Ed Hoy
By Eric Suevel
Ed Hoy regularly demonstrated beginner level techniques
in his first store, often handing the soldering iron to the
customer and walking them through the process.
Ed Hoy passed away on April 29th, 2013.
There was no GAS Journal produced in 2013,
as such, Ed’s memorial tribute is included in
the 2014 Journal.
When I was asked to write something about
Ed Hoy, of Ed Hoy’s International — a large
stained glass wholesale supplier based outside
of Chicago — it was much harder than I thought
it would be for many reasons. Of course, I
wanted to write about Ed, but where does one
start? Somehow, I felt I needed to be able to
touch on my personal experiences with Ed so
people who never met him would get to see
a glimpse of the brilliant individual that I had
come to know over many years.
Many artists have known Ed for a much
longer time than I and many have wonderful
personal memories to share. There was one
correlation between Ed and I that made me
feel a strong connection to him, which was
that he had another career, working for 34
years, before he “retired” and started working
in the glass industry. In 1972 Ed started a
small gift shop in Naperville, which eventually
grew into a successful wholesale business.
Like Ed, I followed my dream of making
stained glass after getting a taste of it when
I was much younger, helping my uncle create
stained glass windows.
My initial experience with Ed was the day
I dropped off my wholesale application at his
office. I stood in the front office at Ed Hoy’s
International waiting, and a mature gentleman
walked up to me and asked if I had been
helped. I explained that I had not, but I could
see that everyone was busy and didn’t mind
waiting. At that moment, the gentleman
offered his hand and introduced himself as
Ed — not Ed Hoy, Mr. Hoy, the owner of Ed
Hoy’s, — but simply, Ed and as I shook his
hand I said, “It’s a pleasure to meet you
Mr. Hoy.” I was immediately corrected and
with a friendly tone he said, “my name is Ed.”
His handshake was solid, with direct eye
contact, a smile like the Cheshire Cat, along
with a pat on the opposite shoulder like a long
lost friend. Being introduced to Ed felt like
being invited into someone’s home where you
were being made to feel welcome.
My wife and I enjoyed stopping by Ed’s
and we always received a warm hello, handshake, or hug. On many occasions Ed would
venture out of his office when he heard people
come in and would greet frequent visitors
with a smile followed by a small slew of
questions. How are your kids? What are they
doing in school? How’s business? I was
always impressed that he would ask how my
family was doing long before asking how the
business was doing. There was a genuine
sincerity from Ed, and it didn’t matter how
many people were in the office, he always
made sure he said hello.
Over time our studio grew, and as both
kind and smart businessman, Ed often offered
us advice. Ed made your business his business;
he had a deep understanding of business and
knew that if he helped small glass studios
succeed, then he would also succeed. He was
always generous with advice, very candidly
telling people about things that worked well
for him and things that didn’t work, or were
complete failures. A few years ago we were
very excited about moving our studio and
enlarging our operation. Ed listened carefully
to our enthusiastic ideas and shared in our
excitement, however, when the conversation
was ending, Ed suggested holding on and
sitting tight for the moment because he felt it
wasn’t a good time to move. We heeded the
caution in his comments, and in a few months
the market collapsed. Had we not listened
to Ed and enlarged our operation, I know our
studio would have been one of the victims of
the recession, and likely would have closed its
doors. This character trait was so fundamental
to Ed that it became an unofficial motto
for his company, “You know art. We know
business. Together YOU win!”
Through the years Ed always seemed
to pop up at the right moment to offer his
knowledge and a friendly conversation. Ed
was the antithesis of selfishness; although he
owned a massively successful business, I can’t
remember a time that he wasn’t willing to stop
and give you a moment of his time to help.
For those of you that knew Ed you are blessed,
and for those that didn’t, I am truly sorry that
you missed out on meeting a true icon of the
stained glass industry. Each time I walk into
the front office at Ed Hoy’s it’s hard not to see
Ed walk out of his office to say hello. I still
hope that one day I will see his Cheshire Cat
grin over the top of the bookcase.
Ed Hoy and an employee in Ed Hoy's 5th warehouse location. The current warehouse is over 75,000 sq.ft. and
houses the largest selection of art glass in North America.
Harvey Littleton
By Joan Falconer Byrd
Sculptor Harvey K. Littleton, founder of the
Studio Glass Movement, died at his home in
Spruce Pine, North Carolina, on December 13,
2013. He was 91 years of age. A visionary
artist, teacher and spokesman for the arts,
Littleton brought glassblowing from the factory
into the studio, setting in motion the dramatic
development of glass as a medium in contemporary art. His book, Glassblowing: A Search
for Form, published in 1971, is considered the
manifesto of the Movement. Littleton devoted
four decades of his professional life to pushing
the boundaries of the medium, creating powerful sculptures exploiting the physical properties
of molten glass and developing the technique
for printing from glass plates.
A son of the first research physicist at
Corning Glass Works, Littleton learned his love
of glass as a child, while absorbing the dictum
of industry that it was impossible to work with
hot glass outside the factory. He made his first
sculptures in the medium at an experimental
laboratory at Corning, casting one female torso
in 1941 and a second torso four years later,
after his return from military service in Europe
and North Africa during World War II.
Littleton received his bachelor’s degree
in industrial design from the University of
Michigan, Ann Arbor, and briefly practiced as
a designer before earning his MFA degree in
ceramics from Cranbrook Academy of Art in
Bloomfield Hills, Michigan. While a student of
Cranbrook ceramicist, Maija Grotell, he spent
three days of each week teaching pottery at
The Toledo Museum of Art in Ohio, where he
made two friends who would become his allies
in the founding of the Studio Glass Movement
a decade later: Otto Wittmann, then a museum
staffer, and Dominick Labino, a glass researcher
at Johns-Manville Corporation.
In 1951 Littleton joined the faculty of the
University of Wisconsin in Madison. He would
remain an outspoken advocate of the U.S.
system of education in the arts throughout his
life. Litttleton won an international reputation
in ceramics before a research trip to Europe in
1957-58 rekindled his fascination with glass.
Visiting small glassblowing shops in Spain
and Italy, he realized it was possible to build a
studio-sized furnace that would bring hot glass
within reach of the individual artist. Back in
Wisconsin he melted small batches of glass in his
studio and repeatedly applied for grant funding
12
Harvey K. Littleton, 1997
to establish a glass program at the university.
When Littleton failed to raise foundation
support, Wittmann, who had become director
of The Toledo Museum of Art, invited him to
introduce glassblowing at the museum. The
success of the two groundbreaking workshops
he taught in Toledo in spring and summer
1962, with important technical assistance from
Labino, enabled Littleton to offer an independent
study course for University of Wisconsin credit
in the fall. The class he taught in his home
studio that semester and the next was the first
hot glass course ever offered by a university
in the U.S. The drama of glassblowing soon
captivated his students; and a glass program,
housed in a university facility, entered the
curriculum. Littleton took advantage of his
election to two terms as department chair to
energetically promote this program and the
visual arts as a whole.
Studio Glass gained widespread attention
in summer 1964, when Littleton invited his
friend, Erwin Eisch of Bavaria, to demonstrate
beside him and his students in a temporary
facility at the First World Congress of Craftsmen
in New York City. After blowing glass for the
first time during the conference, glass designer
Sybren Valkema of Holland built the first Labinostyle glass furnace in Europe at the Reitveld
Academy in Amsterdam. From this time on
the Movement spread rapidly as Littleton and
his peers, joined by graduates of his program
— Marvin Lipofsky, Fritz Dreisbach, and Dale
Chihuly among them — took the message
across the country and around the world.
The purchase of Littleton’s work by The Museum
of Modern Art in 1965 and The Metropolitan
Museum of Art in 1977 and the traveling exhibition, “New Glass: a Worldwide Survey,” curated
by The Corning Museum of Glass in 1978,
were landmark events signaling the growing
recognition of the Studio Glass Movement.
In 1977 the University of Wisconsin granted
Littleton Professor Emeritus status, and he
moved his home and studio to North Carolina.
Now the focus of his attention, his sculptures
developed rapidly in size and scope and
assumed a commanding presence. In this highly
productive period, Littleton exhibited widely
and was an eloquent spokesperson for glass
and for the arts. In 1983 he built a second
studio to house the investigation of printing
from glass plates, known today as vitreography;
Littleton Studios editioned prints by more than
one hundred visual artists in various fields who
were invited to expand the repertoire of this
rich and versatile graphic medium.
Throughout his life Littleton pursued diverse
activities simultaneously: he was a scholar
who researched the origins of unidentified
pieces of glass, an entrepreneur who started
three businesses serving the arts, a farmer,
an avid fisherman, and a sailor who took his
sailboat twice across the Atlantic. His lifelong
love was Bess Tamura Littleton, with whom
he shared 62 years of marriage before her
death in 2009. Each of their four children has
a career associated with glass. Carol Littleton
Shay curated the Littleton Studio vitreographs;
Tom Littleton owns and directs the Spruce Pine
Batch Company, which sells pelletized glass for
melting in the studio furnace; Maurine Littleton
owns and directs the Maurine Littleton Gallery
in Washington, DC; and John Littleton and his
wife, Kate Vogel, are artists who work in glass.
Littleton received the Lifetime Achievement
Award from the Glass Art Society in 1993.
Among the numerous public collections in which
his work appears are: The Corning Museum
of Glass, Corning, New York; Glasmuseum,
Frauenau, Germany; The Hokkaido Museum
of Modern Art, Sapporo, Japan; Kunstgewerbe
Museum, Cologne, Germany; Museum
Bellerive, Zurich, Switzerland; Kunstmuseum,
Veste Coburg, Coburg, Germany; The Museum
of Glass, Liege, Belgium; The National Glass
Museum, Leerdam, Holland; The National
Museum of Modern Art, Kyoto, Japan; The
Toledo Museum of Art, Toledo, Ohio; and The
Victoria and Albert Museum, London, England.
Carletto (Carlo) Doná
By Roberto Doná
Carlo Doná
Carletto (Carlo) Doná was born on the island
of Murano in 1927. His father (also named
Carlo) had opened the metal working “Bottega”
(studio) in 1923, and Carletto began working
in the studio in 1941 when he was 14 years
old. It was a difficult period in Italy during
World War II, and life was strange in Murano
during that time. Carletto’s studio created
tools, machinery, and many things for glass
factories and also had to produce field
kitchens for the military. He learned a lot
about glass from his father, but always liked to
resolve problems and develop new techniques
on his own. Carletto was crazy for motors and
machines and he liked to work with them and
experiment in the studio making molds, kilns,
cold working machines, tools, and much more.
As he grew up, Murano grew up as well, and
the Carlo Dona studio had a lot of different
work requests.
Even with many orders, the business
wasn’t very profitable. But that it didn’t matter
because he enjoyed the work so much –
working with his toys and new discoveries.
He was so smart and eclectic; every type of
new thing was interesting to him.
Everyone knows Carletto was a great
craftsman who was skilled and always prepared
to work. His regular routine, work ethic, and
exceptional abilities in metalworking built a
strong reputation for him. However, owning
a business meant problems associated with
management, administration, and accounting.
He hated these things and so he delegated
them to me, his son. He worked for 74 years
in the studio, 36 of which we spent together
– coincidentally the exact age difference
between us. Carletto limited his contacts and
relationships with people. He didn’t like to
go out and socialize, but not because he
considered himself superior. Indeed, his
perceived confidence was a way to defend
himself from criticism. He knew that he could
not compete with a society that was based
on ambition, selfishness, and envy. He had
no interest in money or material things.
He was so naive, pure, and without malice;
in Venetian dialect we say, “beo come el so”
(beautiful like the Sun).
Honesty and respect were paramount to
Carletto. I saw him cry because of bad work
or because he didn’t know how to submit an
invoice to a customer when the amount was
too high. “Would you pay it well?” was his
most common question. He empathized with
his customers, but found it difficult to accept
late payments from clients or someone who
robbed him. It was not about the money, but
rather he saw it as an offense to his work.
As the business changed, it opened the
door to a whole new world where people he
met did not interfere with his privacy and
allowed him to feel appreciated and admired.
He spoke with the world from our little lair,
communicating with foreigners only with smiles
and kindness. I often received emails and
cheers from his friends: “Say hello to your
sweet daddy”, “thank your father for his
kindness”, “we can see that your father is a
good person”. I like to show photos of him
being embraced by people from the world –
Japanese, Turkish, African, Nordic – and his
smile. Big smile.
His work and family were his entire world.
Carletto just wanted to feel comfortable in his
workshop and protected with his family; alone
in his castle he was safe. He loved his books
and his curiosity often directed him to invent
something, solve a problem, or build his games.
s t r e n gt h e n i n g c o mm u n it y , c o l l ab o r ati o n , f o r gi n g n e w b o n d s This is the concept of family that he and
my mother gave to us growing up: a life based
on patience and sacrifice, but full of so much
love. Love for us, love he taught us, love he
has shown and lived everyday. My father
waited until his 56th wedding anniversary
before he left this life… letting go. “For the rest
of my life, I love you.” This is what he wanted
us to write on the card that he gave to our
mother, along with a heart of gold he asked
my sisters to purchase. Another lesson he
taught us is that love exists, and that yes, we
can live it everyday.
It may seem strange, but the best moment
I had with him was when he was rushed into
the hospital and we talked and confided in
each other about things that were deep and
personal. I heard him make declarations of
love to my mother, he cuddled us, and he
was always, always, always, smiling. He was
so good and knew that he needed to make it
easier to let him go. I don’t know exactly why
I wanted to tell you these things. Many of you
knew him only as a work contact, others by me
and my family, but to everyone who knew him
Carletto was like his smile; the clearest person
I have ever met in my life.
Ciao Papà
burned an empty box
you are not ashes ... iron powder ...
screams of a lathe, hand grinder squeaking,
hammer on sheet metal breaks the eardrums
the child adjusts his toy
smile in a dirty room ...
the lightness of the good result
13
gl ass art societ y awards
Dan Dailey’s Lifetime Achievement Award lecture.
14
Lif e time Ach iev eme n t Awa r d
Illustrating With a Glass Palette
By Dan Dailey
Preface
Despite the existential implications, I am
very happy to have this acknowledgement
of lifetime achievement from the Glass Art
Society. The professional recognition comes
without being sought, and there are many
deserving candidates, so this feels like a
lucky turn. The respect and sincerity of
congratulation from all of you on this occasion
is heartfelt.
My lecture of March 20, 2014 in Chicago
at the Glass Art Society conference was
extemporaneous, a narration of images with
explanation of motives for the creation of
each work. I described working processes
and my working relationships with colleagues,
factories, machine shops, foundries, and
electroplating companies. A transcript of the
lecture without the images would lack an
essential component.
Therefore for this journal I have described
my work as an artist with an emphasis on the
subject matter addressed and the methods of
production adopted to achieve various goals
when taking ideas from images in my mind to
drawings to 3D forms. Looking back over 47
years of making art is somehow confining to
me, because my normal perspective is looking
forward, toward tomorrow, and the next work
ahead. In any case, I hope you will find these
words informative and engaging.
Even though glass has been the dominant
medium for my expression there is nothing
about glass itself that leads to a work of art,
no matter how well made something may be.
It is the genuine expression of ideas and
feelings that make a work of art.
Materialism
Like many American art students of the
1960s, I went to art college with the broad
idea of becoming a professional artist.
I could have become a painter or a filmmaker,
graphic designer, or illustrator. But, the Craft
Department was most compelling to me at the
Philadelphia College of Art (PCA), and their
programs in clay, jewelry, metalworking and
woodworking were very exciting compared
to the many other major concentrations.
My main courses of study were in ceramics
and jewelry, and I took the classes in filmmaking and illustration for two years. Because
of the rigorous training we received in 3D
studies, and the demands put on us to
perform at our highest level of commitment
and skill, I began to expect a lot from myself
in answer to the assignments and also in
creating works that were self-assigned.
Dan Dailey, Birds with Red Cubes Photo: Bill Truslow
s t r e n gt h e n i n g c o mm u n it y , c o l l ab o r ati o n , f o r gi n g n e w b o n d s Dan Dailey
We had classes from 8 am to 6:30 pm,
five days per week. Considerable homework
was assigned, which took hours and days
to complete. The quality of our work was
thoroughly examined, no matter what medium
we were using, because the faculty wanted
us to understand the demands of a professional life as an artist. For example, Richard
Reinhardt, my jewelry and metalworking
professor, picked up a small brass sculpture
my friend John Meade had brought to our
weekly critique. Reinhardt looked it all over,
examining the bottom of the piece and
every detail of the construction then asked,
“Meade, if you died tonight, would you want
your mother to receive this as the last thing
you ever made?” Many of the faculty, like
Reinhardt, went to art college on the GI Bill
after WWII, and had seen lives disappear
in a flash. They had fought for our country
and were determined to make meaningful
contributions to society. They were serious
about our pursuit of a professional degree
and their role as our educators.
When I was a sophomore in 1967, a
ceramics teacher, Roland Jahn, asked me to
help him build a glassblowing studio at the
college. PCA had been given a grant by the
Fostoria Glass Company, and we built the
studio during the summer. In the fall, when we
began to work with hot glass for the first time,
it was an amazing addition to my accumulating
palette of materials and processes for making
art. There was no formal instruction in glass15
blowing; it was experimental for the students
and the faculty. I call this the “slop and slump”
period of American glass, and it is easy to find
examples of brutally worked objects from the
1960s. But we began to explore form and
develop our own techniques for working with
hot glass. This lack of skill saved us from
becoming experts in the European traditions,
and we therefore developed methods and
styles that were new to the history of glass.
Many of us in similar situations as art
students in the 1960s decided to work in
craft media instead of the currently accepted
fine arts mediums. We were attracted to the
materials of the traditional crafts, and adopted
the working processes and even the forms
(vases, chairs, necklaces, etc.) as formats
for our artistic expression. As we developed
skills and experience with these materials
we became connected by the interchange of
technical information and techniques with
numerous colleagues all over America. The
Materialist Movement grew as we formed
organizations like the Glass Art Society,
Society of North American Goldsmiths (SNAG),
and National Council on Education for the
Ceramic Arts (NCECA), and many students
followed the lead of relatively few artists
who had made the initial move into these
mediums and working traditions, while
looking for ways to make art that was
distinctly their own.
The Materialist Movement has never had
a common conceptual philosophy like other
art movements of the 20th century, such as
Surrealism or Pop Art, where artists adhered
to a stylistic trend and adopted the intellectual
attitude of certain group thinking. The mastery
of specific traditional craft materials placed
in service of individual artists’ concepts has
defined Materialism as an art movement.
The artists are Materialists in the sense
that they understand and employ specific
materials, which identifies their art in
some way.
This differs from other definitions of
materialism. In the philosophical sense,
materialism describes matter and its motions
constituting the universe and all phenomena,
including thought. Therefore material is
everything, and everything is material.
According to MIT professor Morris Cohen,
materialism is a humanistic and cultural term:
it is a description based on our genetic heritage,
the human material. A popular current understanding of the word materialism is the
gathering of possessions to the exclusion of
spiritual or more meaningful pursuits. I define
materialism as the artist’s thorough devotion
16
and accumulated knowledge and expertise
based on the material they have chosen to
make their art. It is therefore a philosophy of
material mastery that characterizes their work
and unifies them in a movement.
The craft media bring with them a heavy
legacy of traditional forms and working methods. This causes many people who learn the
processes for making traditional objects
to repeat history. Some people decided that
they are artists because they learned to craft
something with great skill. Other people, who
would have been an artist no matter what
medium they chose, happened to become
interested in a craft medium and their desire
to communicate through their creations
dictates the forms they create. The acquisition
of skills and learning of processes enables
them to articulate their thoughts in the medium
of their choice, and their pursuit of artistic
notions supersedes their need to make a
product. Many artists focused on a material
do not feel connected to the craft scene;
they just use the materials and processes
as a vehicle for expression. They are different
from the potter making vases for a craft fair
or the furniture maker who makes a beautiful
handmade chair of his own design. Artists
who have adopted these working methods
and materials create works with varying
degrees of adherence to traditional forms,
so there are often references to historical
precedents in the forms and formats they
choose for their work. This quirk of the artist’s
thinking has blurred the line between art
and craft for decades.
Glass
A focus on the material qualities of glass
has guided some of my conceptual thinking,
and objects made of glass by many predecessors were inspiring. As I studied the history of
glass and discovered the work of the ancient
Egyptians, or the creative genius of Galle,
Daum, and Lalique, the material became
more and more intriguing as a medium for
art. The designs of Martinuzzi and Barovier,
which I studied while working in the Venini
factory, were influential. The accomplishments
of these workshops and factories pulled me
toward functional art, and that interest has
never faded. Modernist art, from Van Gogh to
Pop Art, was also a powerful influence on my
development as an image-maker, and I am
still strongly attracted by the works of Bosch
and Caravaggio, to which I was introduced as
a student. Like many artists I am intrigued and
excited by works of other artists from the past,
and I could list hundreds of names and places
where I have found inspiration. These various
Dan Dailey, Imagist Photo: Bill Truslow
instigators of thought, and a focus on glass
and metal, have prompted me to interpret my
drawings as objects.
I never produced more than experimental
work as a student. It took me several years at
PCA and RISD before I had made something
I considered to be resolved. Most of my
student works were throwaways, until the
last year of graduate school. There I focused
on a series of “lamps”, of which were more
sculptural than functional. When I moved to
Italy and worked at the Venini factory one
year, I focused again on illuminated pieces.
Although the work I did there was appreciated by many factory workers, their in-house
designer, the owner Ludovico Diaz de
Santillana, gave me a critique at the end of
my stay which was an eye-opener. He looked
at all the pieces I had made from Venini glass
that also included metal parts I had made at
the factory. He walked around smacking his
forehead saying, “These are mad! These are
mad!” He did keep two of them as prototypes
but they were never produced. Before leaving
Italy I had a show in Rome at the US Embassy
with those illuminated pieces. When the show
came down my work was shipped to Boston
where I continued to develop ideas for
illuminated sculpture.
Teaching
Massachusetts College of Art hired me to
start a glass program in 1973. With the help
of students I built a studio and began to
establish a program for glass studies. In addition to the support of the college, I was able
to secure donations of materials, machinery,
and expertise from many companies including
Corning Glass, AP Green, Eastern Refractories,
Boston area machine shops, electrical supply
companies, and an MIT electronic surplus
warehouse. There was a feeling of constant
development that encouraged professional
aspirations in the program as it grew and
more students came to MassArt. We started
an MFA program in Glass, and I was asked to
begin a Fine Arts 3D program at the college to
expand on the existing Ceramics and Sculpture
courses being taught. We added jewelry and
fibers, and hired several new faculty members.
My administrative duties had expanded to a
demanding level and were distracting me from
the art I imagined I would create. When I was
awarded tenure I felt as though a door was
closing on me, and I began to plan an exit
from full-time teaching.
In 1975 I met Otto Piene, a founder of
Group Zero in Germany, who asked me to
accept a fellowship at the MIT Center for
Advanced Visual Studies. Otto and I invented
a class we would teach together, titled Glass,
Gas, and Electricity. The MIT students were
quite different from the Mass Art students,
and all of us found much interest in the
exchange of viewpoints and skills in a variety
of disciplines. Also the potential of the
facilities at each school excited the students
a great deal. My own projects at MIT were to
develop a group of light bulbs with the research
lab for electronics, and to destroy some of my
glass vases in the photo lab of Harold Edgerton.
None of these experiments were successful,
but I learned a few things that have been
useful for later works. My involvement with
MIT those five years left a solid impression of
interest in the way things work and an attitude
of assessment of problems from various
perspectives unrelated to art.
Daum
In 1977 I was invited by Jacques Daum
to work at Cristallerie Daum in Nancy, France.
Linda MacNeil, my wife, and I went there for
two months and worked in the factory, making
models and test casting them in pâte de verre.
At the end of the stay I was asked to return the
next year and one of my models was selected
for edition. This began a relationship that
continues with Daum. Numerous works were
made as editions of 150 or 200, and several
designs have been produced in unlimited
quantities. Although the Daum family no longer
owns the company, there is still an attitude of
positioning Daum as an art entity as opposed
to an industrial concern.
Factories have been inspiring to me
because of the potential they offer. Having a
giant facility and skilled, dedicated workers
who want to be involved in my projects has
expanded the possibility to create works I
cannot build in my own studio, even with
several assistants. Having the invitation and
support of the factory owners has been crucial
to the working relationships, and I have tried
to develop my work with them so that it
benefits their enterprise as well as my own.
These working experiences have influenced my
personal studio work, where I have employed
skilled assistants since about 1976. Having
had a carpentry business during my college
years, it was easy to take on the responsibilities of hired help for the work I wanted to
make. We began to create complex works
with hundreds of parts that took months to
Dan Dailey, Wind
Photo: Bill Truslow
build, which supplemented the blown glass
vase forms and simpler illuminated pieces for
exhibition in galleries.
From 1978 to 2006 when I traveled to
France for work at Daum, I often took a flight
from Boston to Paris that would arrive at
7:00 am on a Sunday. I would take a cab to a
hotel and put my bags in the lobby closet, then
begin walking, sometimes with no particular
destination in mind. Usually this was in winter
so it was often raining, but Paris has hundreds
of great public places where you can ignore
the weather. In addition to museums of all
kinds, I went to the flea markets and antique
centers to look at art and objects. Just walking
around the city with such a collection of
building details, lighting, doors, railings,
interior and exterior patterns, and surface
treatments fascinated me. The incredible
variety of decorative arts would get me thinking
about motifs and forms and when I returned
to the hotel I made drawings based on my
observations. These drawings added to the
accumulating resource in sketchbooks, and
were mostly unrelated to my work with Daum.
On Monday morning I would have a meeting
at the company headquarters, and later take
the train to Nancy. On the way back I usually
spent another day or two in Paris. These visits
to observe the city were a great pleasure, and
I occasionally return. Certainly the Art Deco
works I discovered in Paris were influential,
and I had already followed the work of Lalique
and Daum, but it is the particular stylistic
qualities of that period that had the most
impact on my way of interpreting drawings in
form and materials. The high contrast graphic
qualities of Art Deco, and the geometric
stylization of nature or balanced symmetrical
forms in space, became habits of approach to
forms I create. The use of glass and metal in
combination with nickel and gold plating and
other metal surfacing treatments, gives my
work a certain quality often associated with
that period of design history. My attraction
to acid polished surfaces on glass also goes
back to historic precedents. This is part of
what I call an “Industrial Palette,” which relates
directly to the use of processes outside of my
studio to achieve the results envisioned when
drawing a piece I will create.
Drawing
Most of the time I am illustrating a title
when I begin to draw. I keep a list of words
and phrases that I have read or heard that
trigger an image in my mind. The drawing is
formed by these thoughts and I record the
image on paper. This process has produced
many works that are not part of a series, but
just a thought that I was compelled to invest
the time and effort in with glass and metal
because I wanted to make it real. Drawing is
the first step in realizing an idea. I have kept
sketchbooks since the early 1970s, which
are a visual diary of my thinking. They are a
resource as well as a record, because there
are many more ideas drawn than objects I
could build. Not that they are all worth making.
Often I will draw something a dozen times
and select the one I feel is most successful,
then draw it again from multiple points of view
to work out the dimensional balance, then
proceed to a model in foam or wood before
committing to glass and metal. There are often
technical drawings and template drawings,
which help me to communicate with assistants
or machine shops or anyone who may be
making one part of a complicated assembly.
I also draw in my sketchbooks at a small
scale for blown glass works. These drawings
become references for the full-scale graphite
drawings or watercolor drawings we work from
in the glassblowing studio. There, everyone
can look at the drawing and think in advance
about their part in the coordinated work to
produce the piece. Punctuating the sketchbook
drawings of works to be made in 3D are
drawings of whatever thought or feeling
emerges as an image in my mind or in
response to places I have observed when
traveling for work or pleasure. I make some
of these drawings again on high quality
paper and frame them for exhibition.
Series
Perhaps the process of glassblowing
instigated my penchant for working in series,
but I have taken this approach with many
different ways of building works of art. I often
have multiple ideas for ways to approach a
basic concept, and a series allows me to
explore and re-visit a format while expressing
a new thought.
The vase as a format for expression
captivated me for many years. When I began
blowing glass, I could make simple vase forms,
which I would wrap with rubber and draw
on to create a mask for sandblasting. The
sandblasted vases were acid polished, a
process that produces a finish I have been
hooked on since about 1976. In some series
vitreous enamels were applied to emphasize
the graphic contrast of the image. With the
Face Vase series, I began to explore classic
vase forms from several cultures, and recombine various elements of the contours. These
vase series were in a way blanks for my
drawings, where I would work out variations
on a theme.
18
Early in my exploration of glass as a
medium for sculptural statement, I made
several series that depart from a historic
decorative approach. The Tripod Vessels,
Distorted Vessels, Rat Trap Vases, Nail Vases,
and Wire Glass Vases, were all attempts
to create something new in the history of the
glass vessel. My goal was entirely personal,
with motives of “What if?” guiding each group
of works. These pieces represent a way of
thinking that came partly from my association
with the MIT CAVS and from the urge to break
away from normal expectations of beautiful
glass. They are also less faithful to the
drawings made in advance, because the
process affected the form to a certain degree
in each experiment.
Another approach toward the vase as
format came to me because of the character
of hot glass. Through several series, the
Character Heads, Animal Vases, Mythology
series, and Abstract Heads I worked in a
sculptural manner with the vessel. The vessel
form remains, but the functional aspect is not
of consequence. However, in the Animal Vase
series I put a high contrast colored rim at the
opening of each piece to visually state the
fact that it is a vase, even if it is an animal.
The hot glass additions on all of these series
are used to draw on the glass rather loosely,
allowing the way hot glass moves to determine
the form of the added part in some way. A
streak is pulled out the way hot glass likes to
move, and additions cut with scissors are left
somewhat raw to reveal the cut edges even if
softened by reheating. In contrast to the vase
series, which are most tightly controlled and
made with small details, these series were all
very expressive through the way I use glass.
The Abstract Heads were a direct response to
Cubist paintings. The deconstruction of facial
elements and their abstraction through the
qualities of liquid glass guided my drawings for
the heads, and the blown forms are developed
as representations of each title.
The Circus Vase series has been the most
complex of vase forms in my art. There is an
exploration of classic form throughout the
series, and many types of color application
have been used according to the attributes of
figures each vase carries or the subject matter
addressed. The figures were inspired first by
the theme of the Circus, which I consider to
be a theater of the absurd, foolish, and
stupendous. A second inspiration for the
series was Etruscan bronzes, with vessel
handles that are often human and animal
forms. Some of the Circus Vases have figures
posed to exaggerate a gesture, with activated
characters moving symmetrically. Some of the
Dan Dailey, Oak Man Photo: Bill Truslow
characters are large: three feet tall, mounted
on a five foot tall vase which has become a
kind of pedestal for the figurative sculpture.
There is a multil-level application of detail, so
the viewer is rewarded when time is taken to
look closely at the piece. The vases are also
intended to be seen across a room so the
form is considered for its profile before
determining elements of detail. The blown
glass color often changes from top to bottom
with the cast glass elements in the bronze
figures colored to harmonize.
In 1980 I began to work with a group of
friends in Seattle to blow glass in Ben Moore’s
studio, and I continue to work there. Over
these years Ben, Rich Royal, Dante Marioni,
Preston Singletary, Paul Cunningham, Sam
McMillen, Sean O’Neil, Granite Calimpong,
Robbie Miller, Michael Fox, and many others
have helped to make the pieces. Their
expertise has helped me to achieve the
qualities of each piece I pursue in hot glass.
The experience is extraordinary because the
assembled team is so dedicated to excellent
results, and they have an intimate understanding of glassblowing techniques and the
vision I have for each piece. The pieces are
shipped back to my New Hampshire studio
where we continue the work of cutting, grinding,
sandblasting, and some diamond hand work
in preparation for acid polishing. These
processes have enabled me to create many
blown glass works and parts for sculpture
and illuminated works.
Many forms of illuminated art have
occupied my thoughts since I first began to
work with glass. I have made wall sconces and
chandeliers as sculpture that provides light for
residences and corporate offices, and some
larger scale chandeliers for public spaces.
The quality of light emitted from these works
has been an important consideration, as well
as maintenance of the light sources by the
owners of these pieces. Once I have installed
a piece I don’t want to be traveling across
the USA to do maintenance works, so a lot of
time is invested in the planning and design
of the work, even if we have built something
similar before. Over the past few years we
have used LED illumination more frequently,
which brings a new set of problems to the
mix of elements in the composition, but has
interesting potential.
The lamp as an object has also been
a format for my sculpture. Metal figures,
fabricated from brass or aluminum, or cast in
bronze, are combined with blown glass shades
and other details, including Vitrolite glass
mosaics on aluminum bases. These sculptures
are scenic representations of situations.
A deliberate ambiguity guides the drawing
of various elements as I compose the piece,
which is an illustration of its title. This format
is a direct translation of my interest in certain
Modernist sculpture with attached base plates.
The geometric stylization of the figures comes
from my desire to preserve the qualities of
sheet metal, tubing, and machined parts.
This attitude toward abstraction is evident in
much of my figurative art. Many of the pieces
I have created are made of materials that look
precious, and there are often details that highlight such qualities. Part of my attraction to
ancient art is the rich embellishment that can
be found in many objects that have survived
over centuries. Often the embellishment
is symbolic, meant to say something about the
animal or human portrayed, or the object represented. It goes beyond decoration; becoming
essential to the feeling conveyed by the object.
These pieces of history inspire me and have
influenced the art I produce.
While looking for plate glass I discovered
Vitrolite and Carrara glass in an old Rhode
Island commercial glass shop around 1971.
The colored plate glass was exotic to me,
and I began to use it in assembled sculpture.
Because it was made between 1900 to 1947,
it has become increasingly difficult to find.
I have removed Vitrolite from building facades
and interior walls of abandoned buildings, or
found it in Commercial Glass shop storage
racks covered in layers of debris and dirt from
years of neglect. Colleagues in the Glass Art
Society have called me to ask if I want to buy
their collection of Vitroliote, which has led to a
small library of colored glass that I have used
for forty years. The range of colors typifies an
era of American design, and compliments
my interest in Art Deco. It is interesting that
Libbey Owens Ford and Pitttsburgh Plate Glass
technicians came up with colors that are so
visually compatible, offering designers a
range of choices from both companies
because they were serving a popular market
demand of the time.
My first works with Vitrolite were assembled plate glass heads, busts, and animals.
The abstraction of the faces and bodies of
these characters was deliberately based on
the slabs of glass being joined mechanically
with obvious screw connections and fabricated
metal components designed to emphasize the
geometry of the joined glass pieces. A series
of works with two human heads on a 24” long
base was based on observations of people in
conversation (1982-1984). I wanted to show
the relationship of speakers and listeners as
it changed from piece to piece in the series.
The way each character is stylized emphasizes
their attitude in the conversation. The Vitrolite
animals (1984-1996) began as illustrations
of animal expressions about people, such as
“Sick as a Dog” and “Odd Duck.” Toward the
end of the series I dropped the association
with such phrases and focused on the qualities
of the animals I felt were compelling, while
trying to build a statue of the creature that
showed its unique demeanor.
s t r e n gt h e n i n g c o mm u n it y , c o l l ab o r ati o n , f o r gi n g n e w b o n d s The Vitrolite wall murals (1979-current)
have occupied my imagination longer than any
other series. These pictorial works are perhaps
closest to drawing and painting than any other
art I have made because they illustrate a
subject and a scene through male and female
characters portrayed. I like to observe human
behavior, and the way I draw people is often
interpreted as humorous even when I don’t
intend it to be so. I do show the foolishness
of certain actions and draw people in ways
that reveals their emotions or thoughts. The
stylization of faces and bodies comes from the
original ink line drawing. Obvious references to
Rousseau, Caravaggio, Wesselman, and other
artists who have created images we know from
years of repeated viewing, have been fair game
as sources for classic symbols of a type of
person. My intention with this series has been
to create a picture that has layered meaning,
perhaps not all evident at first glance. The
low relief achieved with the layering of plate
glass makes the materials and dimensionality
important to the image. They are very frontal,
not meant to be viewed from the side any
more than a painting on canvas would be.
The subject matter is varied, and often a
male-female theme drives the image. They
come from an urge to comment on society
and human nature. This is true in much of my
art, most overtly stated in the murals.
The series called Fabricated Music is
conceptually different from my other sculpture.
Dan Dailey, Light Stage
Photo: Bill Truslow
19
My goal was to capture the feeling of modal
jazz through a vague representation of musical
instruments and colored forms held in place
by an armature. The armature is also formed to
represent rhythm and tempo, and is polished
or blackened with patina to accentuate these
references. The moving colors in the blown
forms cast colored shadows – a part of the
concept that depends on angled lighting from
a point close to the wall. None of these pieces
were conceived to be a visual translation
of a musical composition. They are an
attempt to show the mood and feeling of the
composition. This series was a departure from
more deliberately representational work for
me, and came from my response to the death
of my stepfather, Ken Tricebock. Ken and
my mother owned an advertising agency in
Philadelphia, but as a young man he had a
jazz band and continued to play piano and
guitar all the years I knew him. His interest in
modal jazz strongly affected my own diverse
musical preferences.
The Individuals is a series I began in 2005
with a notion to re-visit the bust as a format
after looking closely at marble sculpture in
several US and European museums. I like the
historical formality of the format, where the
figure is presented in a heroic manner. However the gestures are altered with some figures
posed leaning over, nose on the table, bent
over backward, or arms and hands indicating
some feeling or activity. The goal with each
portrayal is to convey an emotion or quality of
character. The facial expressions are important
and the stylization of the features with hot
glass led to a simplified approach. The liquid
forms typical of added glass bits are often left
untouched, to create an eyebrow or a hair,
for example. The sense of hollow volume is
preserved in the heads and many of the
torsos, and the colors overlapping and fading
like watercolor is exploited, so the use of glass
for the busts is essential. This approach leads
to a type of abstraction that I have used in
many other hot glass series, such as the
Mythology Vases and the Abstract Heads.
There is no attempt at realism in the manipulation of the glass. The characters are
symbolic in most cases, although I have made
a few portraits of specific people, such as
Lorenzo Di Medici as a young man, or Daniel
Boulud with a street vendor’s hot dog.
My means of rendering does not necessarily
make them recognizable.
