Is There Such a Thing as 'Good Enough'?

There's been a big discussion about participating in swaps on arttechniques lately that has a sidebar discourse on what is good enough. Or maybe that's just what I have taken out of the discussion. I feel that I’ve learned a lot by looking at others’ original work. I know that I’ve also received work that displeased me. I feel it is junk. OK, let me be honest. It's crap!

I’ve tried and I just cannot throw it away so I won’t see it anymore, so it won’t bother me. I keep thinking that I should be able to find a way to tell these people what is wrong with it so that they can improve. Someone suggested that a swap hostess should deal with this issue and tell people that their work is not up to standards. First of all, whose standards? What makes it good enough?

Second, did you ever TRY to do this? I have. How do you say “your work isn’t good enough” without sounding like a snob or worse, just plain mean? It is honestly easier to tell someone that they have bad breath or BO!

And thirdly, if someone sent the item in, doesn’t that suggest that they found it of high enough quality to represent them? Would they even get it about quality? I think that the most a swap host can or should do (because, let’s face it, they have enough work to do already!) is to swap the work out as equitably as they can. There is one thing I got in a one on one swap that, if I’d received it for a swap as a hostess, I would have had to turn back somehow because I could not have passed it along. I might have taken the coward’s way and tried to send it back looking unopened when it was too late to resubmit it (oh, if only I knew when to be sneaky about opening packages!) because as I said, how do you say “This is crap” without hurting someone’s feelings? If they got mad at me and decided to never participate in my swaps again, so much the better!

I also received something in a swap recently that was so non work, that I was horribly disappointed. Punching a hole in a piece of plastic and putting a jump ring in the hole is not making a charm! It is simply punching a hole in a piece of plastic and putting a jump ring in it! I'm sorry to say that that person got a charm into which I actually put a lot of thought and effort. The rest of the work in that swap was amazing!

I haven’t let the receipt of poor quality in the past stop me from swapping and I’ve received wonderful work as a result. And yes, I learn from the pieces I receive. Amazingly, two of the best pages in a fatbook I recently received are by people who had never been in a swap before. What made them “best” pages? They are well thought out, well executed, pleasing to the eye. Experience is not what makes you good, though if it doesn’t help, maybe you are not paying attention to what you get back.

I read something recently – in a series of short essays on art by Robert Genn in his twice weekly art letters http://www.painterskeys.com/ - about people feeling that their work was ‘good enough’. The gist of it was that if someone took the time to worry about whether their work was good enough, it generally was. It is those who don’t even question how good their work is who might send in inferior quality work. I think the difference is that if you care whether or not your work is good enough, you will put thought and effort into making it good enough.

I would encourage everyone to try swaps and see how they like the experience. Even if your time is really limited, some of the swaps will still be do-able for you, just choose one where you only need to send in a few items.

And if you get something bad, learn to live with it, deal with, and get past it. I’m learning. But you’ll get back a lot more than you give most of the time.

Here's my latest offering for a swap that I have to mail off tomorrow, a Frida domino.

Looking for Leonardo, Michelangelo, Rembrandt, and Monet

Last night, I posted to one of my Yahoo groups about my concern for the use of poor quality materials in people's art.

All these people are going into raptures about the things you can do with dried up baby wipes, paint-covered paper towels, and used-up dryer sheets in your art.

I don't see the attraction.

Here's my original post:

"I’ve been puzzling about why everyone has been using their paper towels, baby wipes, and dryer sheets as elements in their artwork for a while now and finally felt compelled to post about it. In my opinion, there are two main reasons not to do this. One is that these materials are not meant to last in the first place and I would think that you would want your artwork to last for many years. The second reason is that you really DO need to match dyes to the fibers being used and to use the right chemical agent to promote proper bonding of the dye ions to the fiber molecules. Dyeing is chemistry where the dye bonds with the fibers and paint just lays on the surface. The vinegar you put in easter egg dye is what enables the bond with the proteins in the eggshells, and the hot water you use promotes that bond. Paper towels, et al do not contain proteins at all.

"Easter egg dye and food coloring are acid dyes and will work with protein fibers such as wool, mohair, etc. (though probably not silk as only specific acid dyes work on silk despite the fact that it is a protein fiber). While these may color your paper towels, baby wipes, and dryer sheets right now, they are not the correct dyes to use with those fibers (cotton and synthetics) and will fade with time and light. I would not use these in any work you would want to last, and especially not in items for trade and for sale. Sealing/covering them with a thoroughly applied coat of acrylic medium MIGHT prevent the color from fading, but unless someone tests it, I would not use them. Because acrylic paints would seal the fiber inside a polymer layer, works made using acrylics might last for a while. However, the fibers used in paper towels, baby wipes, and dryer sheets are intentionally produced to biodegrade over a short period of time. Coloring them with dyes that are not made for those fibers without sealing them inside (which means coating BOTH sides) some sort of plastic layer, won’t make for a lasting material.

"I was a dyer and weaver in a previous life. I still spin yarn. I’ve worked with dyes a LOT and studied them for many years. Using the right dyes the wrong way on the right fibers can lead to great disappointment when the colors fade over the years. If you look at Golden Artist Colors’ website, you’ll see that even acrylic paints are rated for their ability to resist fading in normal light conditions when applied properly to an artist grade substrate. It’s the same with dyes.

"Who wants to pay $80 for a collage that won’t retain its original color for five years or that might disintegrate to dust? If we call ourselves artists, shouldn’t we be responsible enough to ensure that anything we sell or give away will last the lifetime of the buyer or recipient?"

I have had two responses thus far. One, an online friend, thanked me for reminding her about the need to use quality materials. The other, someone with whom I've never so much as emailed and therefore an unknown quantity, is here:

"I really disagree heavily with this idea. Why should our work last forever when a blackberry sold for $599.00 lasts about 2 years? How long a piece of art lasts is up to the owner and their care -- I don't believe the artist is responsible for that."

I resisted the urge to email back and ask this person why they think the disintegration of overall standards is an excuse to not care about what you create after it leaves your hands.

Aren't we all glad that Leonardo, Michelangelo, Rembrandt, and Monet didn't think that way?

Authenticity in art, being a genuine artist, the inherent craftsmanship I was taught should go with the pride of creation, and an ethic of providing quality work when you sell your art, these things matter! Whose work will still be around two or four hundred years from now instead of having spontaneously biodegraded in the landfill where it was tossed when the colors faded? My name is not Monet, but I care enough to preserve my work only if for my own amusement years from now.

This is WHY standards have become so low!

If people don’t care that the Blackberry falls apart after two years when a new technology replaces it, then that becomes the standard. Two years. If nobody cares how long their art lasts, then what will represent our generation of artists two hundred years from now? Who will be the Leonardo, Michelangelo, Rembrandt, or Monet of the twentieth to twenty-first century artists?

Oh yeah. *lightbulb going off over head, my lovelies!*

Those of us who cared will represent our generation!