Close to 100 department heads, faculty members, administrators, instructors and a small group of students came together to discuss the future of glass education. Approximately 18 presenters from the US, Canada, the Netherlands, the Czech Republic and Australia, shared their visions and experiences. Instead of giving a synopsis of all the presentations, I rather give you a personal impression on the symposium as a whole and invite you to visit the Robert M. Minkoff Foundation’s website http://www.rmmfoundation.org where you can listen to all the audio recordings of the different lectures to form your own opinion.
The event started on Thursday 4pm with a pre-symposium gallery tour and reception. Hauser & Wirth, Claire Oliver gallery, Heller gallery, and Nancy Hoffman gallery, were on the list. When I walked into the first gallery, arriving a bit late, I found myself alone amidst several large drawings and 2 installations of Roni Horn in her show, ‘Everything was sleeping as if the universe were a mistake’. One installation consisted of 10 solid glass objects in hues of yellow and green. The second one followed a similar setup but this time in hues of violet and blue. Both installations strongly provoked contemplation and when I left the gallery I couldn’t help but think that this was a perfect start for what would hopefully be a great symposium.
After a short but wonderful walk along the ‘High Line’, one of New York’s newest attractions, I caught up with the group of participants and continued the tour. We were treated to short presentations in each gallery and by 7.30pm, we found ourselves meeting and greeting at a private reception, hosted by Geoff Isles and the Glass Art Society. The symposium had begun.
Friday morning Cybele Maylone, Executive Director of UrbanGlass, welcomed all the guests in the auditorium of the St. Francis College, where keynote speaker Jack Wax kicked of the official program. Nine speakers would have presented before the end of the day, all strictly guided by Andrew Page who did a fantastic job keeping everybody on a tight schedule. As to be expected from experienced instructors, the presentations were of high caliber. To conclude the day, we all walked from the lecture place to the gallery in the newly renovated UrbanGlass building. By now, informal discussions where happening everywhere and it became clear that this symposium was indeed turning into a unique and long awaited event.
Jens Pfeifer, Head of the glass program at the Gerrit Rietveld academy in Amsterdam and Marc Barreda opened Saturday’s presentation series in the brand new studio of UrbanGlass. The space is like a dream come true for everybody who loves glass studios. Unfortunately however, the ventilation system was working so well that we all had to wear jackets and open up some furnaces in between activities to stay warm. But this couldn’t stop the energy. Another day of high quality presentations and a demo by Alexander Rosenberg, Glass Program Head at the University of the Arts, ended with a superb lecture by Rony Plesl and Klára Horácková from the Glass Department at the Academy of Art, Architecture, and Design in Prague.
There’s no doubt that the symposium was a big success and all participants will agree with me that a second edition would greatly benefit the glass community at large. But let’s remain critical - or as Jack Wax formulated it in his opening speech: “be honestly and brutally self critical” - and keep our focus on the initial intention of this gathering. Because despite the high quality of all presentations and the openness of the dialogues taking place, it did occur to me that words like ‘studio glass’, ‘glass artist’, ‘art glass’, ‘glass techniques’, etc. were still used way more than perhaps should be. And as is the case in any situation where like-minded people gather, there’s always the inherent danger of tapping each other’s back a bit too much. We have to, by all means, remain very conscious of the fact that, as educators, our primary concern should always be the students and not some self indulging structure that serves the institution’s needs or our own academic visions.
The road is long and work has just begun but thanks to the organizers of this symposium, a platform was provided to start up the dialogue that needs to take place. The intimate character of the event allowed for in depth discussions in an amicable atmosphere and I’m convinced some long lasting partnerships were established during these days. Let’s hope we can continue the conversation during similar kinds of events organized in the future. Meanwhile, Jens Pfeifer and Marc Barred already announced the startup of an online platform called ‘The Glass Virus’. It’s a new “internationally operating ‘Think Tank’, dedicated to new strategies in glass art education”.[1] It will definitely open up the discussion towards a larger public. You can find it at www.facebook.com/theglassvirus.
The glass community is slowly maturing. It felt good to be part of this new step forward and it was fascinating to notice the differences between European presenters and their US or Australian counterparts. But one thing still felt strange: despite the fact that many glass programs function within a larger fine art, craft or design department, no one was there to represent those other parties, and although a small group of students were present, no real platform was given to hear their voices either. Considering the content of many of the presentations, it would have been fascinating to hear both groups’ critical feedback. After all, if we really care about our students and our position within a larger field, we cannot afford to exclude anyone. It will be interesting to see how this conversation will evolve and who will be willing to take the discussion out of our own comfort zone and past the limitations of the medium glass, into a broader context of Art, Craft and Design.
But let’s take it step by step. Thank you Robert and Andrew for a fantastic and well-organized event. I’ll be looking forward to the next edition.
