The Believer - February 2012

The February issue of The Believer did not disappoint again.   

For example, the interview with Chris Johanson by Natasha Boas captures a thoroughly unfettered authentic man who expresses clearly the need to practice his art form.  The business side of showing his art and the artist’s responsibility in this regard flies in the face of what he does best, the doing part.  It’s a perennial obstacle for any creative person.   

Katie Bachner’s interview with Sam Farber, collector of ‘outsider art’ exposes essential points on how art is defined in the mainstream and how the traditional definition may be changing; whether biography informs the content significantly; how ‘outsider art’ may be confidently forging its own path and smudging the lines between what is mainstream and what is not all the while protecting its unique aesthetic.

‘La Bibliothèque Impossible’ tells about a collection of work which few people know about, the Oulipians.

And then, the piece by Aaron Bobrow-Strain on the making of the USDA White Pan Loaf No. 1 was an amazingly informative, fascinating study on the origins of the enriched white loaf which occupies miles and miles of grocery store shelves throughout the continent.  Who would have thought that this spongy nothingness played such an important role in the military strategy of the country in the 40’s.

Each of the articles in this remarkable magazine has to be savoured.  There is so much packed into them.  For the time it takes for McSweeney’s Publishing to prepare the next issue, it takes me to read the one in my hands.  No gleaning over the words here.  In fact, to the contrary.  I feel enriched, just like  Pan Loaf No. 1 and well fortified for the creative day ahead of me.  

Moral centre

I am following the Republican candidate race and have just heard the results of the voting in South Carolina yesterday.  Newt Gingrich can now, with this resounding victory behind him, respond to the latest questions about his second marriage and the statements made by his ex-wife that he desired to have an 'open marriage', statements which may colour the public's view of his moral centre. 


At the same time, the media is reporting on the lack of clarity surrounding Mitt Romney's finances and investments and whether or not he will divulge details of his recent tax return.  His credibility has also been undermined.


In both cases, it is not the particular issue that irks me, it is the apparent lack of transparency of both these candidates to send a message which rings true.  Why is it so hard to tell the truth?  Why do we need to practice denial so often?  Where is our moral courage?  Why are we so reluctant to face the music?  I can't think of one single person who hasn't made some mistake in his/her life that hasn't been regretted.  I think we all have a capacity for forgiveness.  


Imagine, if we could regain such confidence in our politicians knowing that no game is being played and that transparency is really the order of the day and not just a word to be thrown out to the electorate for the purposes of sounding lofty and holier than thou.  Would this not be the beginning of a more savoury environment to govern our country.


Call me naive.  Yes, maybe.  But surely we have to start somewhere and at some point to get back to 'real' and 'true'.  Accepting that it's difficult being a good human being would be a beginning.  Admitting to our frailties and working to strengthen them is surely a sign of courage which we can all recognize.   As a bonus, what a terrific example it would be to show to the generation who currently is dependent on us but who ultimately will follow us in government and upon whom we in later years will be dependent.   If that is not incentive enough to show the way, I don't know what is.

The Creative Self - define

"What is the best way to describe the creative self?  How should we conceive of the relationship between creative persons and the context that informs their work?  Do the rules that govern cultural property help or hinder that work?  When creators mix their labor with contemporary material, or with an inherited tradition, what portion of the new creation may they claim as their own, and for how long?"


This is another quote from 'Common as Air' by Lewis Hyde


I am less focussed on the last question of how long a creator may claim a work as their own and more on how much of the new creation can they claim as their's.  In my work, I am much inspired by designers of previous centuries and depend on those age-worn techniques of the embroiderers of the past, so what part of my work can I authentically claim as mine?  I believe that the answer is in all since it is my mind that interprets the form, my choice of contemporary materials, my selection from the repertoire of stitches and my hand that executes in a way that only that hand can do.  In all these parts lies the source of originality and that which distinguishes my work from another.


And in terms of the 'how long', I invite any other person to take whatever they may from what I do and make it their own.  The goal is to encourage an open exchange and not place any restraint in any place whatsoever.  

Who am I?

This paragraph stayed with me this morning:


It is a quote by Wolfgang von Goethe, when talking to a friend, he asks of himself:  What am I?  
This is his answer:


'Everything that I have see, heard, and observed I have collected and exploited. My works have been nourished by countless different individuals,  by innocent and wise ones, people of intelligence and dunces.  Childhood, maturity, and old age all have brought me their thoughts,....their perspectives on life.  I have often reaped what others have sowed.  My work is the work of a collective being that bears the name of Goethe.'


