MATERIALITY – A MATTER OF REALITY

PLEASE CLICK ON AN IMAGE TO ENLARGE

Since we are talking about SILOEDthinking, well I am, it has to be said that it has become THEdefault thing to do because it is supposed to be logical and perhaps it is BUT it shuts down too many alternatives. Nonetheless, the image set above is an example of siloism and that needs to be said in order to move beyond all that.

For instance, clay and metal in some conditions are PLASTIC and both will BURN – AKA oxidise – and MELT depending on a range of factors. interestingly for both, the things we make with them can be glazed with glass if needs be. Yes, each material has its idiosyncrasies but it is often more useful to test their limits and especially so if PRACTICEporosity is on the agenda as it well might be increasingly. Clearaly knowing the properties, the characteristics of, a material enables useful manipulations often times in extraordinary ways.

Nonetheless, siloed imaginings of materials and their 'realities' is limiting rather than liberating. Likewise siloed making practices need to be porous enough to exploit the. a material's realities and the realities of networked making in a CULTURALlandscape.

In the traditional 'apprenticeship system' it was once 14yrs was more a secondary education that evolved into a 'trade training' that evolved into 'further training' under the 'journeyman system'  supported by the relevant Craft Guild. With the guilds there was something of an orderly system whereby young people were equipped to fill designated rolls in their communities as blacksmiths, stone masons, carpenters, weavers, whatever.  In many of these 'arrangements' the apprentice was expected to kind of steal techniques and information. 

Something that is well stolen has a new 'owner' who has won it by valuable experience that in time will be stolen again – adding to its value.

By-and-large the Industrial Revolution and the Social Revolutions in Europe and the advance of colonialism disrupted the traditional systematic methodologies whereby 'makers' acquired their:

•  Requisite technical knowledge relevant to the 'materiality' of the materials which they; and
•  Requisite haptic and dexterity skills won with time and the ability to coordinate 'head & hand'; and
•  Requisite life skills that enabled them to survive in the world and ideally thrive in their community; and
• Develop relationships with other makers in other 'guilds' that enabled them to expand the scope of their practices.

Yes, yes we all know all this as we were taught history within our schooling.  Well maybe, but was that a catalogue of events or was it delivered with a critical interrogation of the events and how they have influenced this or that. Indeed, just how much of our primary and secondary education pays attention to understanding cultural issues and our placedness? That is the places we belong to.

When it comes it institutions/ organisations/operations makers need 'places' to belong to rather than places that belong to them.  That is mutual support operations tthat are networks of networks [LINK] etc. Already, and currently, makers have established support networks but they are not working in quite the way as say the Medieval Guilds did given the intervening histories.

Since WW2 the apprenticeship system has essentially been transformed from its original purpose sometimes being a source for cheap labour source with 'training and skills development' being a secondary issue. With the unionisation of workplaces employers became less and less inclined to take on 'apprentices'.  More and more inclined to employ skilled migrant labour as markets globalised. 

Technical and Further Education attempted to fill the gap as did many universities but the financial pragmatics and the ever increasing limitations on student contact time diminished institution's abilities to deliver one-on-one-time and indeed the time needed for the shared experiences makers need to experience the materialities that matter most.

In large part currently makers are required to become autodidacts supported to some extent by institutions. Increasingly, that has become more and more possible with more digital platforms becoming available to glean technical information online. Often, generally does not come with TIMEbased experiences - albeit that it might do yet ... in time.

Nevertheless, what remains missing for makers-in-training are those somewhat formalise opportunities for the one-on-one MENTORmoments and that are accompanied by haptic experiences that enable materiality confidence and competence to evolve over time. It needs to be said that there is no single way to experience 'materiality' even if there are teachers/trainers/mentors who may imagine that there might be a PROPERway ... and that they posses that wisdom.

In a recent conversation with a 'maker' it came up that there were makers out there with whom you knew that you agreed furiously with. That is in what they write and say but when in the same room somehow there was nothing to say or share.  After musing upon this dilemma, somehow it seemed to be to do with one's placedness in a CULTURALlandscape. Making and placedness do matter, as  does a makers' understandings of 'materiality' matters. Both are to do with cultural sensibilities and sensitivities.

In that conversation there was quite a bit about who had picked THEtools again, who was doing this or doing that, who was living here or there and it was a conversation makers tend to have when they meet up at home or when out and about. It is a matter of networking and a quintessential exchange that makers tend to have.

Indeed, it seems that the period when the European makers who undertook a journeyman they made a commitment to invest in themselves. Indeed, one of the important aspects of their journey was/is to intentionally experience first hand a diversity of cultural sensibilities and sensitivities – indeed different cultural realities.

As for the porosity of makers' practices there is, and there always has been, a myriad of ways that are to be seen whereby makers garner their life experiences and have won paid employment and all are equally significant. That said, gender often plays a part and the makers in various fields will be more likely to gravitate to particular ancillary employment opportunities. It is interesting to note the European 'journeymen' on 'the walz' were generally required to gain a range of experiences. For example, a 'carpenter' on the walz, for three years and a day, the expectation was/is that the journeyman broadened their workplace experience along with their life experience.

Notably, contemporary makers generally adopt a lifestyle in their early careers where they move around  gleaning experiences and qualifications to support them in their 'practice' long term. Nonetheless, many would welcome some form of mentored 'walz' , or in Australia it might well win a colloquial name like 'on the walkabout' winning experience – and sometimes building savings as well.

 HOME