Commissions
The Providence Performing Arts Center
asked me to make a chandelier in 2003. The
theater was built in 1928, and they never
20
installed a chandelier because of the stock
market crash. The interior surfaces are covered
with an amazing collection of low relief motifs
from various cultures in a baroque manner,
gilded and very complex. There are many
smaller hanging lamps that reference Tiffany
style. The feeling of the theater was inspirational, but the assignment to create a piece that
looked like it belonged there was daunting.
The Rhode Island Historical Society, the
President of RISD, the architects of the renovations, the board members of the theater, and
the owners all reviewed my first presentation
of 50 concept drawings at a meeting. By the
end of the meeting we narrowed it down to
five drawings, and selected the final concept
drawing at the next meeting. The piece
references many of the built-in details of the
theater and has figurative elements similar
to many of my illuminated works. It weighs
3,950 lbs. and has 350 light bulbs and
21 LED assemblies. In the context of commissioned works I have made, it is unusual
stylistically and mechanically because of the
demands of the space.
Commissioned works have been an
interest since the time I first became a
professional artist. Most of the works made
on commission have been functional art,
such as sconces, chandeliers, cast glass
murals, entrance doors, stair railings, gates,
and other parts of buildings where a work of
art can be installed to replace the expected
standard. I have also made many commissioned works where a client has seen a
drawing of a sculpture in my sketchbook and
asked me to make it real. It is fairly common
to be asked to repeat previous works as a
commission. I have made similar pieces when
asked, but make enough changes to satisfy
myself and the client that their piece is unique.
Commissions have stretched me in many ways
because I have taken on jobs that require
incorporating unfamiliar processes to achieve
the imagined results. These occasions are also
opportunities to learn, increasing my methods
of approach to a problem. The kind of work
I have made on commission is not practical
to create for gallery exhibition. Often there
are site-specific demands that make certain
dimensions or colors perfect for the space,
but I would not have imagined it that way
for a show in a gallery. Creating works
for a specific location usually means I must
be there to imagine the scale and proportions
of the piece, understand the limitations of the
space, and examine the building structure,
electrical wiring, and material qualities of
the construction.
Concluding Thoughts
These descriptions of certain series give
you an idea of how and why I have made
certain works of art. Without images the
explanation remains abstract to you the
reader, but perhaps it would still be abstract
if you had the image in front of you. Who can
predict how someone will feel when confronting
an image? My work is almost all subjective
and narrative, intended to convey a thought.
I have never pursued beauty, although I try to
make things beautifully. Luckily enough people
have been interested in my creations over all
these years that I have made a living from my
art. The connections with colleagues who work
with glass have been extraordinarily helpful.
The creative world in which I work enables me
to imagine capabilities well beyond my own
studio and allows me to realize projects with
various means of expertise. Cooperation of this
kind has contributed to my work immensely,
and the industrial palette I adopted has
allowed me to articulate my thoughts in
complex ways for many years. While strongly
connected to glass through all the processes
and relationships I have described, I have
always considered my work in the larger
context of the history of art and the richly
diverse world of contemporary art when
evaluating the success of any given piece.
I hope this overview of my work with an
emphasis on explaining my reasons and
methods has been interesting for you, my
colleagues, in the Glass Art Society.
Thank you again,
DD
2014
__________________________________
Dan Dailey is the founder of the Glass
Department at MassArt and was one of Dale
Chihuly’s first graduate students at the Rhode
Island School of Design. Dan Dailey is a major
player in the American contemporary glass
scene. His Art Deco-inspired work has been
represented in 46 museum collections around
the world, including the Metropolitan Museum
of Art, New York, the Museum of Fine Arts,
Boston, and the Musée des Arts Decoratifs,
Louvre, Paris. He has received fellowships from
the Fullbright Program, the National Endowment
for the Arts and the Massachusetts Council on
the Arts. Dan Dailey also served on the GAS
Board from 1978 to 1982 (President 1980-82),
and was given the Honorary Lifetime Membership Award in 1998. He now lives and works
in his studio in Kensington, New Hampshire,
and continues to teach in the Glass Department
at MassArt. Visit www.DanDailey.com.
Lif e time Memb er s hip Awa r d
Meet me in Chicago
By Shane Fero
It is fortuitous that I have received the Lifetime
Membership Award in Chicago where I was
born and lived for the first 14 years of my life.
This great city is responsible for forming me
into the artist I am today with its incredible
museums and cultural life. Much of the cities
grandeur originates from the great Columbian
Exhibition of 1893, which began Chicago’s
legacy as a great architectural city. When I was
young, I went on field trips with my classes
from school as well as with friend’s families
to visit the Art Institute of Chicago, the Field
Museum, the Museum of Science & Industry,
the Chicago Historical Society, the Shedd
Aquarium, the Alder Planetarium as well as
operas and plays. These experiences fueled
my interests and made me aware of a larger
world filled with the wonders of other cultures
and art. To have such resources close to me
was a great inspiration, and I truly believe that
Chicago’s influence is why I turned out to be
an artist.
In 1990, two pivotal events changed the
direction of my life: my wife, Sallie, and I
moved to Penland School of Crafts and I joined
the Glass Art Society and attended the Seattle
conference that year. The supportive atmosphere
at both Penland and GAS was so nurturing that
it brought about a renewed confidence and
creativity in me. I was able to meet many artists
at my first GAS conference that year, and I
also participated in the GAS’s Humor exhibit.
Connecting with so many people with suggestions and advice was uplifting and made me
realize the importance of networking at
conferences. I suppose it was the only club (or
perhaps religion) I ever embraced. Often, I have
heard the ridiculous term “glass mafia” used
to refer to our close knit community, but rather
than being a clique, I believe it is really just
common interests that bring us together.
I went to the next GAS conference in Corning
in 1991 and demonstrated at the Toledo
conference in 1993. Later that year, we were
told that GAS wanted to have its 25th anniversary conference in Asheville in 1995 and
have a full school day at Penland, where GAS
started. We met with the “NC Glass” group and
Penland staff to start planning the conference.
My wife Sallie and I headed the committee that
organized and hosted the GAS membership to
attend a day at Penland, and I organized all the
pre- and post- conference workshops. Needless
Shane Fero and GAS Executive Director, Pamela Koss, at the Lifetime Membership Award ceremony.
to say, it was a lot of work that lasted for
almost two years. After that incredible
conference, I continued to contribute to GAS
by acting as an informal ambassador, demonstrating and lecturing at various conferences,
writing occasional articles for the GAS
newsletter, and spreading the word wherever
I was in the world. Late in 2004, I was formally
nominated and accepted to the Board of
Directors. I contributed much of my time and
energy to the Board, and in 2005 I was nominated to be Vice President of the Board as
President Elect, and I embraced the position.
I served two terms as President, from 20062010, and stayed on as Ex-officio President of
the Executive Committee to smooth the transition for my successor Jeremy Lepisto and GAS.
The fact that GAS was started at Penland
is no coincidence. The mission of GAS is
to promote the free exchange of ideas and
techniques as well as the promotion of excellence in the arts, which is basically the general
philosophy of Penland. Learning in a supportive
and creative atmosphere is endemic; sharing
information and perhaps even the de-emphasizing individual egos is important for individual
artists to grow. A bit of humility and openness
goes a long way to nurture a movement, create
a sense of community, and help it thrive. At
GAS, there is an inherent sense of responsibility
s t r e n gt h e n i n g c o mm u n it y , c o l l ab o r ati o n , f o r gi n g n e w b o n d s to share different techniques for all to grow.
This is a principle that is compelling to me and
one that I proselytize in every way, in both my
career and social circles. This is why I devote
my time and energy to GAS and why I continue
to contribute to GAS in any way that I can – to
strengthen the organization and our community.
It remains a viable and active organization and
despite what anyone might say, it is inclusive
in nature.
I thank everyone at GAS for this award,
including the GAS Board (past and present),
Patty Cokus and the rest of the staff at GAS,
but especially Pam Koss for all their help and
advice while I served on the Board.
__________________________________
Shane Fero was a member of the GAS Board
of Directors from 2004-2011, serving as
Vice President (2005-2006) and President
(2006-2010). He has been a flameworker for
over 42 years and maintains a studio next to
Penland School of Crafts in North Carolina.
The birds and totemic spirits in his work
dance to a rhythm created in his imagination.
He has won many awards and taught or
lectured on lampworking at many locations
including Pilchuck Glass School, the University
of Michigan, and Penland School of Crafts.
His work had been exhibited at museums
across the US.
21
International Student
Exhibition Awards
GAS 2014
Student Scholarships
We extend our appreciation to the exhibition jurors: Shane Fero,
Jutta-Annette Page, and Ken Saunders. We are also grateful to
the institutions and companies who generously contributed a
combined value of $3,710 toward the awards.
We thank jurors Matt Durran, Ruth King, and David McFadden
for evaluating all of the entries in the student scholarship
competition. 28 applicants from 16 different schools and
4 countries.
FIRST PLACE
Sarah Vaughn, Lost in a Little World
Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, NY
The Corning Museum of Glass - $1000 cash award; Glass Axis $500 gift certificate for classes; GOTT STEAMER Glass Shaping System $250 gift certificate; Steinert Industries - $125 gift certificate;
Glass Art Society - one year GAS Membership
SECOND PLACE
Ryland Gulbrandsen, Apis Collective
University of Wisconsin, Stevens Point, WI
Uroboros Glass - $500 gift certificate; HIS Glassworks - $250 gift certificate;
GOTT STEAMER Glass Shaping System - $125 gift certificate;
Steinert Industries - $125 gift certificate; Glass Art Society - one year
GAS Membership
THIRD PLACE
Meng Du, Imaginary Friends
Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, NY
His Glassworks - $250 gift certificate; GOTT STEAMER Glass Shaping
System - $125 gift certificate; Steinert Industries - $250 gift certificate;
Glass Art Society - one year GAS Membership
HONORABLE MENTIONS
Adam Cohen, Boat - Southern Illinois University Carbondale
James Downey, The Condition - University of Wisconsin - Stevens Point
John Jordan, Caged Desire - University of Texas at Arlington
Namdoo Kim, Mommy will always be here for you, my baby Rochester Institute of Technology
James Labold, Capitol Restorations 1 & 2 - Ball State University
Lily Rawson, Worry Dog: Bitterness - University of Wisconsin - Stevens Point
Shaheen Salehi, Organic - Sheridan College
Madeline Rile Smith, Arthropods - Tyler School of Art
Gina Zetts, While He Sleeps - Rochester Institute of Technology
22
Becky Winship Flameworking Scholarship - $1000
Generously funded by David Winship of Glasscraft, Inc.
Gabriel Greenlaw
Rochester Institute of Technology in Rochester, NY
General Scholarships - $1000 each
Morgan Chivers
University of Texas at Arlington in Arlington, TX
Qiang Liu
University of Wisconsin-Madison in Madison, WI
Sarah Vaughn
Rochester Institute of Technology in Rochester, NY
Leah Waldo
College for Creative Studies in Detroit, MI
Nao Yamamoto
California State University at San Bernardino in San Bernardino, CA
Each year, the Glass Art Society recognizes the achievements
and potential of those members currently enrolled as full-time
students in undergraduate and graduate programs. Applications
are evaluated by a professional jury, and selected students are
awarded scholarships so they may attend the annual conference
in order to learn, connect, and grow as artists.
Strengthening Community,
Collaboration, Forging New Bonds
Conference attendees at the Goblet Grab.
Collections, Craft, and Care:
Selections from the GAS Keynote Address
By Theaster Gates
Hi glass people! Weirdo, crazy earthlings.
Very nice to be here to share heat with you,
to see the fire burning in us all!
I just left the NCECA (National Council on
Education for the Ceramic Arts) conference.
How many glass people have done clay stuff?
Look around at yourselves. I think once you
have that fire thing, it transfers. It’s very
good to be here and I’m honored to be your
keynote speaker.
I thought a lot about how to talk about
what I do in relationship to this amazing
industry, this group of hand-believers. Instead
of making generic associations between what
I do well and what you do well, I want to leave
our material choices aside for thirty minutes.
I will instead try to frame ways of thinking about
some of the stuff that I have in my life and
use glass as a loose metaphor – in this glass
lantern slide archive that I have – as a way of
understanding how I think about the world.
I found myself with this amazing collection
of glass lantern slides originally from the
University of Chicago’s art history department.
It’s the only collection I have that comes close
to the material that you know, but I think it’s
extremely useful. I am imagining the glass
slides as a metaphor for about six things.
The first is that the slides are a portal to
understanding culture. Looking at a slide of
Brancusi or a slide of an African fraternal
ceremony, I found myself uncovering ways of
understanding culture. The encounter with
the material was not only an encounter that
I could have by myself but then – in the spirit
of art history – I could also share my cultural
findings with other people.
I found myself newly interested in things,
in objects, in periods of art history that I never
would have been interested in, save the seductiveness of looking at it through this material.
The material was calling me to look and as a
result of looking, my understanding of culture
was growing.
I became excited about who wrote in the
margins of this thing. What kinds of classification systems were created? Which art historian
was responsible?
The slide collection also helped me understand that there were ways of organizing
information that were much more complex
than anything I would pursue in my own art
practice. The university called the slide collection “a working slide collection”, which basically
24
meant when a new professor was hired, if they
liked Spanish rooftops, then a whole new body
of work on Spanish rooftops might emerge
in the collection and they’d have to find a
place to put it. So the collection wasn’t a fixed
archive, it was one that was growing and transforming and constantly reorganizing so that
in the future more people could come to the
archive and the archive would make sense.
I really liked that idea: that we would do
things so that people would have an understanding of the things that we did, and those
things we’ve done would become markers.
The way that I think about contemporary art
sometimes is that it pinpoints the most current
moment. The work that we’re looking at today
in glass, the weird work that we see in these
contemporary art museums, the intellectual
work that’s happening when people choose
to write about the work that we do... it all is
saying: “this is an important moment.”
When I’m playing with fire, I don’t really
care about the outcome all the time, as much
as I’m engaging the process of the thing. Just
having access to and playing with this archive
opens up my imagination about history. Sometimes the limitations of our knowing have to do
with the limitations of our seeing.
When I talk about access, I start thinking
about our fire friends in Chicago – Ignite Studios
and Little Black Pearl – folk that are trying
to do interesting work in the city. They’re not
only preoccupied with their making ambitions
and desires, but they’re also willing to share
the creative arts with a world that would not
normally have access to it. That access sharing
is the creation of new histories. It’s an opportunity for young people to imagine themselves
as making history; if we photograph their
stuff and throw it in the glass lantern slide
collection, they would permanently and into
perpetuity become part of history.
Where are the Little Black Pearl young
people? These young African American
students are being turned on to a way of
making completely foreign to the South Side,
completely foreign to the West Side. But that
exposure to the making process means that
they’ll have new ways of imagining what the
world looks like.
There are aspects of the glass slide archive
that were densely complicated. The work was
overseen by ethnographers, archeologists,
and anthropologists, and sometimes they
Theaster Gates, courtesy of Kavi Gupta Gallery
were getting the histories wrong, but even that
became interesting – that we have an archive
of ignorance. It was a mark in time where we
can see evidence that our perception of the
world was one way. If you look at a dictionary
made in the 1750s from Germany, it imagines
California as this little peninsula – just this
little strip. Over time our understanding of what
California is changed as California changed.
And I love the idea that history is still an
open question and something that, if shared,
broadens.
Initially, when I got the slide collection, I
was convinced that there was nothing black in
it and that it was preoccupied with the Western
Canon of Art History because 80-90% of the
things that I saw were just that. But, I realize
that sometimes it requires an artist combing
through things in order to tease out all of the
other complimentary narratives, the counter
narratives. It requires real intentionality and research in order to manifest all of the important
histories that live and have influenced the work
of modernist sculptors, painters, and artists
all around the world. If we were willing to look
more closely at these histories we might find
ourselves not only informed, but inspired.
The slides also started to show me these
new mechanisms of understanding beauty.
Because, when looking at a slide of a figurative
sculpture, I saw myself in this big-nosed, biglipped, nappy headed guy – knowing that this
thing was made a very long time ago –
I thought, “oh, there’s actually a place for my
big nose and big lips in history.”
These slides started to indicate to me
that culture lived in places that I didn’t know.
I think that these glass lantern slides are
relevant because there is this subtext that
I’ve been talking about – both with my clay
friends last night and with you – about how is
it that we come to have the opportunity and
access to these ways of making and ways of
exploring beauty. What are the privileges and
advantages of our lives that would allow us to
run natural gas all day and cast these things?
Because, honey, fire ain’t cheap. Right?
How do we take these opportunities and
make them available to others? And then,
our sense of beauty and the necessary skill
required in order to do the great things, the
team work required in order to move one work
of art from the kiln to an annealing station, the
tremendous amount of focus and discipline
necessary: how do we transfer that information?
How do we share multiple notions of
beauty in the world? Is it ok to share that
Brancusi may have been inspired by African
masks? And that our sense of the Western
Canon and modernism has everything to do
with the idea that the West was encountering
other places? That they were expanding the
notion of western beauty by looking to others
and that’s a good thing too?
The funny part about these glass lantern
slides is that they get dusty, and they require
care. Beauty requires care, care-givers, and
exceptional people who are willing to stay at
a problem longer than normal until something
beautiful breaks through.
I keep looking at my friend in the audience, and I’m thinking, “oh, this guy’s been
collecting glass.” He probably bought one
thing from each of you in this room. If he
hasn’t, he’s going to. And then at some point it
seemed something switched in him from being
a collector and wanting to know glass and
glass artists to wanting to actually experience
making the thing. He has been a great caregiver and that care made him curious enough
to want to be a maker.
Exposure leads to curiosity leads to
desire. What I hope is that if we can make the
exposure piece happen – it’s a low hanging
fruit – and then allow curiosity to turn on
–which is something that has to be born in
a person, you can’t make that part happen –
that curiosity might be enough of a driver to
compel these young people to want to make.
Once you start making, you gain a new
sense of why things are important, because
you understand how long it took to make a
thing and how quickly a thing could explode
if it cools too fast and how horrible it is when
you’ve spent all day attempting to make a
thing and you lose it because you were careless. You start to gain a sense of care that
maybe you didn’t have before.
Theaster Gates’ keynote
lecture discussed a
collection of glass lantern
slides that were reclaimed
from the University of
Chicago and are currently
housed at Dorchester
Projects.
When I think about the violence in Chicago,
the lack of care that we give our young kids
in schools around the city, or the lack of care
that we give the poor; I think that it’s easy not
to care when you don’t have relationship. It’s
easy not to care when you haven’t been close
enough to another person that you would become curious and for that curiosity to seduce
you into wanting to develop a new friendship.
I think the glass slide archive is teaching me
how to be a caregiver and how to imagine an
expanded family that I might care for.
I’m finding that these slides are starting
to inform how I make; these motifs from the
beginning of what we understand as civilization have the capacity to help us understand
ourselves in the world. I’m a new maker as a
result of all of this information from all over
the world in this one archive. If we as glass
artists and clay artists, if we as makers, would
expand the content of the things that inform
how we make, there might be room for new
kinds of making.
The archive is just the material index to
my desire to get to the thing. I want to see the
real thing. The archive is making me hunger to
experience these things.
I’m finding myself more and more
compelled, having the desire to be present
with these things, and to then be present with
people and to be present in those places.
The archive has unlocked my imagination. It’s
created heat inside me. It’s compelled me to
s t r e n gt h e n i n g c o mm u n it y , c o l l ab o r ati o n , f o r gi n g n e w b o n d s make new kinds of work. It’s compelled me to
want to share the archive with others. It feels
like it is such an amazing gem that I shouldn’t
keep it to myself. These gifts that we have are
rare and important gems. In a world that is
increasingly more mechanical, the gift of this
place is that we can take satisfaction in each
other and that some people are still committed
to making. My hope is that we would find ways
to share it. Thank you very much.
__________________________________
Theaster Gates Jr. – Chicago-based artist
Theaster Gates has an expanded practice
that includes space development, object
making, performance, and critical engagement
with many publics. Founder of the non-profit
Rebuild Foundation, Gates is currently
Director of Arts and Public Life at the
University of Chicago.
Gates has exhibited and performed at
the Studio Museum in Harlem, New York;
Whitechapel Gallery, London; Punta della
Dogana, Venice; Museum of Contemporary
Art, Chicago; Santa Barbara Museum of Art;
and Documenta 13, Kassel, Germany;
among others.
Gates has received awards and grants
from Creative Time, the Vera List Center for
Art and Politics, United States Artists,
Creative Capital, the Joyce Foundation,
Graham Foundation, Bemis Center for
Contemporary Arts, and Artadia.
25
wi ll son Lect ure
Glass and Steel: The Sympathy of Opposites
By Albert Paley
My studio is based in Rochester, New York,
and has a staff of fifteen assistants who
are focused on large public sculpture. The
majority of sculptures the studio produces are
site-specific and engage both architecture and
landscape design. These large scale pieces
often result in public plazas or pedestrian
areas, while other works engage directly
with architectural elements such as gates or
chandeliers. These sculptural commissions
are the result of a directive from a client,
an architect, or the result of a competition.
Some of the sculptures have been placed in
various contexts, including educational arenas,
religious sites, civic programs, and corporate
campuses.
During my formal training during the
1960s at the Tyler School of Art at Temple
University in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, I was
Albert Paley, Subductionarger
Photo: Paley Studios Archive
26
exposed to a wide range of studio disciplines
and explored many of them. At that time,
however, glass was not yet established as
part of the curriculum.
Now, working as a professional, the
exploration of various media and technical
processes has been fundamental in my
evolution as an artist. Although I was aware
of the history of glass and the development
of the Studio Glass Movement in the US,
it wasn’t until 1998, when I was invited as
Artist in Residence at Pilchuck, that my
exploration with glass began. I was afforded
direct interaction with various teams of glass
makers who engaged with my design sensibilities and helped me blow, cast, and become
involved in the hot working processes.
Due to the fact that I do not have a glass
facility at my studio I have worked with many
glass artists, in their studios, over the years.
At Pilchuck I worked with Dante Marioni and
in other engagements I have worked with
Bill Carlson, John Miller, John Lewis, and have
had several visiting artists residencies at the
Tacoma Museum of Glass. My most recent
work has been made with Martin Blank. Most
of the glass produced is large scale, which is
Martin’s specialty.
However, prior to my Pilchuck residency, my
understanding of form was developed primarily
with metal and specifically my experience in
forged iron. Forging, the plastic manipulation
of metal, is a response to the cause and effect
of putting a material under pressure. Tapering,
twisting, folding, compression, splitting, and
forge welding was the basis of my experience
and informed my perception and understanding of organic form development.
I have applied this perceptual avenue of
evolutionary form development to working with
glass. Obviously the material characteristics
of metal and glass differ greatly – opacity
versus transparency, monotone versus color,
strength versus fragility – as do the various
cultural references and influences of these
mediums. However, in the evolution of form
development and process they follow a
similar parallel logic. They are born from
fire and manifest as plastic and organic
materials. Heat and external pressures, which
determine the final form, make reference to
the evolutionary process of their construction.
Glass, bronze, or steel have no basic funda-
Albert Paley
mental form derivation as compared to wood,
stone, or fiber. Their material nature, in the
context of form, is transient and amorphous.
As such, my experience with forged metal
was applied to my approach with glass and
I hybridized my methodology, vocabulary,
and my previous understanding of metal to
the medium of glass. Organic, plastic form
that yields and responds to touch, produces
a material literally frozen in motion as it cools.
The form’s fluidity and movement, experienced
by the viewer, is therefore only referential.
The glass is not organic, rather it is rigid, inert,
and inorganic, and the movement experienced
is perceptual.
After my residency, the glass forms that
I developed at Pilchuck and at other studios
were brought back to my studio to become
the basis of a series of sculptures. The glass
became the genesis of the design. Within
this methodology, a twisted or wrapped piece
of glass would engage a wrapped or twisted
piece of steel. The process is more akin to
collage. The final composition would be the
integration of sympathetic, yet dissimilar,
materials and forms unified by composition.
A dialogue between materials and forms is
established, and a sympathetic pairing of
opposites thus results in a dynamic synergy.
However, practical aspects must become part
of this dialogue – structure, balance, stability,
holding or cradling of the glass, and assembling or dismantling for shipping.
This fascination with the dialectic aspect
of inter-determination has been the basis of
my work with glass from 1998 to the present.
From that time, a continuous body of work has
been developed with the integration of glass
and steel. The majority of this work has been
sculptures ranging in size from 2’ to 12’ in
height. There have also been various applications and commissions within the architectural
context such as portal gates, sconces, and
chandeliers.
The major focus in this body of work has
been balancing one form or material so that
it does not dominate the other but has equal
visual presence. These aesthetic relationships
are fundamental.
Within this context, one material explains
and defines the other. Values seen and unseen
are reflected by their opposites: volume seen/
Albert Paley working with Martin Blank at the Museum of Glass in Tacoma, WA. Photo: Chuck Lysen
volume opaque, surface seen/surface evasive,
plastic and fluid/rigid. Although I have introduced color into some of the glass, it has
been minor. The majority of the glass has been
clear or monotone thereby focusing on the
inter-relationships of form. This fundamental
interaction of opposites is basic to of the
formal paradox within the work – realizing
and experiencing unseen realities. White next
to black does not produce grey but rather
the aspect of contrast and thus produces an
energy that either color would not produce
on its own.
In 2017 the Museum of Glass in Tacoma,
Washington will present a solo exhibition of my
work that will document my recent exploration
with glass and steel sculpture.
Albert Paley working on Opus, 2000.
Photo: Paley Studios Archive
s t r e n gt h e n i n g c o mm u n it y , c o l l ab o r ati o n , f o r gi n g n e w b o n d s __________________________________
Albert Paley is Professor and Artist in
Residence holding the Charlotte Fredericks
Mowris Endowed Chair at the Rochester
Institute of Technology. He is the 1995
recipient of the coveted Institute Honors
Award from the American Institute of Architects
and has been heralded for his inventive
approach to form development and metal
technique. He has received numerous
corporate and civic commissions, and his
sculptures are featured in such institutions
as the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New
York, Victoria and Albert Museum in London,
Smithsonian’s National Museum of American
Art in Washington, Cooper-Hewitt National
Design Museum, Philadelphia Museum of
Art, Boston Museum of Fine Arts, and the
Houston Museum of Fine Arts.
27
l abi n o Lect ure
Digital Playground: The Power of CAD and 3D Printing
By Sophie Kahn & Norwood Viviano
Introduction
For the Labino Lecture, we focused on
major themes in our individual creative
practices related to the emergence of 3D
scanning, the manipulation of point cloud data
to create new forms in a digital environment,
and the range of available choices for 3D
printer technologies and output materials.
As practitioners, we are keenly aware of the
opportunities and challenges involved in
3D scanning and printing processes. We also
discussed how to begin working with this
technology on a limited budget and find
like-minded users for an extended support
network. We also explored the multiple ways
in which digital techniques can feed in and
out of a material, studio-based practice.
Norwood Viviano
My studio practice is fairly traditional in
that I’m strongly connected to materials
and their histories. Much of my work is
finished in cast metal, ceramic, and glass,
often downplaying the role of the computer
and ultimately the new technology necessary
for the creation of the work. In my studio,
I regularly use Rhinoceros software to create
working drawings, renderings, and 3D models
for upcoming projects. I also utilize Magics, a
reverse-engineering software, to help prepare
complex files for 3D printing. My studio is part
workshop for mold making, wax working, and
kilncasting and part digital laboratory requiring
consultation with GIS specialists, engineers,
and a 3D printing service bureau.
I was introduced to 3D printing and the
Sophie Kahn, Reclining Figure
potential of digital fabrication in 1997
during an elective course in 3D design and
architecture at the Cranbrook Academy of
Art. At the time, I was an MFA candidate in
sculpture, but engineering, industrial design,
and architecture were leading the emerging
field of 3D printing. My first 3D printed project
was completed in 2000 and was based on
previous forms I had experimented with in the
hotshop. Simulation Goblets (2000) are 3D
printed renditions of 16th century Venetian
goblets that reside in the Corning Museum of
Glass. I created this project using an ultraviolet curing resin-based 3D printing process,
stereolithography, because of its similar
material characteristics to glass. Stereolithography was one of the earliest commercially
available additive 3D printing processes and
remains a viable choice today as it produces
high-resolution parts quickly.
Norwood Viviano, Mining Industries
Detroit City Center (detail)
28
Rhinoceros, or similar CAD software, is
an essential tool in the creation of working
drawings and renderings for 3D fabrication
projects. Cities: Departure and Deviation
(2012) is a recent project designed on the
computer and hand blow in the hotshop.
The completed installation is comprised
of 24 blown glass forms based on threedimensional rotations of statistical data for
major urban centers in the United States.
Each individual piece explores the speciﬁc
history of its namesake city, tracking shifts
in population growth and decline relative
to their dependence on the expansion and
contraction of local industry. The original
computer generated drawings included scale
and dimensional information communicating
the shape, size, and color for each glass
form, and this information was used to work
with the hotshop team at the Museum of
Glass in Tacoma, WA. The final installation
includes vinyl cut drawings that evolved from
the original working drawings. I used Adobe
Illustrator to add text and prep for the vinyl
cutting process. It was simple to move files
between Rhinoceros and Adobe Illustrator
as both software packages use vector lines
as a foundation.
My current project Mining Industries
(2014) explores the potential of 3D printing as
a tool for generating patterns, mold making,
and kilncasting. As I continue to research and
produce pieces in the series, I’m focused on
sites in three major cities – Detroit, Houston,
and Seattle – and the iconic industries
associated with their evolution. To create the
3D models of the sites, I start by converting
LiDar scan data. LiDar scans capture the
Sophie Kahn
topography of landscapes and urban areas
via lasers and airplane flyovers. The scan data
is often archived at the county level or on the
US Geological Survey (USGS) website. One
of the biggest challenges of Mining Industries
has been the extreme complexity of LiDar
point cloud data. Only a few powerful software
packages have the ability to process the data
and manipulate, scale, and prepare the files
for 3D printing.
The finished works for Mining Industries
consist of two or three stacked, kilncast,
clear, polished glass blocks with a cast glass
3D model of the site on top. Describing the
passage of time, and sandwiched between the
layers of glass, are engravings of aerial photographs from the early 1960s and Sanborn fire
maps from the early 20th century – viewable
in the mirrored reflection below. I’m interested
in how the three distinctly different, but related,
mapping technologies describe changes in the
landscape over the 20th century.
Sophie Kahn
I use a 3D laser scanner to create all my
work. This device sweeps a laser line over a
person or object and uses a video camera and
magnetic location to reconstruct the geometry
of its subject. The result is a digital model,
which can be digitally edited and then output
in a range of materials using 3D printing.
I first encountered laser scanning in 2003,
while studying in Australia. The faculty in my
department were using 3D scanning and 3D
printing to aid in the reconstruction of Gaudi’s
famously unfinished Sagrada Familia Cathedral
Norwood Viviano
in Barcelona. 3D scanning felt like a natural
transition from photography for me; a scanner
still uses light and a lens, and it makes images
from life. I began using the scanner after
hours, scanning my own face and body. I was
particularly intrigued by the errors generated
by the scanner. This precisely engineered
device was never designed to capture the body
and when faced with breath and motion, it
generates a 3D ‘motion blur.’ My work’s fragmentary aesthetic is the result of this collision
between human and machine, and it reveals
the consequences of new imaging devices’
potential to misunderstand the body.
I started rendering my body scans in 3D
Studio Max to create large digital prints. This
software, commonly used in the video game
and film industries, allows the artist to virtually
place lights, cameras, and take a virtual
photograph (also called a 3D render). Using
a “shader” the artist can texture a model
to mimic metal, rock, or any other material.
I created a modified glass shader, which
instructed the software to render my body
scans as if they were made of glass. I went on
to use this virtual glass material in a number
of prints and videos. In works like Strange
To Inhabit the Earth No Longer, the scanned
body was stripped of solidity, and becames
immaterial and ghostlike – a contemporary,
digital spirit photograph.
After several years of experimentation
with 2D printing and video work, I turned to
3D printing to realize my body scans as solid
physical objects. In 2003, 3D print technology
s t r e n gt h e n i n g c o mm u n it y , c o l l ab o r ati o n , f o r gi n g n e w b o n d s was almost totally inaccessible to artists and
designers without institutional access or large
budgets, but by the time I entered graduate
school in 2011 the market had changed. DIY
printers like the RepRap became popular,
allowing artists to build their own 3D printers.
Companies like Shapeways were now offering
3D printing in materials like nylon, plaster, and
even ceramic and steel. Shapeways originally
featured a glass material, but it was limited in
size and finish.1
While earning my MFA at the School of the
Art Institute of Chicago I spent most of my time
learning traditional sculpture skills and began
casting my 3D printed sculptures in bronze
using silicone glove-molds and lost wax
casting. Several portrait busts, including
L:Degrade, resulted from this experimentation.
Bronze was particularly appealing to me, as
its solid materiality provided an interesting
counterpoint to the ephemerality of the glitchy
data I was working with. I also made work
in ceramics, using one or two part silicone
glove molds, into which I pressed clay. My
work continues to explore fragmentation and
the failures of technological representation,
and technology allows me to generate forms
that could never be made by hand. While
my most recent series, Prodromes, uses 3D
printed nylon as the final material outcome, an
interested glass artist could just easily recreate
my process, and then go one step further to
make a multi-part plaster mold from the 3D
printed object in order to create a kilncast
glass artwork.
29
Conclusion
The new manufacturing technologies we
use in our studio practices are now readily
accessible. Regionally, many maker spaces
and tech shops are appearing. Like public
access glass studios, they are great access
points for learning, exchanging information,
and building community with like-minded
users without a large time or financial investment. Creating files for 3D printing can be
challenging, but the software is becoming
more accessible and user-friendly. Blender is
open source, and Sketch Up, Tinkercad, and
Netfabb have free versions available. Adobe
Photoshop recently introduced 3D file repair
tools into Photoshop CC, which is integrated
with Shapeways’ website and ordering system.
Documentation and free tutorials for all
these programs are also available online,
giving users easy access to training outside
of academic institutions. If you do decide to
purchase a printer, consider the scale and
amount of work you hope to accomplish
and don’t forget to account for supplies
and maintenance.
1. While glass 3D printing is not currently offered by
Shapeways or ExOne, research into this technology
(also known as vitraglyphics), continues, most notably
at the University of Washington under Professor
Mark Ganter.
__________________________________
Sophie Kahn earned a BA in Fine Art/History
of Art at Goldsmiths College, University of
London, and an MFA at the School of the
Art Institute of Chicago. She has exhibited her
artwork in New York, Los Angeles, London,
Paris, Sydney, Tokyo, Osaka, Seoul, and
elsewhere. Her video work has been screened
in festivals including Transmediale, Zero1
San Jose Biennial, and the Japan Media Arts
Festival. She has taught in the Department
of Digital Arts at Pratt Institute as a Visiting
Associate Professor, and completed an Open
Studio residency at the Museum of Arts and
Design in New York City. Sophie is a 2011
New York Foundation for the Arts Digital and
Electronic Arts Fellow.
Norwood Viviano received a BFA in sculpture
and glass from Alfred University and an MFA
in sculpture from the Cranbrook Academy
of Art. In 2001, he was the recipient of the
Emerging Artist Award from the Glass Art
Society. Recently he was an Artist-in-Residence
at the Museum of Glass in Tacoma, WA, the
Corning Museum of Glass in Corning, NY, and
was awarded an Arts/Industry Residency at
the Kohler Company in Kohler, WI. Viviano’s
recent exhibitions include the Grand Rapids
Art Museum, Art Miami/Context Art Miami,
Heller Gallery in NYC and the Venice Biennale.
His work is represented in the collections of
the Museum of Decorative Arts, Prague, Czech
Republic; John Michael Kohler Arts Center,
Sheboygan, WI; the Museum of Glass, Tacoma,
WA; and Lincoln Motor Company, Dearborn,
MI, as well as numerous private collections.
Resource List:
Out of Hand: Materializing the Post Digital,
Museum of Arts and Design, New York, NY,
October 16, 2013 - June 1, 2014.
Beginner’s guide to 3D printing:
http://learn3dprinting.co/
Shapeways:
http://www.shapeways.com
Maker Space:
http://makerspace.com
Tech Shop:
http://techshop.ws
Mark Ganter’s research:
http://open3dp.me.washington.edu/about-2/
MakerBot:
http://www.makerbot.com/?gclid=CPqeiMPJ8L
0CFbBj7Aoda34AEQ
Stratasys Uprint SE:
http://www.stratasys.com/3d-printers/
idea-series/uprint-se
Rhinoceros software:
http://www.rhino3d.com
Magics software:
http://software.materialise.com/magics
Netfabb software (3D file repair):
http://www.netfabb.com/basic.php
Autodesk 123D Catch (3D scanning app):
http://www.123dapp.com/catch
DAVID 3D laser scanning (3D scanning with
a webcam):
http://www.david-3d.com/
Skanect (3d scanning with a Microsoft Kinect):
http://skanect.occipital.com/
Sophie Kahn, Torso Shards
30
St r attma n Lect u r e
W(h)ither Glass?
By James Yood
I opened the lecture, W(h)ither Glass?,
by thanking the person who introduced me to
the audience. That was Lance Friedman, whom
I have known for 30 years, and who for much,
if not all, of that time has been the premier
sculptor who works in glass in Chicago. While
Chicago has great collectors of glass and fine
dealers who exhibit it, and in recent years has
seen a renaissance of hotshops and other
glass fabrication outlets, for a long time Lance
was the sole face of serious sculptural practice
in glass here. His hot shop was available to
young artists who wanted to learn about a
medium not then or now taught at Chicago’s
art schools or universities. It was a pleasure
to be introduced by him.
As this was the first GAS conference since
2012, the 50th anniversary of the so-called
Studio Glass Movement, it seemed a propitious
moment to reckon how that year went. It was
as bad as I had feared. I saw it as a yearlong
unrelieved orgy of self-congratulation and
back slapping, an uncritical and un-nuanced
celebratory exercise, determined to look back
and not to look forward, in every way a missed
opportunity. It was like a 50th wedding
anniversary, seeming not a moment to analyze
the situation or to consider its challenges and
failures, but just to raise – here in scores of
repetitive and lackluster exhibitions – a glass
of champagne and collectively cry “mazel tov!”
