2010 symposium: introduction

The origins of this symposium stretch back almost two years from the time of writing. Roderick Duncan, a member of SPW's Board of Trustees appeared in the workshop one day outraged that gicleè reproductions of paintings were being editioned in hundreds, signed by the artist and sold as limited edition prints. His annoyance was with the classification “limited edition print” which he felt further clouded the public's hazy understanding of what an original limited edition pint was. In his view these works should be promoted as signed reproductions to ensure people knew what they were buying. At the same time Mike Booth was highlighting similar concerns on his website www.printworkshopcentral.com and asking for submissions of designs for a 'No Gicleè' symbol. The winning symbol could be used by traditional printmakers to identify that they were not running off reproductions on an inkjet. The term ‘Gicleè’ provides a certain ‘je ne sais qua’ to the lowly inkjet; though with its connection to the phrase ‘to spray’ – as in tom cats – it’s less elevating than you may first think.

 

Having created artwork using inkjet printers for several years I wondered why the technology was being lumped in with the concern that the public was in some way being hoodwinked by unscrupulous artists and publishers. For me these seemed to be two separate issues. As I explored the fraught term ‘original’ further many interrelated issues began to emerge gravitating toward the four 'p's of creativity as defined by Mel Rhodes in the 60's; person, process, place, product.

Person: what part did the signatory play in the physical making of the print?

Process: do certain processes carry more weight in relation to a work being considered original?

Place: does where the print is produced matter, whether it is an artists’ studio, print workshop or publishing house?

Product: what constitutes an original print in light of its journey from concept to product particularly in relation to new technologies?

Are the fears expressed by many printmakers toward digital production just a Luddite knee-jerk reaction or are there justified concerns in relation to the ease with which reproduction has been made possible. Bradd Shore (1996) observes that ‘… The information age represents the apotheosis of the “knockoff” and the consequent change in the conception of value. The ease and effectiveness with which modern technology can reproduce virtually anything has created a legal and moral challenge to conventional notions of property and value.’ (Shore, 1996, p154). Should artists working in original printmaking seek to identify the added value of their reproduction methods? Should they be seeking an agreed code of conduct to which all can adhere? If so, who would police it? Defining what is and isn’t ‘original’ printmaking takes on new impetuous in the current climate and perhaps a little naval gazing is necessary at times of marked change. It was my hope that the discussions engendered by ‘Unique Reproduction’ might play a role in clarifying some of these issues and feed into wider discussions.

The day was broken into three sessions beginning with the Keynote Address ‘Making our Mark in a Digital Age’ by Marjorie Devon. This was followed by speaker Kelly Troester whose talk was entitled ‘Collectors’ Understanding of Unique Reproductions’. After lunch we engaged in a round table discussion. Contributing to this section was Steve Hoskins, John Mackechnie and Jenny Roland joined by Kelly and Marjorie. Importantly, members of the audience were invited to share their views and this section was recorded. The text of this recording can be read here. Over sixty artist/printmakers attended from across the UK and Ireland. This publication contains the text of both talks, the opening statements of those contributing to the roundtable discussion and an edited version of the conversations between contributors and audience.

I would like to thank The Arts Council of Northern Ireland who provided Lottery Funding through their Small Grant Scheme to support this event; North Down Borough Council’s Arts Office which also provided financial support and the Ulster Festival of Art for helping to host the event and particularly Tim Kerr, Cultural Development Officer, for his commitment and enthusiasm

Supported by

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mel Rhodes 'An Analysis of Creativity'

1961 Phi Delta Kappan

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bradd Shore: 'Culture in Mind: Cognition, Culture, and the Problem of Meaning'

1996 Oxford University Press

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Click on the links to read the full articles