In Art History, the terms "modern" and "contemporary" are sometimes used interchangeably. In my own mind, however, I am inclined to use "modern" for a style that is a complete departure from anything that has preceded it (Jackson Pollock comes to mind, although I admit his style resembled a house-painter's drop cloth), and "contemporary" for a piece that uses old techniques in fresh new ways, and (sometimes) reflects something about the culture in which it is made.
I think it is important to look at the development of lace style over the centuries (not THAT many, after all...) and then compare that to the developent of painting styles, sculpture, etc. Those media have enjoyed an unbroken line of patronism since the end of the middle ages, which has supported their constant shifts in allegance to the "brightest and the best". Lace, OTOH, nearly died out completely 100 years ago, and only really began its wonderful renaissance in the last 50 years - but without the patronage that the old lace enjoyed. While lacemakers have been eager to learn new skills, they are focusing on the classics - just as artists in other media do when they first learn. In Europe, where the renaissance was more like a silent rekindling of the flames, the lacemakers have become much more unfettered in their approach. Some of this lace is stunning, some of it is... not. But remember, for every Rembrandt and Vermeer and Monet, there were many more painters who worked hard, but did not have the "magic" to surpass the masters. Many artists are not recognized as pivotal in their fields until well after their deaths. So... it is really unrealistic for us to expect to say whose lace will be important in the future, and which lace will become yesterday's dish towel. Some of the "edgy" lace being designed in Europe today may well be viewed as pivotal - not because it was an immediate hit, but because it made other designers think in new ways and ultimately develop something which appeals to a wider audience. I am one of the people that Aurelia refers to when she speaks of the "present rage" for Binche! I am happy to explore the endless mysteries of the "queen of laces", as I think of it. The more I learn, the more I need to know. I don't think Binche should be dismissed as "just another Flemish lace"... although even there, that should be seen as an accolade! The laces of Belgium remain some of the most exquisite ever made, and it is no wonder that other countries had to impose embargos on importing lace! My efforts at reconstruction during workshops, last summer and this summer, have given me a huge appreciation for those sturdy scholars who have worked to hard to bring some of this stunning old lace into the hands of today's lacemakers. And finally, the question of modern/contemporary vs. classic needs to be viewed from the perspective of the lacemaker today. Most lacemakers (I am in this group) make lace for pleasure and personal satisfaction. Some design, for the enjoyment of others, but not with personal gain as a goal (Tamara Duvall comes to mind), and others enjoy teaching, and find that they also have a knack for design. But within the field of Binche, there are precious few designers. The Master Class at the Kantcentrum has been producing some very nice designs for the past five or ten years. Their designs are very much dependent on classic technique, but the subjects are new. Anny Noben's work is probably the best known, as she travels to the US each summer for IOLI and other workshops around the country. But even her small designs take hours and hours and hours to get from her head to the printers. And once in the hands of today's lacemaker (who usually has at least a few other obligations i n her life to keep her from being at the pillow all the time), a small round motif can take as much as six months or more to make! Still, the volume of lace produced by one lacemaker after all the study, all the teaching, all the designing, can often be tucked into an archivally safe display book. Without a market, or even a venue for display, the only voice is that of the lacemaker. If the lace is accessible, it becomes popular. If it is not... then it remains in obscurity, or becomes the focus of those who want to move beyond "intermediate" to something that requires more time and focus. Clay -- Clay Blackwell Lynchburg, VA USA > Tamara writes: > Don't know how this -- what looks like a part of a private > correspondence -- wound its way onto Arachne, but I find the subject > fascinating and am grateful for the mysteries of the e-space which made > it public :) > And Devon responded: > Does anyone else have anything to offer about what "modern lace" is? Or > contemporary lace? It is a good question. > > Devon - To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