Dominick Labino wasn’t this busy when he
was alive. I don’t know how many soporific
museum surveys of Studio Glass I saw in
2012, almost in every case culled from two
or three local collectors, the same artists, the
same narrative, the same repertoire, until I
couldn’t in my memory distinguish one from
another. They became like airports, something
to be passed through and forgotten.
And the celebration was in the wrong
place. I won’t go through this pet peeve of
mine, but I still oppose this article of faith that
just because Toledo hosted two workshops in
1962 it is the founding site of the Studio Glass
Movement. I continue to argue for Madison,
where Littleton really set in motion the most
significant characteristics that mark Studio
Glass. But everyone shrugs when I make this
argument, and like contented zombies intone
“Toledo, Toledo, Toledo, must go to Toledo.”
It’s the “Wholly Toledo” syndrome, and I hope
everyone had a good time there. I won’t be
James Yood
around in 2062, but suggest a lovely Spring
GAS conference in Madison, Wisconsin. Or not.
I turned then to the post-anniversary
environment, where, perhaps as a tonic to
the necrophilic tone of 2012, there has been
an explosion of interest in proposing postStudio Glass futures for sculpture in glass.
We shouldn’t see this as a cause of regret,
50 years is a very long run in art history for
an art movement or dominant style, it’s only
natural that new issues, new artists, etc.,
will move things in new directions. Impressionism had a run of about 20 years as a
central vehicle of the avant-garde art of its
time, cubism about ten, abstract expressionism
also about ten, Pop Art even less. The eye is a
hungry orifice and demands new stimulation,
and while acknowledging the ongoing efforts
of artists who were once innovative and fresh,
the world – and that includes the art world –
must move on, like it or not. The question is,
move on to what?
I then attempted two things. The first was
to go off course a bit, do a veer to analyze
the reception of glass as a sculptural medium
today. Aficionados of glass do a lot of that,
there’s plenty of navel-gazing and sturm und
drang about glass and its role in contemporary
art, and that’s understandable: if we love
glass it’s natural to contemplate how others
see it and wonder why many don’t love it as
s t r e n gt h e n i n g c o mm u n it y , c o l l ab o r ati o n , f o r gi n g n e w b o n d s much as we do. I compared glass with three
other medium-specific pursuits: printmaking,
photography, and ceramics, and showed a
group of visuals comparing the state, status,
and stature of each medium say, from 1965 to
today. Printmaking, I proposed, had suffered
the worst, its recruiting of artists famous for
their work in another medium (I discussed
Rauschenberg and Rosenquist specifically,
but spoke a bit about Johns, Stella, Warhol,
etc.) has led to its complete colonization and
near disappearance as an independent art
medium. Printmaking, like glass, photography
and ceramics, had its own collectors, galleries,
artists, publications, place in the museum
(actually, glass and ceramics don’t have that!),
and master printmakers were fine artists in
their own right. But today large print workshops have become places famous artists go
to work with master printers to produce print
variations of ideas they have first created
elsewhere. I turned to photography, which has
had the most dramatic success in the last 50
years and is today a mainstream platform in
contemporary art. Its transition from darkroom
to digital, from Ansel Adams-ish small black
and white images largely rooted in processing
skills to the large, museum scale color digital
prints of a Thomas Struth or Cindy Sherman
has led photography to be fully integrated
into the most progressive conversations about
31
contemporary art. It has surrendered its
independence and separateness, but achieved
full assimilation into high art. Ceramics, not
surprisingly, has experienced the closest
journey to glass. Still dogged by its historical
legacy of functionality (in many museums
contemporary ceramics, like contemporary
glass, is still considered the domain of the
decorative arts curator) it’s pretty much in
the same place as it was a few decades ago,
largely a separate discipline (while GAS was
meeting in Chicago, NCECA was meeting in
Milwaukee) with only the occasional spillover
in the high art world (Robert Arneson, Viola
Frey, Ken Price), it, like glass, has drifted
in a wonderful cocoon of self selected
separateness.
I then tried to characterize my shift in
thinking in recent years. I had for some 20
years been a happy scribe for the Studio Glass
Movement, writing about its practitioners,
content in its insularity, enjoying the cycle of
SOFAs and GAS conferences, crisscrossing
the country talking about glass, writing for
magazines and museums all around the world,
etc. It was a self-contained universe filled with
artists and art I admired and I felt lucky to
have the opportunities to share my thoughts
about it. But beginning in 2011 I began to
sense some cracks in my insularity; I was in
Venice for the Biennale and was assigned
by GLASS magazine to review Glasstress
and interview its organizer, Adriano Berengo.
Glasstress that year contained the work of
more than 60 artists and design teams; only
Judith Schaechter had any connection to the
Studio Glass Movement. Berengo spoke to me
of his belief that the Studio Glass Movement
was a mistake, that it concentrated too much
on technique and process and had become
a closed and inbred camp, and that making
glass accessible to a wide range of artists
and designers (Glasstress 2011 included
sculptures in glass by Fred Wilson, Zaha
Hadid, Tony Oursler, Pharrell Williams, Yutaka
Sone, Kiki Smith, etc.) was a more fruitful
and interesting direction to go, that glass
had to widen its impact outside of its narrow
specialists. I had never heard Studio Glass
so interestingly dismissed by someone in a
32
position to know, and I brooded over Berengo’s
remarks and then found them somewhat
substantiated by the listless presentations of
Studio Glass I saw in the U.S. in 2012.
I was back in Venice in 2013, and that was
the kicker – Glasstress exhibited 63 artists
who sculpted in glass, none of whom had any
connection to the Studio Glass Movement.
And a concurrent exhibition in Venice, Fragile?,
held at the Fondazione Cini and curated by
Mario Cordognato, surveyed modern sculpture
in glass by exhibiting the work of 37 modern
and contemporary artists (including Joseph
Beuys, Gerhard Richter, Rachel Whiteread,
Joseph Kosuth, Mona Hatoum, Keith Sonnier,
Ai Weiwei, Damien Hirst, etc.) none of whom
had any connection to Studio Glass. So – two
exhibitions held in Venice in 2013 containing
over 100 artists presented a history of modern
glass that altogether excluded Studio Glass.
Not marginalized it, not gave it token presence,
not threw in a Chihuly, Tagliapietra, or even a
Littleton to mark the 1962 chapter, just simply
completely dispensed with it without even a
backward glance. The exhibitions were terrific,
exciting, fresh, diverse, and provocative, and
following the dozens of US exhibitions of 2012
that solely showed Studio Glass artists, with
no acknowledgement of Robert Rauschenberg,
Marcel Duchamp, Thomas Schutte, Monica
Bonvicini, Jaume Plensa, etc., all reflected
to me a medium at war with itself, with two
myopic systems of approach that seemed
determined to ignore one another.
W(h)ither glass, then? Well, either we
stand for glass or we don’t. If we stand for
glass it seems necessary that we stand for
all glass, architectural glass, Google Glass,
glass as public sculpture, Edward Snowden’s
glasses, conceptual glass, etc. Or glass may
remain a niche endeavor, a subchapter in art,
if we continue to present the argument that
it’s either all Studio Glass all the time, or no
Studio Glass any of the time. Both camps
present histories that slide obliviously past
each other, eventually, to my mind, to the
detriment and marginalization of both. 50 years
of exclusionary practice is enough, and we
should broaden the tent (in both directions!)
or be prepared to see it vacated.
__________________________________
James Yood teaches contemporary art history
and criticism at the School of the Art Institute
of Chicago, where he is Director of the New
Arts Journalism program and Visiting Professor
in the Department of Art History, Theory, and
Criticism. Active as an art critic and essayist
on contemporary art, he has been the Chicago
correspondent to Artforum and writes regularly
for GLASS Quarterly, art ltd., and Aperture.
Educated at the University of Wisconsin and at
the University of Chicago, he has lectured on
issues in modern art at museums all over the
US. He served as a writer and consultant to
Encyclopedia Britannica in modern and contemporary art and is a regular correspondent
to WBEZ National Public Radio in Chicago.
Among his many books are studies of William
Morris, Jon Kuhn, Stephen Rolfe Powell, and
Baldwin and Guggisberg.
Emergi n g Ar tis t L e ctu r e
Sweet Spot
By Steven Ciezki
When I was seven years old I found satisfaction
and enjoyment in representational drawing.
Years later my creative attention shifted to
different materials. I was first exposed to the
possibilities of glass through a high school
chemistry assignment which entailed bending
a solid clear glass rod to a ninety degree angle
with a Bunsen burner. I was enthralled by the
immediacy that the glass displayed; within a
matter of seconds it started to move and melt
as I obtained control over the manipulation
of its final shape. I had no idea this simple
project would anticipate my future profession.
My first extensive experience with glass
blowing was in 2008 in the hotshop at Illinois
State University with my instructor John Miller,
Matthew Cummings (a graduate student at
that time), J W May, and Devin Baron. From
that point on I have incorporated photography,
drawing, and glass blowing research into a
cohesive body of work.
In 2011 scholarship opportunities allowed
my technical abilities to develop and grow
during workshops with Boyd Sugiki and Lisa
Zerkowitz at both Pilchuck Glass School and
the Appalachian Center for Crafts. That same
summer I interned for a month with Pablo Soto
at his personal glass studio in North Carolina.
In the spring of 2012 I graduated with my
BFA in glass from Illinois State University
and was fortunate enough to take a workshop
at Haystack Mountain School of Crafts with
Dante Marioni the following summer. These
influential idols of mine have exponentially
increased my understanding of glass in a
discernible way.
After college, I worked at a public access
glass facility, Nuesole Glass, in Cincinnati,
Ohio. I taught basic classes to the general
public, was an assistant shop technician,
and maintained the equipment. Working
at Nuesole also allowed me to experiment
with the production of personal artwork.
After a year and a half in Cincinnati a fellow
glass artist, Jason Chakravarty, and I moved
to Phoenix, Arizona with plans to build a
personal glass studio.
The inspiration for my body of work,
Sweet Spot, began in a college photography
class. I was not only interested in the photographs as the end product, but the whole
process itself; watching, waiting, and exploring
my terrain for the perfect moment or point of
view was just as exciting as the final result.
This whole experience of being immersed in
my environment without a planned destina-
Steven Ciezki, Multistable Figure
s t r e n gt h e n i n g c o mm u n it y , c o l l ab o r ati o n , f o r gi n g n e w b o n d s Steven Ciezki
tion was a turning point in thinking about my
future glass work. When travel, or any style
of living, develops into a routine, we become
acclimated to our surroundings. The world
around us becomes stale and disappears
as we live internally in our minds rather than
externally through sight and observation. Our
perception of the world undergoes a shift
causing common visual information to lose its
sense of interest. Specific to each individual,
all experienced phenomena get compared and
contrasted with past experiences, which are
then placed on a personal imaginary reference
scale. High on that scale are experiences of
excitement, love, beauty, wonder, and awe,
but as time spent around a certain phenomenon increases, the positioning on the scale
decreases resulting in feelings of banality.
This is a natural tendency that is programmed
into our brain.
I create three-dimensional geometric glass
objects that produce perceptual illusions
through spatial “drawings”. Each piece, when
viewed from a particular monocular vantage
point, coalesces into the semblance of
two-dimensional representation. This work
is my attempt to break free from mundane
experiences and impose meaning onto all of
the noise and randomness in the world. I am
recreating points in life when everything lines
up. I am asking: “if it will get there, can it get
there, and most importantly will it ever be
33
that perfect again?” These are the moments
I cherish. In the world, when objects line up at
one monocular viewpoint, both near and far,
I want to think that someone or something put
it there for me to find. Take a different route to
work or go for a walk to realize how new visual
stimulation seeks dominance over regular
experience. We follow such a tight schedule
that it denies us the ability to appreciate the
little gems in our surroundings.
These “sweet spots” are just a taste of
what is happening around us every day. At
these viewpoints, this noisy and chaotic world
of visual stimulation is silenced by necessary
and desired order. Humans yearn for things
that line up to make sense of our world.
We look for associations and patterns that
simplify random happenings in the present
Steven Ciezki, Perceptual Box
Steven Ciezki, Switch II
34
and throughout history. I want to share my
rediscovery of what makes something fresh as
I recapture moments of pure bliss through the
numerous properties of glass.
Glass is the most versatile material I have
found for artistic expression. I am attracted
to the creative process of working with glass
in the hotshop. The physicality, intensity,
and teamwork it takes to finish a piece are
incredible. Not only do I love problem solving
when creating my own work, but on the
opposite end, I love the pressure of thinking
on my feet when assisting other fellow glass
artists because it allows me to become a
mind reader.
Glass is most hypnotizing when it is worked
at a high temperature. There is an describable
harmonious connection between the artist and
the fluid material. My fascination with glass
comes from viewing the easy manipulation of
the fluid material that is so commonly seen as
an everyday solid. This is what got me hooked.
It is about having control over something that
wants to fall to the floor. Glass wants us to fail.
I do not blow glass because it is easy. I do it
because it is a challenge. There is vast potential and opportunity within the field as well as
inspirationally fun and selfless people. Most of
all, I blow glass for my artistic expression and
because it makes me happy.
__________________________________
Steven Ciezki was born in Calumet City,
Illinois. As a kid, he was fascinated with the
art of drawing. During his college career at
Illinois State University, he was able to
experience glass blowing, which changed his
vision of the two-dimensional world. Both the
delicacy of cup making and vessel-orientated
work have had a major influence on him.
His work has been constantly developing,
keeping the viewer’s perceptual experience
in mind.
The Intangible in Practice
By Karen Donnellan
Karen Donnellan
My work deals with the invisible, intangible
essence of things. As a master and teacher
of the energy healing modalities Reiki1 and
Seichem2, I am, and have always been, highly
sensitive to my surroundings and the energy
fields of others. Much of my work is about
illustrating these invisible auras that can have
such a profound affect on us.
I am originally from Wicklow, Ireland,
a small coastal town just south of Dublin.
I received a bachelors of Design in Glass
from the National College of Art and Design,
Dublin. In 2009 I moved to Rochester, New
York, to embark on a Masters of Fine Art at
the Rochester Institute of Technology. It was
here that I expanded my praxis to incorporate
wood, paper, iron, bronze, sound, film, and
performance.
I grew up with energy healing and have
long been familiar with the physiology of
chakras and auras. I began my Reiki training
in 2008 and have since extended my practice
to include Seichem and sound healing. The
philosophies and practices surrounding these
systems continue to have a dominant influence
on my artistic practice.
I think of glass as a transcendental
material. It is a super cooled liquid and has
long been an enigma. Visually, it lends itself to
notions of ephemerality in the multitudinous
range of textures and transparency it can take
on. Its ability to hold, reflect, and refract light
also speaks of the magic of universal energy,
or chi. In contrast to glass, I perceive a
material like iron to have a very physical, red,
earth energy. This perception of materials, a
kind of synaesthesia, is reflected in Working
through… The five elements in this piece
reflect key types of energy in the human aura.
These range from the physical (iron) to the
spiritual (glass) with wax, paper, and wood
comprising the more emotional and mental
energies in between. The forms themselves
are an interpretation of the movement of
these energies within the body.
The circle, a universal symbol and a
symbol of the universe, is a recurring motif in
my work. It is widely recognized to represent
such concepts as the divine feminine, balance,
and infinity. My fascination with the shape
was affirmed while attending a Zen meditation
workshop in 2010. The only symbolism in Zen
Buddhism is the circle, as seen in the enso-.
An enso- is an ink drawing on rice paper; a
meditative practice where a circle is painted
in a state of “pure mind”. The quality of the
painting is not dependent on the hand skills,
but rather on the quality of mind of the painter
as it is formed. It is enso-’s balance between
the physical and metaphysical that resonates
with me. This ethos continues to permeate
my work where concept is valued equally to
intention, intuition, and presence of mind.
The writings of the artist Agnes Martin have
been influential in this regard. One quote,
which I often refer back to, illustrates this
intuitive approach; “My paintings are not
about what is seen, they are about what is
known forever in the mind”.3
I tend to work on many smaller complimentary projects at once. By working in a
variety of materials and techniques simultaneously, the knowledge gleaned from each
influences the others. I get lost in processes,
not in a strictly technical way, but rather in the
way that a physical repetitive process can be
calming. Methodical, monotonous techniques
like wood turning and glass blowing can be
experienced as meditative or even transcendental. This presence of mind instilled in each
piece is intended to be tangible to the viewer,
at some level. This intuitive approach to making
is alluded to in my short film O. The film draws
together a continuous loop of meditative
processes used in the studio including mould
mixing, frit making, and paper making. The
score is an original composition of the same
Sacred Solfeggio4 tones, which brings a calmness to the images.
Collaboration has become a key aspect
of my practice in recent years because of its
power to change perspective. It allows me to
work in directions which I might not have the
confidence to explore alone. J/K is an ongoing
collaborative project with the Seattle-based
artist and designer John Hogan. By using
glass and light as materials to harness energy
Karen Donnellan, Working through…
and mood, this collaborative work offers an
esoteric experience to the viewer. Taking cues
from the 1960s Light & Space movement,
and contemporary artists like Olafur Eliasson,
the aim is to create an experience, rather
than conveying a specific message. Through a
playful exploration of phenomenology associated with glass, light, and color the viewer is
immersed in an atmosphere, aimed at imbuing
a sense of presence and connection. We draw
on our design backgrounds, our love of color,
form, and a minimalist aesthetic. Most recently
we completed a short residency at the Toledo
Museum of Art Glass Pavillion in Ohio where
we developed a new rear projection series.
This particular collaboration is proving very
influential to my personal practice as I return
to working with color.
A recent project, which continues to influence my work, is Experimental Resonance, a
multi disciplinary installation and performance
collaboration with the choreographer Merav
Israel and sound engineer Dr. Dave Murray
Rust. This project took place during a year-long
residency at the Edinburgh College of Art in
2013. The interactive installation exposed
the hidden acoustic qualities of glass with a
minimal use of material. The piece explored
Karen Donnellan, Vortex
the sonic qualities of glass though an interactive landscape of hot worked glass, projected
sound, light, and movement.
As I write, I am developing new work for
a solo exhibition titled Cercle at the National
Craft Gallery of Ireland, which runs from
August 9 to October 15, 2014 as part of
Kilkenny Arts Festival. This new series is a
meditation on the act of drawing a circle.
I have made a soundscape in collaboration
with the composer Alma Kelliher, which will be
central to the exhibition where the sounds of
drawing a circle are interwoven with Solfeggio
tones. The ambient sound will be complemented
by clear blown glass amplifiers, some that will
emanate sound and others that will merely
evoke it. Gold leaf details, handmade paper
and graphite drawings will ground and integrate the various sculptures into the space.
Following the opening of Cercle, I shall be
moving back to upstate New York to assume
the position of Assistant Professor of Sculpture
and Glass at the New York State College of
Ceramics at Alfred University.
Notes:
Karen Donnellan and John Hogan (J/K), Slide 1
36
1. Reiki is a system of channelling universal life
force energy, or chi, through the hands and into a
person’s body in order to ground, heal, and balance
them on a physical, emotional, and spiritual level.
It was rediscovered in 1922 by Dr. Mikao Usui.
2. Seichem (pronounced Say-keem) is based on the
same system as Reiki with the added combination
of all four elemental healing rays (Earth, Fire, Water
and Air/Spirit). Seichem also expands and raises
our level of consciousness. It was rediscovered in
1980 by Patrick Zeigler.
3. Writings, 1991
4. Sacred Solfeggio tones are an ancient system of
sound healing. This scale, originally used in ancient
in Gregorian Chants, is unusual in that there are
nine tones as opposed to eight in a standard octave.
The tones directly relate to a sacred geometry and
have been shown to have profound healing effects,
including DNA repair. (Horowitz and Puleo, Healing
Codes for the Biological Apocalypse, 1999)
__________________________________
Karen Donnellan earned a Bachelor of Design
from the National College of Art & Design
(NCAD), Dublin and attained an MFA from the
Rochester Institute of Technology, New York.
She is a past Board Student Representative
of the Glass Art Society and regularly
contributes to their publication GASnews.
Recent exhibitions and awards include;
Royal Hibernian Academy, Dublin, Burchfield
Penney Art Center in Buffalo, NY made
possible by the Kenzie Endowment Award,
2011 and the Pilchuck Glass School
Emerging Artist Residency in 2013.
Exploring the Space Between Self and Other
By Charlotte Potter
My work explores the space between myself
and the other, both tangibly and metaphysically. In my current studio practice I struggle
with duality, so it is only fitting that glass, a
prominent material within my work, has binary
qualities cloaked with competing characteristics: liquid and solid, elastic and brittle,
captivating and humbling.
I desire to articulate and name the liminal
“space between”. This elaborate strategy
of probing undifferentiated space involves
constantly struggling with the boundaries of
separation and defining the “space between.”
It seems that there is an undiscovered intimate
tie between us in this world that we share.
In my work I attempt to make these connections visible through apparatus, interventions,
installations, and collaborations.
Art is subjective; therefore I ground my
practice by approaching the process much like
a scientific experiment. I begin making work by
asking a question and then embark on setting
the variables and constants. There is room in
this approach to court the poetic while taking
aesthetic and historical cues from science,
medicine, and technology. I am constantly
looking for historical references, relevance, and
reasoning for using this material. My works often
begin with a historical model, paying homage to
traditional glass techniques, or industries that
have used glass, which I refashion to create
commentary on our present moment in time.
The human desire and dilemma to bridge the
unfathomable distance between each other is
at the heart of my investigation.
Prologue: Glass,
the Participatory Theater
Prior to appreciating glass objects I fell
deeply in love with molten glass; moving and
volatile, unpredictable and alive. The process
has always held allure, while the end product
has often felt cold and lifeless compared with
the almost magical activity of making. It has
taken research and time to gain a deeper understanding and appreciation of glass objects.
The collaborative nature of glass blowing has
informed my approach to interacting with both
life and work. Strong verbal communication,
diligence, and taking deliberate risk are all
learned behaviors and skills of my glassblowing
practice. I appreciate the tactile character of
this team sport. I am dedicated to educating
and exploring the enthralling communal nature
of working with glass.
I was trained as a dancer. The very physical
process of blowing glass is often likened to a
dance, usually a duet between the gaffer and
the assistant, where each person must predict
the ballet to come and understand the rules
of working with a partner. It becomes a performance, sometimes just for the two of you, but
depending on the studio (public or private),
you can also expect a crowd. People gather
Charlotte Potter, Bottled Emotion
s t r e n gt h e n i n g c o mm u n it y , c o l l ab o r ati o n , f o r gi n g n e w b o n d s Charlotte Potter
for different reasons; to be awed by the
spectacle, learn techniques, or be entertained.
This puts the maker in the strange position of
performer on center stage. Exploring the notion
of the hot shop as an avant garde theater or
stage has become a large part of my professional practice.
Chapter One: The Quest for Fusion
Where is the break between myself and
the rest of the world? My investigation begins
with defining “self” through rigorous examination and comparison. Glass and Medicine
have a deep history; the industries have been
linked for over 2000 years. Some of the first
glass vessels made were for ointments and
salves. For over a century, specimens have
been collected on glass slides to be studied
and catalogued. The fates of people’s lives are
cast within these small transparent pieces of
glass. In a recent work, Armor, I mapped my
entire body and printed each inch of my skin
onto glass microscope slides. A fragile glass
scale-like armor was constructed out of these
pieces, bringing into question how it feels to
be in another person’s skin, how thick our skin
is, and finally referencing our skin as the largest
organ in our body - our armor or barrier to the
world. This work is both strong and fragile,
it simultaneously shrouds and exposes my
body, and is deeply personal and collective in
nature. Ultimately this work is about examining
“self,” the first step in the search for fusion.
Chimera is the scientific term for an
instance when two fertilized eggs, that are in
their own separate sacs, fuse within the first
four days of conception. In a chimera, each
twin claims different boundaries within the
body, creating a single body with two different
genetic identities. This ongoing series of stereoscopic cards, Chimera (2010), is comprised
of the faces of two people aligned next to
37
each other. Each person is photographed in
a specific way so that when viewed through a
stereoscope the two faces create a threedimensional singular image of a third, hybrid
person. What emerges between two individuals
engaged in an intense relationship, whether
physical or emotional, is a third identity: the
relationship itself.
Charlotte Potter,
Chimera
Chapter Two: The Consequence of
Connection and Other Emotional Idioms
As cells collide and divide molecular
structures continue to become one and tear
apart. What is the consequence of the tear?
Inevitably, the fusion of cells, or of people, is
not eternal; humans will fight and be at war.
What aftermath follows this rupture? This body
of work explores the symptoms associated
with the quest for fusion, relationships, and
connection.
Cupping refers to an ancient Chinese
practice in which a glass cup is placed upon
the skin. Pressure is built up within the cup
by applying a flame or a pump to create a
vacuum. The skin and superficial muscle layer
is then drawn into and held inside the cup.
This is a form of massage to draw out impurities
and is still practiced today.
Readapting this design for the cupping
device, Pressurized Connection (2010) utilizes
custom double-sided glass cupping pieces to
both physically and visually bind two people.
Although the cups are a physical binder, it
begins to beg the question: what is the consequence of forced connection? The cups leave
marks on the skin as a residue of the act and
the marks reference impressions relationship
leave on the individual.
Mortality is another factor when considering
connection. Loss and death are inevitable
parts of life. Cellular Reliquary (2013) is a
celebration and memorial honoring the relationship of dog and owner. Utilizing Venetian
cane and murrini techniques, I went through
a series of experiments using only glass and
the cremated remains of my pet dog to explore
cellular structures. These glass pieces reconstruct the body mass of the diseased, 84 lbs.
21 oz. This examination of materials and form
allowed me to continue to actively engage with
my lost companion, even in the afterlife.
Chapter Three: Therapeutic Remedies
to Intervene and Mediate
How is one cured of the ailments that
accompany separation? Is there a way to
make people see eye to eye and truly understand the way another person feels? I have
proposed possible solutions such as creating a
therapeutic clinic to bottle emotions or finding
38
prosthetic devices for connection. In these
projects, there is a genuine desire to connect
and to heal.
Bottled Emotion (2009) is a participatory
event, which has been performed in communities around the world including Rhode Island,
Virginia, New York, Vermont, and Bergen,
Norway. This pseudo therapy session invites
the participant to take a deep breath and
exhaust their emotion into an oxygen mask
that is attached to the end of a blowpipe by
a rubber hose. Their concentrated emotion
inflates the molten glass and these feelings
give shape to the mass.
Much of my work is about finding the hidden
structure for how people connect to one
another and Facebook seems to have become
the modern day prosthesis for connection.
Historically, a “profile portrait” was a person
in silhouette. Often these portraits would be a
hand engraved as a glass cameo pendant. The
modern “profile” has become the Facebook
profile picture. Employing images collected
from each of my 864 Facebook friends profile
pictures, I created a web of handmade glass
cameos, mimicking the structure of the
World Wide Web. The taxonomy of this network
is organized on the wall using a personal
cartography; marking the physical place I first
met each person geographically as a map of
the United States. Charlotte’s Web (2013)
is a collision of historical, handmade, and
modern technologies, charting the way that
humans continually struggle to connect to
one another.
Conclusion:
The Human Paradox
Can one be cured of the desire to erode the
lines between self and other? It seems that in
spite of the desire to connect to one another,
we are, in the end, utterly alone. This is what
makes life so wonderful; the persistence to
find connection in spite of the inevitable
challenges and failures. I am trying to capture
the false logic and delightful parody in this
human enterprise.
__________________________________
Charlotte Potter is a conceptual artist,
designer, arts administrator, and educator
originally from Vermont. She received a BFA
from Alfred University and an MFA from the
Rhode Island School of Design. Trained as
a traditional glassblower, Potter has been a
pioneer in developing glass as a performance
and conceptual medium. She has co-founded
numerous performance glass troupes and her
sculptures, installations, and performances
have been exhibited at galleries and museums
worldwide. Charlotte Potter is the Programming Director at the Chrysler Museum of Art
Glass Studio and teaches glass and new
media courses at Old Dominion University and
Virginia Wesleyan College in Norfolk, Virginia.
T e chn olo gy A dva n ci n g G l as s Le ct u r e
Light in the Public Realm
By James Carpenter
James Carpenter
James Carpenter Design Associates (JCDA)
approaches the built environment with a
primary interest in the phenomena of light,
and we foreground the experiential qualities
of light in our design methodology. Since its
founding in 1978, JCDA has sought to bring
together art, social context, engineering,
construction, innovation, and a particular
fascination with light and glass. The studio is
often called upon as an interpreter of a site’s
inherent natural character and has remained
focused on the transformative potential of
integrating phenomenal light into the public
realm. The studio has expertise in the technical
details of glass in addition to other materials
and techniques required to integrate light into
urban spaces. The studio has always been
fundamentally concerned with performance
and other issues that have couched JCDA’s
practice within the realm of ‘architecture’.
As a design practice, JCDA’s interest in
architecture is focused on the possibilities
of creating human environments seamlessly
informed by light phenomena – light being
the information that mediates our contextual
experience. Light, like art, does not require
hidden techniques to create wonder in the
viewer. We strongly believe our approach
to design resides outside the conventional
conception of architecture and requires the
unique merging of art, science, architecture,
engineering, fabrication, and construction
techniques.
JCDA’s focus on integrating light with urban
environments is founded on an awareness of
light’s many phenomenological expressions.
Light phenomena such as opposition effects in
shadows, atmospheric refraction, and mirages
exist in urban spaces, but are often obscured
by other distracting visual “noise” that
competes for our attention. JCDA applies a
cross-disciplinary approach to architecture that
embraces the unique characteristics of light
and emphasizes them as an integral part of
the urban experience, by using light’s intuitive
language to provide program, wayfinding, and
other urban and architectural planning needs.
Furthermore, there are specific light phenomena
that are not found in urban environments,
or are fully suppressed by them, that we aim
to reintegrate into the public realm. These
phenomena elevate the entire experience
of urban life, reclaiming humans’ powerful
connection to nature and our inherent response
to its power.
JCDA is interested in a kind of observation
that is essentially experiential. This observation
does not demand the rational interpretation
required by cultural artifacts, but instead
connects us to what lies beyond the limits of
our knowledge. We seek to design spaces that
evoke the transcendent connection between
the individual and the greater world beyond
the built environment. This phenomenological
kind of experience provides the passersby with
a sense discovery and a new perspective on
their environment.
The benefits and drawbacks of dense
urban living are well understood, and the
compressing of private and public space calls
for a design approach that simultaneously
activates both realms with light. Daylight is
essentially a public resource that should be
treated responsibly and we believe that,
although some daylight is obscured by the
built environment, there is a corresponding
opportunity to manifest unexpected light
phenomena within these spatially dense
contexts. Furthermore, the urban contexts
has the potential to become a space whose
beauty is self evident. The less equitable
distributions of light in cities can be mitigated
with responsive materiality. Conversely, an
overabundance of light can be mediated by
succinct design knowledge. In either case,
an insightful treatment of the urban envelope
can be used to reconnect urban dwellers to
a broader sense of nature through creating
experiential environments with light.
James Carpenter Design Associates, Dichroic Light Field Photo: © JCDA
The installation dissolves the expanse of the brick, reflects light and color, and acts as a screen framing light in its
urban context.
Just as light organizes nature, glass
mediates and manipulates light to transpose
the presence of nature into the public realm.
It is interesting to note the relationship
between the development of science and
the exploration of glass’ optical properties.
The development of the lens and its use in the
earliest telescopes in the late 16th century
speaks to the deep connection between glass
and the modern world’s expanded view of
our planet. The telescope lens enabled a new
perspective on the universe and its place
within time and space. My own interest in this
history stems from the dual use of glass as an
aesthetic tool for manipulating materials and
light, and a scientific tool expanding the exploration of the universe through the observation
of light. In each case glass is closely related
to the observation of nature as it is revealed
through light. In essence, glass has the capacity
to reveal information deeply connected to
nature, which is carried by light.
Though most people think of glass as a
material, it is better characterized as a state
in which a material finds itself. Glass is a
state that has been historically described as
James Carpenter Design Associates, Ice Falls
Photo: © Andreas Keller.
The cast glass prisms and blocks control the flow of
water, both redirecting light and revealing its presence.
40
James Carpenter Design Associates, Suspended Glass Tower Photo: © Brian Gulick
Suspended within the towering glass atrium of the public space, this sculpture uses the structural and phenomenal
properties of glass to create a luminous beacon within the building and across Hong Kong Bay.
an amorphous solid, a super-cooled liquid,
or a non-crystalline solid. Today, perhaps its
characteristics are better situated within the
field of jamming or granular physics. Although
physicists studying granular materials or
biologists studying polymer science are far
better qualified than I to describe what ‘glass’
is, it is interesting to note that glass science is
still in the process of debating the very nature
of glass. Beyond the problems defining glass
scientifically, I am interested in the simultaneity
that glass possesses. It is a dense material
with the ability to appear weightless and its
mass is literally transparent. The full range of
optical properties found in glass – transparency,
reflection, refraction, and diffraction – are
evidence that glass has the potential to capture
and represent many levels of light information
simultaneously, and this information can be
deployed across the depth of the glass.
Glass straddles materiality and immateriality
due to its ability to expand and reveal itself
within an interstitial space, a phenomenon
I describe as volumetric light. Glass and its
characteristics provide a conceptual design
approach for JCDA, allowing us to weave an
emotive experience of place into the urban
fabric that connects us to nature, the wider
world, and beyond.
__________________________________
James Carpenter studied architecture and
sculpture at the Rhode Island School of
Design, graduating in 1972. While actively
exhibiting light-based art works he consulted
at Corning Glass Works from 1972 through
1982, developing new architectural glass
materials. Since establishing James Carpenter
Design Associates in 1978, Mr. Carpenter
has been integrating a synthesis of light into
building structures. Mr. Carpenter is the
recipient of numerous awards including
the American Academy of Arts and Letters
Architecture Award, the American Institute
of Architects Honor Award and a MacArthur
Foundation Fellowship.
l e ct u r e s
James Carpenter’s lecture, Light in the Public Realm.
Lect ure
Successful Collaborations:
Going Beyond the Limits of Your Own Studio Space
By Robert DuGrenier
Robert DuGrenier
“Often I am commissioned to produce
custom items that are too large for my hot
shop to accommodate. Over the past thirty
years, I have developed relationships with
other glassblowers and glass manufacturers
around the world so that I can collaborate
with them on producing what my clients need.
I will be discussing a wide variety of projects
ranging from perfume bottle design and production to large-scale sculptural installations
and chandeliers, and I will talk about some
of the pitfalls to avoid and tips for successful
outcomes. I will be featuring work that I have
done over the last thirty years in locations
worldwide.” – Robert Dugrenier, 2014
Much of the work I do is commissioned by
architects and interior designers. They come
to me with a vision of what they are trying to
achieve and together we work out the details
so that their vision can be produced within
their timeframe and within their budget.
My solar-powered glass studio in southern
Vermont is fairly small – the tank holds about
190 pounds of glass and my biggest annealer
measures about 36” square. I am able to
produce a lot of the work in my own studio,
but often I need to reach out to others for
some help.
A good example of this was a commissioned project for a custom chandelier and
cast glass bar front for the Hotel Principe di
Savoie in Milan, Italy. This project required me
to collaborate with numerous producers to
complete it.
42
For the chandelier, I worked with a local
metal shop in New York State to design the
interior structure that supports all of the
glass pieces. The blown glass “tassels” that
I needed to make were too large for my
annealer, so I collaborated with Martha’s
Vineyard Glass Works, which had a bigger
facility.
For the cast bar front, I created scaleddown prototypes at my studio to get approval
on the colorations. I then sent the approved
samples to a factory in China to make the
larger sized castings, because they were too
big for my annealer to handle. Sending them
a “real” sample was key in assuring that they
knew exactly what we needed and was instrumental in the quality control process.
During the installation of the chandelier
and the bar front, we received many comments
about how beautiful they both were, but how
audacious it was that an American glassblower
was creating glass pieces for an Italian
company. To mollify the clients I contacted
Davide Fuin, a master glassblower in Murano,
Italy, and presented him with a sketch of a
goblet I wanted him to make for the bar in the
hotel. Essentially, the goblet shape mimicked
that of the chandelier and would be appropriate for serving extra-special champagne
cocktails. He was able to create these objects
beautifully, and the hotel management was
happy to purchase them.
For the Divan Hotel in Istanbul, Turkey, the
studio was commissioned to create multiple
items for their completely renovated space,
including two different styles of chandeliers
(3 of each), a cast glass sushi bar, bronze
gates with cast glass panels, pendant lamps,
bedside table lamps, and a variety of different
wall sconces. We created many of these items
in Vermont, but some of them we had made in
glass factories in China with a large production
capacity, so that we could complete the work
within a fairly short time frame.
The three massive chandeliers in the lobby
of the hotel were made at a factory in China
that I’ve worked in several times. The factory
was able to melt a ruby glass, which was
imperative, and create an intricate metal armature to support each 300-piece chandelier.
Once we arrived in Istanbul to install all
of the pieces, we discovered that some of
the cast glass panels for the sushi bar were
damaged when the Turkish contractors opened
the crates. We did not have time to have the
Chinese factory recast them and ship them to
us, so I contacted The Glass Furnace, a local
glassblowing school and studio outside of
Istanbul, to see if they could help. Hakan
Kanca, the general manager, was incredibly
helpful and came to the hotel to assess the
damage. He submitted a quote and once it
was accepted by the hotel, he arranged to
transport the cast pieces back to his facility
for repair. The Glass Furnace is similar to
UrbanGlass in Brooklyn (I’ve been on the
board of directors there for many years) in that,
in addition to being a teaching facility, they
also offer short-term residencies to artists.
For another project I received the commission to produce the large celestial globe that
hangs in the Seattle, Washington home of Bill
Gates. At the time I did not have my own glass
studio, so I contracted Deborah Czereszko to
Robert DuGrenier, Lucci Bottle
blow the 36” diameter globe at UrbanGlass.
My studio applied the night-sky artwork complete with gold enameled stars. Then the piece
went to Les Metallieres Champenois in France
to be enrobed in a bronze metal frame, which
we designed.
In addition to working with architects and
interior designers, I have had a long career in
developing fragrance bottles, caps, and packaging for the cosmetics industry. Abercrombie
& Fitch, Donna Karan, Nautica, and Faberge
are just a few of the many fragrance clients the
studio has created designs for. We develop the
design ideas and photocomps, then create a
hand-blown prototype for the client to review.