(extract from  'Common as Air' by Lewis Hyde  2010)


Whether we recognize this or not, this is who we all are, and for this reason, we are ever changing. 

The Believer

The November/December 2011 issue of The Believer (www.believermag.com) just arrived.  If you have never read this magazine, I strongly suggest buying at least one copy.  It’s not your usual arts magazine.  No glossy pages here, no advertisements appealing to fat wallets and status conscious consumers.  It is a magazine whose main theme is ‘real’, calling it how it is, telling stories for the story’s sake, real-life pictures of lives lived or ideas expressed honestly.  It’s a magazine which even smells real, the paper is somewhere between newsprint and school  primer.  The pages all have a coloured margin, a different colour for each issue.  This issue is orange, the October issue was purple.

I had devoured the October, #84, issue.  It was no quick read, so much chunky word food but when # 85 arrived last week, my appetite for more was at its height.

It’s a magazine that succeeds in informing the reader on a variety of subjects which otherwise he might not discover on his own (ex:  The Dale Guild Society – Article entitled ‘The Last Man for the Job’).  This particular piece was written in a deeply heartfelt way.  It was not a story about monetary success but about how a person found himself following an ineluctable path directed by a passionate desire to save an art form which otherwise would be lost for ever.

And then there is ‘Stuff I’ve been reading’, Nick Hornby’s book review.  Just by the tone of the title and the reputation of the contributor, how could you not read him.  There is something wonderfully accessible about the style, so much so, that after reading his review on Claire Tomalin’s book ‘Charles Dickens – A life’, I ordered it.  A Christmas present for one lucky family member, me.

I anticipate the arrival of #86 with the same excitement as when I was a young girl waiting for my monthly teenage magazine to arrive.  Admittedly, The Believer is of a totally different content, but relatively speaking given the almost 50 years that separate the delivery of that teen mag and today, the level of importance I place on the content probably equates to the same, that is to say: enormous.

Thank you, McSweeney’s for this pleasure.  

A start

I spend at least an hour each morning reading after breakfast.  Books of choice usually centre around psychology, human nature and behaviours, the why of all the differences amongst people.  Thanks to a Christmas present of several years ago from my son, I was introduced to Lewis Hyde (www.lewishyde.com), "poet, essayist, translator, and cultural critic with a particular interest in the public life of the imagination".   This introduction to the works of Lewis Hyde was appropriately entitled 'The Gift' and started me exploring more deeply the idea of the role of 'art' and 'creative works' in our society.


To speak to the content of the book directly would take far too long.  My random thought today is just to say how much the reading of this book prodded my brain and allowed me to widen my own reflections on the impact any creative process has on its public.  In short though I was caught by Mr. Hyde's clarity where he plays on the word 'gift' where in English, a 'gift, is both a 'talent' and a 'present' and how these two meanings intertwine.


Just a couple of months ago, while browsing in Amazon.ca, I saw another of his books 'Trickster Makes this World'.  I ordered it  and was excited to anticipate spending my morning read over the next couple of weeks with this in hand.   Once again, I was caught by one of its themes, the idea of how the artist allows the spectator to cross boundaries by encouraging him to look at something with a different slant and by doing so, to one degree or another changes and enriches his view on society.  To quote Lewis Hyde in his introduction:


"Trickster is the mythic embodiment of ambiguity and ambivalence, doubleness and duplicity, contradiction and paradox"    


And then, as I was doing my research for Christmas books (a bit of a tradition in our family - rather than an orange stuffed into the toe of the proverbial Christmas stocking, our now-adult children get a book), I fell upon his most recent publication, 'Common as Air'.   The New York Times Book Review says this about the book:  


'An eloquent and erudite plea for protecting our cultural patrimony from appropriation by commercial interests'


With two kids in the creative business, one a writer, the other in the writing, editing, graphic design in the space of Art, I felt that in reading this book, there would be much fodder for discussion during the Christmas holidays.  Lewis Hyde explains so well the historical significance of 'commons' that which belongs to the people as it pertains to all things with the limitations and benefits.  He then takes the reader into the world of copyright and patents and how this plays into our current context of the digital world, once again outlining the advantages and disadvantages.  


And through this reading, my own vocabulary with regard to my favoured creative expression, embroidery, might become clearer.