Andi Harriman MTJW 702 February 28, 2011

A Necessary Collaboration: Wearable Art + Photography

The body is the heart of jewelry; it dictates the way makers develop concept and design. In redefining adornment, several jewelry artists work in larger scale, attempting to engage the body in new, creative ways. For this reason, traditional photography procedures used in most jewelry documentation must be forgotten. The wearable art requires a unique process of photography to avoid a misunderstanding of the piece. In order to create a successful picture, the photo must take the wearable art aspect out of the work and make it seem wearable; such works must be put into a context that creates believability. A piece of jewelry as an object can be intriguing: the form with its small scale architectural elements, skillful technique, and even the content can be revealed in an observation of the jewelry as mini sculpture. Most jewelry can survive without the bodys presence in pictorial form because its identity is known -- a bracelet serves as a bracelet, a brooch as a brooch, and so on. But in the realm of wearable art, the viewer might find it difficult to realize the function or placement of the work in relation to the body. The absence of a wearer within the photograph can be disastrous in terms of understanding and appreciating the jewelry. Rachelle Thiewes, a jewelry artist, found that without proper photography of her work, the audience did not make the connection to the body (Personal Interview). Use of the body in photos can indicate several elements in the simplest of forms: the proper placement on the body as well as an indicator of scale. Both are integral aspects in the definition of wearable art. In an effort to pinpoint the term wearable art, this type of work might be deemed more difficult to wear than everyday jewelry within that, a responsibility of selfconsciousness is implied to the wearer. Wearable art can change the wearers gait,

balance and form, allowing for the work to inhibit or enhance certain parts of the body. Photography in terms of this genre of jewelry should be specific in its execution. Model choice, setting and even story line, if necessary, should be included within the concept of the wearable art form. Photographs must translate a meaning or mood about the work to the audience. The body should not be used simply as a living pedestal but the person must interconnect into the work itself. Some jewelry artists find that without photography in a gallery setting, the work cannot be completely understood. Thiewes believes that while it is possible for wearable art to exist without the photograph, imagination is required from the viewer: My own work has never been truly complete without being worn (Personal Interview). The disconnect between the body and the work is evident when photographs are absent of the wearer. Wearable art photography seems to lose its vivacity because of certain repetitive decisions made within the field. A particular trend of photo documentation is the model choice and clothing choice. Black clothing, particularly the stuffy turtleneck shirt, short hair and a somber face are prominent recurrences. While it does make sense to allow the jewelry to outshine all else, the stereotypical wearable art photograph seems dated. Though a pioneer in wearable art, Marjorie Schicks photography lacks appeal (Fig. 1). The example photograph of her work, Golden Web, proves all the previous stereotypical points the hair being the most distracting of all because it is fighting against the neckpiece and vying for attention. What Schicks photo does, however, is focus in on the work so that when the viewer is not focusing on the models hair, he or she can observe the piece clearly. Unfortunately, in Katrin Sprangers case, the photograph takes away the quality of

her work, Shoulder Piece: Neoplasms (Fig. 2). The structure, embodied with graceful electroformed and patinaed ruffles, sits like an ugly slug on the models shoulder. Because of the cropping of this image, the piece is not the focus of the photograph the eye quickly finds the bit of skin revealed amongst her black clothing, just beneath the arm. The cropping of the photo could easily fix this issue but, for some reason, the artist chose not to crop the lackluster photo in order to allow the focal point to be the jewelry. Photographs of wearable art that do not capture the works spirit might be worse than the photographs discussed above. In Masako Onederms photo of her work Flesh Propagation, the image has managed to stifle the life out of the bulbous bracelet (Fig. 3). Despite the fact that the light is positioned on the models back and her clothing is distracting to the work, what is worse is the position of the body and how it exudes an irreverent feel to the bracelet, disservicing the wearable art. A photo of Flesh Propagation to attract the idea of fantasy and play would be beneficial to the work further consideration with clothing, styling and lighting could make this piece convincing. In Contemporary jewelry, photography is not traditionally incorporated into the thought process of the artist until after the object has been made. It seems, however, that when documentation is considered before the finished piece, the photography becomes an essential component to the meaning of the work. The artist, Otto Kunzli integrates photography and jewelry into jewelry as theatre, as described in the book The New Jewelry. The photography of Contemporary theatre jewelry must suggest a play on imagination to confirm its believability. Otto Kunzlis collection titled Brooches (Fig. 4) is photographed in a thoughtful,

provoking way. When first observing his series of pictures, the models are normal, everyday people. Each person is adorned with a brooch of varying sizes and shapes; and despite the brooches appearing to be actual brick or heavy metal, all are made from wallpaper and hardfoam. None of the models look out of place, they seem comfortable with his or her photo being taken, assuming a pose as if they were not adorned with radical brooches that fill up their chest area. What makes this series successful is the seamlessness of the photograph each model looks as though the brooch was chosen because it matched his or her personality, as if the jewelry was made specifically for each individual. The New Jewelry confirms, The Kunzli brooch might be said to give the face position and to be the very detail that completes the portrait and yet, by other criteria, it is absurd. The brooch is worn with a beautiful seriousness, and a dignity, which almost but not quite renders the object perfectly normal (p. ). Kunzli has defined the work of wearable art and photography: the work translates through photographs as seemingly normal, though, with a skewed reality, perhaps far more interesting than reality. Similar to the theatrics of Contemporary jewelry, another world where the fantastical and the outrageous thrive is within fashion realm. Photography in magazines aim to create narratives with the clothes and accessories, piecing them together with expertise to sell a look by engaging their audience. A photograph is not unlike a clothing boutique, for example. The customer develops decisions about, say, a dress because of the fantasy aspect. She must be able to imagine herself wearing the dress, to visualize about how fabulous she would look. With fashion photography, a context is created through use of setting, makeup, hair and adornment choice. To sell the audience, the