By creating a hand-blown prototype, we can
give the client a tangible “finished” piece, and
from that finished model we create technical
drawings to submit to factories that massproduce bottles.
For Abercrombie & Fitch, we produced
a prototype of a 1000-ml bottle that is
essentially a scaled-up version of their 50and 100-ml bottle. Creating a handmade
glass prototype allowed us to pinpoint some
revisions that needed to be made from the
original client-supplied technical drawing so
that the factory would be able to successfully
produce this limited-edition bottle.
A part of my art that has recently become
a “business” is the glass shells that I make
for hermit crabs to live in. Originally part of an
installation titled Mobile Homes in 1995, the
demand for these glass shells has exceeded
my interest (and time) in making them in my
studio, so I taught a master glassblower in
China how to make them, and his factory now
supplies us with the glass shells we need to
fulfill our customers’ orders.
When working with other studios, artists,
and craftspeople, it is imperative that communication is clear and that your expectations are understood before the collaboration
begins. In addition to knowing the budget and
timeframe of a project, your collaborators also
need to know what the quality expectations
are. Especially when working remotely with
factories in other parts of the country or world,
it is extremely helpful to supply them with a
quality control mechanism – of model of what
constitutes good versus unacceptable work.
I’ve found it is also helpful to let them know
“why” certain quality attributes are key so that
they understand how their role fits into the
whole context of the project.
The last topic I introduced during my talk
was the idea of the Glass Art Society working
on organizing a world-wide internship for the
glass field driven by a website where studios
publicize their needs and interns can search
Robert DuGrenier, Hand Blown Chandeliers
for opportunities. Some of you know about
the WWOOF organization for organic farmers
(World Wide Opportunities on Organic Farms)
where interns come and stay from one week
to one year learning alongside an experienced
farmer about organic farming. I have had
numerous interns stay at my farm who have
had glass experience and they helped in the
glass shop as well as on the farm in exchange
for room and board. The WWOOF organization’s website showcases farmers’ profiles
and available opportunities as well as the
profiles of interested potential interns
(most of whom have graduated from college
and could not find a job but did not want to
return home, and who have an interest in
where and how their food is made). A datadriven website with input from glass studios
and interested glass “apprentices” would
serve to link willing interns with glass studios
that may need extra help with special projects
on a short-term basis.
s t r e n gt h e n i n g c o mm u n it y , c o l l ab o r ati o n , f o r gi n g n e w b o n d s __________________________________
Robert DuGrenier Associates, Inc. was
started in 1980 by Robert DuGrenier as a
design studio specializing in glass sculptural
pieces and 3D design. Over the years, based
on his strengths of creativity and knowledge of
materials, Robert has worked in collaboration
with architects and designers to create custom
glass sculptural installations and chandeliers.
These are installed in hotels, stores, and private
residences around the world. The company
has also become well-known for its design and
development of innovative packaging for the
cosmetics industry and for creating custom
awards for a variety of high-profile clients
including MTV Networks, CMT Music Television,
and ESPN. Much of Robert’s work is informed
by nature and its effects over time on a variety
of elements. He worked on the redesign of the
flame for the Statue of Liberty and was commissioned to create and produce the 1/12th
scale model from which the French artisans
sculpted the new flame.
43
lect ure
Face Saving
By Matt Durran
Matt Durran
“Saving Face” is a project that exemplifies a
real-world application of craft processes by
solving a problem in modern medicine using
a specialized knowledge of glass.
In 2010, I began a collaborative project
with Adelola Oseni, a researcher from the
University College of London’s (UCL) Division
of Surgery who worked with the Interventional
Science Department at the Royal Free Hospital
(RFH), in London. She sought me out to advise
these institutions on a technical issue relating
Matt Durran, Glass Nose Molds
44
to the use of glass for growing tissue for a
medical procedure.
The UCL and RFH were working together,
and using nanotechnology, to develop a
highly specialised synthetic material that could
be used to grow living tissue for reconstructive
surgery. They intended to grow tissue on this
polymer material and implant it into the human body where it would effectively integrate
with the patient’s native tissues. However,
reconstructing parts of the human body
that have been damaged by cancer, trauma,
disease, or genetic abnormalities is a
complex process, and their initial experiments
produced adverse reactions between the
polymer and the various mould materials.
These experiments led them to realise that
glass would be an ideal mould material
because it was inert, translucent (enabling
the observation of cell growth), and could be
sterilised at high temperatures.
Unfortunately, their attempts to use
traditional scientific glass techniques failed,
and they were considering diverting the
research money into another field. When I
heard about the project I had a eureka
moment. I realised that through the slumping process I could make personalised glass
moulds of different body parts, with the
exact morphology and size required for each
individual patient. For my first attempt, I
created a mould of the scaffolding of my
nose. My eureka moment also perpetuated
the hope that if this process was to become
a standard medical procedure, opportunities
would arise for local glass crafts-people to
create mouldings.
We started our experiment with moulds
taken from my own nose. To my surprise, a
month after supplying the glass moulds, I saw
twenty of my own synthetic noses being grown
in a controlled environment within the hospital
lab. It was oddly curious! Since this initial
experiment we have developed moulds for
the trachea and voice box, as well as running
more tests on noses and ears.
To put a financial perspective on the
ramifications of this technology, every year
patients who have lost their noses through
various cancers receive treatments costing
a collective 60 million pounds and those
who have undergone surgery on their trachea
and voice boxes receive treatments costing
up to 120 million pounds. Although this
shows the vast potential in financial terms,
the true reward is helping a patient to regain
their quality of life. This project is ongoing,
and is now moving towards creating synthetic
alternatives to almost every part of the
human body.
A researcher from the Royal Free Hospital Hampstead,
London showing a synthetic ear and nose cast from the
glass moulding system devised by Matt Durran.
Matt Durran, Bio Reactor
Matt Durran, Nose in Petri
For me, this project exemplifies the
importance of the artist’s experimenting in
the studio and struggling with materials in
the pursuit of their personal work. These
“expressive” pursuits have the potential for
real-world applications, and you can see the
ramifications here, in the fields of medicine
and science.
__________________________________
Project Partners:
Matt Durran has played an important role in
developing the technology behind this tissue
growth operation, specifically in creating
moulds for the tissue that could withstand
the fierce heat of a bio-reactor. His surgical
research colleagues at the Royal Free
Hospital report that without Durran’s work,
the project would have stalled. As a result
of their collaboration, Durran’s moulds are
being used to develop tissue engineered
noses and other organs. The world’s first
tissue engineered organ transplant took
place in July 2011, saving the life of a throat
cancer patient.
Adelola Oseni, Research Fellow (UCL)
Alexander Seifalian, Professor of nanotechnology
and regenerative medicine, UCL Division of
Surgery & Interventional Science at the Royal
Free Hospital, London
Peter Butler, Professor, Senior Consultant,
Plastic Surgeon Head of Plastic Surgery &
Royal Free Hospital
Currently, this project has been viewed at
the exhibition “Power for Making” at the
Victoria and Albert Museum, and it has been
presented at the House of Commons, in the
“Crafting Capital” paper.
Lect ure
Glass Mold Innovation Through Collaborative Research
By Gayle Matthias with Tavs Jorgensen
Tavs Jorgensen & Gayle Matthias, Sinew
Collaborations between practitioners with
different skills and knowledge bases can
be a driver for innovation. Over the last four
years Tavs Jorgensen and I have been working
together and combining our knowledge to
develop a new approach to creating molds for
glass casting. We have established a process
that creates molds directly from 3D computer
files without the need for a physical pattern –
a process that offers significant advantages
compared to conventional glass mold-making
techniques.
Both Tavs and I work at Falmouth University,
but in different departments and roles. Tavs is
a Research Fellow at the Academy of Innovation and Research (AIR) and has a background
as a designer in the ceramic industry. Over
the last ten years, he has focused his practice
on academic research into new digital design
and fabrication tools. I am a Senior Lecturer in
Contemporary Crafts and an established glass
artist who, over many years, has gained extensive experience in a wide variety of kilnformed
glass techniques. In particular, I have explored
the use of ceramic shell as a mold material
for glass casting. Ceramic shell molding is
an established process in the metal foundry
sector, but unless it is modified the process is
unsuitable for glass casting. I served as a case
study for Aron McCartney, who’s PhD research
adapted the ceramic shell molding process
to make it functional for the glass sector.
46
My expertise with this process informed many
of our early experiments in our subsequent
research project at Falmouth.
Tavs and I started our research with a series
of open-ended explorations of how various
3D printing technologies can be applied within
a glass practice. Initially, we produced ABS
plastic models on the university’s Stratasys
Rapid Prototyping (RP) machine. To explore
other 3D printing technologies, we contacted
the UK supplier of ZCorp powder based 3D
printers, who agreed to donate a number of
models printed in a starch material for our
early stage research. We ran a series of tests
on these materials using an adapted ceramic
shell recipe and treating the models as if they
were standard wax patterns in a ‘lost-wax/
burn-out’ process. Both the plastic and the
starch models provided mediocre results.
The plastic patterns expanded slightly during
the pattern burn-out stage, which resulted in
cracked molds. The starch models had poor
surface quality and were also very fragile,
making them tricky to mold.
The ZCorp retailer also supplied us with a
printed sample made in a new printing powder
(ZP 150 powder) in the form of a small vase.
We decided to test this material by casting
glass into it. The resulting cast, though small,
indicated good refractory possibilities and the
ability for the mold to dissolve easily in water.
This changed the nature of our investigation:
we were no longer using RP models as mold
patterns, but rather directly printing the mold
itself, a process is commonly known as “Rapid
Tooling” (RT). The ZCorp retailer continued to
support our research by supplying us with a
series of complex printed molds. When firing
these more advanced molds, we found their
thin walls to be structurally deficient, readily
collapsing during the kilncasting process.
It became apparent that the printed molds
would need to be reinforced in some way.
Consequently, we started to explore ways of
strengthening the molds with layers of ceramic
shell. However, in our initial tests we found that
the internal 3D printed mold layer would shrink
considerably when fired, while the ceramic
shell would not shrink at all. This resulted in
a gap between the two surfaces and cracks
in the internal mold layer after glass was
cast into it. Through extensive research we
managed to reduce the shrinkage of the inner
printed part of the mold by adding infiltrants into
its formula. We also established an alternative
exterior refractory coating that provided a
much better fit with the printed layer.
The method we have established can
produce molds that are thin (6-12 mm in
total wall thickness), with very good structural
integrity. Apart from eliminating the need for
a physical mold pattern, the process has
a number of other potential advantages
compared with conventional mold-making
Tavs Jorgensen & Gayle Matthias, Random Sphere
approaches. In particular, lower firing temperatures and shorter firing cycles can be used,
allowing for a wider range of glass types.
Molds assembled from several parts have also
successfully been tested, which makes the
process extremely versatile.
One of the driving forces of our research
was my desire to employ this new moldmaking process in my own creative practice
and to more widely explore the potential of
new technology tools. My recent Anatomical
Deconstruction series, low-tech assemblages
combining sheet and cast glass with broken
sanitary ware, were made in pursuit of ‘willful
amateurism,’ an idea that provided an artistic
starting point. I thought that it was important
to maintain this ethos during the digital
collaboration. My intention was to respond to
two broken ceramic fragments, reuniting them
in a new configuration using cast glass as a
conduit. Conventional digital modeling was
found to be counterproductive and unintuitive;
as a consequence, a 3D scanning machine
was used to digitally capture the ceramic
edges. By repositioning the ceramic fragments
on a grid base, the ceramic edges could be
orientated using a digitizing arm. The data
could then be aligned with the scanned data
enabling the production of a digital model.
‘Sinew’, the resulting glass casting, assembled
with ceramic ready-made, possessed a degree
of accuracy in the fit and fluidity its form that
is very difficult to achieve through conventional
mold-making and illustrates how other artists
could use the RT glass molds.
In addition to employing the RT moldmaking process in a creative practices, we
are keen to explore other applications for this
technology, and we continue to actively seek
partners to collaborate with. We recognize
that the pooling of our collective knowledge
has been one of the key ingredients in successfully developing our research, and we believe
that establishing wider spheres of collaboration has the potential to develop the project
much further.
Such an opportunity arose when contact
was made with glass artist Matt Durran. He
had been working with the Royal Free Hospital
in London on a project that investigates the
use of glass molds to grow human replacement
tissue for reconstructive surgery. Through
Matt Durran we have explored how our mold
process might be employed for this novel,
application. The relationship with the Royal
Free Hospital is still developing, but so far
we have successfully made ear, trachea, and
face glass molds. The molds for these parts
have been created either through 3D
modeling from diagrammatical drawings
Tavs Jorgensen
or directly from 3D digital scan data.
While seeking external collaborations,
we also continue to extend our collaborative
engagement within our own institution. In particular we are very keen to involve the students
in the research that we are undertaking. In
February of 2014 we undertook an initiative to
launch a pilot project with level three undergraduate students from design based courses
at Falmouth University. We created a call for
students to propose designs that could be
interpreted through RT molding, with the aim of
testing the boundaries of the molding process
through the application of scale, texture, form,
and intricacy of patterns. Although not concluded, the project has provided a very useful
‘testing ground’ for the mold process, driven by
diverse, individual student designs.
When we started this research, our target
audience was creative studio glass practitioners,
however the development and dissemination
of the research has presented us with the
potential use it in wider applications. As 3D
scanned objects and CAD files can be directly
translated into RT molds without the need for
physical models, easy transition from virtual
files to RT molds could result in CAD files
being shared and modified as part of the
design process. As a consequence, glass
casting could become more collaborative and
new creative opportunities and materials could
be explored. The RT process can also eliminate
many of the difficulties with the lost wax
method of casting. Furthermore, the molds are
made from safer materials and the casts are
very easy to divest.
Combining and exchanging knowledge and
skills can create exciting new hybrids, and we
intend to further our collaborative relationships
to explore and utilize this mold-making process
to its full potential.
s t r e n gt h e n i n g c o mm u n it y , c o l l ab o r ati o n , f o r gi n g n e w b o n d s Gayle Matthias
Tavs Jorgensen was initially trained as a craft
potter in his native Denmark before moving
to the UK to establish a successful career as
a designer in the ceramic industry. While he
still maintains an active creative practice, he
is now mainly focused on academic research
into the use of new digital design and fabrication tools. He has used glass in a number of
recent research projects and is currently in the
process of exploring new approaches in glass
forming with a novel molding concept known
as ‘Reconfigurable Pin Tooling’.
Tavs is a regular visiting lecturer at the
Ceramic and Glass Department at the Royal
College of Art, London and also frequently
guest lectures at a number of other leading
international academic institutions.
Gayle Matthias is a practicing glass artist who
has exhibited internationally and has work in
the permanent collections of the V & A, Musee
de Vianne, and Ebeltoft Museum of Glass
amongst others. Gayle previously worked in
the Gallery Education Department at the Crafts
Council, UK. Over the years she has worked
with Colin Reid, Diana Hobson, and Peter
Layton at the London Glassblowing workshop.
Gayle has been an artist in residence in
France and the US and examples of her work
can be found in many glass publications.
Gayle has also been visiting lecturer at
Wolverhampton University, Central St Martins,
and North East Wales Institute.
Gayle and Tavs are both members of The
Autonomatic Research Group at Falmouth
University, UK. This research group is widely
recognized for pioneering research into the
use of emerging digital design and fabrication
technologies in craft and design practice.
www.autonomatic.org.uk
47
d e m o n s t r ati o n s
Dante Marioni and Preston Singletary during their hot demo at Ignite Glass Studios.
48
Lif e time Memb er s hip Awa r d
Flameworking the Figure Fantastic
By Shane Fero
Currently, my glass work is associated with
colorful blown birds, my most well-known
body of work. Perhaps because of this, and
a desire to try something new, I decided to
revisit my figurative body of work for my GAS
demo. I wanted this to be more than a typical
flameworking demonstration. My idea was to
prepare a painted shadow box and interact
with it by making black figures that would
ignite free associations in the imagination of
the audience and refer to automatic sculpture
method of the surrealists. As the demo
unfolded, the resulting flameworked figures
would be placed in pre-drilled slots in the
shadow box. This framework allowed me
freedom in my demonstration and fulfilled my
passion for mixed-media.
I used a prepared, hardwood shadow box,
divided into a diptych, which I painted with
acrylics. I examined my painting before my
arrival in Chicago and determined that my
black surrealistic figures would be made out
Effetre glass from Murano, which is a suitable
Shane Fero’s flameworking demo at the Chicago conference.
material because of its ease of flow and the
visual contrast the black would create against
the brightly colored painting. Once the drill
holes were positioned inside the shadow box,
I was ready to rock and roll.
I had never been to Ignite in Chicago,
and I was impressed by the hospitality and
the professionalism demonstrated by their
studio staff. During my demo there were many
colleagues and friends in the risers, and it
made for a lively interchange. Robert (aka
Robin) A. Mickelsen was in the audience and
the demonstration became more than just a
demonstration of technique, it turned into a
dialogue between Robin, me, and others in
the audience. We had a good discussion
about mixed media and flameworking, which
I have been a proponent of for decades.
Flameworking has a long tradition of mixed
media. Best known examples are the Venetian
and Austrian framed vignettes and dioramas
from the 16th century. The small pieces that
I demonstrated are a natural fit for constructing
such a diorama. Inevitably, someone brought
up the issue the seeming disparity between
my birds and the surrealistic figures I was
demonstrating. I explained that I had always
made birds in some form or another since
I was a teenager and actually, many of my
sculptural figures had elements of bird parts
in them.
Later, my friend Lucio Bubacco stated that
he found my presentation interesting and
was appreciative that I turned the demo
into a discussion about mixed media and
the history of flameworking, instead of just a
straight-forward demonstration. It is always
nice to watch a Maestro work, but discussing
the content of what you are doing and its
historical or artistic references can make a
demonstration fantastic.
__________________________________
Shane Fero was a member of the GAS Board
of Directors from 2004-2011, serving as
Vice President (2005-2006) and President
(2006-2010). He has been a flameworker for
over 42 years and maintains a studio next to
Penland School of Crafts in North Carolina.
The birds and totemic spirits in his work
dance to a rhythm created in his imagination.
He has won many awards and taught or
lectured on lampworking at many locations
including Pilchuck Glass School, the University
of Michigan and Penland School of Crafts.
His work had been exhibited at museums
across the US.
Shane Fero, Spruce Pine Photo: Mary Vogel
hot gl a ss demo
The Fast and the Curious
By Joe Cariati
__________________________________
Joe Cariati began blowing glass over 20
years ago at San Francisco State University.
Since then he has traveled extensively and
taught at numerous institutions such as the
Rhode Island School of Design, Pilchuck
Glass School, Penland School of Crafts, and
most recently the California State University
in Fullerton. Designer and maker, Cariati’s
work has received international attention
and is currently available at fine retail
establishments worldwide. Cariati owns and
operates 141 Penn Studios and Joe Cariati
Glass in Los Angeles; a studio and team
committed to creating blown glass with an
effortless, “less is more” approach.
Joe Cariati
Joe Cariati, Petite Decanters
For the past 22 years of my career one desire
has remained constant: the desire to produce
more. I consider my glassblowing practice a
mixture of yoga, skateboarding, and playing
chess. My process requires being fully present
and engaged, pushing forward without pause,
and mentally planning the execution of each
move. When I work, the action of making takes
precedent over other mental noise, creating a
seamless dialogue between my mind and body.
My activity at the bench is both deliberate
and intuitive: process and progress is tracked,
muscle memory is engaged, and decisions
are made. Knowing the hyperconscious way I
choose to work, it was no surprise that anxiety
set in upon my arrival to Chicago. “The Fast
and the Curious” demonstration was a
problematic game where the goal was to
create six vessels in 90 minutes, along with
four talented assistants: Tyler Barry, Corey
Pemberton, Clare Grimes, and Cedric Mitchell.
My current line of glassware consists of
modernist bottles, decanters, and tabletop
objects that are produced freehand, in rapid
succession, using no blow molds. These
formal pieces have no frills – by design, not by
accident – I simply must blow glass this way
or my head might explode. I make thousands
of pieces per year and thrive on practicing a
repeatable process with predictable results.
I cannot stand spending time on surface
50
decoration, and cane and murrini techniques
are my absolute nemesis. An efficient, seamless, and precise process drives my spirit in
the studio, enabling me to practice with focus,
confidence, and curiosity. I subscribe to the
yoga sadhana “practice and all will come,” as
a mantra. “Practice” is a lifelong commitment
to work in a way that is disciplined, yet
simultaneously reflective and aware.
I consider my finished works to be residue
of all the action that transpired in a given day.
In the relationship between form and practice
I seek truth. All the decisions made at the
bench are present the next morning in the
subsequent vessels, and the glass does not
lie; if the process went well, it shows in the
final form. The glass, now frozen in its finished
state, is scrutinized and either held back or
released into the world. In my studio in Los
Angeles, my work does not survive unless it is
of premium quality; dimensions, forms, and
glass clarity are all critical factors. Seconds
(pieces that do not meet my standard of quality)
get smashed with a hammer – seriously.
What continues to pique my interest is
the essence of the practice of glassblowing:
gather, blow, shape, transfer, and finish. This
essence is what my demonstration was meant
to address. For me, the challenge of producing
while “in practice” is never ending.
hot gl a ss demo
Pressed Into Service: Pressing Studio Glass Art in the US, UK, and China
By Mark Hursty
This paper describes the creative motivations
and implications behind my recent research
developing experimental, sculptural uses for
pressed glass. This work has been informed
by my experience in China’s nascent glass
art institutions as a Fulbright Fellow from
2011-2012, participating in the February
2014 Glass Virus pedagogy forum 1 at Gerrit
Rietveld Academie, Netherlands, and my
research at the National Glass Centre,
University of Sunderland, UK.
Pressed glass is often perceived as artistically
impractical, fit only for the mass production
of commercial items like ashtrays, streetlamp
covers, and the creatively dubious kitschpatterned souvenirs. Other artistic deterrents
include the heat, tedium, mechanization,
manpower, and energy required to produce
industrialized pressed glass. Neutral, or even
negative, perceptions towards pressing have
served to discourage artists from using it in the
studio. This misapprehension is unproductive
and should be re-examined. The same challenges presented by pressing were overcome
by the early Studio Glass artists who were
pioneering glassblowing and kiln casting. This
begs the question: why couldn’t more studio
artists use pressed glass?
Pressing glass offers unique creative
advantages that blowing and casting cannot,
and where the processes overlap, pressing is
quicker and cheaper. My research serves as
a model for how pressed glass methods can
augment and expand the glass artist’s toolbox.
Encouraging Sculptural Motivations
for Pressing
In 1990, while I was a RISD undergrad,
I glimpsed pressed glass’s aesthetic and
sculptural potential during my first entry-level
glass job on a factory press crew.2 I was
initially intrigued by the performative spectacle
of pressing glass: transforming glass instantly
from molten to solid and then releasing a
sculpted, glowing glass form from the press
mold. Importantly, while waiting for these
pressings to cool, I realized that they could still
be manipulated while retaining their exterior
detail. Since then, I have spent years using
pressed glass at my own studio 3 in commercially thrifty, utilitarian ways, and exploiting
the sculptural potential of the technique.
Mark Hursty,
Shanghai Veil
Similar to clay, the benefits of pressed glass’s
malleable state are significant and can be
expressed in glassblowing terms by relating the
pressings to the roll-up process. By flattening
glass between molds containing two-sided
detail (like a waffle-iron) it is possible to roll
them up into cylinders while maintaining
high-relief interior and exterior detail. This
effect cannot be created with conventional
mold-blowing. Because the glass begins in a
molten state, the process does not require
preheating the way a roll-up typically does.
An extension of this technique, described
below, combines kilnforming with pressing to
create unique forms and color applications that
are extremely efficient and could potentially
reduce the amount of glass purchased.
Throughout history pressed glass has
attracted artists’ attention. Artists like Marcel
Duchamp and Joseph Cornell used mass-produced pressed glass objects as ready-mades
s t r e n gt h e n i n g c o mm u n it y , c o l l ab o r ati o n , f o r gi n g n e w b o n d s and multiples. Others have used pressed
glass techniques to form simple and decorative sun-catchers and complex architectural
structures.4 My research expands the possibly
for artistic approaches to pressed glass.
Additionally, my goal is to make the intensive
press mold fabrication easier, more intuitive,
and ultimately less expensive. To accomplish
this I have placed a unique emphasis on
practical studio techniques and materials
that are compatible with digital design and
fabrication methods.
For my hot glass demonstration at the
2014 GAS conference, I pressed the following:
components for “galaxies,” glass components
inspired by Islamic architecture, alternative
mold materials, graphite molds based on
Chinese glass motifs, and press-molds made
entirely of sheet glass. In the following
paragraphs, I summarize the technical and
theoretical components of each technique.
51
Mark Hursty, Jali Pressing Montage
Mark Hursty, Jali Screen
Pressing Galaxies: Miniaturization,
Hole Forming and Practical Mold
Fabrication
I showed a process for prototyping pressed
disks components for miniature “galaxy”
chandeliers, a smaller commissioned version
of Josiah McElheny’s “Island Universe”
sculpture.5 The commission’s relevant qualities
were primarily problem solving: a reduction in
scale of the original sculpture, creating uniform
glass disks, creating a molten hole forming
rather than drilling, and the practical use of
sheet metal techniques, rather than impractical
industrial milled, cast metal molds.
Veil Molds: Perforated Screens
and Stalactite Vaulting
The following process was used to create
an architectural screen comprised on glass
multiples covered in stalactite-vaulting forms,
or muqarnas, inspired by Islamic architecture.6
This two-part mold process has many advantages and implies further applications,
including digital machining for creative
pressing. The digitally fabricated components
for the mold were waterjet cut then hand
fabricated. Using CAD/CAM for the design
and manufacture of press-molds resonates
with an emerging methodology called Rapid
52
Tooling (RT). Rapid Tooling is an alternative
use of rapid prototyping (RP) and refers to the
rapid production of tools and infrastructure for
use in manufacturing, rather than simply for
prototyping finished objects. Using RT for
making pressed glass molds has the potential
to be an entry-level process that integrates
digital techniques with hot glass work.
A strictly practical feature of this mold is
that both the base and the plunger are detailed
for pressing pattern into both sides. The base
plate detail is retractable and can be adjusted
to create variable shapes.7 Once the glass is
pressed in the first mold and has achieved a
surface pattern, it can slide onto the secondary
shaping mold while it is still hot.
Paper Molds as Alternative
Mold Materials
Next I demonstrated a press mold made
from paper and glue, a low-tech alternative
to metal. In this case, the paper mold helps
form the glass before its final shaping by a
secondary mold. The relatively brief contact
of molten glass and press-mold shows that
some flammable materials can be used for
press-molding.
Celestial Disks and Subterranean Armour:
Chinese Funerary use of Pressed Glass
for Bi and Burial Garments
Celestial Disks are classical Chinese
objects that I reinterpreted using pressed
glass. They are particularly significant because
they appear to have developed independently
of the Western glass traditions that relied on
lead/barium-based glass. During the Han
Dynasty (206 BCE -220 ACE) glass was sometimes
used as a substitute for jade. It was also
believed to have anti-decaying properties, and
was often used in a spiritual context for burial
ceremonies. Glass would often take the form
of celestial disks known as Bi (Chinese-币)
and would make-up burial garments that
looked like suits of armour comprised of
rectangular pressed glass components.8
First, for my reinterpretation of the Bi,
I expediently created circular molds for each
garment segment by cutting graphite with
electrical hand tools. I then demonstrated a
technique for making through-holes by creating
a form for the molten glass to surround,
which was placed into the mold and removed,
leaving a hole.
Second, the garment segment I created
had a hole in each corner of the rectangle
(for threading to other segments), and used
mechanical pencil leads formers, inserted into
tiny fittings in the mold. Rather than removing
them, they were left in the pressed and
annealing glass for removal later. The simplicity
of pressed glass hole forming belies its
importance as a technique that can reduce
or eliminate coldworking.
Compatible Sheet Glass Molds
This mold-pressed glass system demonstrated a practical and creative application
of rapid tooling for pressing. In this process,
the traditional components of mold, plunger
and finished object are literally fused together.
The single-use mold and plunger are made of
water-jet cut segments of System 96® sheet
glass, which interlock to form an open topped
box. Hot glass is poured into the preheated
glass box, then pressed using the pre-heated
glass plunger, fusing all of these elements
(box, hotglass, and plunger) into one object.
This new system marks a departure from pressing glass in conventional metal molds. It also
has the potential to replace certain kiln-casting
and blowing operations while offering new
design possibilities for glass sculpture.
The creative implications of this technique
are numerous. Because these elements are
fused in seconds and can be annealed like
blown glasswork, the system could prove to be
a quick and efficient substitute for some kilnforming and casting operations. Because the
glass is not surrounded by investment material,
the kiln programs are considerably shorter.
This technique also offers complex cantilevered
and colored details, visual effects unique to
this process. This process could also transform
traditional kiln-fused roll-ups. Instead of using
100% factory made sheet glass, only enough
sheet glass to form the exterior glass-forming
box would be required. The rest could be filled
by relatively inexpensive compatible furnace
glass. This technique also could also take
advantage of screenprinted decals to embed
dimensional imagery in glass. Because the
glass “mold” segments are interlocking, with
overlapping and penetrating edges, the edges
can be emphasized to create details that are
difficult to achieve in kiln casting. Alternatively,
like a veneer, this process might be used to
color the surface of various hot cast objects.
Conclusion
My intent for the GAS demonstration was
to introduce accessible methods of pressing
glass to the studio glass community by providing a range of examples adapting pressed
glass for practical artistic use. The best way to
make pressing more practical is to make the
mold fabrication process easier. I approached
this by using digital fabrication to make simple
molds. The primary way to simplify the mold
making process is to create flat press molds
with carved detail, and a secondary mold
to manipulate the glass while hot to make
volumetric shapes. Wherever possible one
should design joinery features in the mold,
such as formers for making holes and notches.
I demonstrated a series of processes based on
these principles in which molds made entirely
from fusible sheet glass. I also showed how
digital rapid tooling techniques can enable the
artist to work creatively with glass pressing.
The advantages of this approach include
improved efficiency, and a more streamlined
production process compared to blowing,
casting, and coldworking processes. This also
provides a model for enhancing traditional
glass processes using digital manufacture.
New technologies like waterjet cutting could
enhance design possibilities by mixing digital
and manual processes. In this way, the field of
creative hot glass can thrive alongside digital
manufacturing.
I would like to thank GAS, J.J. Riviello, and
West Supply for hosting this demonstration.
I also extend a special thanks to Kuhn
Vanderstukken and Sheridan College for
assisting with the preparations for this demo.
I successfully tested these experimental
molds for the first time at Sheridan College.
An extra thanks goes to Sheridan students Rob
Raeside, Kristian Spreen, Stephanie Baness,
and Alfred student Chelsea Leung for assisting
with this demonstration. Lastly, thank you to
my Chinese glass colleagues, Gong Kehai,
Jiao Bo, and Liu Shi Jun. We worked together
for a year in Shanghai making glass sculptures.
Both GAS and I sent them official invitations
to attend the Chicago conference, but they
were still unable to make the trip.
__________________________________
Mark Hursty – Since he began pressing glass
in Sandwich, Massachusetts in 1990, this
ancient but artistically maligned manufacturing
process has shadowed him. He continued
pressing as a student (RISD’93 BFA, Alfred’08
MFA), at his hot shop, Hurstin Studio Glass
and Metal (1999-present), as Jacksonville
University’s glass program head (2008-10), and
in various Chinese university glass programs
as a 2011-12 China Fulbright fellow. Currently,
he is developing sculptural pressed glass as
a researcher at the University of Sunderland’s
National Glass Centre, UK. Hursty’s aim in
Chicago was to expand and economize Studio
Glass’ toolbox by reacquainting GAS participants
with ancient and contemporary pressed glass.
s t r e n gt h e n i n g c o mm u n it y , c o l l ab o r ati o n , f o r gi n g n e w b o n d s Mark Hursty
Notes:
1.An international operating platform, dedicated
to new strategies in glass art education
www.theglassvirus.tumblr.com
2.Pairpoint Crystal in Sagamore, MA is a namesake factory that ties, through the Mt. Washington Glass company and the original Pairpoint factory’s press equipment, to Deming Jarves, a glass factory owner and designer who received the first pressed glass patent in 1824 and is best known as an inventor, and later an author, who espoused the use of semi-
automated pressed glass equipment. The factory still presses glass using the antique presses.
3.Hurstin Studio Glass and Metal, established 1999
in Hamilton, MA. www.markhursty.com
4.Dick Marquis, Amy Rueffert, and Amber Cowan each use pressed glass in their sculptures. Frantisek Vizner, a master of pressed glass design emblematic
of fine creative pressing in the Czech glass industry, used the aesthetic of pressing in his elaborate cold-worked sculptures. Rene Lalique, known for his Art Nouveau style glass, provides the best-known examples of French creative pressed art glass.
5.Currently, John Lewis, Josiah McElheny, and
Elizabeth Kelly are artists who are producing pressed glass for sculptural aims. It should also be noted that Wheaton Arts and Cultural Center in Millville, NJ has pressed glass equipment available for artistic use.
6. I have presented a paper on this process at the 2014 International Symposium of Electronic Art (ISEA) in Dubai.
7. An extension of this telescoping mold technique is a “pin-screen” that is capable of making variable shapes. The term for such a mold is “reconfigurable
pin tooling” (RPT), which, as evidenced in Tavs
Jorgensen’s slumped glass research is another potential use of rapid manufacturing for shaping glass.
8.Additional use of funerary jade included covers
and plugs, and glass substitutes that were inserted in and over the body’s nine orifices to stave off decay in the afterlife.
53
hot gl a ss demo
Material Hybridity: A Fluid Negotiation with Glass & Metals
By Miles Van Rensselaer, with Angus Powers and J. J. Riviello
two hours. An epic pace and controlled mania
became the framework for the GAS demo,
Material Hybridity, at the West Supply hot
shop, where Riviello is a principal.
Miles Van Rensselaer, Jari-Jari Gelas
After 50+ years, glass is finally beginning to
enjoy its well deserved and overdue acceptance into the fine art world, a field historically
dominated by materials like stone, wood,
ceramic, and metal. Glass has an intrinsic
beauty, an ephemeral, spiritual feel, and
optical qualities that allow artists to incorporate
and manipulate light in an otherwise dark
form. The relative infancy of glass as an art
material compels artists to push the envelope
of technique ever further. Material Hybridity
was an attempt to demonstrate, to an audience,
the extent to which artists are pushing the
material – and inspire other artists to push it
even further in the future.
The madness began when I was invited by
the Glass Art Society to share some techniques
I often use in the final stages of creating
my sculptures. I invited Angus Powers and
J. J. Riviello to join me in creating a hot glass
spectacle. After a weeklong brainstorming
residency at Alfred University, where Angus is
an Associate Professor of Glass, we settled on
four works that were feasible to complete in
54
1. Jari-Jari Gelas (Glass Fingers) I
2005-present
The making of my works begin in my New
Jersey studio, a former marble warehouse
along the Delaware River. Wall-mounted bronze
hands are first cast from life using alginate or
platinum silicone rubber. Once in wax, they’re
fitted with customized “french cleat” mounts
and mocked-up to their desired sculptural
composition. These arrangements range from
an individual hand to twelve pairs representing
entire families, with each generation pouring
glass down to the next. The waxes are then
cast in bronze using ceramic shell and chased,
then each hand is fitted to the Apparatus, a
movable jig which secures bronzes at working
height and allows mobility while hot glass is
flowing, and instantly releases once the glass
has cooled.
Finally, we come to the demonstration
worthy step: glass is hot-cast, via ladle or
punty, directly onto the bronze hands and
sculpted using various hand tools while the
Apparatus is simultaneously angled to the
desired position and gesture. This process
works best with two assistants who are familiar
with the hardness and working characteristics
of the batch being melted. Once an even heat
in the glass is achieved via torch, the entire
piece (glass and metal) is removed from the
Apparatus and annealed for up to 72 hours.
This process has been influenced by years of
assisting Daisuke Shintani and Steve Tobin,
and my subsequent personal experimentation
with just how far glass can be pushed when
“dumped” and “sculpted” directly onto metal.
When a hand is presented individually, glass
becomes a metaphor for time and the fleeting
moments that escape our grasp.
2. Jari-Jari Gelas (Glass Fingers):
Angle Iron Variation
Fingers are cast from life in plaster using
dental alginate, then rubber molds are made
to cast wax patterns, which are then cast in
bronze. We demonstrated hot-casting glass
over a pair of bronze hands in Chicago, and
then added iron sleeves, which were cast from
actual sleeves.
Pairs of hands can also be used to compose
a three-dimensional family tree. Coming from
a very close family, I launched a hand-casting
project of all the living members of my immediate family. Ancestral Flow is the resulting
installation. Glass drips from the ceiling to
represent my father’s deceased parents, and
it flows accordingly into his fleshy hands.
The highest pair of hands are my maternal
grandparents (ages 98 and recently deceased
at 99) and they pour glass into the hands of
their offspring, my mother. My parents pour
into an overflowing set of hands, which are my
own. In this piece glass is a metaphor for the
intangible things passed from one generation
to another; call it DNA, genes, innate idiosyncratic quirks, perhaps even spirituality.
3. Hot Log!
This is an experimental new approach to
my hand series. Rather than hot casting directly
onto bronze, we ladled into a 3’ x 4” graphite
tube then transferred the “hot log” onto a
pre-cast line of hands. If transferred hot enough,
when the core is still molten, glass spills out of
the hot end of the casting. The demo casting
was transferred a bit cold and only spilled a
few inches, but a smaller-scale trial run at
Alfred yielded a 2’- 3’ spill. This initial experiment
lead us in an exciting new direction which,
given more experimentation, will blow the
doors open on more elaborate compositions.
Miles, Angus, and J.J. manipulating hot glass during
their demo.
Miles Van Rensselaer, Ancestral Flow (detail)
4. Kenyah Kayah Fetish Mask
One of my largest bronze masks to date –
originally modeled in clay and cast in 5 parts,
then assembled – was the mold for our finale,
which demanded that Angus lick the 250 lb.
pot clean. The mask was secured in another
Apparatus designed to accommodate different
sized work, maintain flat back, and quickly
release pieces for loading. After a large bubble
was blown into the mask, the overhead hoist
at West Supply helped us load 120 pounds of
glass and bronze into a top-loading annealer.
