Starshine Salon: April 2012

I usually use my blog to show my latest work or my latest finds, but today I’d like to depart from the norm and share some views.

I’ve seen many critical comments about the use of nonworking gears and clock mechanisms in art. I haven’t used these items in my own art yet, but I plan to, and I feel the need to defend artists who use these items decoratively.

I’ve recently become interested in Steampunk art. Like most people, I bring my own unique perspective to the movement. As a medievalist, I’ve always avoided the Victorian period, as it seemed much too modern for my interests. Then several things happened that changed my mind. I started learning about traditional handcrafts (like spinning, weaving, lacemaking, leatherworking, metalsmithing) and started researching their histories. My husband and I bought a house built in 1790 and I started learning more about the history of our country. My mother got me started on a Victorian murder mystery series. The books were well-written and well-researched, and focused quite a bit on the status of women and the poor, and that struck a nerve for me. Then the current corset craze led me to research the history of women’s clothing, and I found picture after beautiful picture of women in Steampunk mode.

Steampunk envisions the future from the viewpoint of the past, hovering around the Victorian era but venturing into the periods before and after. I find the whole concept fascinating. I’ve spent a lot of time studying “what was” (in literature and history) and “what is” (languages) but Steampunk is all about “what could have been.”

Most of the negative comments refer to people who use nonworking gears and clock mechanisms in work they label “Steampunk.” The critics think that the gears, even if they don’t work, should at least represent something that pretends to work. So maybe this is just a debate between representational and abstract artists.

Here is something you all know: art is subjective. On the other hand, classification of art into genres could be more objective, but really, it comes down to individuals. So, maybe this is a debate between purists and those who like to step outside restrictive bounds.

To me, Steampunk is all about possibilities (what could have been or what could be) and human ingenuity (what we have made, what we make, and what we could have made). Gears are perfect symbols for possibility and human ingenuity. A shiny, new, symmetrical gear represents potential and human invention. An old, tarnished, damaged gear can represent realized potential, spent energy, or human accomplishment. Clock mechanisms are similar. They are amazing, tiny creations of incredible exactitude, displaying the very best in human workmanship. And they are beautiful! That’s not even mentioning the concept of time and how people react to it. A clock means many things, including the passing of time, the human construction of time, the life cycle, and nostalgia for past times.

The “nonworking” aspect of the criticism is interesting. Recently I’ve seen pictures of necklaces with vintage thimbles as charms and bracelets made from old tape measures. Nobody has criticized their creators for using nonworking parts! Rather, they have been praised for recycling unused pieces. Steampunk artists who make ray guns don’t make real ray guns. They make something that suggests a ray gun, the way that someone else’s nonworking gears suggest associations with invention, mechanization, creation of wealth, realized or unrealized potential.

Maybe the answer is for people using nonworking gears to avoid the use of the term “Steampunk.” But it’s really just a label adopted for the purpose of getting people who might be interested to look at one’s work. Any time you label your work, you take the chance that someone else will disagree with your choice.

When I complete my pieces featuring gears and watch mechanisms, I may call them “Steampunk” or I may avoid the controversy and call them “Industrial.” I’d just as soon not label them, but if you don’t, no search engine will ever bring anyone to your work. But I will not hesitate to use those parts, even if they serve no practical purpose, because I believe they are beautiful and I know they are meaningful and culturally significant. My art is my expression, and my attempt to reach others, whether or not my work fits neatly into someone else’s category.

As always, I send you Starshine Wishes,

Karen