fairytale world must seem real. In a fashion photo shoot from Elle Magazine featuring Johanne Mills neck and headpieces, the result is the seamless intermingling of clothing and the jewelry (Fig. 5). The setting is in a remote desert, evoking a galaxy where the model is a princess of the land. Every day the princess adorns herself in metallic clothing and large neckpieces. For ceremonies, she wears a techno headpiece that recalls a lions mane and dresses in luxe gold jodhpurs and winged jackets. The photos transform Mills wearable art to convincing pieces that can be worn in reality. With a metallic dress must come a copper neckpiece. Similarly, the photo of a Missoni necklace redefines the jewelry through the images use of lighting and lack of clothing (Fig. 6). The harsh blue light on the models skin indicates an alien or robot creature in which the necklace is necessary for functionality as either armor or a system of channels to control her movement. Because of the grandeur of the necklace, no clothing is needed the piece, flipped around and placed on the back of the models body supplies enough dialogue of its own. Within fashion magazines, the jewelry is left to the imagination of the photographer and stylists, which can be beneficial for the maker. However, when the artist can dictate the development of the fashion photograph, the result is a collaboration between the maker and the photographer. Naomi Filmer, a jewelry maven, has worked with several designers in the fashion field such as Alexander McQueen, which verifies her understanding of fantasy and fashion. When documenting her work, the necessity of context as an image has always been important to her (Filmer). [Photography] is part of the communication. My work is not separate from anatomy and flesh so it was instinctive to document it in this way (Filmer). As a maker, one must be thoughtful of

the body at all times; it must be the nucleus of the wearable art. Filmer translates her perceptiveness of the body and jewelry into the photography of her work (Fig. 7). The photographer must understand the meaning of her work in order to successfully collaborate (Filmer). The mutual understanding is proven within the finalized photographs; and without communication between the two artists, successful representation of the work will not be achieved. This being said, Kat Marks is a superior example of collaboration of the maker and photographer. A corset from the collection Infundibulum: Amazing Brace is captured in a high fashion manner by the photographer (Fig. 8). The models pose is stylized and disjointed, similar to the strips of metal molded around her hips. Along with photography, the photo editing enhances the fantasy and allure of the wearable art. The absence of a bottom half on the model is almost unnoticeable, as if she were a doll whose torso had popped off. Marks presentation of her work causes the audience to investigate more, to explore other worlds to which they can be introduced. The consideration involved in photographing wearable art must be a thorough brainstorming process in order to achieve the innovative or interesting. Wearable art has been cheated, in a way, through monotonous photography and stagnant poses. The charm of this specific type of jewelry should be brought forth as a legitimate category in the Contemporary jewelry world. It seems few artists have grasped this idea; and rather than collaborating with photographers, stylists and designers, the wearable art jewelry remains stationary. Only through convincing the viewer of its wearability can the piece be validated and translated as successful wearable art.

Fig. 1. "Golden Web by Marjorie Schick." Craft Exhibit 'A Bit Unusual'. Web. 21 Feb 2011. <http://www.bloomingtonalternative.com/node/8741>.

Fig. 2. "Shoulder Piece: Neoplasms by Katrin Spranger." Katrin Spranger. Web. 21 Feb 2011. <http://www.klimt02.net/jewellers/index.php?item_id=14606>.

Fig. 3. "Flesh Propagation by Masako Onedera." Jewelry. Web. 21 Feb 2011. <http://web.mac.com/masakoonodera/Masako_web/Jewelry.html>.

Fig. 4. Kunzli, Otto. Brooches. 1983. The New Jewelry: Trends + Traditions. By Peter Dormer. London: Thames And Hudson, 1985. 164.

Fig. 5. Bush, Richard. Everything is Illuminated. 2009. Elle Mar. 2009.

Fig. 6. Missoni Necklace, Nylon Magazine.

Fig. 7. "Out of the Ordinary by Naomi Filmer." L'atelier. Web. 21 Feb 2011. <http://christinefortune.blogspot.com/2009/09/blown-away-naomi-filmercontinuously.html>.

Fig. 8. "Infundibulum: Amazing Brace by Kat Marks." Kat Marks. Web. 21 Feb 2011. <http://www.katmarks.com/infundibulum.html>.

Bibliography Dormer, Peter, and Ralph Turner. The New Jewelry: Trends + Traditions. London: Thames and Hudson, 1985. Filmer, Naomi. Personal Interview. 15 Feb 2011. Thiewes, Rachelle. Personal Interview. 21 Feb 2011.