After annealing, the bronze in all of the
demo pieces blackens with fire scale and is
resurfaced using pneumatic grinders with
Roloc pads and wire brushes. Once the desired
finished is achieved, oxidation is arrested with
patina, wax, or lacquer. The septum hole and
elongated earlobes of Kenyah Kayah will be
fitted with kiln-cast crystal nose ornaments in
the shape of a tusk and spiral earrings before
finally resting atop a steel pedestal.
My sculpture explores form through unfamiliar processes. I push my skills, materials,
and artistic sensibilities repeatedly into the
realm of the unknown. In exploring, exploiting,
and expanding the unique characteristics of
bronze and glass, I seek to create compositions that unite material and form to give my
ideas a concrete unshakeability. I value the
generations that have come before me and
question the interchangeability of binary terms
like “modern vs. primitive”, “civilized vs. savage”
and “developed vs. developing.” I see modern
civilization as an ever-shrinking global village,
teeming with hyper-developing technology
and Facebook-socializing, where each new
generation is becoming successively more
immersed in virtual worlds. I’m fearful that we
may be losing touch with our basic humanity,
and an appreciation for smaller, more tangible
things. In my opinion the information age
seems to be placing too much emphasis on
the wrong things and, sadly, grossly devaluing
the right ones. Society seems to be lacking
personal touch – the basic, simple, healthy,
tangible, natural side of life. By juxtaposing the
temporal rawness of “tribal” imagery against
the permanent slickness of glass and metal,
such notions of “modern” and “primitive” are
evoked and challenged.
It was an honor for Angus, J.J., and I to
share these processes and ideas with attendees
of the 2014 Chicago GAS Conference. I hope
this work helps further bridge the gap between
content and technique by demonstrating
that they work together, not exclusive of one
another. There will always be those who claim
everything has been done in glass – I believe
the surface has only been scratched.
__________________________________
Miles Van Rensselaer has exhibited professionally since 1999; his first solo show was at
Heller Gallery in 2005 in NYC. His works are
well-conceived juxtapositions of material and
concept that lock the two together into unique
sculptural form. Miles received his Bachelor’s
(double-majors in sculpture and poetry) from
Kenyon College while studying the Indonesian
language, mask-making, and woodcarving with
Javanese and Balinese masters. Miles has since
worked with many other professional artists
while converting an abandoned marble quarry
along the Delaware River into a modern bronze
foundry and glass studio, where he now lives
and works. He exhibited monumental (4’ x 6’)
slumped/carved glass heads, presented 16’
from the ground in Navy Pier for SOFA Chicago
and emerging from the floor of the “grand
entrance” of Art Palm Beach. Newer works are
currently on view in the 41st Annual International Glass Invitational at Habatat Galleries,
Michigan and the International Exhibition of
Glass Kanazawa (travelling Japan into 2014.)
s t r e n gt h e n i n g c o mm u n it y , c o l l ab o r ati o n , f o r gi n g n e w b o n d s Miles Van Rensselaer, Elder Mask: Papua New Guinea
Angus M. Powers is a contemporary sculptor
working with blown and cast glass sculpture,
installations, and function wares. He explores
glass and mixed material sculpture with a
philosophy that anything is possible and the
ability to fail will take him further into the craft
and concepts of any particular body of work.
Angus has practiced glass making and
education since graduating from Tyler School
of Art in 2002 with an MFA in glass. He
attended Alfred University and received his
BFA in sculpture, glass, and light. His work
has been experimental and has meandered
through all types of venues, focusing on glass,
light, technology, craft, and design. Angus is
currently the head of the Glass Department
and is an Associate Professor of Glass in the
New York State College of Ceramics at Alfred
University. Most recently he has been
developing curriculum that promotes collaboration between glass artists and engineers
in a course called GLASSARTENGINE.
James Riviello, Director of Glassworks at West
Supply, received his BFA in glass from Tyler
School of Art, and his MFA from Southern
Illinois University. Over the past 20 years, he
has dedicated much of his career to teaching
glassmaking and helping create several
educational glass centers and art school
studios. Since 2009, he has been focused on
creating a new niche in the design industry
for glass artisans. “21st century technology
combined with the creativity of glass artists,
has huge potential for art, design, and
architecture of the future,” he says.
55
hot gl a ss demo
Meeting of the Minds
By Robin Rogers with Julia Rogers
Upon learning that the 2014 GAS conference
would focus on building community and
collaboration, Julia and I knew we wanted to
be presenters. We live this theme everyday
and were thrilled to be able to share our
collaborative process in Chicago.
Collaboration is a way of life for us. It is
a way to achieve much greater goals than an
individual can, alone. It is a journey that can
take unexpectedly inspiring routes, pursuing
steep goals, and ultimately arriving at unimagined vistas. First and foremost, collaboration
begins with a relationship.
As artists, Julia and my relationship has
gone through many stages over the years.
Initially we were friends, and I was one of her
first glass instructors. Eventually we began
a relationship and are now married with two
children. After teaching Julia for a short time,
she grew out of her role as my student and
proceeded to make her own work based on
her own decisions. When this happened we
didn’t spend much time working together in
the studio, as tension could and would arise.
Understandably, Julia wanted to listen to her
inner gaffer and I had to hold myself back from
offering suggestions about “how I would do it.”
After years of working separately in the
glass studio we found ourselves frequently
helping each other on artwork outside the
hotshop. We would brainstorm, troubleshoot,
and critique each other’s ongoing projects.
Our ideas for our work began to overlap
and sometimes blur together. We eventually
found that we could combine aspects of our
individual sketches to create new and exciting
possibilities. In 2010, we decided it was time
to wholeheartedly combine our efforts, skills,
and ideas and focus on creating collaborative
artwork. Having this common goal strengthened our relationship and gave us a new direction artistically. Although we both still work on
individual projects, the last four years have
been primarily dedicated to collaboration.
There are very few times in life when
someone can have absolute say and total
control over a situation, regardless of anyone
or anything. Creating art is one of those rare
instances. There is great freedom in the act of
creating art and as an artist you have absolute
power over the direction of a piece and no one
can say otherwise, simply because it is not
theirs. The artist is empowered in the moment
56
Robin and Julia Rogers,
The Beating Mind III
of creation, but hopefully it doesn’t go to their
head and fuel their ego. Collaboration means
giving up some of this coveted freedom and
power. If a partnership is going to work, both
people must share this creative power and
trust their partner’s vision. Perhaps the most
important part of collaboration is being
willing to compromise and meld approaches;
or maybe it is having the patience to hear your
partner’s ideas without quickly judging them.
It can be a challenge at times and a joy at
others. When everything works together it’s
very rewarding, and in the end, the whole is
greater than the sum of its parts.
For our demonstration, we decided to
create a piece that is part of our Beating Mind
series. In this series we explore the idea of
thinking with your heart and inviting love
and compassion into your cognitive process.
This notion of selflessness is something the
world can always use more of. It is illustrated
in our sculptures in a very literal way. We
construct a head, remove the top of the skull,
and insert an anatomical heart where the
brain should be.
The glass head is made from an evenly
blown bubble, then features are added using
“inside sculpting” techniques. Then, we start
coloring the bubble with powdered colored
glass. Once the color is applied, the basic
shape is roughed out, and a jack line is in
place, we remove the tip of the bubble and
make the opening wide enough so that we
can insert long curved “inside” sculpting tools.
From this point on, the head is only flashed in
the gloryhole, not heated to the point that it is
moving. Heat is applied to specific sections of
the bubble using an oxygen/propane torch and
the tools are used to shape the bubble from
the inside. For instance, the chin and nose
can be “pushed” out. Details are also added
on the surface. We make it a point to each
sculpt a couple of the major features of the
face. The sculpture’s countenance becomes
like one of our children; he has my nose and
Julia’s eyes, etc.
Once the features are sculpted, the opening is closed down so that the piece can be
transferred to a punty. We attach the punty
to the top of the head and break the bubble
Robin Rogers
Julia Rogers, GMH Biotechnologies
off at the neck line, leaving an opening that
is heated, flared and shaped into a sculpted
neck. Another large, three-pronged punty is
made and attached to the neck, which is
supported by the three points of contact.
Finally, the top of the head is heated, opened
again, and trimmed away leaving a four inch
hole where the top of the skull should be.
While the head is being finished on the
main bench, one of us sculpts an anatomical
heart at a second bench. Before the body of
the heart is made, the major blood vessels –
the pulmonary artery, aorta, and superior
vena cava – are blown, shaped and put into
the garage to keep from cracking. The lower
ventricles are then formed from a single
bubble and colored with powders. The major
vessels, except the aorta, are one by one
removed from the garage, heated in the
gloryhole, and attached to the heart’s body.
The heart is then puntied with a connection
where the aorta will eventually be placed.
As the piece nears completion, the heart
is inserted into the opening on the top of the
head. Once in place, the aorta is attached
on top of the punty mark, and adjusted into
position. With all the details completed there
is a final performative flourish: the heart is set
ablaze using a mysterious fiery magic dust.
The anointed finished piece is removed from
all three connection points simultaneously and
placed in an annealing oven to cool slowly.
In the spirit of collaboration it must be
noted that we couldn’t do what we do without
the support of an amazing team. Typically
we work closely with three to four assistants.
At the conference we had the help of Nate
Avery, Eli Cecil, John Forsythe, Ed Francis,
Laura McFie, and Liesl Schubel; a huge
thanks is owed to them. We would also like
to extend our gratitude to the Glass Art
Society for including us in the conference
and everyone who came to the demonstration.
It was a great honor to be featured at such
an amazing gathering!
__________________________________
Julia & Robin Rogers Sculpting glass has
been a driving force in the lives of Julia and
Robin Rogers. The couple first met in a glass
studio in 2001. After nearly ten years of
working together and assisting with each
other’s work, the duo decided to start creating
artwork collaboratively. Robin holds an MFA
from Southern Illinois University Carbondale,
2008. Julia’s MFA is from Bowling Green
State University, 2010. They live in Costal
Virginia, where Robin is the Assistant
Manager of the Chrysler Museum of Art Glass
Studio and Julia is glass faculty at Tidewater
Community College.
s t r e n gt h e n i n g c o mm u n it y , c o l l ab o r ati o n , f o r gi n g n e w b o n d s Julia Rogers
57
hot gl a ss demo
Avian Roll-up
By Marc Petrovic
Marc Petrovic, Avian Pair
My Avian series has been germinating for
several years. My first effort to create an
“Avian,” a murrini roll-up bird, was a demonstration at the 2009 Glass Art Society conference in Corning, New York. During the summer
of 2010, I completed two more attempts while
teaching at the Penland School of Crafts, but
it was not until January of 2011 that I began
working on the Avian series in earnest.
The unique feather patterns for these
blown and sculpted murrini birds are formed
much like our identities: one piece or experience
at a time. Piece by piece our unique experiences
are assembled into a complete picture of
ourselves. The particularly challenging part
of the Avian series is envisioning the two
dimensional pattern that can be rolled up
and sculpted into a three dimensional bird.
To create the intended feather pattern, I
envision the final form of the Avian, and then
mentally deconstruct and flatten the three
dimensional image into a two dimensional
pattern. Deconstructing the forms allows me
to make flat tablets with the correct pattern,
orientation, and coloration to be hot sculpted
into an accurate three dimensional feathered
bird. To me, the abstracted tablets are a fully
realized bird, in two dimensional form.
I begin the process by creating the small
murrini pieces that will comprise the final
composition by choosing colored sheet glass
58
and stacking them up into patterned sections.
These stacks are fused, picked-up on a pipe
and heated, and then pulled into lengths of
12 feet or more. After the glass lengths cool,
they are chopped into small slices that show
the patterned cross-sections. Much like the
sketch marks in the beginning of a drawing,
every hairline formed between the layers of
sheet glass will be present and visible in the
final piece. I then compose the tablets by
placing the murrini on the kiln shelf, one at
a time, with their cross sections visible. Even
the slightest change in the orientation of a
murrini can make a dramatic difference in the
final piece. These assemblages are then fused
together into a single tablet. The flat tablets
contain all of the color information for the final
bird, except for the beak and eyes. Some of
the tablets are rolled up and formed into
birds, while others remain as abstracted and
deconstructed Avians.
__________________________________
Marc Petrovic graduated from the Cleveland
Institute of Art in 1991. Marc has been a full
time studio artist since graduating from CIA.
He works out of his private studio that he
shares with his wife, Kari Russell-Pool, near
their home in Essex, Connecticut. They have
two wonderful children, Phoebe and Kay, and
two above average dogs, Pixie and Roux.
An Avian Deconstruction and source material.
Marc Petrovic closing down the bubble
on an Avian Roll-up.
c oldwor kin g d emo
How to Mirror Glass with Silver, Gold, Copper, and Galena
By Sarah King
During the 2014 Chicago GAS conference,
I showed that mirroring glass is a simple
chemical process. A mirror does not have
to be silver. You do not need spray guns, air
compressors, or other special equipment. You
can mirror plastic or paint as well as glass.
If you measure carefully and perform the steps
in the right order, you can create a perfectly
reflective coating on any hard, glossy surface.
I was honored to show this process in
Chicago, because it is the only place in the
world where the neighborhood streets glimmer
with double-sided gold mirrored stained glass
windows in ordinary middle class homes.
When these windows were built in the early
20th century, stained glass studios were
guilding thin sheets of glass with chemically
deposited gold and silver before cutting them
up and placing the pieces back-to-back in
their windows. At AngelGilding.com we make
the mirroring processes available to the glass
artists of the 21st century.
Most mirrors are silver because silver
reflects all the wavelengths of light. A silver
mirror reflects the true colors of an object.
A gold mirror on colorless glass is yellow, a
copper mirror is bright pink, and a galena
(lead sulfide) mirror is blue-black, the color
of polished hematite. If you use one of these
metals to mirror transparent colored glass, you
can create any color, or combination of colors,
you want. The possibilities are endless.
There are many ways to produce a
perfectly reflective surface. Aluminum can be
applied to glass (and other substrates) by
high temperature vacuum deposition. Gold,
silver, and aluminum leaf can be glued to any
substrate. China painters paint gold, silver,
and other precious metals on glass, then glaze
and fire it in a kiln using Liquid Bright Gold or
Duncan Gold Luster. You can mirrorize a metal
surface by polishing it, electro-plating it, or
covering it with a base coat and silvering it.
The easiest, fastest, and least energy
intensive way to metallize a non-metallic
surface is by chemical deposition. For this
process metal salts are dissolved in de-mineralized, steam-distilled, or de-ionized water.
The solution is combined with other dissolved
chemicals that cause the metal salt to come
out of solution and form a metal layer that is
only molecules thick. The silver layer formed by
chemical deposition is 50 to 100 nanometers
thick; about 1/600th the width of a human
hair. Two layers of gold mirror are eight times
thinner than a single layer of gold leaf.
As I showed in my demonstration, it is
possible to metalize any non-metallic, nonconductive, substrate including plastic, wood,
ceramic, or a leaf from your garden. However,
the chemistry of mirroring does not work when
applied directly to a metal surface. To achieve
a reflective surface, the substrate must be
as glossy and shiny as glass. The mirroring
Sarah King, Angel Gilded commercial vase. Photo: Sarah King
s t r e n gt h e n i n g c o mm u n it y , c o l l ab o r ati o n , f o r gi n g n e w b o n d s Sarah King
process will not make a dull surface appear
reflective.
Mirror chemicals will not mirror a dirty
surface. Any grease, dust, or film, including
finger prints, that comes between the
chemicals and the substrate will prevent the
chemicals from attaching. The surface must
be perfectly clean.
In order for the chemicals to form a metal
layer, you need to sensitize a clean surface
with a chemical that initiates the process of
metal crystallization and bonds the metal to
the surface. The best metal for this purpose is
the tin salt stannous chloride. No one knows
exactly why tin is so effective, but you can be
sure that you will not get a good mirror if you
do not sensitize the surface with the correct
concentration of tin salt.
Copper and galena mirrors must be tinned
and then super-sensitized with a second metal
layer. Palladium sensitizer does not affect the
color of a copper or galena mirror. However,
you can change the color by adding a thin
layer of silver or gold. Galena on top of a thin
layer of silver produces a “black silver” mirror.
Copper deposited on gold produces a warm
sunrise gold. Always deposit a less precious
metal over a more precious metal. If you try to
deposit gold on top of silver, for example, the
chemistry does not work and all you get is a
black mess.
59
You can apply the mirroring chemicals
by pouring, immersing, dripping, or spraying.
Spraying is the fastest; the silver forms in five
to ten seconds. Poured silver forms in about
five minutes and gold in twenty minutes.
A slow reaction time gives you more control
over the end result. At Angel Gilding, we have
different formulas for pouring and spraying
silver. Our gold, copper and galena formulas
are only available as pouring formulas.
I began my demonstration by pouring a
blue-black galena mirror onto glue-chipped
glass to show that not all mirrors are flat silver.
A galena mirror forms in five to seven minutes.
As the chemicals interact, they change color
from brown to purple to dark blue to black.
If you pour them off at the right time, you can
preserve this color change to some extent.
The color change is not uniform across the
piece so you never get just one color. If you
pour off the chemicals before the deposition
is complete, you will have a translucent mirror.
The light that filters through translucent galena
is olive brown.
Next, I gilded the inside of a small commercial vase. Chemical deposition allows you
to gild in places that could never be reached
with gold leaf. A pure gold mirror is translucent
with a coppery golden sheen. The light that
passes through it is sea green. You can
brighten the gold by gilding the surface twice.
If you gild it three times, the gold can become
too heavy for the tin layer to hold and it
sometimes peels right off the glass.
To produce a brilliant 24-carat gold mirror,
you need to apply two layers of gold and then
one or two layers of silver. The silver makes
the gold opaque and helps to fasten it to
the glass. This silver gold combination was
invented in England by Joseph Pratt in 1885.
The technique is called angel gilding to
distinguish it from gold leaf gilding. Angel
gilded mirrors do not have the wrinkles and
leaf lines that inevitably occur with gold
leaf gilding.
For my final demonstration, I used a spray
silver formula and a drip siphon system to
silver the outside of a large blue plastic mug.
Since there were not enough respirators for
everyone in the audience, I decided not to
spray the silver. The drip system allows you to
silver a large 3D object safely and easily.
Plastic, unlike glass, is hydrophobic; any
60
Sarah King, Galena mirror on
double glue-chipped glass
Photo: Sarah King
water on the surface just beads up and rolls
off. Before I tinned the mug, I sprayed it with a
wetting agent that breaks the surface tension
long enough for the tin and silver to deposit
in a continuous sheet. You will not get a good
mirror if the water-borne mirroring solutions
cannot flow evenly over the surface.
When I silvered the outside of the mug,
we created a front surface mirror. All metals
except gold tarnish when exposed to the air.
When the silver is behind the glass or plastic,
you can protect it with backing paint or lacquer.
When you silver the front surface, you have
to protect it with a transparent coating. The
problem is that when you cover a thin layer of
silver with any transparent coating, including
distilled water, the silver has a golden tone to
it. To counteract this optical phenomenon, you
need to add a transparent purple or blue tint to
the coating. I did not coat the silver mug with
lacquer for this demonstration.
The craftsmen who created the Hall of
Mirrors for the “Sun King” Louis XIV at
Versailles in 1680 used a highly toxic amalgam
of mercury and tin on glass. In 1835 the
German chemist, Justus von Leibig, discovered
how to mirror glass by dissolving metal salts
in pure water, the same process I used in this
demo. Leibig’s process is simple and safe –
if you are careful. Wear gloves to protect
your hands, a respirator to protect you from
sprayed silver mist, and use our waste treatment clay to remove heavy metals from the
waste water before you pour it down the drain.
At AngelGilding.com our goal is to take the
mystery out of mirroring for everyone –
glass artists, auto enthusiasts, and scientific
inventors alike.
__________________________________
Sarah King In the early 1980s, Sarah King
learned how to repair residential stained glass
windows in Chicago. Many of these windows,
including those designed by Frank Lloyd
Wright, contain double-sided gold mirrored
glass. This gold is not gold leaf. After a long
investigation, she learned how Chicago studios
in the early 20th century had gilded glass
by chemical deposition using a process they
called Angel Gilding. In 2003, with the help
of her husband, a university trained chemist,
Sarah set up a company to manufacture and
sell mirroring supplies to glass artists in the
US and worldwide.
Coldworking Beyond Tradition
By Ethan Stern
Coldworking is a part of the glassworking process that involves cutting, grinding, polishing,
and generally manipulating glass in its solid
state. This may seem obvious to those with
experience in the field, but coldworking can
also be mystifying to those with limited experience. Most students I encounter come out of
their respective glass programs not wanting to
set foot in a coldshop for as long as they can
manage. This disdain for coldworking usually
comes from canned projects like, “make a
wonky glass block and cold work it into a
perfectly symmetrical and optically polished
cube.” This project demands countless hours
and usually ends with the student finishing
the cube right before class, then dropping it
on the way to critique. I bring up this example
because my approach to coldwork, which I
demonstrated in Coldworking Beyond Tradition
at the 2014 GAS conference in Chicago, is
markedly different.
My glasswork is created through a combination of processes. I apply color, blow, and
sculpt a bubble in the hotshop. Then, after it’s
annealed, I carve into the glass with diamond
and stone wheels in the coldshop. These two
processes demand completely different
approaches and create two distinct types of
creative space. Blowing and sculpting glass
in the hotshop is fast, intense, and team
oriented. I work with at least three people and
rely on each person for a different part of the
process. Much credit is owed to the artists on
my team for helping my blown work progress.
In contrast, the coldworking process is slow,
wet, and almost always done alone. For me,
this is when I develop a relationship with the
object that I have just created. Standing at
the lathe, where most of coldwork is done,
I hold the objects in my hands and work the
entire surface with the various cutting wheels.
When I’m carving I can see every angle,
every edge, and can tangibly experience the
physical nature of the shape. Each engraved
mark, like the stroke of a paintbrush on
canvas or a finger pushed into clay, leaves
evidence of my hand. The marks are undeniably connected to my process and the nature
of the material itself. I feel no ownership over
the traditional techniques I employ, but rather
it is achieving a particular quality of carving
that attracts me to this revealing method of
manipulating glass.
Ethan Stern,
Coastal Shelf
Photo:
Russell Johnson
My demonstration at GAS attempted to
show my approach to glass cutting as one
that re-examines the process of coldworking
and uses it to enhance the surface of a form,
create ornamentation, and materialize the
overall voice of an object. To illustrate this
I attempted to work a piece from start to
finish over a period of three and a half hours
in the coldshop at Ignite Glass Studios.
I worked on a blown piece that was approximately 10” x 10” x 3”. This piece was called
Quadraform and is part of my Structure
Sound series. This series uses the language
of geography, architecture, and industrial
design and is inspired by how these disciplines
can influence the visual deconstruction of
our surroundings. The piece was blown with
multiple layers of color and shaped into a
geometric form in the hot shop. Normally,
coldworking this piece from start to finish
would take approximately 12 hours, but I
rushed it for the demo.
I began by drawing on the object with a
wax pencil to create a guideline. I often use
a wax pencil, graphite pencil, or sharpie to
s t r e n gt h e n i n g c o mm u n it y , c o l l ab o r ati o n , f o r gi n g n e w b o n d s mark the surface prior to cutting it. The cutting
process began with a rough diamond wheel,
which was used to carve the majority of
material way. I then used an 80 grit sintered
diamond wheel with a flat profile to carve away
the colored glass to more precisely align with
my surface drawing. I also used a spherical
profile 80 grit diamond wheel to remove a bulk
of the material that was not part of the linear
design. Once I had removed the necessary
material and finished the basic image on the
surface, I used a 400 grit diamond wheel with
the same flat profile to smooth out the 80 grit
cuts. After the diamond cutting was complete
I used an aluminum oxide stone wheel to put
a semi-polished surface on parts of the piece.
This stone wheel had a leaded center and was
used with a tapered and threaded spindle
that fit onto the lathe shaft. The stone wheel
removes very little material, but leaves a
beautiful satin finish on the glass. However,
the stone must be dressed and polished
before it can polish the glass. Lastly, I finished
the entire surface of the form with 2F pumice,
which I used with a brush wheel made from
61
Fer left:
Ethan Stern, carving
a blown form with a
diamond wheel on
a cutting lathe at
Diamond Life Studio,
Seattle, WA.
Photo: Chris Sisco
Left:
Sintered Diamond
wheels from the
Czech Republic used
for carving glass.
Aluminum Oxide Stone
wheel from Austria
used for polishing glass.
Tampico Fiber Brush
Wheel from Germany
used with Pumice for
polishing glass.
Photo: Ethan Stern
Tampico fiber, to give the surface a semipolish without losing the texture of the cutting.
The bristles of the brush wheel allowed for
the pumice to polish the surface without
removing the grooves and marks left by
the wheels. These steps illustrate the basic
processes that I use in my own studio to
cut and polish my blown works. Some steps
were altered or abbreviated to conform to
the equipment at Ignite.
In order to create more interest and
excitement during the demonstration I had a
GoPro camera focused on the lathe, at the
point where the cutting happens, and set it up
to stream to a large monitor in the coldshop.
The area where the glass is cut is usually
hard for the viewer to see in a demonstration
because there are many obstacles blocking
it from view. The GoPro’s point of view was
highly effective. It captivated the audience and
I hope this display method will be used at all
GAS coldworking demos in the future.
I hope that the people who saw my demo
will walk away from it with a better understanding of how to use coldworking to create
a dialog between form and surface. Carving,
62
cutting, and engraving glass is approachable
for everyone regardless of their level of skill or
knowledge. Safe operation of machinery and
a considered approach to the material can
lead to great things in the coldshop, with very
rewarding results.
__________________________________
Ethan Stern Born in Ithaca, New York, Ethan
Stern currently lives in Seattle, WA where he
owns a glass studio. He earned his Associates
degree in ceramics at TAFE College in Brisbane,
Australia and his BFA in sculpture and glass
from Alfred University. Stern’s work is widely
exhibited and is currently featured in the
collections of Eboltoft Glass Museum in
Denmark, the Museum of American Glass in
New Jersey, and Palm Springs Art Museum in
California. Ethan has taught sculpture in glass
at the University of Washington, Pilchuck Glass
School, Pratt Fine Arts Center, Penland School
of Craft, and the Pittsburgh Glass Center.
A Unique Way of Cutting Glass
By Yusuke Takemura
Thinking about the title for my demonstration
made me reflect on my initial idea of carving
into glass to make artwork. To me, this process
is unique simply because it produces forms
I have never seen before.
In 2006, just after graduating with my
with BA in Japan, I was looking for new ideas
for my art practice that focused on ancient
coldworking techniques like engraving and
stone carving. Through my own research,
I learned that these fundamental coldworking
techniques have mainly been used for
decorative art, often for engraving patterns
and pictures onto the surface of glass.
During my initial idea development, I was
creating very simple vessel forms and drawing
patterns on them. I then questioned myself,
“what would it look like if these patterns
were voids within a three-dimensional form?”
This is how I started to focus and develop my
current ideas and techniques. I am not just
carving in the traditional sense, but piercing
right through the glass. This is how the idea
came about for the title of my demonstration,
A Unique Way of Cutting Glass.
Further development of my techniques
continued in 2008 in Sydney, Australia.
There, I was exposed to industrial methods of
coldworking such as laser engraving, waterjet
cutting, CNC machining, sandblasting, and
diamond grinding. All these methods are
available to the glass industry, and they are
also helping artists develop their ideas and
create new, innovative artworks. In the
beginning of my process I experimented with
several different techniques.
I chose sandblasting and diamond
grinding because laser, waterjet, and CNC
machines were not economical solutions
for a starving artist like me. There were also
technical concerns arising from these digital
methods, which made me not choose them.
Laser engraving generates heat that could
cause damage to a glass object; waterjet
machines cannot cut through a single surface
of a blown glass object, but must cut through
both front and back; CNC machines require
that objects sit flat or be held in the same
position continuously.
During my demonstration at GAS I introduced the tools that I currently use. I showed
a NSK micro grinder with a 2’’ diamond disk
and diamond burrs in 60, 100, and 325 grit.
Yusuke Takemura, Conversion
I also demonstrated the differences between
electroplating, cold press, and hot press
sintered diamond disks and burrs. The cold
press and hot press sintered diamond tools
are manufactured with different processes and
work differently. Generally, electroplated diamond tools have diamonds plated only on the
surface and don’t last long. On the other hand,
sintered diamond tools contain diamonds
throughout the entire matrix and are usually
cold pressed to make them more economical.
Hot pressed tools are more expensive, however
they have a much longer lifespan.
Since 2008 I have been developing new
cutting methods and have experimented with
sandblasting, air angle grinding, and using a
micro grinder with diamond disks and diamond
burrs. I have successfully improved on two of
these methods by changing the size of the
diamond burr itself and shrinking the diameter
of the disks. I scaled down the diameter
of diamond disk from 4’’ to 2’’ in order to
attach the disk to the micro grinder, and then
changed the matrix of the diamonds on the
s t r e n gt h e n i n g c o mm u n it y , c o l l ab o r ati o n , f o r gi n g n e w b o n d s burrs from electroplated to sintered, which
lasts much longer and retains a steady
sharpness for grinding glass.
After experimenting with the sandblaster,
I concluded that it wasn’t a suitable process
for making my work, because the sand left
numerous contamination marks inside and
on the outside of the glass surface; it also
demanded a lot of cleaning.
During the GAS demonstration I went
through pretty much every process I use at my
studio. The most difficult thing I had to deal
with was explaining the different characteristics
and nuances of the process with all of my
protective gear on.
A brief summary of the process begins
with making glass blanks that usually take
the form of a large cone shaped vessel with a
thin lip. I then draw an intricate design directly
onto the blanks and cut through the glass with
a Dremel. My work often appears free-form
and is inspired by organic forms and patterns
in nature.
A coarse grit diamond burr below 60 is
63
Yusuke Takemura
very aggressive and grinds glass down very
fast, however, it creates large chips on the rim
of the glass and these chips are so enormous
that I only use 60 as a roughing out tool. After
this initial roughing I concentrate on smoothing
the rim of the glass and removing chips made
by coarser grits using at least two successive
finer grades, 100 and 325.
I had hoped that the process of getting the
initial cuts in the glass with the 2’’ diamond
disk would be a very exciting and an almost
frightening process for the audience; It is for
me! However, with time and repetition failures
and cracking happen less often and you begin
to feel as if you are making headway.
The processes I have been developing will
get better and more precise with time and
will give glass artists another expressive tool
to work with. Even though the process has
limitations I believe this technique is the most
precise and efficient way to create intricately
carved glass sculpture.
Yusuke Takemura, History
__________________________________
Yusuke Takemura was born in Japan and
currently lives and works in Australia. He has
been awarded several major prizes, most
recently in 2011 The AusGlass Vicky Torr
Memorial Prize and The AusGlass Sabbia
Gallery Solo Exhibition Prize. He was also
shortlisted for the prestigious Ranamok Glass
Prize. His solo exhibition at Sabbia Gallery was
also a big success in 2012, following SOFA
Chicago from 2011 to 2013 represented by
Kirra galleries. In 2006, Yusuke completed
his Bachelor degree in glass from Kurashiki
University of Science and the Arts in Japan.
In 2009 he continued his studies in Australia
completing a Masters degree in studio arts at
The University of Sydney. During this studio
research Yusuke honed his highly specialised
skill, of cutting shapes out of fragile glass
forms, into a strong, highly individualistic
visual language. Yusuke’s innovative methods
are a daring fusion of traditional technique
with contemporary knowledge.
Working on the carving process at the studio.
This event was partially sponsored by the
Japan Foundation, New York.
64
Shane Fero, Celadon & Blue Photo: Mary Vogel
Dante Marioni and Preston Singletary, Box Drum Photo: Russell Johnson
66
Albert Paley, Opus 2000 Photo: Bruce Miller
Dan Dailey, Madeleine Photo: Bill Truslow
68
Ethan Stern,
Green Coastline
Photo: Russell Johnson
Erin Dickson,
Tyne Tunnel
Ryan “Buck” Harris x Chris Carlson
Untitled
Photo: Daniel Fox
Richard Royal,
“Ascendant” Geo13-10
70
James Carpenter Design Associates, Lens Ceiling
Micah Evans, Singer
Joe Cariati, Decanters
72
fl am e wor ki n g d e mo
An Endless Love and Passion for Nature ...and Lampworking.
By Vittorio Costantini
This was my third time as a demonstrator at the
Glass Art Society conference. The first time was
in Amsterdam, the second time was in Corning,
and this year I demonstrated in Chicago.
It’s always a great experience to participate
in the GAS conference, not only because you
have the opportunity to meet friends and other
artists, but also because you can see different
realities, different techniques, and different
mindsets for working with glass.
This often makes me reflect on the difficulties of my own journey. In the 1960s and
1970s, working in Italy at the furnace was not
easy. There was no opportunity for those who
had creativity to realize their artistic ideas. You
had to do what the master ordered. For those
like me, who were not from Murano (I was
born in Burano, the lace island), there was no
opportunity to become a maestro. The mentality
of Murano was very restricted, and that was
one of the reasons I chose to leave the furnace
and dedicate myself solely to lampworking.
The reality for those who make glass in
Murano, Venice, or elsewhere is very different
from the reality in the United States. There is
no real glass community, no spirit of sharing,
and no meetings to compare techniques and
improve upon each other’s work. It is even rare
that artists stay friends for a long time.
For this reason, years ago, I agreed to
exhibit abroad, mainly in the United States.
Vittorio Costantini, Starfish
This allowed me to meet a lot of people, visit
different places, and learn about different
cultures. It was an honour to know, in person,
artists of whom I only knew the name or whose
work I only had admired in catalogues or
books. I must admit that I have gained great
satisfaction, from an artistic and human
perspective, from my experience abroad.
Vittorio Costantini
s t r e n gt h e n i n g c o mm u n it y , c o l l ab o r ati o n , f o r gi n g n e w b o n d s In the past, I have had the opportunity
to teach, and I always explain to my students
that when they begin lampworking for the first
time they must arm themselves with patience.
They must not surrender in front of difficulties
or obstacles. They must not be discouraged if
their first pieces break. In my workshop, I have
a lot of broken pieces – some of them broke
after being done! Breakage is a risk when you
mix different colours or a piece is part of a trial.
I do not throw away those broken pieces; in
fact, when someone asks me, “how long does
it take to make one piece,” I answer “more
than 58 years of experience!” And I show the
broken pieces!
I have always been fascinated by nature.
When I was a child, I often went fishing with my
father. Sometimes it was very tiring, especially
throwing and collecting the great nets. It was
always a joy to watch the birds fly over the lagoon
or the river and see the butterflies and insects
fly through the wild flowers of the barene
(salt-marsh). I knew the fish very well as I had
to choose them according to their commercial
value before taking them to the market for sale.
When I grew up, I had the opportunity
to visit botanical gardens and museums of
natural history (though I prefer animals in their
natural habitat). These places were sources
of inexhaustible inspiration for my work. Every
73
time that I travel, I try to learn about the native
species of animals from an area by purchasing
picture books or visiting museums.
Today, young people have a lot of opportunities, even if they can’t travel, to research and
get inspiration. Through the internet they can
find websites that talk about different cultures,
art, and civilizations from all over the world.
Not to mention, there are many websites with
photos of animals and flowers.
Sometimes I realize that I have been working
with glass for almost 58 years! A life! There
have been many changes throughout the years.
I have seen the evolution of the materials like
dichroic glass, colored borosilicate, new advanced
equipment, and other technologies that a new
generation can take advantage of. I hope that
this new generation of glassmakers, regardless
of technique, will treasure their experience
and have the passionate love to maintain this
ancient glass tradition and keep it alive!
__________________________________
Vittorio Costantini was born in Burano in
1944, the son of a fisherman and a lacemaker.
He began his apprenticeship at the furnace
in Murano at the early age of 11. Initially,
working glass “a lume,” or lampworking, was a
hobby during the little free time he had after a
long day in the factory. Since 1973, when he
opened his workshop in Venice, this hobby has
become his true work.
All the creations of Vittorio Costantini show
his great mastery and love of nature, which
is expressed in the creation of multicoloured
insects, iridescent butterflies, bird, fish, and
colorful flowers that reference the floral landscapes of his native island of Burano, and the
lagoon surrounding Venice.
His artistic talent brought his work to
numerous exhibitions in Italy and abroad.
Vittorio has been always motivated to
educate people about lampworking. He has
done so through exhibitions all over the world
and, in the last few years, he has devoted
himself to teaching or demonstrating.
74
Vittorio Costantini, European Robin
Vittorio Costantini, Elephant Beetle
lec-mos
Conference attendees gather for Stacy Lynn Smith’s lec-mo about powder printing.
Lec-Mo
A New Vision in Glass: Low Relief
By Omur Duruerk with Fatih Duruerk and Lucio Bubacco
It was a great pleasure and experience for
Fatih, Lucio and I to participate in the GAS
Conference. Not only because we met many
friends, but also because we developed new
ideas within the beautiful atmosphere of
Chicago. Although Lucio has attended the
GAS Conference for many years, it was the
first time that Fatih and I (from Turkey), have
attended as presenters.
Bubacco and the Duruerks have been
collaborating since 2009 and have spent five
years on the technique “Low Relief.” As soon
as we heard the GAS Conference was calling
for artists, we applied to share this technique
as a new vision in the glass community. It is
an honor for us to see that many people like
this new approach.
Low Relief is a new combination of flameworked glass figures and kiln casting. It is the
collaboration between these two techniques
that create one unique outcome.
Instead of describing Low Relief as a
combination of kiln casting and flameworking
roughly and simply, evaluating it as a new
vision and approach to glass is more
acceptable. It is useful to consider it an
artistic concept.
The logic of this technique is
based on protecting the premade
flameworked glass pieces with
plaster and silica and then creating
a cast form with tiny and colorful
details. Likewise, artists may
create heavy pieces that cannot be
produced in the flame. Because of
those aspects, this technique can
be an inspiration to many different
artists in creating new art pieces,
it can also be applied with other
glass techniques.
For many decades, encasing
premade flameworked pieces
in sand casting, kiln casting, or
hot casting has been a common
technique. The flameworked figure
is preserved and covered (a kind
of encapsulation) in layers of hot
glass. Many examples can be seen
in historical glass literature.
In Low Relief the flameworked
figures are on the surface of the
piece, not encased in the layers of
glass. You see even the smallest
details of sculpted figure after the
kiln process. It does not loose its form during
the casting process, but stays as firm as it was
when it was created.
The cast part of the piece accumulates
the flameworked figures in one form and
balances both fragility and toughness.
Details of the Technique
1. Preparing the Flameworked Pieces
Glass art has many elaborate technical
procedures, but flameworking has a different
flavor, a precious place in our hearts compared
to other kinds of glass techniques. It is a way
of creating tiny elaborate details in a short
time. Therefore, the first step of Low Relief
begins at the torch.
While preparing the glass figure at the torch
consider keeping a small portion of the figure in
the cast piece. A minimum of 60 percent of the
figure should stay out of the casting, which is
important to keeping the piece safe where the
figure meets with cast glass.
A kiln cast portrait with flameworked details.
76
2. Preparing the Wax Model
The Low Relief technique is different from
lost wax process, because glass pieces are
placed on the surface of a wax form. Alter-
A piece that incorporates
a flameworked figure into
a kiln cast piece of glass.
natively, covering all the glass pieces with
wax then shaping the wax is another way to
approach creating form. Placing a minimum of
60 percent of the glass figure on the surface
of the wax positive is essential to creating an
undercut in the plaster silica mold. Without
an undercut, glass pieces might fall out of
the mold with the wax while steaming out
the mold.
Placing the premade glass pieces on
the top surface of the wax helps secure them
and protects their details with plaster and
silica. You must place your pieces in the
bottom of the plaster silica mold for your glass
pieces to stay intact in the final form. If you
place the glass on the side surface of your
mold heat and gravity will force the pieces to
melt and slip out of place.
Shaping the wax with heat gun is essential.
Before starting this step, all your premade
glass figures should be annealed. Before the
next step all the wax particles or dirt on your
glass should be cleaned, because what you
see as wax will turn to glass.
3. Preparing the Mold and Steaming it Out
With respect to the size of the wax positive,
a dam is prepared and the mold material is
poured. After steaming out and cleaning the
wax, there may be some areas where the
plaster has not moved and had made some
bubbles, those areas should be fixed.
4. Loading Glass and Coloring Process
Protecting of the color, bright surface,
details, and form of the flameworked pieces is
the basic goal of this technique.
Creating one unit that combines the
pre-annealed flameworked pieces and the cast
form is the theory of this technique. To realize
this scenario, the glass which is cast into the
form should melt before the flameworked
part. Transparent, clear, and light colors, rock
glasses, and frit between 2 mm and 20 mm
are ideal for this technique. Loading the
glass from small to big diameter, from top to
bottom of the mold, will prevent distortion of
the premade flameworked pieces.
To strengthen the diversity of flameworked
colors, apply some frits and shards in the cast
form to create the effect of depth.
Conclusion
Omur Duruerk
Fatih Duruerk
Omur and Fatih Duruerk live in Denizli, Turkey,
and have worked with glass professionally
since 2006. They are the owners of Karma
Glass Studio. In addition to developing their
artistic glass vision, their aim is to develop
the Studio Glass Movement in Turkey. The
couple organized the first glass flameworking
biennial in Turkey in 2011, the second in 2013,
and the next will take place in 2015. They
design objects with the notion of urban fragility.
Their biggest project, a 14-foot glass rooster
sculpture (symbol of Denizli) is the biggest
open area glass sculpture in Turkey.
Low Relief is a new collaboration between
flameworking and a kiln casting, where each
technique needs the other. It is the combination of the two techniques that creates one
unique outcome. It turns the disadvantages of
these two techniques into new advantages.
With this new technique, the flameworked
figures are on the surface and are vivid, solid,
and 3D without losing detail. You can feel
the toughness of the cast form and the
fragility of flamework piece at the same time;
two different tastes in one glass piece.
This technique has been created with the
artistic notion of friendship between flameworking and casting. You need to respect the
materials otherwise you cannot achieve the
final success. All the energy you put into
realizing a project is to materialize your
thoughts, and therefore, it’s important to
have an artistic concept.
Lucio Bubacco has worked with glass since
his childhood in Murano. Today he is considered one of the most respected figures in
flameworking, and his works are inside many
permanent museum collections. Bubacco has
always been open to new ideas and trying to
combine different glass techniques. Twenty
years ago he combined his flameworked
figures with hot glass forms. Now he is trying
the Low Relief technique, in which the
flameworked figures stay firm on the surface
of a casting.
Lucio Bubacco and Fatih Duruerk
Lucio Bubacco
Lec-Mo
Powder Printing
By Stacy Lynn Smith
I was introduced to kilnformed glass in 2005
by James Yood, a contemporary art historian,
while earning my BFA from the School of the
Art Institute of Chicago. At the time, my
focus was on printmaking and installation art.
After graduating I moved to Portland, Oregon,
and found employment at Bullseye Glass
Company, where I began my journey into combining printmaking methods with kilnformed
glass. Six years have passed and I continue
to be enamored with the possibilities of this
synthesis, both on the job and in my personal
work. Printmaking with glass allows artists to
explore texture, color, durability, fragility, and
space in unique ways. My work often uses
the ability of printmaking to create multiples
to address the social mores associated with
glass. The notion that glass art is precious and
should not be handled lends gravity to pieces
that allow the audience to touch, hold, and
break the work.
The method I am most familiar with is
powder printing, where the artist presses
dry powdered glasses through a screen onto
sheet glass. The glass is then fired in a kiln to
varying temperatures depending on function
and effect. Other practitioners utilizing similar
processes include Kathryn Wightman, Steve
Royston Brown, and Catharine Newell.
Imagery
There are numerous ways to affix an
image onto a screen for powder printing.
Here I will discuss digital imagery suited for
photosensitive emulsion screen printing.
Photosensitive emulsion will be covered later
in the article. Imagery for this process can
be sourced from many materials including
photographs, textiles, drawings, rubbings,
and more. (When including found images in
artwork, it is best to be aware of copyright
laws.) If an image is not originally created in a
digital format, images can be digitized through
photography or scanning. Once the desired
images are in digital form, they are altered in
a photo editing software such as Photoshop to
create an image that has the correct resolution
for the screen mesh. It is essential that the
images consist of pure black and white areas
for photosensitive emulsion screenprinting
processes. Gray tones cannot be used.
After editing, the images are printed onto an
appropriate transparent film, like acetate.
These are called film positives.
78
Stacy Lynn Smith, Yellow Fragment
Photosensitive Emulsion
Screenprinting
Powder printing requires a low screen
mesh count. The lower the count, the more
open the mesh. For this process, a mesh
between 90 and 156 (U.S.) is preferred,
depending upon application. Mesh counts of
137 are fitting for a variety of image types.
After an initial degreasing, the screen is
coated with emulsion. Screen printing emulsion is a two-part, photosensitive, viscous
liquid. Once sensitized according to product
instructions, the emulsion is thinly and evenly
applied to the screen mesh using a scoop
coater. The screen is set aside to dry. Drying
times range depending on studio atmosphere
and equipment. Screen coating and drying
must be accomplished with little to no UV light.
Photography safelights may be used.
After drying, the emulsified screen is
ready to expose with UV light. Exposure units,
which are essentially UV light boxes, can be
purchased or self-made. The film positive is
placed on top surface of the exposure unit
with the toner side up for a correct reading.
The dry screen is then placed on top of the
film. Next, black foam and weight is added to
the screen. Weight ensures adequate contact
between the screen and films, preventing light
seepage and blurry images. A kiln shelf sized
to the screen is usually sufficient weight.
Professional units often include a rubber
vacuum frame for this purpose. The exposure
unit is then turned on for a specific amount of
time. Exposure time varies between emulsions
and units. A calibration test should be performed for accuracy.
Once exposed, the screen is ready to be
washed. Using cold to lukewarm water, the
screen is gently rinsed on both sides. The
areas of the screen that were protected from
the UV light by the black toner of the film
positive wash away, leaving open areas of
mesh for powder to pass through.
(1250 -1275°F ), powder retains much of its
texture and feels like sandpaper after firing.
If fired to tack-fusing temperatures (13001350°F), the grains of powder gloss and
seal, making this an appropriate temperature
for functional pieces while preserving some
texture. Above 1400°F, the print will be glossy
and the powder will have fused into the sheet
glass surface. It is important to consider color
when choosing a firing temperature. Many
powders and sheet glasses “strike”, or mature
to their target color, only when brought to a
full-fuse (1490°F for 10 minutes). Powder
prints often include multiple firings at different
temperatures for desired lay-ups and results.
Resources:
www.stacylynnsmith.com
Classes and video lessons by Stacy Lynn Smith
can be found at www.bullseyeglass.com.
__________________________________
Stacy Lynn Smith, Selection
After printing the emulsion can be removed. This reclaims the screen for future use.
Reclaiming requires emulsion remover and
proper cleaning protocols.
Printing
For printing, you will need 1 oz. condiment
cups, a chip brush, white paper, assorted
lengths of stiff, non-corrugated cardboard, and
compatible sheet glasses and powders.
A piece of white paper is placed onto the
work surface for reclaiming extra powders after
printing. Next, three single condiment cups
are situated on the paper. Clean glass is then
placed on top of the cups, raising the glass
off the work surface. This is to allow for easy
transportation of the glass to the kiln after
printing. Four stacks of cups are arranged
around the glass to support the screen. If
printing three millimeter glass, each stack
will likely need to be three cups high. Powder
printing is an off-contact method, meaning the
screen never touches the glass. There should
be about a three millimeter gap between the
glass and the screen for crisp results.
Once the image is registered, or aligned
properly to the glass, the piece is printed.
Powdered glass is applied to the top of the
screen, above the desired printing area. The
powder is applied evenly and extends past the
print area on either side. Next, a cardboard
squeegee is used to pass the powder over the
image field. It is best to stand and use both
hands while printing. With firm pressure, but
avoiding contact with the glass, powder is
swept back and forth over the imaged screen
area. Each pass deposits more powder onto
the glass. The thicker the powder, the denser
the color appears after firing. The screen is
then set aside. If the print appears as desired,
the glass is placed into a kiln to fire. If the
print appears too light or if detail is lost due
to the over-application of powder, the powder
is brushed off and the image is printed again.
Remnant powder is reclaimed and stored
after printing.
Stacy Lynn Smith, a native of Vancouver,
Washington, earned a BFA from the School
of the Art Institute of Chicago. After returning
to the Northwest, she mounted Accumulate,
her first solo exhibition in 2010, followed by
shows at Art Santa Fe and the Inform exhibition at Bullseye Gallery in 2011. In 2013,
she joined the Research & Education team
at Bullseye, in addition to exhibiting her work
in the duo exhibit The End and After (with
Michael Endo) at the Bullseye Gallery. Later in
2013 she showed new work at SOFA Chicago.
Firing
Heat plays a large role in the aesthetic
qualities of a powder print. Working with
Bullseye Compatible glasses, I fire between
1250-1490°F, depending on the desired
outcome. At low, sintering temperatures
Stacy Lynn Smith, Intersect 2
Lec-Mo
Collisions of Style: Printmaking with Glass
By Kathryn Wightman
There are a myriad of ways that contemporary
artists can combine the two separate
disciplines of printmaking and glassmaking.
Printmaking is used in combination with
glassmaking in a number of different processes
including flat and architectural glass, kilnformed glass, and blown glass. One rationale
to combine print and glass techniques could
be to exploit the unique aesthetic characteristics that printmaking processes can offer.
Printmaking has a language characterized
by a richness of color, depth, texture, and
sensitivity to surface.
My specific interest in combining print and
glass is focused on embedding screenprinted
transfers (decals) into blown glass forms. This
study was the foundation for PhD research at
the University of Sunderland from 2007- 2011.
Overview of PhD Research
During the four years that I researched my
PhD, I encountered many frustrations with the
process of embedding screenprinted transfers
into layers of blown glass. Even though successful artworks were produced, the limitations
I encountered were hindering my professional
practice as an artist and the quality of my
pieces often deemed them unfit for this
purpose. A retrospective analysis of my
previous artwork was undertaken to formally
document the problems that I encountered.
This analysis was carried out using a specifically designed standardised image that clearly
revealed the various problems. Limitations
of the process included the stretching and
distortion of imagery, loss of density resulting
in faded imagery, and loss of clarity and detail
in the imagery. There were also compatibility
issues that resulted in the artwork cracking.
Additionally, it was necessary to provide a
contextual overview that consolidated and
added to existing literature on combining
glass and print processes for the decoration
of blown glass forms.
My research was concerned with developing
and documenting novel methods of working
with glass by drawing inspiration from existing
printmaking techniques and adapting them
for use in the decoration of blown glass forms.
Five different print inspired methods were
explored and an additional two processes,
based on new technologies, were examined.
Each method was introduced and a set of
questions were formulated to structure the
80
Kathryn Wightman, Perpetual Pattern
testing. The results were documented using
photographs and conclusions were drawn
based on whether the different methods
overcame any of the limitations previously
identified in the research. Each process
was assessed in terms of visual quality and
practicality. The various processes were:
Process 1:Screenprinting glass powder to
create a water-slide transfer (decal)
Process 2:Screenprinting glass powder to
create a glass stencil for a roll-up sheet
Process 3:Screenprinting glass powder onto sheet glass to create a roll-up sheet
Process 4:Hand-carving a plaster block to create a patterned roll-up sheet
Process 5:Utilization of photopolymer plates to create a patterned roll-up sheet
Process 6:Utilization of laser cutting
technology to create a patterned roll up sheet
Process 7:Utilization of water-jet cutting
technology to create a patterned roll up sheet
To substantiate my research, I developed
several bodies of artwork that demonstrated
the practicality and creative potential of these
novel glass printing processes. The final stage
of my research was to draw conclusions and
connect them to the aims and objectives
developed at the beginning of my research
study. One striking conclusion I reached upon
completion of my research was the immense
potential for applying print processes to kilnformed glass.
Current Practice
Over the past two years my practice has
focused on the textural, dimensional possibilities that are apparent through exploitation
of powder screenprinting and kilnforming
processes. My approach seeks to balance
concept and technique in a reciprocal manner.
Decorative patterns are used as a way of
challenging the viewer’s perception of reality
by deconstructing visual elements and
presents them in an illusioinistic way. Images
are developed, processed, and visualised
digitally prior to their application in glass.
The development of the visual imagery is
critical to the process and ultimately defines
the application method. The artworks I have
developed to date display innovative techniques
that challenge the common conceptions of
glass powder work.
The demonstration component of my
lec-mo illustrated how it is possible to stack
multiple layers of screenprinted powder on
top of one another to create low relief textural
surfaces. In order to achieve precision when
stacking screens for printing, I developed a
jig system (the “Sift & Shift”) that allows the
screen to be locked in position, but moveable
in a vertical direction. The basic process of
powder screenprinting is described below.
Powder Screenprinting
Powder screenprinting is a method of
creating an image ‘with’ glass. In this process
powdered glass is used as the ink, which is
sifted through the mesh of the screen. When
printing with glass powder it is possible to print
either directly onto a sheet glass substrate or
in some cases (dependent upon imagery) it
is possible to print directly onto the kiln shelf
prior to firing.
Powder screenprinting requires a more
open mesh screen than enamel screenprinting. This is because glass particles are
larger than enamel particles. The recommended mesh size is between 86-137 threads
per inch (U.S) and 32- 55 threads per cm
(International). Powder screenprinting follows
the same set-up process as enamel screenprinting, described below:
1. Coat the screen with photosensitive
emulsion. The coating of photosensitive
emulsion deposited on the screen will be thicker than when coating a higher mesh screen due to the openness of the mesh.
2.Expose the screen with artwork.
3. Wash out the screen.
Care should be given during washout as over blasting will result in the emulsion peeling away from the screen.
4.Set up the screen to print. For powder screenprinting an elevated snap distance may be required. This is because a dense amount of powder is being built up onto the surface below. Therefore space is required in order to not disturb the
deposited powder particles. The recom-
mended snap distance for a multiple layer powder print is 4 mm. The snap should be increased accordingly for subsequent layers.
5.Register the image.
6. Apply the dry glass powder at the base of the image using a spoon to spread it the full width of the image to be printed.
7. A flood stroke is not required to print powder through the screen.
8.Use a squeegee or rigid piece of cardboard to gently push the powder through the screen. The mesh of the screen must not make contact with the surface below to prevent the printed powder being
disturbed.
9. Multiple passes back and forth across the
screen are required to build up a dense enough layer of powder on the surface below. A recommended number of passes is between 8 and 14. Some powder colors contain finer particles that pass through the screen easier. Therefore it is a good idea to check the density of the printed layer after approximately 6 passes.
10.Gently lift the screen to access the glass below. If the powder is stacked too high it will tip at the edges and fall away.
11.Once printed, transfer to kiln for firing.
12.Unsatisfactory prints are cleaned away
by tapping the glass onto a sheet of paper on top of a hard surface such as a bench. This causes the powder to fall away and
be collected.
13.To remove excess powder from the screen use a wide paint brush to push it into the corner. From here the screen can be
unhinged and remaining glass powder tipped onto a sheet of paper. If a second color was to be printed and the image had already been registered it is possible to leave excess powder in the corner to print the second color.
14.Powder screen prints can be fired through a range of temperatures depending upon the desired aesthetics.
Tack fusing (low fire) will give the print
a textured appearance and the powder will
have a granular look to it. However, the
powder will not strike to its true color at a low
temperature. This means transparent colors
will remain relatively opaque in appearance.
Alternatively, the powder print can be fully
fused at higher temperature (high fire). This
means that the powder looses its textural
appearance, but strikes to its true color and
will be shiny in appearance.
The following cycles are a guideline for
firing a powder print on a single layer of 3 mm
Bullseye Glass.
LOW FIRE (Farenheit)
Rate
Temperature
Time
350
1000
20
600
1275
10
AFAP
900
30
150
700
01
AFAP
70
01
high FIRE (Farenheit)
Rate
Temperature
Time
350
1000
20
600
1400
10
AFAP
900
30
150
700
01
AFAP
70
01
low FIRE (Celsius)
Rate
Temperature
Time
175
540
20
315
690
10
AFAP
482
30
65
371
01
AFAP
20
01
HIGH FIRE (Celsius)
Rate
Temperature
Time
175
540
20
315
760
10
AFAP
482
30
65
371
01
AFAP
20
01
__________________________________
Kathryn
Wightman
s t r e n gt h e n i n g c o mm u n it y , c o l l ab o r ati o n , f o r gi n g n e w b o n d s Kathryn Wightman obtained both her BA and
MA from the University of Sunderland (UK)
between 2001 and 2005. In 2011 she completed PhD research (University of Sunderland,
UK) that focused upon the development and
application of creative printmaking processes
for the decoration of blown glass. More recently
she has relocated to New Zealand to undertake an academic post at The Wanganui Glass
School. Current research can be seen as a
development of her PhD work, in a kiln-based
format. She has developed a strong visual
aesthetic rooted in textiles and pattern design
and is successfully integrating digital technologies
and hand-based skills into her practice.
81
pa n e l s
Glass Pipe Art Panel with (l-r) James Baker, Robert Mickelsen, David Francis, Micah Evans and Chris Carlson.
82
Students work in a
youth development
program at Sonoran
Glass School.
pa nel
At-Risk Glass
Moderator: Andrew Page
Panelists: Debbie Bradley, Jerry
Catania, Pearl Dick, Jaime Guerrero,
Jason Mouer, Tracy Kirchmann,
Nick Letson, Joel Ryser
Introductory remarks were delivered by panel
moderator Andrew Page, who is the director
of the Robert M. Minkoff Foundation, which
sponsored the summit of at-risk youth programs
together with the Glass Art Society. Page explained that while many programs have sprung
up since Hilltop Artists in Residence pioneered
the use of glass as a means of providing life
lessons to at-risk youth in 1994, all of these
programs, including Hilltop, are so focused on
their students and on sustaining their programs,
they have very little contact with their counterparts in other parts of the country. The purpose
of this gathering was to provide an opportunity
to share experiences, exchange best practices,
harness synergies between the organizations to
build new connections, and provide a forum for
the discussion of shared experiences.
Jerry Catania of Water Street Glassworks
was the first panelist. In his presentation, he
discussed the founding of his Benton Harbor,
Michigan organization’s after-school glass
program called “Fired Up,” which he said was
inspired by Hilltop Artists in Residence. He
discussed the challenges of funding, and described innovative ways the organization makes
ends meet, including sponsorships and running
a gelato café in the summer season that brings
in income to support programs.
Next up, Pearl Dick discussed her experiences working with youth at Ignite Glass Studios
in Chicago, where she is currently setting up
a separate nonprofit organization to operate
glass classes to at-risk youth. She also spoke
about her earlier experiences with community
organizations in which she found ways to work
with glass on an extremely limited budget.
Jaime Guerrero, who runs a glass program
at Watts Labor Community Action in Los Angeles
spoke about his experiences working with economically disadvantaged youth. He described
his program, that is very loosely organized
and open to anybody who comes in from the
community, as a powerful means of using art
to reach kids who are seeking ways to express
themselves. He spoke about production projects
that generate income by selling designed
objects, and how his program has been taken
under the wing of the Santa Monica Museum.
Jason Mouer of Hilltop Artists in Residence
in Tacoma, Washington, spoke about the origins
of the organization, which date back to 1994.
He also shared how the program is set up and
told success stories about how the rigors of
glass training have helped students develop
discipline. He also discussed an initiative to
start measuring the impact of the program as
a way to strengthen the fundraising efforts.
Tracy Kirchmann, glass instructor at Little
Black Pearl in Chicago, gave a description of
its glass program, which is now part of a
charter high school in the public school system
in an economically disadvantaged area of the
city with a serious problem of gun violence.
Tracy discussed how she started out teaching
conceptual thinking about art, while the
students’ glass skills were being developed,
and she stressed how she doesn’t teach down
to her students.
Nick Letson of Sonoran Glass School in
Tucson, Arizona, shared the fundraising and
marketing strategy of the at-risk youth program
– including community projects and public
art projects.
Debbie Bradley of Neusole Glassworks in
Cincinnati, Ohio, talked about the start of the
at-risk youth program in 2010. She talked about
the evolution of the programs – a partnership
with two YMCAs – and the students who improved
a great deal as the program has evolved.
Joel Ryser who is starting up a program
in Davenport, Iowa, was the final panelist who
discussed the challenges of starting up a new
program. Drawing on his experience as a former
teacher in the public schools, he wanted to
devote himself to starting up an at-risk youth
s t r e n gt h e n i n g c o mm u n it y , c o l l ab o r ati o n , f o r gi n g n e w b o n d s program in the quad-city schools to target
children from lower income backgrounds.
The remaining time was devoted to a question
and answer session, in which the term “at-risk
youth” was discussed. We heard from the
founder of Little Black Pearl, Monica Haslip,
who was in attendance, and everyone was
invited to a student exhibition and demo held
that evening at Little Black Pearl, with bus
transportation from the GAS conference
sponsored by the Minkoff Foundation.
An audio recording of the panel, as well
as additional resources, can be found at
atriskglass.org.
Travel for panel participants was sponsored
by the Robert M. Minkoff Foundation Ltd.
__________________________________
Andrew Page, the editor-in-chief of GLASS: The
UrbanGlass Art Quarterly, works with art critics,
museum curators, and practicing artists to put
the most important work being done in glass
into a critical context. He is also the director
of the Robert M. Minkoff Foundation, which
advances the glass arts through funding and
initiating artist residencies, symposiums, and
publishing projects. Prior to editing GLASS,
Page was the executive editor of Avenue
Magazine, the arts editor of the Philadelphia
Weekly newspaper, and a staff writer at
Brooklyn Bridge Magazine. His articles have
appeared in the Philadelphia Inquirer as well as
New York, Details, Philadelphia, and Brooklyn
Bridge magazines. Page’s essay on the history
of Studio Glass appeared in a book entitled
Contemporary Glass (Black Dog Publishing,
2008). He is a graduate of Vassar College
and lives in Manhattan.
83
pa nel
Green Forum: Chicago 2014
A roundtable discussion moderated by Chris Clarke and Julie Conway
Since 2007, GAS has hosted the Green Forum,
a panel discussion that focuses on how
glassmakers can use less energy and save
money in our fuel-intensive industry. At the
2014 Chicago gathering, Chris Clarke, director
of operations at Pittsburgh Glass Center (PGC),
and Julie Conway, founder of BioGlass.org,
co-moderated the Green Forum. The forum
was set-up as a roundtable discussion and felt
more like a community gathering than a traditional panel presentation. More than 60 glass
artists, inventors, equipment builders, studio
managers, professors, and business owners
attended the forum. The room was packed
to capacity, and people were spilling out into
the hallway eager to know more about making
their glass studio practice more economical
and energy efficient.
The Green Forum presentation included
information, photos, charts, and graphs of
current studio efforts, new equipment, and
glass projects that help save energy. In
anticipation of the conference, Julie and Chris
sent a call for submissions to artists, studio
managers, and equipment builders to invite
them to come share their latest developments.
Julie Conway began the discussion with a
presentation on the history of glass and how
Bioglass.org formed by bringing an international community of glass artists together in one
place, with a mission to educate and discuss
energy issues. Her experiences in Italy, France,
and other historical glassmaking centers of the
world allowed her to personally connect with
glassmakers and hear about their struggles
keeping up with operational costs and their
fears that rising energy costs could ultimately
lead to the loss of their prized glass traditions
and techniques. The increasing price of fossil
fuels, the closing of factories, and loss of jobs
have hurt glassmaking centers in Europe;
likewise, studio artists are feeling the pain
of high operating costs.
Chris Clarke presented the energy-saving
efforts made at PGC including creating thermal
cascades from waste heat for the building and
other recuperation systems. He explained how
daily operation costs decreased due to energysaving efforts.
Public access studio managers, technicians,
and teachers including Chuck Lopez, the
studio manager at Pratt Fine Arts Center; Slate
Grove, the studio manager at UrbanGlass;
84
Angus M. Powers working an ancient furnace reproduction at his personal studio in Alfred, New York. This was an in-depth
research project about and running an inexpensive glass studio using local and sustainable resources. Photo: Dan Volk
Angus Powers, an associate professor at Alfred
University; Ben Sharp; the studio manager
at Pilchuck Glass School; and Mary White,
a former professor at San Jose State and
consultant at the Crucible, all had much to say
about their respective programs and all agreed
that energy savings equals money savings.
Cost is a touchy subject for many educators;
some fear that addressing their energy
consumption will bring the administration’s
attention to their final energy bill and risk
their program being shut down. However, in
the long term, forthright action taken to save
energy can help save glass programs.
Recuperation experts Charlie Correll and
Eddie Bernard both presented new models for
recuperated furnaces and shared their newest
discoveries about efficient thermal cascades
made from waste heat. Using recuperated
glory holes and furnaces can save energy by
capturing lost heat and feeding it back into
the system.
Eddie Bernard also displayed a damper
flue system that make furnaces more efficient
and discussed a hot water heater exchange
that uses the heat lost from the glory hole.
“The flue damper system works by measuring
the pressure inside the flue and then opening
or closing proportionally to maintain a stable
pressure in the furnace. When the furnace
goes to high fire, the pressure inside the
furnace rises and the damper opens. When
it goes to low fire, the pressure drops and the
damper closes. Anywhere between low and
high fire will cause the damper to be somewhere between open and closed.”
Hugh Jenkins and Jordan Kube submitted
their recent side-by-side test of a recuperated
versus non-recuperated glory hole, built last
year. Their test results demonstrated a 50%
energy savings when using a glory hole with
recuperated heat.
Julie took a moment to honor Durk
Valkema and his father Sybren for spearheading
many modern energy savings concepts and
practical furnace building techniques. Many
artists and inventors are greatly indebted to
the Valkemas’ legacy.
Christian Thornton from Oaxaca, Mexico,
is running a glass production studio where
a methane digester miraculously provides
electricity to his village while also running the
equipment of his glass studio. He uses a triplefuel burner system that utilizes methane gas,
vegetable oil, and propane to melt his recycled
glass batch. The studio also has a multi-port
work station that many people can use at
once, which only relies on a single fuel source.
Garrett Wheeler represented Green VI, a
local program in Hawaii that is cleaning up
the streets by recycling the discarded glass in
the hotshop, alongside other trash clean-up
efforts. The hotshop uses waste vegetable oil
as fuel and provides work to local residents.
Timm Muth, from Jackson County Green
Energy Park in Sylva, North Carolina, shared
the latest news about the their vegetable oil
ceramics kilns, in addition to the use of
recovered landfill methane gas and other
clean energy resources as fuel for a blacksmith
forge, glassblowing furnace, and kilns.
Salem Community College is operating
with methane gas as a supplemental fuel to
run their hot shop. The future of glassmaking is
going to depend on the progressive education
of young glass artists, and their understanding
of glass as an art form as well as the resources
needed to create it.
Ed VanDijk submitted photos of a woodfired glass furnace, based on ancient Roman
furnace building techniques. It was amazing to
fathom that for thousands of years glassmakers
have been making incredibly beautiful glasswork without the use of electricity. Angus
Powers also uses a furnace base on ancient
Roman techniques to demonstrate energy use
to his students at Alfred University.
Hugh Jenkins and Pablo Soto have made
giant energy-saving strides in their own individual studios by adding solar panels and hot
water heat exchange systems. It was inspiring
to see these individuals adapt their own
equipment to decrease their overhead costs.
Brian Kerkvliet, from Washington State,
has built his own energy-efficient studio, which
has been running flawlessly for the last six
years. His concept is to utilize a low flow down
draft system that maximizes heat recovery of
exhaust gasses while minimizing the flow of
the incoming air. As a result, the furnace idles
at almost off and sounds like it is off; low
noise and a low fuel bill.
Here was a lovely comment from Ed
Schmid, author and illustrator of the Glassblowing Techniques book series, “I really
enjoyed your presentation at GAS. As tough
as it is to cram all of that info in with such
Chris Clarke
a short time frame, you did the best job of
organization and moved through the info better
than anyone I have ever seen at any conference I have been to. Congratulations!”
There was definitely too much information
to cover in such a short allotment of time, but
we hope the audience will continue to grow
and share their knowledge with one another.
Julie Conway has made an effort to
organize these discussions on the GAS website,
BIoglass.org, and a Facebook discussion page.
Glass artists are now sharing ideas internationally and helping inspire each other to take
energy saving steps in their studio practice.
There were many more topics and amazing
energy-savings techniques that were not
presented due to time constraints.
Questions for Next Year’s Green Forum
What does efficiency mean? For some,
increased efficiency is simply decreasing energy costs. For others, it’s increasing the ratio
of creative output to operating costs.
What if there was an independent
organization which could analyze, rate, and
certify a hot shop as “energy efficient” based
on a set of published, well-defined standards
(basically a LEED standard for hot shops)?
Could GAS play a role?
Solar panels that provide energy to the Crucible in Oakland, California.
s t r e n gt h e n i n g c o mm u n it y , c o l l ab o r ati o n , f o r gi n g n e w b o n d s Julie Conway
What kinds of things could GAS do to
support bridging the information gap between
the equipment experts and the hot shop
operators?
__________________________________
Chris Clarke has been the Director of Studios
and Technology at the Pittsburgh Glass Center
since the opening in October 2001. He is
responsible for the management, usage, maintenance and improvements of the PGC facility
and its technology including computer and
phone systems, HVAC, and all studios including two 1,000 lb. furnaces, eight glory holes,
and over 30 kilns. Chris received his BFA in
sculpture from Massachusetts College of Art in
Boston and an MFA in Glass from Kent State
University in Ohio. He received the Creative
Glass Center of America Fellowship in 2000.
Chris has worked as an artist, metal fabricator,
and craftsman for over 15 years, and his work
has been exhibited at museums and galleries
across the country. When he is not in the PGC
studios, you can find him either restoring his
1910 Arts and Crafts home or fly fishing in
Pennsylvania’s beautiful streams.
Julie Conway is a glass artist and the founder
of BioGlass.org. She works in a community
studio and shares resources to create her glass
art. She, along with other concerned glass
artisans, are creating bridges for alternative
renewable heating technology and glass
melting needs, resulting in a positive environmental impact and savings for glass studios.
“As a contemporary glassmaker, I believe that
we need rapid and creative responses to the
current human and environmental challenges.
By introducing innovative ideas that apply
to our needs as glassmakers and working
together as a global community, we can ﬁnd
solutions for success that save money, time,
and energy – in essence, becoming more
sustainable.”
85
pa nel
Glass Pipe Art: A Critical Discussion of a Maturing Field
Moderator: Jim Baker
Panelists: Chris Carlson, Micah Evans, David Francis, Robert Mickelsen
Robert Mickelsen, AK47
Robert Mickelsen
The American Glass Pipe Movement is now
nearly 20 years old, but many people who are
intimately involved with glass art in America
are only recently becoming aware of it. What
they are discovering is that contemporary glass
pipes are no longer the stereotypical bongs
and spoons of Grateful Dead concerts. They
have evolved into a counter-culture phenomenon driven by a generation of artists that are
ushering in acceptance of a long-held taboo.
Previously, the American Glass Pipe Movement was strictly an underground movement
populated by artisans with an outlaw attitude.
However, modern “Pipers” are also professional artists who take great pride in their work
and employ sophisticated business practices
to promote themselves. They are pioneers of
social media and are constantly developing
never-before-seen techniques in flameworking. The best artists are treated like rock stars
complete with six-figure incomes and all the
amenities associated with such notoriety.
The American Glass Pipe Movement has
benefitted many more people than just the
Pipers. As a result of their success, manufacturers who service the flameworking industry
have experienced tremendous growth. There
are new glasses, torches, kilns, tools, galleries,
and schools that would have never existed
without the success of glass pipes. Longestablished teaching institutions that specialize
in scientific glassblowing have experienced
86
a surge in enrollment from young would-be
pipers seeking to learn the skills needed to
ply the trade. There is no question that the
American Glass Pipe Movement has made an
indelible impression on the glass art scene.
The future holds much promise for the
Pipers and the movement shows no sign of
slowing down. Thousands of future glass art
collectors are currently getting their start with
glass pipes. These new collectors are young
and some are very young. They love glass
and will be collecting for a long time. They are
already showing interest in other types of glass
objects besides pipes. This bodes well for
anyone involved in glass art, not just Pipers.
The Pipers themselves are showing increased
interest in the broader glass and contemporary
art community, attending Art Basel, visiting art
museums, and traveling extensively to broaden
their artistic horizons (after all, they have the
means). With their expanding awareness of
the art world and the heady success of their
current work enabling them, it is exciting to
imagine what the next decade holds in store.
Micah Evans
I have been involved in the pipe industry
and making pipes since 1998 and let me tell
you, it has been a roller coaster ride of fun
and fear, success and failure. In the early
years pipe makers hitchhiked down the road
less traveled, selling pipes out of gun cases
wherever we could find a like-minded crowd.
In the beginning it was fun, I was learning to
work with glass and I could pay the bills by
making pipes for friends. Secretly, though,
it was hard for me to work through the guilt
instilled by growing up in the DARE (Drug Abuse
Resistance Education) generation and knowing
that my craft was looked down on by society at
large. As I matured as an artist I began making
a lot of serious sculptural work, which also
functioned as pipes, but I found it hard to gain
momentum because of the stigma attached to
the pipe. As a result I had to create two bodies
of work and keep them separate. The alias that
used to protect me from the law now protected
my art portfolio from my pipe portfolio. Over
the years I have been discouraged that some
of my best work had to be hidden and kept out
of slide shows leaving huge gaps in my story
as an artist. Hell, I hid the fact that I made
pipes from my parents for 10 years before I
finally broke down and told them how I paid the
bills. But now it seems this country’s attitude is
changing towards pipe and marijuana culture.
Even my mother, who proudly displays her
signed Sarah Palin t-shirt, is ok with the fact
that I work in the pipe industry.
Over the past 15 years I have seen what
was once a deep subculture of self taught
artists ignite into a borderline pop culture
explosion. There are masters of the medium,
and our aliases have become our brand.
Instead of running from the law we are signing
autographs. Instead of making it up as we
go we are studying with masters and pushing
flameworked borosilicate to places that we
couldn’t have imagined 15 years ago. We
still face negative opinions from the more
traditional corners of the contemporary art
and craft world, but we are developing the
language to be understood and accepted in
these circles. I now show mostly pipes in my
slide shows and have come to understand
myself as an artist more fully because of it.
I can have serious conversations about craft
and design using my pipes as an example.
I am proud of that work and am grateful that it
is starting to be accepted as a traditional craft
object not to be feared or easily dismissed.
There are many more like me in this subculture
and in the next ten years I see a wave of
new and exciting work, pipe and non pipe,
exploding from it.
Chris Carlson
Art is changing, evolving rapidly with
technology, seeping into the sciences and
embracing social change. To have a practice
or engage in an open-ended creative process,
the artist no longer makes an object that is
an end in itself, but instead aspires to make
something that is the byproduct of a larger
exploration into the unknown.
It was uplifting to see the glass pipe
discussion so well received at the Chicago GAS
conference. Now is a very energetic time for
glass pipes, and they are being accepted and
embraced on many levels. The convergence of
great artwork and legalization has pushed the
momentum of the pipe movement immensely.
Previously, to be exposed to pipe making,
you had to have a friend who was involved or
be following the Grateful Dead to even know
what was happening. There was almost no
information on how to make pipes and very
little specialized tools; most tools were hand
made and there were only a few colors to work
with. Most people who bought a piece kept it
forever (and probably hid it somewhere).
As a pipe maker you had to be willing to
potentially break the law and dedicate your
life to a craft that was looked down upon by
society at large. I think with the popularization
of the internet and medical marijuana made
people feel more inclined to share pictures of
their pipes, which encouraged both collecting
and making. With the advancements of
materials, knowledge, support, and large
social media audiences, there are a lot more
people being exposed to amazing pieces of
pipe art, and this exposure not only encourages
collecting, but it encourages talented and
creative people to put their energy into pipe
making. It’s exciting to be a part of it, and I’m
optimistic for the future.
David Francis
The What if? Imperative
Pipes, like vessels, have a functional
aspect that, for some, automatically precludes
their status as fine art objects. I see them
as sculptures in their own right and thier
functionality is becoming more and more
aestheticized; it is often concealed or cryptically
encoded in the object as part of a fascinating
conceptual framework. As a curator of both
glass and contemporary art, I am intrigued by
the avant-garde quality of artwork that is at
once illegal and becoming-legal at the same
time, depending on state jurisdiction.
In terms of content, some of the best
pipes refer to the Art Toy Revolution and other
pop culture phenomena; some are cartoonbased figures carrying guns (Ryno’s Suicide
Ducky) or suicide-bomber vests (JAG’s Bomber
series). Many artists offer a take on our postmodern world, reflecting a love of Thanatos,
evoking kind of Nietzschean joy in the face of
such sobering realities as corporate personhood, private money in the election system,
and the erosion of civil liberties. Other artists
James Baker
Robert Mickelsen x Banjo, Femalienne
create classic hippie colors swirling together
in trippy, psychedelic patterns, or eroticized
women often festoon some of the more
decorative pieces.
As the Pipe Movement matures Pipers are
begining to seek new audiences in contemporary art by shifting the pipes functionality from
smoking to kinetic interaction (for example
a wall-mounted glass sculpture that one
interacts with by exhaling into). Perhaps the
pejorative sense of the movement’s origins
will fade into memory. From what I have been
lucky enough to see, artistic experimentation
is well under way in the work of my copanelists as well as artists like Buck (Ryan
Harris) and Snic Barnes, who consider
themselves glass artists that make both pipes
and sculptures. Perhaps my favorite example
of all is a Buck x Snic collaboration involving
a portable torch kit in a backpack, a hike into
the deep forest for the ephemeral installation
of a dazzling, site-specific boro sculpture
consisting of geometric lines encircling a tree.
s t r e n gt h e n i n g c o mm u n it y , c o l l ab o r ati o n , f o r gi n g n e w b o n d s Serving as moderator for this panel, I
came in with few prejudices and no previous
knowledge of glass pipes. As I talked to the
panelists, and learned about their interests
and perspective, I found them remarkably
thoughtful and articulate (frankly, something I
had not expected – I did have that prejudice).
Not only did they take a great deal of pride in
their work, but they also saw themselves as
artist/entrepreneurs in a rapidly expanding
field at a time when we’re seeing a softening
of social mores around pipe making.
It was heartening to see the engagement
of the hundreds of people who attended.
A show of hands revealed that half were
involved in pipe making and the other half
curious. Though it was anticipated that the
core debate might revolve around whether
or not a pipe should be accepted as art –
and there was some discussion about that -instead most of the dialog centered on the
vitality of the movement itself. It became
evident that the energy fueling technical and
creative innovation has been generated from
within the field rather than from a yearning for
art world acceptance.
The panel pipe makers were quite willing
to take on complex issues about their work –
such as the role of money in fueling the field’s
growth, the challenge of balancing personal
anonymity with the realities of having large
followings, as well as recognizing that the
formerly marginalized status of the field –
which had great appeal to many pipemakers
– is now vanishing as the field become more
accepted by the culture at large.
I am intrigued. Will the energy and enthusiasm in the field lead to further technical and
creative innovations and, in turn, influence
glass making in general? Will their currently
robust markets continue to expand and
endure? Will artists emerge from the field who
will impact the larger world of contemporary
artists and their audiences and, in so doing,
influence other fields of art?
87
Robert Mickelsen was born in 1951 in Fort
Belvoir, Virginia and raised in Honolulu,
Hawaii. His work is exhibited in many prominent collections including the Renwick Gallery
of American Crafts at the Smithsonian
Institution, the Corning Museum of Glass,
Toledo Museum of Art, Museum of Arts and
Design, Carnegie Museum of Art, Mint Museum,
Cleveland Museum of Art and the Museum of
American Glass at Wheaton Village. He has
taught extensively at the major glass schools
including the Pilchuck Glass School, Penland
School of Crafts, The Studio at the Corning
Museum of Glass, Pratt Fine Arts, and
Pittsburgh Glass Center. He has published
numerous technical and historical articles on
flameworked glass. Robert served for six years
on the Board of Directors of the Glass Art
Society as Treasurer and Vice President.
Micah Evans began working with glass in
1999 in Seattle Washington. He spent the
better part of a decade traveling, teaching,
and working with some of the best craftsman
this country has to offer. He began a three-year
residency at the Penland School of Crafts in
the spring of 2012. Micah is the first flame
worker to receive a residency at Penland.
88
Chris Carlson was raised in Los Angeles,
California, and began flameworking glass in
2001. After only two years in a factory production setting he began making his own work,
taking advantage of historical glassblowing
processes at the torch, primarily canework
and murrini. Also working in photography,
printmaking, mixed-media, and flameworked
glass street art, Carlson’s work is featured in
the movie Degenerate Art and has been shown
at the Center on Contemporary Art in Seattle,
Washington. Carlson lives and works in
Portland, Oregon with his beautiful family.
James Baker is currently Executive Director
of the Pilchuck Glass School in Seattle and
Stanwood, Washington. Previously he served
as President of Maine College of Art in
Portland, Maine (2006-2010) and as Executive
Director of Anderson Ranch Arts Center in
Snowmass Village, Colorado (1995-2006).
Nationally, Baker has served on the boards
of the Alliance of Artists Communities (chair
2004-2005), the Association of Independent
Colleges of Art, and Design and the
Nominating Committee for the Glass Art
Society. He has moderated panels at SOFA,
Art Palm Beach, and the national conferences of the Alliance of Artists Communities
and the Glass Art Society.
David Francis works primarily as an artistcurator with a practice informed by archaeology
(field excavator, 1985-2005) and poetics
(MFA, PhD in poetry and critical theory,
University of Washington). From 2005-2013,
he curated exhibitions for the Center on
Contemporary Art (CoCA) in Seattle. In
addition to more than 20 curatorial essays in
exhibition catalogs, his publications include a
book of award-winning poems, and a book on
backpacking in Oaxaca. In 2013, he curated
one of the first exhibitions in a contemporary
art context to focus on flameworked pipes.
Currently, he serves as curator for the Museum
of Glass in Tacoma.
c o n f e r e n c e e v e n t s & p r o g r am
Conference attendees wear didymium glasses while sitting in the front row of a flameworking demo.
Glass Art Society’s 43rd Annual Conference Program
Chicago, Illinois, March 19 -22, 2014
Shane Fero
accepting the
Honorary Lifetime
Membership
Award.
Events and Ongoing Activities
Registration, Information table, Technical
Display, Education Resource Center and
Posters, International Student Exhibition,
Neon Show
GAS Collectors Tour: Tour to private collections,
Lightology, Holly Hunt Showroom, Dreihaus
Museum, Ken Saunders Gallery, and Echt
Gallery. Private demo by Rik Allen and Shelley
Muzlowski Allen.
__________________________________
Wednesday, March 19, 2014
Chicago Day of Glass: Gallery exhibitions
in the Chicago area
Dan Dailey, Lifetime Achievement Award
Acceptance & Lecture - Illustrating with
a Glass Palette
Albert Paley Willson Lecture Glass & Steel: The Sympathy of Opposites
Theaster Gates Keynote Lecture Reflections on the Future of Making
Ignite Glass Studios:
Sarah King Demo: Cold - How to Mirror Glass
Jonathan Chapman Demo: Flame Building on Curiosity
Richard Demo: Hot - Get it Wicked Hot
and Swing it Over Your Head!
West Supply:
Pre-Conference Reception: Fundraiser-dinner held at Ignite Glass Studios
__________________________________
Marc Petrovic Demo: Hot - Avian Roll-up
Thursday, March 20, 2014
Stacy Lynn Smith Lec-Mo - Powder Printing
Palmer House:
Opening Reception at Palmer House
Shane Fero Lifetime Membership Award
Acceptance
Gallery Hop
90
Vittorio Costantini Demo: Flame Sea Creatures
__________________________________
Friday, March 21, 2014
Palmer House:
Robert DuGrenier Lecture - Successful
Collaborations: Going Beyond the Limits of Your Own Studio Space
Forum - Combining Tradition with New
Technology to Create Eco-Efficient
Glass Studios. Panelists: Chris Clarke (moderator) and Julie Conway (moderator)
Emerging Artists Presentations Steven Ciezki, Sweet Spot
Karen Donnellan, The Intangible in Practice
Charlotte Potter, Between Self and Other
James Yood Strattman Lecture W(h)ither Glass? The Next 50 Years
Tavs Jorgensen & Gayle Matthias Lecture - Glass Mold Innovation Through
Collaborative Research
At-Risk Youth Forum - “New Directions”
High School After School Glass Programs. Debbie Bradley, Jerry Catania, Andrew Page (moderator), Pearl Dick, Jaime Guerrero, Tracy Kirchmann, Nick Letson, Jason Mouer, Joel Ryser
Vittorio Costantini
Joe Cariati Demo: Hot - The Fast and the
Curious
Yusuke Takemura Demo: Cold - A Unique Way of Cutting Glass
Shane Fero Demo: Flame - Flameworking
the Figure Fantastic
Rik Allen & Shelley Muzylowski-Allen Demo: Hot - Hot Glass Sculpting: Hyprovational
West Supply:
Mark Hursty Demo: Hot - Pressed Into Service: Pressing Studio Glass Art in the US,
UK and China
Amy Lemaire Demo: Flame - Linkage:
Soft Glass Assembly in the Flame
Saman Kalantari Lec-Mo - Paper-thin Pâte
de Verre: A New Approach
Glass Pipe Art Panel - A Critical Discussion of
a Maturing Field. Panelists: James Baker (moderator), Chris Carlson, Micah Evans, David Francis, Robert Mickelsen
Sophie Kahn & Norwood Viviano Labino Lecture - Digital Playground: The Power
of CAD and 3D Printing
Matt Durran Lecture - Face Saving
Chris Carlson Demo: Flame - Borosilicate Basketweave Hollow Sphere
Dante Marioni & Preston Singletary Demo: Hot - Collaborative Works
Ethan Stern Demo: Cold - Coldworking
Beyond Tradition
__________________________________
Kiva Ford Demo: Flame - Encapsulated
Saturday, March 22, 2014
Palmer House:
Benjamin Britton Lec-Mo - Digital Art
Techniques for Kiln-Formed Glass Art
Improvisation: Mechanized Biomodification
Detroit Glass House: Taylor Kurrle & Andrea
Oleniczak Lecture - Contemporary Tools:
3D Printing to Seed Funding
Angus Powers, J.J. Riviello & Miles van
Rensselaer Demo: Hot - Material Hybridity: Fluid Negotiations with Metal and Glass
Design Panel - The Business of Design & the Role of Glass. Panelists: Tom Jacobs of Krueck + Sexton, Rick Valicenti, Alberto Velez and Angie West of West Supply
Informal Poster Presentations
James Carpenter Lecture - Light in the
Public Realm
Silent and Live Auction
Alison Berger Lecture - Reinterpretation Through a Modern Lens
Education Resource Center
GAS Business Meeting
Closing Night Party at the Chicago
Cultural Center
Martin Janecky Demo: Hot - Inside Sculpting
Kristina Logan Demo: Flame – Beadmaking: Details and Precision at the Torch
West Supply:
Julia & Robin Rogers Demo: Hot Meeting of the Minds
Amber Cowan Demo: Flame Morphing the Mundane
Kathryn Wightman Lec-Mo - Collisions of Style -
Printmaking ‘with’ Glass
Dan Dailey Demo: Hot - White Forms
Micah Evans Demo: Flame - Working by Feel
Lucio Bubacco, M. Fatih Duruerk & Omur
Duruerk Lec-Mo - Low Relief: Flameworked Glass Figures that Don’t Collapse in the Kiln
Goblet Grab at the Palmer House
Auction Preview at the Palmer House
Portfolio Review at the School of the
Art Institute of Chicago
Dan Dailey
Presenter Abstracts
Jonathan Chapman
Demo: Flame - Building on Curiosity
Reacting to the influence of science, technology,
and mechanics, this demonstration will
explore Jonathan Chapman’s artistic
curiosities at the torch.
Chris Carlson
Amber Cowan
Demo: Flame - Borosilicate Basketweave
Hollow Sphere
Chris will be assembling flat cane squares
in the flame to create a finished hollow
sphere with a tiny hole. He will pre-make
the cane and will show cutting, arranging,
preparing collars, assembling, shaping, and
cold punty seals.
Demo: Flame - Morphing the Mundane
By revitalizing and reconstructing the glass
in our everyday lives, this demonstration will
reveal ways in which recycled and factory
produced pressed-glass can be flameworked
and formed to be used in sculpture or jewelry.
The demonstration will cover technical
problem-solving for using found glass and will
discuss histories related to the factories that
created the found glass. The demonstration
will include how to pull usable canes from
scrap glass and creating components that
will be constructed into a larger sculpture at
the torch.
Dante Marioni and Preston Singletary,
Wolves in the Forest, 2011
Richard Royal
Dante Marioni & Preston Singletary
Demo: Hot - Get it Wicked Hot and Swing it
Over Your Head!
Richard Royal will be making a piece from his
Optical Lens series. The series is an homage
to the Fresnel lens, used in lighthouses all over
the world. Not only are these lenses beautiful,
they are instrumental in saving thousands of
lives in both secluded locations and densely
populated places. In a Fresnel lens glass
and light create a guiding force that is often
unnoticed and taken for granted.
Demo: Hot - Collaborative Works
After years of establishing their respective
careers, two friends come together to merge
their talents in a collaborative artwork. Their
piece will combine elements of each artist’s
distinct aesthetic approach and highly developed set of technical skills. Their combined
sensibilities include Marioni’s elegant Venetian
forms, rich colors, and delicate reticello
patterning alongside Singletary’s signature
formline designs and sculpted glass animals
inspired by his native Tlingit heritage from the
southeastern Alaska coast.
92
Micah Evans
Demo: Flame - Working by Feel
Working with clear glass has to do with reading
the heat and feeling the material respond
before it is visually hot. Micah Evans will
demonstrate how to use heat gradients to
create complex shapes and push borosilicate
glass to its limits.
Martin Janecky,
Big Boy 5
Amy Lemaire
Demo: Flame - Linkage: Soft Glass Assembly
in the Flame
Hollow flameworked soft glass components
will be fabricated and then assembled hot to
create a complex sculptural form.
Martin Janecky
Kiva Ford
Demo: Flame - Encapsulated
This presentation will focus on the assembly of
a decorative bottle-within-a-bottle. Emphasis
will be put on the techniques involved for
encapsulating the miniature bottle within the
larger bottle.
Demo: Hot - Inside Sculpting
This demonstration will be about sculpting
glass and will focus on the human head and
trying to bring out expression and feeling.
Benjamin Britton
Lec-Mo: Digital Art Techniques for Kiln-Formed
Glass Art
From photographs to line drawings to computercontrolled laser and waterjet cut stencils and
forms, this talk will review processes and procedures used to produce 35” x 20” composite
glass wall panels. Digital art tools including
details about specific tools, software, machine
controlled processes, and file format types will
be presented.
Saman Kalantari
Kristina Logan
Demo: Flame - Beadmaking: Details and
Precision at the Torch
Kristina will demonstrate how she flameworks
large-scale beads that have smooth uniform
shapes. She will also explain how to place
precise dots and patterns on the surface of
these forms and alter the dots by dragging
and picking.
Lec-Mo - Paper-thin Pâte de Verre:
A New Approach
Saman Kalantari will describe the process of
using recycled paper to create glass objects
and explain how his social-political experiences
in Iran and new challenges in Europe have
influenced his work.
Alison Berger
Rik Allen & Shelley Muzylowski-Allen, Cerulean Paint
Rik Allen & Shelley Muzylowski-Allen
Demo: Hot - Hyprovational Improvisation:
Mechanized Biomodification
The artists will demonstrate hot glass sculpting
with the use of inside/outside sculpting
techniques, torch work, and hot assembly.
The demo will focus on improvisational hot
work to create a unique sculptural experience.
Drawing from their combined skills and
interests, Rik and Shelley will create
something outside of the known Universe.
Lecture - Reinterpretation Through
a Modern Lens
In this lecture Alison Berger will present
her the artistic process, which is inspired
by historical references, and will show
how she transforms glass and metal into
timeless works.
Design Panel
Panel - The Business of Design & the Role
of Glass
Panelists: Tom Jacobs of Krueck + Sexton,
Rick Valicenti, Alberto Velez and Angie West
of West Supply
Panelists will discuss their experience as
entrepreneurs and will highlight strategies for
growing a design business.
Detroit Glass House:
Taylor Kurrle & Andrea Oleniczak
Lecture - Contemporary Tools: 3D Printing
to Seed Funding
This lecture will explore ways that modern
technology can be applied to glass, public
access fabrication studios, and opportunities
for business development.
94
Pre-Conference and Post-Conference Workshops
Workshops in Chicago
Workshops Outside of Chicago
Peter Patterson Glassworks
Karen Willenbrink-Johnsen & Jasen Johnsen:
Hot Glass Sculpting
Boyd Sugiki and Lisa Zerkowitz: Four Days,
Four Forms: Refining Skills
A Taste of Hot Glass
Paperweights
Chicago Glass Collective
Carol Milne: Secrets of Knitting With Glass
Kathryn Wightman & Jeffrey Sarmiento: Graphic
Glass-Patterns and Imagery for Kilnformers
Water Street Glassworks
Kait Rhoads: Form and Color
Inspired Fire Glass Studio and Gallery
Lucio Bubacco & Fatih Duruerk: Low Relief of
Glass: Two Techniques, One Unique Outcome
Special Exhibitions & Gallery Hop
MADEgallery
1430 W. Chicago Ave, Chicago, IL 60642
312.733.7307
www.facebook.com/madegallery
How Glass Is... A Curated Group of
Contemporary Glass
March 20 - April 1, 2014
Opening reception: Thursday, March 20, 7 pm
Mike Shelbo has selected this group showing
of contemporary glass out of artist submissions
from all worlds of glassmaking and all generations. The show focuseson bringing a new
audience to share in a different view of modern
glass art and see work from the underground
and today’s leading and emerging artists
during the 2014 Chicago GAS Conference.
John E. Bannon, Bored of Frustration
GAS Neon Exhibition
Ken Saunders Gallery*
Palmer House, 3rd Floor - Ashland/Congress/
Harvard Rooms
Friday, March 21, 9 am - 1 pm & 5 - 7 pm
Saturday, March 22, 11 am - 4 pm
230 West Superior Street, Chicago, IL
312.573.1400
kensaundersgallery.com
Neon and Plasma Artists show their enlightened
glass artwork at the GAS Conference.
ECHT Gallery*
222 W Superior St, Chicago, IL
312.440.0288
www.echtgallery.com
Oben Abright, Janusz Walentynowicz,
& Daniel Clayman
March 21 - April, 2014
Special opening reception:
Friday, March 21, 5 - 7:30 pm
These three artists’ work will be featured at
the gallery during the 2014 GAS conference.
Original Voices, A Group Show Celebrating
Young Artists
March 20 - April, 2014
Special opening reception:
Friday, March 21, 5 - 7:30 pm
Lotton Gallery*
900 N. Michigan Avenue, Level 6
(Magnificent Mile)
Chicago, IL 60611
312-664-6203
www.lottongallery.com
Three Generations of Glass: The Lotton Family
Special opening reception: Friday, March 21,
5 - 8 pm
s t r e n gt h e n i n g c o mm u n it y , c o l l ab o r ati o n , f o r gi n g n e w b o n d s Goblins!!! An Exhibit of New Work
by Mike Shelbo
Opening reception: Thursday, March 20, 7 pm
This exhibition will highlight new solo work from
artist, Mike Shelbo. Known for his Goblins and
work with Glass Alchemy on their color palette
poster, this show is an opportunity to see many
goblin pendants in person, including several
new unreleased series. New sculpture work will
also be shown using glass and mixed media,
revealing Shelbo’s love of found objects.
Vale Craft Gallery*
230 W. Superior Street (lower level), Chicago IL
312.337.3525
www.valecraftgallery.com
Midwestern Glass group exhibition,
Special reception: Friday, March 21, 5 - 8 pm
*participated in the Gallery Hop
95
Special Events and Programs
Chicago Day of Glass
Wednesday, March 19
•Ignite Glass Studios: Demonstrations and Tour (8 am - noon)
•West Supply: Demonstrations and Exhibition
(9 am - 3 pm)
•Chicago Glass Collective: Demonstrations, Exhibition and Tour (10 - noon; 1 - 3 pm)
•Chicago Glassworks: Demonstrations and Exhibition (10 am - 6 pm)
•Chicago Hot Glass: Demonstrations
(9 am - 5 pm)
•Little Black Pearl: Tour, Demonstrations and Exhibition (noon - 5 pm)
•Opal Glass Studios: Demonstrations and
Exhibition (10 am - 2:30 pm)
•Solstice Stained Glass: Demonstrations (noon - 6 pm)
This event was sponsored by the Art Alliance
for Contemporary Glass
GAS Collectors Tour
Wednesday, March 19 - Saturday, March 22
Tour participants enjoy an exclusive glass
experience in the city of art and design!
The Collectors Tour provides special access to
private collections and special demonstrations,
plus unique fine dining experiences around
Chicago.
Pre-Conference Reception A Fundraiser at Ignite Glass Studios
Wednesday, March 19
A once in a lifetime experience to elegantly
dine amid the fire and creation at Ignite Glass
Studios, the evening offered a sampling of
delights from some of Chicago’s best on the
culinary scene as well as an exciting hot glass
demonstration in honor of Lifetime Achievement
Award winner, Dan Dailey. Special guest artists
were Dante Marioni, Benjamin Moore, Rich
Royal, and Preston Singletary.
19th Annual Goblet Grab
Friday, March 21
Fast-paced, spontaneous, and fun, the Goblet
Grab is a fundraiser for the GAS Special Project
Community Partnership Fund.
Artist Portfolio Review
Saturday, March 22
Gallery owners, curators, educators, and artists
review portfolios of GAS conference attendees.
Reviews will last 10-15 minutes each.
96
Board members Geoff Isles and Jutta Page carrying a sketch of Dan Dailey’s piece to be auctioned off at the
Pre-Conference Reception.
International Student Exhibition
& Sales
Preview and Awards: Friday, March 21
Additional Hours: Saturday, March 22
The International Student Exhibition features
work by Glass Art Society members who are
currently enrolled full-time in an accredited,
degree program. This year six companies
donated $3,710 in awards. The first-prize
winner received a $1,000 cash award from
the Corning Museum of Glass.
Gallery Hop
Friday, March 21
(see exhibition list) Participants experienced
the depth and diversity of the exciting Chicago
art scene at ECHT and Ken Saunders galleries
in the River North neighborhood. Nearby
galleries also hosted special exhibits during
the conference. This event (including transportation) was free and open to the public.
This event was sponsored by the Art Alliance
for Contemporary Glass
Education & Professional Resource
Center
Browsing: Friday, March 20 and Sat., March 22
Informal Poster Presentations: Sat., March 22
School Q&A Hour: Sat., March 22
In the Education and Professional Resource
Center attendees could check out glass
school promotional materials and see posters
showing some of the latest in glass research.
School representatives and researchers
participated in a Q&A hour during the Informal
Poster Presentations to answer questions
about various glass programs. As a new
addition to the conference, GAS also offered
tools and information for job preparation and
trends, including a panel discussion about
careers in the arts.
The GAS Auction
Previews: Friday, March 21 & Sat., March 22
Live and Silent Auction: Saturday, March 22
The GAS Auction has become one of the
highlights of the annual conference. Donations
and purchases help keep conference registration fees affordable and support low student
fees and ongoing operations of GAS.
Closing Night Party
at the Chicago Cultural Center
Saturday, March 22
This year’s celebration took place at Preston
Bradley Hall, a beautiful event space at the
Chicago Cultural Center, located just a few
blocks from the conference hotel. Conferencegoers and guests enjoyed light hors d’oeuvres
and beverages while dancing the night away
beneath a 38-ft. Tiffany stained-glass dome
(one of the largest in the world). This room
also features twenty-five Tiffany glass chandeliers, marble arches inlaid with sparkling
mosaics, and a spectacular view of Millennium
Park. The G.A.R. Hall and Rotunda was also
included in the event space and features a
second glass-domed ceiling, designed by the
Healey Millet glass company.
2014 Chicago gas Conference Technical Display
Exhibitors listed alphabetically
Abell Combustion, Inc.
Linda and
Fred Metz of
Spiral Arts, Inc./
Carlo Donà,
helping attendees
in Tech Display
Stephen G. Abell
PO Box 198
Kimberton, PA 19442
T: 610-827-9137
abell@fast.net
abellcombustion.com
ABR Imagery
3808 W Vernal Pike
Bloomington, IN 47404
T: 812-339-9147
rossglass@abrimagery.com
abrimagery.com
Advanced Glass Industries
Anthony Marino
1335 Emerson St
Rochester, NY 14606
T: 585-458-8040
agi@advancedglass.net
advancedglass.net
Bullseye Glass Co.
Corinna Horsell, Asst. Sales Mgr.
3610 SE 21st Ave
Portland, OR 97202
T: 503-232-8887
sales@bullseyeglass.com
bullseyeglass.com
Charley’s Deadman Switch
Charles Friedman
2841 NW 70th St
Seattle, WA 98117
T: 206-781-0608
charlesf@friedmanglassworks.com
friedmanglassworks.com
Covington Engineering
Dan Drouault
715 West Colton Ave
Redlands, CA 92374
T: 877-793-6636
sales@covington-engineering.com
covington-engineering.com
Denver Glass Machinery, Inc.
Holly Morrison
2800 S Shoshone St
Englewood, CO, 80110
T: 303-781-0980
info@denverglass.com
denverglass.com
Digitry Company, Inc.
Gaffer Glass USA LTD
Ron Shapiro
449 Forest Ave Ste 9
Portland, ME 04101
T: 207-774-0300
ras@digitry.com
digitry.com
19622 70th Ave S Bay #4
Kent, WA 98032
T: 877-395-7600
info@gafferglassusa.com
gafferglassusa.com
East Bay Batch & Color
6512 23rd Avenue NW Suite 329
Seattle, WA 98117
T: 206-382-1305
info@glassart.org
glassart.org
Jim Meyer
169 S First St
Richmond, CA 94804
T: 510-233-0708
ebbatch@aol.com
ebbatchcolor.com
Ed Hoy’s International
Maria Moran
27625 Diehl Rd
Warrenville, IL 60555
T: 800-323-5668
info@edhoy.com
edhoy.com
ELECTROGLASS®
Rebecca Stewart & Steve Sinotte
PO Box 908
Portage, MI 49081
T: 877-540-9444
info@electroglass.com
electroglass.com
Emhart Glass Manufacturing Inc.
Roger Smith
405 E Peach Ave
Owensville, MO 65066
T: 573-437-2132
webmaster@emhartglass.com
bucheremhartglass.com
s t r e n gt h e n i n g c o mm u n it y , c o l l ab o r ati o n , f o r gi n g n e w b o n d s Glass Art Society
Glasscraft, Inc
David Winship
3844 Janisse St
Eugene, OR 97402
T: 541-684-680
dwinship@glasscraftinc.com
glasscraftinc.com
The Glass Furnace Foundation
Elif Yalcinkaya
Koyici cad. 72/a Öğümce
Istanbul TURKEY
T: +90 216-433-3693
info@glassfurnace.org
glassfurnace.org
Hang Your Glass Inc.
Poppy Mussallem
PO Box 6535
Bend, OR 97708
T: 650-353-4642
info@hangyourglass.com
hangyourglass.com
97
His Glassworks, Inc.
Penland School of Crafts
Steinert Industries, Inc.
2000 Riverside Drive Ste 19
Asheville, NC 28804
T: 828-254-2559
support@hisglassworks.com
hisglassworks.com
Dean Allison
PO Box 37
Penland, NC 28765
T: 828-765-2359
glass@penland.org
penland.org
John J. Steinert
1507 Franklin Ave
Kent, OH 44240
T: 330-678-0028
glasstools@steinertindustries.com
steinertindustries.com
Pilchuck Glass School
The Studio of the
Corning Museum of Glass
Hot Glass Color and Supply
Cyrena Stefano
2227 5th Ave
Seattle, WA 98121
T: 206-448-1199
sales@hotglasscolor.com
hotglasscolor.com
Jim Moore Tools for Glass
Jim Moore
PO Box 1151
Port Townsend, WA 98368
T: 360-379-2936
glasstools@olympus.net
toolsforglass.com
Molly Supply
Ryan Staub
3905 S Morgan St
Seattle, WA 98118
T: 218-296-6742
sales@mollysupply.com
mollysupply.com
National Torch
Craig Hamernik
1590 99th Lane NE
Blaine, MN 55449
T: 763-786-4020
c.hamernik@premierind.us
NationalTorch.com
Olympic Color Rods
Phil O’Reilly
818 John St
Seattle, WA 98109
T: 206-343-7336
cherylg@glasscolor.com
glasscolor.com
Paragon Industries L.P.
Shelia Collins
2011 S Town East Blvd
Mesquite, TX 75149
T: 972-288-7557
info@paragonweb.com
paragonweb.com
98
Tina Aufiero, Artistic Director
1201 316th St NW
Stanwood, WA 98292
T: 360-445-3111
taufiero@pilchuck.com
pilchuck.com
Pittsburgh Glass Center
Heather McElwee
5472 Penn Avenue
Pittsburgh, PA 15206
T: 412-365-2145
glassinfo@pittsburghglasscenter.org
pittsburghglasscenter.org
Pratt Fine Arts Center
Scott Darlington
1902 S Main St
Seattle, WA 98144
T: 206-328-2200
sdarlington@pratt.org
pratt.org
Red Hot Metal, Inc.
Jeff Lindsay
24 Bellarmine Ct., #1
Chico, CA 95928
T: 530-342-1970
info@redhotmetal.net
redhotmetal.net
Spiral Arts, Inc. / Carlo Donà
Fred Metz, Joe Miller, Roberto Donà
901 NW 49th Street
Seattle, WA 98107
T: 206-768-9765
orders@spiralarts.com
www.spiralarts.com
Spruce Pine Batch Inc.
Tom Littleton
PO Box 159
Spruce Pine, NC 28777
T: 828-765-9876
spbatch@yahoo.com
sprucepinebatch.com
1 Museum Way
Corning, NY 14830
T: 607-438-5100
thestudio@cmog.org
cmog.org
Sweetwater Glass,
Cherrywood Blocks & Molds
Art Reed
6411 Fall Clove Rd
DeLancey, NY 13752
T: 845-676-4622
artlindareed@catskill.net
sweetwaterglass.com
System 96®
Brandon Byhre
24105 Sno-Woodinville Rd
Woodinville, WA 98072
T: 425-483-6699
hotglass@system96.com
system96.com
UrbanGlass
Cybele Maylone
647 Fulton Street
Brooklyn, NY 11217
T: 718-625-3685
info@urbanglass.org
urbanglass.org
Uroboros
Kat Hartley
2139 N Kerby Ave
Portland, OR 97227
T: 503-284-4900
kat@uroboros.com
uroboros.com
Wet Dog Glass, LLC
Eddie Bernard
PO Box 96
Star, NC 27356
T: 910-428-4111
eddie@wetdogglass.com
wetdogglass.com
ack n o w l e dg e m e n t s
2014 Conference Co-Chairs (l-r) John Gross, Deb Gross, Glen Tullman and Trish Tullman with GAS Board President, Jutta-Annette Page.
The Glass Art Society Thanks and Acknowledges
our 2014 Conference Committee, Donors, and Volunteers
Contributions cover the period from July 1, 2012 - March 31, 2014
Thanks to our sponsors, without whose help
the conference would not be possible.
Glen & Trish Tullman,
Deb & John Gross
Michael Polsky
J.B. & M.K. Pritzker Family Foundation
Ann and Gregory K. Jones
Mr. & Mrs. David W. Nelms
Venue Sponsors
West Supply
Department of Cultural Affairs
and Special Events
School of the Art Institute of Chicago
collectors tour dinner
at the home of Deb & John Gross
GAS History Project Sponsor
Birkhill Family Foundation
Day of Glass & Gallery Hop Sponsor
Art Alliance for Contemporary Glass
Transportation Sponsor
Uroboros Glass
Conference In-Kind
Contribution Donors
Carlisle Machine Works Inc.
Paragon Industries LP
Spruce Pine Batch Inc.
Other Sponsor
Kim and Andy Stephens
100
The GAS Board of Directors, Pamela Koss, and
GAS staff would like to thank the Co-Chairs
Trish and Glen Tullman, Deb and John Gross,
and Angie West, and the following venues:
Ignite Glass Studios, West Supply, Department
of Cultural Affairs and Special Events, and
School of the Art Institute of Chicago
Portfolio Reviewers:
Eoin Breadon, Brent Cole, Helen Lee, Carmen Lozar,
Marc Petrovic, Angus Powers, Michael Rogers,
Jeffrey Sarmiento, Jan Smith, Diane Wright
Emerging Artist Jurors:
Clare Belfrage and Julie M. Muñiz
Student Scholarship Jurors:
Matt Durran, Ruth King, and David McFadden
International Student Exhibition Jurors:
Shane Fero, Jutta-Annette Page, and Ken Saunders
Auction Donors: The auction is an important
source of support for the annual conference:
Rik Allen and Shelley Muzylowski-Allen • Alan
Avery • Alex Bernstein • Frederick & Jeannie
Birkhill • Anna Boothe • Lucio Bubacco and
M. Fatih Duruerk • Joe Cariati • Chris Carlson
• Deborah Carlson • Mat Cat • Vittorio
Costantini • Jennifer Crescuillo • Dan Dailey
• Edgardo De Bortoli • Jacci Delaney • Cecile
Derel • Pearl Dick • Matt Durran • Delphine
Ewen • Juliann Ewing • Shane Fero • Nicole
Fierce • Kiva Ford • Jennifer Halvorson • David
Helm • Holly Hunt • Mark Hursty • Geoff Isles
• Saman Kalantari • BJ Katz • Kirill Korzinski
• Peter Layton • Jiyong Lee • Amy Lemaire •
Jeff Lindsay • Kristina Logan • Jay Macdonell
• Jeff Mack • Paula Mandel • Margie Mattice
• Grant Mayberry • Lani McGregor • Paul
Messink • Robert Mickelsen • Carol Milne •
Jeff Newman • Chris Nordin • Jutta-Annette
Page • Kit Paulson • Marc Petrovic and
Wesley Fleming • Antoine Pierini • Spencer
Pittenger • Kait Rhoads • James Riviello •
Julia and Robin Rogers • Susan Roston •
Richard Royal • Olga Rozin • Shaheen Salehi
• Jeffrey Sarmiento • Edward Schmid • Daniel
Schreiber • Rebecca Smith • Tim Southward
• Ethan Stern • Cassandra Straubing •
Matthew Sukiennik • Stephen Szymanski •
Yusuke Takemura • Joe Upham and Sarah
Hingley • Miles Van Rensselaer • Sarah Vaughn
• Paul Vernon • Philip Vinson • Dennis Walker
• Adriana Walters (Quarisa) • Rebecca Wehmer
• Angie West • Mary B. White • Kathryn
Wightman • Emily Williams • Albert Young •
Gina Zetts • Eli Zilke and Margie Mattice
Goblet Grab Donors: This year the Goblet Grab
raised money for the GAS Special Project
Community Partnership Fund allowing students
from at-risk programs from Chicago and around
the country to attend the conference:
Darrek Benish • Frederick and Jeannie Birkhill
• Mat Cat • Jerry Catania • Eli Cecil • Jennifer
Crescuillo • Michele D’Amico • Josh DeWall •
Paul Elyseev • Juliann Ewing • Shane Fero •
David Frigon-Lavoie • George-ann Greth • Peter
Layton • Jeff Mack • Grant Mayberry • Robert
Mickelsen • Michael Moran • Jason Murphy •
Skyler Offenhauser • Corey Pemberton • Jacob
Pfeifer • Raymond Queen • Robin Rogers •
Olga Rozin • Edward Schmid • Daniel Schreiber • Edward Skeels • Matthew Sukiennik •
Heather Sutherland and Tyler Gordon • Adam
Thomas • Joe Upham and Sarah Hingley •
Paul Vernon • Philip Vinson • Hayden Wilson
Presenters Who Donated All or Part
of Their Honorariums to GAS:
Lucio Bubacco • Steven Ciezki • Dan Dailey •
Tom Jacobs • Rick Valicenti • Alberto Velez •
Angie West
Work Exchange and Volunteers:
Elizabeth Jackson, Work Exchange Coordinator
• Garrett Arnold • Rachel Arnold • Michael
Bailey • Signe Ballew • Brianna Barron •
Theresa Batty • Marian Berg • Susan Cannon
• Alan Castonguay • William Cator • Amanda
Chapman • Lynne Clayton • Jennifer Crescuillo
• Morgan Croil • Aniko Dani • Susan Darling
• Lauren Davis • Cecile Derel • Eric Edner •
Brian Engel • Juliann Ewing • Jean Fernandes
• Sallie Fero • Ophelia Gardner • Abby Gitlitz
• Meghan Harvey • Sarah Hingley • Daniel
Hogan • Jennifer Johnson • Carmichael Jones
• Kristoff Kamrath • Melissa Kistler • Michelle
Knox • Michelle Knox • Raymond Lauk •
Chelsea Leung • Jeff Mack • Dylan Martinez •
L McFie • Derek Nadeau • Jesse Nelson • Skyler
Offenhauser • Jesus Olivero • Sue Parry • Kit
Paulson • Susie Peck • Chuck Pheatt • Jamie
Ragan • Kait Rhoads • Natali Rodrigues • Olga
Rozin • Biagio Scarpello • Alexandra Scott •
Anjali Singh • Rebecca Smith • Erin Snodgrass
• Jamie Stevens • Helene Stoffey • Carrie
Strope • Heather Sutherland • Sherri Taus •
David Tennessen • Julia Voke • Mary B. White
• Karen Willenbrink-Johnsen • Sibelle Yuksek
GLASS ART SOCIETY FUND DONORS
Contributions cover the period from
July 1, 2012 - April 30, 2014
The GAS Journal is sponsored in part by the
Corning Incorporated Foundation. Without
their support, this publication would not have
been possible.
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
Lloyd Greenberg and Vida Russell • Ronnie
Hughes • John and Lyn Musgrove • Amanda
Nardone • Jong-Pil Pyun • Ana Viñuela
Lorenzo • David Willis and Erika Christian •
David Winship
Dominick Labino Lecture Fund Established
in 1993 by GAS to continue the legacy of
Dominick Labino in furthering the technical and
aesthetic quality of glass art by sponsoring a
lecture at each conference
Sandra Christine and Dale Meyer • Marty
Christy-Burt • Lloyd Greenberg and Vida Russell
• Hugh Jenkins and Stephanie Ross • Claudia
Lipschultz • Michele MacFarlane • James
Manshardt • Scott Mitchell • John and Lyn
Musgrove • Mary and Liz Reidmeyer • Robert
and Margaret Stephan • Thomas Williams
GAS in CERF (Craft Emergency Relief Fund)
Aids artist-members of GAS faced with careerthreatening catastrophe
Pat Arnold, Dancing Light Glass • Claire
Bateman, Running Fox Studio • William and
Katherine Bernstein, Bernstein Glass • Lauretta
(Lori) Blessing, d’Verre Kilnformed Glass Art •
Dave Braun • Mark Brodnan • Susan Burkart,
Q by Dezine • Mary Ellen Buxton-Kutch, Pier
Glass • Molly Cadranell, Glass Roots • Gregory
Cap • Deborah Carlson, Shooting Star Glass
Studio • Becky and Craig Chadwell • Marty
Christy-Burt, Marty Christy Glass • Vittorio
Costantini and Graziella Giolo Costantini,
Costantini Vittorio Lavorazione Del Vetro A Lume
• Clifton Crofford, SiNaCa Studios • Miriam
Di Fiore • Deborah Ellington, Dragon Fly Studio
• John Etter • Donna Figone • Kathie FoleyMeyer • Jane Francescon • Gini and Dora
Members gather at the Opening Night Reception at the Palmer House.
Elia Garcia, Garcia Art Glass, Inc. • Josephine
Geiger, J.A. Geiger Studio, LLC • Martha
Giberson • Abby Gitlitz, Tweetle Beetle Glass
• Barbara Grauke, Cuesta Glass • Lloyd
Greenberg and Vida Russell, Lloyd Greenberg
Design, LLC • Charlie Holden, Chaos Glass •
Alexandre Hupe • Hugh Jenkins and Stephanie
Ross, Hugh Jenkins Glass Studio • Claudia
Lipschultz • Anita LoMonico and Urs Affolter,
ASL DreamWorks • Susan Longini and Muni
Barash • Lucy Lyon, American Glass Studio •
Suzanne Mears, SWM Art • Michael and Jane
Meilahn, Meilahn Glassworks • Paul Messink,
Paul Messink Glass Art • Richard Moiel and
Kathy Poeppel, Houston Studio Glass Inc. •
Mark Murai • John and Lyn Musgrove, Musgrove
Glass Art • Harumi Nagai, NAGAI U.S.A., Inc.
dba Trading Post • Joel O’Dorisio • Mary
O’Shaughnessy • Jacob Pfeifer, Hot Glass Alley
• Antoine and Robert Pierini • Laura Quinn
• Mary and Liz Reidmeyer, Missouri S&T •
Elliott Rosenstein • Lorraine Schinelli, Glass
Inspirations • Sherry Selevan • Morton
Silverman and Kineret Jaffe • Jamie Stevens •
Ruth Summers and Bruce Bowen • Mark Swaim
• Dan Terrible • Rebecca Terrible • Miguel
Unson • Joe Upham • John Webster, Padilla
Bay Art • Edris Weis • Yilmaz and Nimet
Yalcinkaya, The Glass Furnace • Carlos Zervigon
GAS Special Project Community Partnership
Fund Funds special arts-related project or
program for under-served populations (i.e. atrisk youth, developmentally disabled, minorities,
s t r e n gt h e n i n g c o mm u n it y , c o l l ab o r ati o n , f o r gi n g n e w b o n d s veterans, etc.) in the conference host city
Gloria Badiner • John Brucker • Nancy
Destefanis • Kathie Foley-Meyer • Lance
Friedman • Kenneth Goldberg • Paul Highfield
• Tina Stidman and Julie Snider • Kathryn
Kasch • Alan and Susan Kirshner • Cecilia
Martinez • John and Lyn Musgrove • Barbara
O’Hearn • Michael Rogers • Elizabeth Seifel •
Morlen Sinoway • Shannon Smith-Crowley •
Delene Wolf
General Student Scholarship Fund Provides
support for student members who could not
otherwise afford to attend the annual conference
Wendy Avery • Herb Babcock • John de Wit
• Roberta Eichenberg • Deborah Ellington •
Corinne and Frieda Franco • Martha Giberson
• Lloyd Greenberg and Vida Russell • Ann
Hartmann and Frank Snug • Linda Karlik •
Lynn McManus • Mark Murai • John and Lyn
Musgrove • Jong-Pil Pyun • Jon Rees •
Judith Schaechter • Ruth Siegel • Morton
Silverman and Kineret Jaffe • Dana Smith •
Robert and Margaret Stephan • Mark Swaim
• Cappy Thompson • Tom Zogas
Hilbert Sosin Fund for Professionalism in the
Glass Arts Established in 1995 by GAS to support
educational endeavors within the GAS membership that benefit the organization as a whole
Herb Babcock • Lloyd Greenberg and Vida
Russell • Semrin Korkmaz • Jon Lickerman •
John and Lyn Musgrove • Ruth Summers and
Bruce Bowen
101
GAS International Emergency Relief Fund
“GAS in CERF” fund is not available to
international members so under this fund all
members outside of the U.S. are eligible to apply
Michele D’Amico • John Fletcher • Barbara
Grauke • Hugh Jenkins and Stephanie Ross
• Mark Murai • John and Lyn Musgrove •
Anne Oberin • Laura Quinn • Mark Swaim •
Francois Turbide
GAS Student Rep Travel Fund Established
in 2006 by Eddie Bernard and Angela Bernard
of Wet Dog Glass, who have continued funding
since then
Eddie Bernard and Angela Bart Bernard
Robert Wilson Lecture Fund Established
in 2001 with the initial contribution by
Mrs. Margaret Pace Wilson for an annual
GAS conference lecture addressing sculpture
and glass
Nell Gotlieb • Lloyd Greenberg and Vida Russell
• Olivia Kim • Emma Klau • John and Lyn
Musgrove • Magnus Robbestad • Brady
Steward • Zoe Topsfield • Thomas Williams •
Carlos Zervigon
Takako Sano International Student
Scholarship Fund Established in 1999
by GAS to support the attendance of one
non-USA student at each annual conference
Mark Bolick • Bradley Braun • Lloyd Greenberg
and Vida Russell • Heather Horton • Olivia Kim
• James Manshardt • Mark Murai • John and
Lyn Musgrove • Mark Swaim
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
Gloria Badiner • Jane Bruce • Morgan Chivers
• Marty Christy-Burt • Kathie Foley-Meyer •
Lloyd Greenberg and Vida Russell • Claudia
Lipschultz • James Manshardt • John and Lyn
Musgrove • Meryl Raiffe • Natali Rodrigues •
Elaine Sokoloff and Margarete Wells • Wayne
Strattman • Carrie Strope • Carol Yorke and
Gerard Conn • Carlos Zervigon
102
Sy Kamens Educational Fund Helps keep
student memberships and conference
registration fees low
Jane Bruce • Bertran Cohen • Lloyd Greenberg
and Vida Russell • Semrin Korkmaz • Claudia
Lipschultz • James Manshardt • John and
Lyn Musgrove • Elizabeth Netts and Charlotte
Mitchell • David Pfeffer and Nick Rustic •
Jesse Rasid • Neil and Frances Ryan • Judith
Schaechter • Carlos Zervigon
Unrestricted General donations help support
the organization wherever it is needed most
at that time
Susan Abanor and Harold Woolley • Wendy
Avery • Ellen Beller • Eddie Bernard and
Angela Bart Bernard • Alan and Barbara
Boroff • Bradley Braun • Dave Braun • Molly
Cadranell • Charles Cannon • Robert Carlson
• Steven Ciezki • Judy Doyle • Paul Elyseev
and Bonnie Kooklin • Louise Erskine • Matthew
Eskuche • Jane Francescon • Lance Friedman
• Steve and Marsha Funk • Martha Giberson
• Michael Glancy • Carol Green • Lloyd
Greenberg and Vida Russell • Victory Grund
• Lee and Milt Hakel • Frederick Heath and
Merrily Orsini • Geoff Isles • Anja Isphording
• Elizabeth Jackson • Linda Karlik • BJ Katz
• Kristin Korn • Leonard and Adele Leight •
Jeremy Lepisto and Mel George • Robin Levin
• Claudia Lipschultz • Roger MacPherson •
Samantha McBride • Heather McElwee and
Chris Clarke • Stephen Mineck • Charlie Miner
• John and Lyn Musgrove • Elizabeth Netts and
Charlotte Mitchell • Ed and Marjorie O’Keefe •
Jutta-Annette Page • Ted Parrot • Andrew S.
Phillips • Jenny Pohlman and Sabrina Knowles
• Ryan Porter • Elaine Pounder-Smith • Lee
Proctor • Glenda Radigonda • Jon Rees •
Mary and Liz Reidmeyer • Andreas Renner •
Walt and Pat Riehl • Chris Rifkin • Ted Rips
• Karuna C. Santoro • Dorothy Saxe • Ruth
Siegel • Elaine Sokoloff and Margarete Wells
• Susan Steinhauser and Daniel Greenberg •
Danny Sullivan • Susan Taylor Glasgow and
Laura Beth Konopinski • Patricia Tector •
Cappy Thompson • Colleen Tremonte • Margy
and R. Scott Trumbull • Ursula Ullmann • Ana
Viñuela Lorenzo • Edris Weis • Georgia Welles
• Yilmaz and Nimet Yalcinkaya • Carol Yorke
and Gerard Conn
General Conference Fund
Joe Upham
Other
Frederick and Jean Birkhill - $5,000
Lucio Bubacco and Deigo Bottacin - $84
Eric and Lorna Lovell - $2,000
David and Mrs Nelms - $5,000
Michael Polsky - $10,000
J.B. and M.K. Pritzker - $5,000
Chris Rifkin - $930
Kimberly Stephens - $300
Trish and Glen Tullman - $65,500
GAS apologizes to anyone who was
inadvertently omitted.
Glass Art Society Upper-Level Members
As of December 2014, the Glass Art Society has 2,021 members.
The following GAS members contributed upper-level memberships from July 1, 2012 - April 30, 2014
Benefactors ($1000):
Deb and John Gross
Nancy and Roger MacPherson
Geoff Isles
Barbara and Sanford Orkin
Margy and R. Scott Trumbull
Patrons ($500):
Sharon and John Amdall
Barbara Caraway
Sheilah Crowley
Sara Jane DeHoff and Ashley Kasperzak
Heather Horton
Nancy and Tom Kabat, Welles Bowen Realtors
Michael and Jane Meilahn, Meilahn Glassworks
David Porter, Fireworks Glass Studios
Chris Rifkin, CLR Design
Mark Swaim
Corporate Members ($275):
David Ablon and Jill Smith, Brooklyn Glass
Douglas Auer, Third Degree Glass Factory
Wendy Avery, Dockyard Glassworks
Richard Barger and David Eichholtz, David Richard Gallery
Elisabeth and Scott Bartky, ARI Imports Inc.
Lisa Bayne, Artful Home
Eddie Bernard and Angela Bart Bernard, Wet Dog Glass, LLC
Anna Carlgren, GLASAKADEMIE
Jason Cornish and Koen Vanderstukken, Sheridan College Glass Studio
Lorna MacMillan, North Lands Creative Glass
Clifton Crofford, SiNaCa Studios
Anna Curnes, Anna Lou Glass
Kevin Boylan, Dimond Art Glass
Tom and Barbara Dimond, Dimond Art Glass
Mary Dougherty, Carlisle Machine Works, Inc.
Dan Drouault, Covington Engineering
Karen Echt, Echt Gallery
Nicole Flowers and Heather Amler, Slumpy’s Glass Molds
Helga Friedrich and Peter Lerch, Kugler Colors GmbH
Keith Fuselier, Studio LVX
Coda Gallery
Joe Grant, Starworks Glass Lab
Kari Guhl, B2 Studio
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
Mun Jung Kim, Mirakkul Glassware
Rik Allen and Shelley Muzylowski-Allen demonstrate hot sculpting techniques.
Kokomo Opalescent Glass Hot Glass Studio
Peter Kolliner, Kirra Galleries
Rich Lamothe and Sean Healy, Glass Strategies LLC
Lawrence Lane, Dynasty Gallery
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.
Patrick Loo, C & R Loo, Inc.
Eric and Lorna Lovell, Uroboros Glass Studios, Inc.
Greg Lueck, Firehouse Glass
Deborah Lys, Firebird Creations
Anthony Marino and Alicia Gionta, Advanced Glass Industries
Jim Matthews, Spectrum Glass Co.
Shawn McHugh, National Basic Sensor
Don McKinney and Howard Sandberg, Coatings by Sandberg, Inc.
Erin McMillen and Natasha Kuring, The Melting Point, LLC
Jeffrey Mentuck and John Volpacchio, Salem State University Glassworks
Magneco Metrel and Kristie Antosz, Magneco/Metrel
Fred Metz and Joe Miller, Spiral Arts, Inc.
Robert Minkoff, The Robert M. Minkoff Foundation, Ltd.
Lori Mitchell and Bruce Ingram, Glastar Corporation
Jim and Liz Moore, Jim Moore Tools for Glass
Maria Moran, Ed Hoys International
Holly Morrison, Denver Glass Machinery, Inc.
Tim Muth, Jackson County Green Energy Park
Phil O’Reilly and Mitchell Burdett, Olympic Color Rods
Sharon Owens and Jill Gard, Inspired Fire Glass Studio & Gallery
Babette and Steven Pinsky
Diana Pollak, Creative Arts Center of Dallas
Meryl Raiffe, The Glass Underground
Karen Rudd, Pratt Fine Arts Center
Michael Scarrone, Wagga Wagga Art Gallery
Jim & Kim Schantz & Saul, Schantz Galleries
Ronald Shapiro, Digitry Company, Inc.
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
Chris Sternberg-Powidzki and Daniel Meisner, Glasshouse Studio
Ralf and Jens Teuchert, Farbglashütte Reichenbach GmbH
Ross Thackery, ABR Imagery
Ana Thiel
Sarah Traver, William Traver Gallery
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
Mary Welch, Niche Modern
Karol Wight, The Corning Museum of Glass
Brett Williams, Bear Paw Studios
John Williams, Pacific Artglass Corp.
David Winship, Glasscraft, Inc.
Joe Wirkus and Hilary Christo, Ignite Globes, LLC
Brian Wong Shui, Atlanta Hot Glass
Scandia Wood and Bill Aebischer, Spectrum Glass Company
Mike Wozniahoush, Ccstes
Jim and Louise Wunch, Larkin Refractory Solutions
Sponsors ($120):
Susan Abanor and Harold Woolley
Gary Adcock and Cindy McEwen, Studio 37 Ltd.
Donald Albrecht and David Mahon
Diane Alfillé, Eve J. Alfille Gallery & Studio
Dudley and Lisa Anderson
Gregory and Frankie Astrauckas
Tina Aufiero, Pilchuck Glass School
Aaron Baigelman and Heather Ahrens, Baigelman Glass
Philip Bailey and Susan Roston
Philip Baldwin and Monica Guggisberg
Erica Barkley
Claire Bateman, Running Fox Studio
Ellen Beller, Beller Glass
Yvonne Besyk and Richard Baumgarten
Paul and Samuel Bevilacqua, Acqua Glass
Frederick and Jean Birkhill, Frederick Birkhill Studios LLC
Benjamin Birney and Jeremy Fellows, Global Glassworks
Donald and Susan Bittker
John and Tricia Blazy, John Blazy Designs
104
Susan Allan Block
Rebecca Boase and Sherry Trautman, West Michigan Glass Art Center
Anna Boothe, National Liberty Museum
Debbie and Jody Bradley, Neusole Glassworks
Nicole Brandstrup, Valko & Associates
Bradley Braun, Chicago Hot Glass, Inc.
Fay Bright
J.J. Brown and Simona Rosasco, Fyreglas Studio
Michael Brown, Three Dimensional Visions
Peter Brown, Paula Brown Gallery
Thomas and Elisabeth Buckles
Marian and Russell E. Burke III
William E. Burke and Susan Sherman
Madeleine Burmester and Ron Murphy
Mary Ellen Buxton-Kutch, Pier Glass
Dominique and Anne Marie Caissie, Terrapin Glassblowing Studio
Steve Campbell and Noreen Mitchell
Karl Carter and Holly
Madison, Bucks County Community College
Ithiel and Jenise Catiri, Catiri’s Art Glass
Becky and Craig Chadwell
Laura Cheges, Steinert Industries, Inc.
Marcia and John Christie
Sandra Christine and Dale Meyer, Quintal Studio
Marna Clark, Marna Clark Glass
Sean Clarke, Diablo Glass School
Libby & Jo Anne Cooper, Mobilia Gallery
Cynthia Corio-Poli and Frank Poli, Cynthia Corio-Poli Design
Vittorio Costantini and Graziella Giolo Costantini,
Costantini Vittorio Lavorazione Del Vetro A Lume
Tricia and Justin Culina, Culina Glass
Rene and Russ Culler, University of South Alabama
Louis and Jon Curiel, Curiel Reynolds School of Visual Arts
Pam and Bill Davis
David and Joanne Denn
Roberto Donà, Carlo Donà
Omur and M. Fatih Duruerk, Karma Design Studio
Larry Eisenberg, Hemispheric Development Inc.
Paul Elyseev and Bonnie Kooklin, Hot Sand
Jim Embrescia
Paul and Lori Engle, Heiden & Engle
James Fackert, CAE Inc.
Debra and Joseph Fenzl, MSR Studio
Shari Flynn and Jim Karan
Collette Fortin and Berry Davis, Neptune Hot Glass
Corinne and Frieda Franco
Joan and Richard Freedman
Arlene and Jack Garfinkle
Jere Gibber and J.G. Harrington
Michael Glaser
Susan Glass and Arni Thorsteinson
Colleen and Gary Grebus
Carol Green
Anthony R. and Susan Grosch
John and Deb Gross, Newcastle Properties
Slate Grove, UrbanGlass
Victory Grund, Old Town Artisan Studio
Debora Gurman and Marco Romero, Romero Gurman
Bill and Ellen Hamilton
Corey Hampson and Aaron Schey, Habatat Galleries
Sandra Harris and Monte Becker, Harris Glass Studio
Ann Hartmann and Frank Snug
Frederick Heath and Merrily Orsini
Myrna Helfenstein
Craig and Carla Hellemond, Rogue Wave Glassworks
Doug Henderson, Thimbleberry Designs
Samuel Herman and Joanna Shellard, Sam Herman Studio
Claudia Hernandez and Terry McCormick,
Origin Glass, a Division of Elan Technology
Dave and Ann Holton, Glass Fanatics
Shari and David Hopper, Paradise & Co.
Deborah Horrell
Joey Huang
David Huchthausen, Huchthausen Studios
Lori and Jeff Hultman, Hultman Glass Studio
John Hutton, Brazee Street School of Glass
Nadania Idriss, Berlin Glas, e.V.
Earl James and Linda Zmina
Matt and Kim Janke, Janke Studios Inc
Joseph C. Jarvis
Hugh Jenkins and Stephanie Ross, Hugh Jenkins Glass Studio
Chester John and Elissa Beach, 2 Muses Fusing, LLC
Karen and Daniel Johnese
Richard Jolley and Tommie Rush, Tomco, Inc.
Katherine Jones
Roy Kapp, Delphi Glass
Sharon Karmazin and David Greene, The Karma Foundation
Sarah King, AngelGilding.com
Teri Kinnison and David Vogt, Desert Fire Art Glass
Kendall and Roberta Krieger
Ted Lagreid
Frank Lane, Gabbert Cullet Co. Inc.
Kathy Laux, Uroboros Glass Studios, Inc.
Leonard and Adele Leight
Jeremy Lepisto and Mel George
Mina Levin
Marla Levine
Jon and Judith Liebman
John Littleton and Kate Vogel, Littleton-Vogel, Inc.
Stephen Loeb Diane Loeb
Robert Lombard, Lombard Contemporary
Anita LoMonico and Urs Affolter, ASL Dream Works
Jane Lucien-Scholle, Lasata Studio
Dawn Lucio, Dawning Glass Studio
James Manshardt
Nives Marcassoli and Tiziana Colantuoni, I Vetri di Nives
Dante Marioni
Patrick Martin and Roberta Eichenberg-Martin,
Emporia State University Art Dept.
Margie and Julia Mattice
Susan Matych-Hager and Gerald Hager, HAGER STUDIOS
Aubrey McClendon
David and Gabriela McCubbrey
Heather McElwee and Chris Clarke, Pittsburgh Glass Center
Libby and Jack McKee, Prudential Manor Homes Realtor
Colin and Pat McKinnon
Johnna and Philip McWeeny
Glenda Melton and Dave Wentz, D & G Creations/Freestyle Artglass Studio
JA and David Meltzer, JA Glass Art
Isabell and Gernot Merker, Kurt Merker GmbH
Frank and Corinne Mertes
Elizabeth G Miller and Juila Packard, The Melting Glass Company
Mark Mitsuda and Erin Yuasa, Punahou School
Richard Moiel and Kathy Poeppel, Houston Studio Glass Inc.
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
Bonnie and Murray Nelson
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
Douglas Ohm, Ohm Equipment
Tina Oldknow, The Corning Museum of Glass
Glenn Ostergaard and David Kaplan
Kathleen and Peter Palmer, Studio 7 Fine Art Gallery
Paul and Elmerina Parkman
Michael Parry and Lori Schlosser, Mike Parry
Jerry and Gwen Paulson
Norman Peiffer
Kathy Perras and Warren Karmol, ItzArt Glass
Doug and Pat Perry
Carl & Betty Pforzheimer III
Diane and Jerome Phillips, Design Dimensions
Robert Pickering
Annamae Pierce
Benson and Francine Pilloff
Jenny Pohlman and Sabrina Knowles, Pohlman Knowles
Jim Polus
John and Joyce Price
Art Reed, Sweetwater Glass
Walt and Pat Riehl
John and Linda Riepma
Richard Ritter and Jan Williams
Mark and Elizabeth Rogers
Karen and Michael Rotenberg
Thomas and Sue Roth
Joel and Logan Ryser, Hot Glass Inc.
Seymour and Marcia Sabesin
Davide Salvadore and Domenico Cavallaro
Toland Sand and Debbe Palmer, Toland Sand Glass Studio
Fred Sanders
Jose and M.K. Santisteban, Franklin Glassblowing Studio
Jane and Don Sauer
Ken Saunders, Ken Saunders Gallery
Robin Schultes and Patrick Dubrevil, Soffietta Art Glass
Amy Schwartz and William Gudenrath,
The Studio of The Corning Museum of Glass
Bryan and Clair Seckelmann
Donald Shamp, Hot Tech
Rory Shanley-Brown
Mike Shelbo, Shelbo Glass Art
Mollie Sikkema
Morton Silverman and Kineret Jaffe
Robert Simmons, Briarwillow, LLC
Preston Singletary
Stephen Sinotte and Rebecca Stewart, Electroglass
David and Julie Sittler
Marble Slinger and Terasina Bonanini, M Slinger Productions
Gaye and Marty Smith
Jan Smith and Emmeline Erikson, Bergstrom-Mahler Museum
Paul Smits and Dr Mel Ball, Smits Art Glass
Gail and Louis Snitkoff
Eric Soderlund, American Beauty Tools
Vanessa Somers and Frederick Vreeland
Malcolm Spann, Artist’s Reliable Tool Co. (ARTCO)
Marianne Spottswood McLane, Luniverre Gallery
David Stevens, Studio STS
Jen Stevenson, Bergstrom-Mahler Museum of Glass
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
Boyd Sugiki and Lisa Zerkowitz
Jo Ann and Glenn Syron, Jo Ann Syron Designs
Richard Tenney, Digitry Company, Inc.
106
Caroline Theriault and Matthieu Raikem, In Vitro
Gregory Thompson and Kerry Causey, GRT Glass Design
Sarah Traver, Traver Gallery
University of Sunderland
Tim Valko and James Moore, Valko and Associates
Micaela van Zwoll and John Green, Micaela Contemporary Projects
Frank Varnell, Varnell Glass Art
Brett Vinsant, Live Laugh Love Glass
William Warmus, William Warmus
Jim Weaver and Jerred Poff, Weaver Industries, Inc.
John Webster, Padilla Bay Art
Steven Weinberg, Weinberg Glass LTD
Mark and Michiko Weiner, Martha’s Vineyard Glassworks
Edris Weis William and Dina Weisberger
George Weiss Jr, SCS
Nancy Weisser, Weisser Glass Studio
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, Sonoran Glass School
E. Crosby and Nancy Lee Willet, Willet Stained Glass Studios
Colby Wise and Sky Lambert, SKYLAMbert
Joseph Wisniewski and Christine Fleischer, Heart of Fire
Valerie Wolf
Merrill and Sheila Wynne
Carol Yorke and Gerard Conn
Tom and Kathy Young
Vaz and Karen Zastera, Zartwerks Studio
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 2014 GAS International Student Exhibition awards.
Gifts of $1,000 or More
CORNING MUSEUM OF GLASS
Corning, New York, USA
www.cmog.org
With over 45,000 glass objects spanning
3,500 years of glassmaking history, the
Corning Museum of Glass houses the world’s
most comprehensive collection of glass. The
Studio at 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
GLASS AXIS
Columbus, Ohio, USA
www.glassaxis.org
Founded in 1987 by ten graduates of the Ohio
State University Glass program, Glass Axis was
created as a non-profit organization to provide
a facility where glass students and community
members interested in glass could come
together and share expenses, knowledge,
resources, and artistic expression through the
medium of glass. Glass Axis has gone through
four major stages of growth in a short time.
In the summer of 2014, Glass Axis made its
final move to a large permanent space in the
Franklinton area of Columbus, Ohio. Glass
Axis offers courses in all phases of glass art,
including hot, warm, and cold glass traditions
and techniques. Glass Axis members can rent
studio equipment (prior experience necessary).
Contact the director with questions at
hello@glassaxis.org.
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.
HIS GLASSWORKS, INC.
Asheville, North Carolina, USA
www.hisglassworks.com
Robert Stephan began working with art glass
in 1970, and established HIS Glassworks
glass blowing studio in 1979. After several
years of cold working with silicon carbide, he
discovered savings in time, quality, and effort
by using diamond-plated tools for cold working
glass, and realized the need for a reliable
source of diamond tools for glass artists –
HIS Glassworks, Inc. Diamond Division was
established in 1992 with Mark Bolick overseeing its development. His Glassworks, Inc.
makes and distributes top quality diamond
tools, machines, polishing compound, glass
bonding epoxies, and much more. We are
the authorized distribution for 3M, Abrasive
Technology, Flex and Suhner grinders,
Covington Engineering, Crystalite Corporation,
HXTAL Inc., Husqvarna, Gemini Saw, VID
Diamond, Polpur, and many other companies.
We can also provide custom tools according
to your specifications for your individual
process. Because we use the products that
we sell in our own studio, we can offer
technical advice from a user’s perspective.
We pride ourselves in our customer service
and personal attention for our customer’s
individual needs. Phone, fax, email or visit our
website www.hisglassworks.com for a wealth
of cold-working information. The website also
s t r e n gt h e n i n g c o mm u n it y , c o l l ab o r ati o n , f o r gi n g n e w b o n d s includes our catalog, information about product
use and care, frequently asked questions,
downloads, and convenient online ordering.
HIS Glassworks strives to be a primary source
of cold-working supplies for independent
glass artists, educational programs, and glass
factories worldwide. We thank you for your
interest in our products, and look forward to
the opportunity to serve you.
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 Web site for more information
on these and other products.
UROBOROS GLASS STUDIOS, INC.
Portland, Oregon, USA
www.uroboros.com
Founded in 1973, Uroboros Glass has been
an industry leader as a manufacturer of high
quality glass including specialty Art Glass,
System 96, FX90 and URO104 for the
discerning kiln forming, torchwork, cold
working, mosaic, and stained glass artists.
We also develop precise custom specialty
colors/products. Our product line includes
sheets, rods, frit, noodles, stringer, casting
billets, and rocks. We offer occasional classes
with world-renowned glass artists for beginners,
as well as advanced artists, and we rent kiln
space. Visit our website for product information
or contact us for assistance on your project.
107
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 Jiří Harcuba
1994 Itoko Iwata (1922-2008)
2010 Dan Klein (1938-2009)
1993 Dominick Labino (1910-1987)
1996 Stanislav Libenský (1921-2002)
2009 Marvin Lipofsky
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)
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
1977 William Brown, Jr. (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)
1993 Henry Halem
1994 Audrey Handler
1982 Frances Higgins (1912-2004)
108
Dan Dailey,
2014 Lifetime
Achievement
recipient and
1998 Honorary
Lifetime
Membership
recipient.
1982 Michael Higgins (1908-1999)
1996 David Jacobs (1939-2007)
1992 Robert Kehlmann
1977 Dominick Labino (1910-1987)
1988 Elizabeth “Libby” Labino ( -2008)
2009 John Leighton
1986 Marvin Lipofsky
1977 Harvey Littleton (1922-2013)
2005 Lani McGregor
1993 Joel Philip Myers
2001 Mark Peiser
2010 Tom Philabaum
2007 Michael Rogers
2000 Ginny Ruffner
2002 Takako Sano (1939-2006)
1995 Jack Schmidt
2005 Dan Schwoerer
1999 Josh Simpson
2012 John Steinert
1992 Susan Stinsmuehlen-Amend
1993 Sylvia Vigiletti
ANNUAL CONFERENCE (YEAR, SITE, CHAIRS,
and SITE COORDINATORS):
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.
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:
(Roger MacPherson 2014-present);
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, 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, 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
PAST STUDENT REPRESENTATIVES:
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
s t r e n gt h e n i n g c o mm u n it y , c o l l ab o r ati o n , f o r gi n g n e w b o n d s 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
PAST MEDIA / PUBLICATIONS COMMITTEES:
Digital Media Committee 2013-2014:
Geoff Isles (Chair), Jiyong Lee, Jeff Lindsay,
Jon Rees, Kristin Galioto, Phillip Gross, Pamela
Koss, Jutta-Annette Page, Jay Macdonell;
Print Media Committee 2013-present:
Kim Harty (Chair), Lance Friedman, Roger
MacPherson, Jon Rees, Regan Brumagen
(Rakow Library), Karen Donnellan, Kristin
Galioto, Michael Hernandez, Pamela Koss,
Grace Meils, Jessi Moore, Suzanne Peck,
Debra Ruzinsky;
Media Committee 2012-2013: Geoff Isles
(Chair), Scott Benefield, Chris Clarke,
Karen Donnellan, Lance Friedman, Kristin
Galioto, Pamela Koss, Jessi Moore, JuttaAnnette Page, Shannon Piette, Jay Macdonell,
Debra Ruzinsky;
(Chair), Chris Clarke, Lance Friedman,
Kristin Galioto, Jeremy Lepisto, Jay Macdonell,
Jessi Moore, Eddie Bernard, Karen Donnellan,
Taliaferro Jones, Debra Ruzinsky;
(Chair), Scott Benefield, Eddie Bernard, Karen
Donnellan, Taliaferro Jones, Pamela Koss,
Jeremy Lepisto, Debra Ruzinsky;
Publication Committee 2009-2010: Scott
Benefield, Eddie Bernard, Taliaferro Jones,
Geoff Isles, Tracy Kirchmann, Debra Ruzinsky;
Publication Committee 2007-2008:
Scott Benefield, Eddie Bernard, Taliaferro
Jones, Debra Ruzinsky, Drew Smith
109
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 from subscription date (or renewal) 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)
•Image gallery included with online member profile
•Four issues of the online newsletter, GASnews
•Access to all Members’ Only information on the GAS web site (including Forums)
•Weekly Digest email (Hot Topic updates and free classified ads)
•Access to the searchable GAS Online Member Directory showcasing member profiles
•Access to database information/mailing lists (over 14,000 artists, collectors,
galleries, schools and museums, other special publications)
•One member eligible to attend annual
conference
•Eligibility for GAS in CERF Fund or GAS International Emergency Relief Fund
•Annual GAS Journal
•Voting rights
DISCOUNTS
•Domestic Shipping and Printing discounts with FedEx Office*
•Discount on GLASS Quarterly Magazine subscription*
•LTL Freight Discounts through PartnerShip
•Hertz and Alamo Rental Car discounts
•Domestic & Travel Insurance benefits*
•Smart Savings Discount Plan
•Members’ price on display ads in GASnews
*For US-based members only
The information above reflects 2014 membership benefits. GAS reserves the right to change
membership fees 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.
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) are available online
(in 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
110
Non-Members:
$27 USD Canada, USA, and Mexico
$32 USD All other countries
GAS Journals available for purchase:
2014 Chicago, IL
2012 Toledo, OH
2011Seattle, WA
2010 Louisville, KY
2009 Corning, NY
2008 Portland, OR
2007 Pittsburgh, PA
2006St. Louis, MO
2005 Adelaide, SA, Australia
2004New Orleans, LA
2003Seattle, WA
2002 Amsterdam, The Netherlands
1999 Tampa, FL
1996 Boston, MA
1995 Asheville, NC
MEMBERSHIP LEVELS
$40 USD – Student:
Basic membership benefits (Must include
proof of fulltime student status)
$70 USD – Individual:
Basic membership benefits
Below levels allow two people at the same
address/business two logins & profiles,
but one set of mailed materials.
$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 Associate Level plus:
Total one free annual full-conference pass
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
Office hours: Monday - Friday 9:00 am to
5:00 pm Pacific Standard Time.
1994Oakland, CA
1993 Toledo, OH
1992 Mexico City, Mexico
1991 Corning, NY
1990Seattle, WA
1989 Toronto, ON, Canada
1988 Kent State, OH
1987 Philadelphia, PA
1986Los Angeles, CA
1985New 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 Gross family with Chef Matthias Merges.
The Red Hot Metal, Inc. Tech Display booth.
Conference attendees at the Student Exhibition.
GAS Board with Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel and Co-Chairs, John and Deb Gross.
Tyler Gordon’s piece, How to Blow, at the Neon Exhibition.
Conference volunteers Dylan Martinez and Juliann Ewing.
(l-r) Benjamin Moore, Dante Marioni, Aaron Baigelman, Preston Singletary, Will Trumbull,
Dan Dailey, Margy Trumbull, Richard Royal, Brent Rogers and Dana Trumbull.
The Silent Auction at the Palmer House.
Glen and Trish Tullman.
Tech Display.
Chris Rifkin at the Live Auction.
Namdoo Kim and Kerry Rowe at the Goblet Grab.
Shawn Messenger, Jack Schmidt, and Amber Cowan.
Alison Berger and Angie West.
Micah Evan’s flameworking demo.
112
Ladislav Pflimpfl, Martin Janecky, and Maxim Velc̆ovský.
Rich Royal demo at Ignite Glass Studios.
Lucio Bubacco, John Gross, and Davide Salvadore.
Yusuke Takemura’s cold demo.
Laura Donefer dances with fellow attendees at the Closing Night Party.
Ignite staff with GAS Board member, Peter Layton.
2014 Presenter Ethan Stern (center) and friends at the Closing Night Party.
Stacy Lynn Smith’s lec-mo.
adv e r ti s e r s
Conference attendee visiting the Hot Glass Color and Supply booth in Tech Display.
114
116
118
120
Kiln temperature control never
had it so easy.
The Vanessa is made for art. From the simple installation to
the way it helps you set and control ramping temperatures,
the Vanessa Small Kiln Controller is about precision and
ease, making what you imagine possible.
For more than 30 years we’ve been manufacturing a range
of temperature controllers for glass and ceramic artists.
During that time our products have evolved to include many
functions and features desired by our customers, creating
controllers that address the needs of artists like no other.
All our controllers are made in USA.
•Low cost, high reliability
• Capacitive touch sealed control panel –
no moving parts to wear out
• Three user programmable temperature profiles
of nine steps each
To place an order or to learn more
about the Vanessa – and our entire line
of programmable controllers,
call 207.774.0300
or email info @ digitry.com
• Separate set-point control for simple situations
Digitry.com
• Standard type K thermocouple input
449 Forest Avenue #9
Portland, Maine 04101
• Available in several different plug configurations, including:
-
120 vac 15 amp (normal wall plug: NEMA 5-15)
120 vac 20 amp (NEMA 5-20)
220/240 vac 20 amp (NEMA 6 -20)
220/240 vac 30 amp (NEMA 10 - 30)
© 2014 Digitry Company, Inc.
• Furnace versions available with type R or S thermocouple
calibration and 4 -20 milliamp output for controlling SCRs
or variable speed blowers etc.
122
T h ank Yo u
The GAS Journal is sponsored, in part,
by 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 San Jose.
Circle of Palms and
The San Jose Museum of Art
Glass Art Society’s
44th Annual Conference
San Jose, California USA
June 5-7, 2015
Interface: Glass, Art,
and Technology
We are pleased to announce that the 44th
Glass Art Society Conference will be held in
San Jose, California. San Jose is a hotbed of
technological innovation and is surrounded by
a vibrant cultural arts community. This area is
bursting with creative ideas and GAS is excited
to invite its membership to interface with the
unique tech culture of San Jose.
Centered in the capitol of the Silicon
Valley, downtown San Jose is a largely
walkable area that will give conference
attendees a pleasant and sunny commute
between venues. 2015 conference venues
include San Jose State University, Bay Area
Glass Institute (BAGI), The Tech Museum of
Innovation, TechShop San Jose, Parkside Hall,
City National Civic, Montgomery Theater and
the CMoG Hot Glass Roadshow at Plaza de
César Chávez. Please be aware, conference
presentations will take place from Friday,
June 5 - Sunday, June 7, a slight shift from
previous conference schedules.
Thank you for your continued support of
the Glass Art Society. We look forward to
seeing you in San Jose!
124

Glass Art society Journal

Transcription

Similar documents

Glass instructions

Large Auction - Don Guthery and Associates Auctioneers

Decor Rentals - The White List

SoftEtch™ SoftEtch™ Colour

Ideation to Integration: Smart Glasses for Enterprise

Borosilicate Glass Art Trade

Vertec - CMS CZ

CONSTGLASS: Annex: Final object report

- Saint

AN ASTONISHING HOUSE CALLED JAGGED EDGE CLINGS TO A