RANAMOK GLASS PRIZE 2011 Underwriters of the 2011 Ranamok Glass Prize

RANAMOK GLASS PRIZE 2011 Underwriters of the 2011 Ranamok Glass Prize RANAMOK GLASS PRIZE SPONSORS 2011 Contents The Ranamok Glass Prize 2011 3 Introduction 4 Finalists Masahiro Asaka 6 Jennifer Kemarre Martiniello 38 Annette Blair 8 Laurel Kohut 40 Kristel Britcher 10 Warren Langley 42 Lee Brogan 12 Kim Logue 44 Tillie Burden 14 Nikki Main 46 Christine Cathie 16 Kristin McFarlane 48 Brian Corr 18 Wayne Pearson 50 Samantha Cuffe 20 Anne Sorensen 52 Mel Douglas 22 Di Tocker 54 George Drobac Taniani 24 Emma Varga 56 Andrea Fiebig 26 Richard Whiteley 58 Brenden Scott French 28 Keryn Whitney 60 Alasdair Gordon 30 Clare Wilson 62 Rish Gordon 32 Nick Wirdnam 64 Sue Hawker 34 Kayo Yokoyama 66 Jenny Judge 36 Take T Yusuke 68 Finalists’ Biographies 70 Glossary of Glass Terms 80 The Judges 83 2010 Recipient 84 Ranamok 2011 Tour Dates 85 Acknowledgements 85 2 The Ranamok Glass Prize 2011 This is the fi nal year for judges Tina Oldknow and Geoffrey Edwards. Both Tina and Geoffrey brought many years of important experience and very important perspectives to the process and this year’s exhibition (as well as the Ranamok Prize itself) is certainly much stronger for their input. Thank you both for your guidance. Louise Doyle also joined us this year as a judge. Louise has ‘done time’ as a judge with Ranamok back in 2000. Louise brings a wealth of experience, knowledge and perspective to the process. I would also like to take this opportunity to thank the Directors of Ranamok for their continued guidance. Over the past year, one of our founding directors, Jane Burns, decided to resign from the board. We thank Jane for her wise counsel over the years. Subsequent to Jane’s resignation, we asked one of our past judges, Jacqueline Clayton, if she was interested in fi lling the vacant board position and were delighted when she accepted our offer. The process of selecting this year’s fi nalists again went without a hitch thanks to the professionalism of our administrators, Elizabeth MacDougall and Peta Mount. The administration of the Prize and creation of the catalogue is a big job and requires skill and perseverance to do it properly...thanks and well done. The judging panel think that this year’s fi nalist exhibition looks very, very interesting. There are some surprising and exciting works in the exhibit, created by both emerging and established artists, and we are looking forward to seeing all of the works ‘in the fl esh’ at the Canberra Glassworks in August. Andy Plummer It is reassuring to see the continuous representation of both emerging and established artists. Often this fl ow is cyclic, ensuring an ever changing eclectic mix of works that present new views through the wide variety of concepts and disciplines in contemporary glass. Not all can appeal and yet so many will please, always ensuring room for exchange and inspiring debate. What is so important about the Prize is that it allows an annual focus on glass, initiating interest and exchange by people from all walks of life, stimulated by the diversity of works presented. I take this opportunity to once again thank all those who have contributed on so many levels to make this Prize the success it is today. Maureen Cahill Glass Artists’ Gallery Co-founder, Ranamok 3 Introduction Thanks to the generosity of the people at Ranamok, left glass for other materials. The same goes for Ranamok. notably Andy and Deirdre Plummer and Maureen Cahill, Scrolling through the past lists of Ranamok fi nalists, I was able to return for a second round of judging in 2011 I noticed a mix, as I mentioned, but I also observed that with jurors Louise Doyle, Geoffrey Edwards, and Andy the trend of established artists dropping out had begun Plummer. Our time together, via Skype, was amiable and in earnest by 2006. fun. My thanks go especially to Elizabeth MacDougall, In the case of New Glass Review, I concluded that it Jo Little, and Peta Mount at Ranamok, who do so much seemed to best serve artists who were in the process of organisational work on short deadlines, and to my hosts embarking on professional careers. There are always the Ann Jakle and Clare Belfrage at the beautiful Canberra experienced professional artists who apply in support of Glassworks, where I look forward to being very soon for New Glass Review—and hopefully to publish new work— the Ranamok opening. just as with the Ranamok Prize. And then, there are the The group of Ranamok Prize applicants has always been growing numbers of emerging artists. What this signals a mix of well-known and little-known names in Australian to me is that there is a generation of artists working in and New Zealand glass, artists young and old, art school glass in Australia and New Zealand who have moved graduates and self-taught practitioners. This kind of mix on from Ranamok. They are known and they have built is healthy, but this year I felt the absence of many of the careers; they may be struggling right now (as everyone is) better-known artists, who had not applied. Most of the but they are on their professional paths. And all of their 2011 applicants were new to me, and many had graduated students, whether in academic or other programs, are within the last few years. Of course, well-established artists coming to the fore with their work, hoping to be noticed such as Warren Langley and Richard Whiteley did submit on the international stage that Ranamok has become. their work, perhaps more in support of Ranamok than The most rewarding part of jurying for me, of course, anything else. Because they, like so many others, don’t is seeing new work by artists known and unknown to me. really need Ranamok anymore and that, actually, is cause Warren Langley is someone whose work I know well, and for celebration. he always impresses me with the high quality and originality After a couple of years as a juror on New Glass Review of his projects. With his digital images, “encapsulated” in Corning, I looked at the publication closely, because in glass and lit from behind, Langley moves the fi eld I wanted to know its history. (We are now going into of photography in/with/on glass to a completely new New Glass Review’s thirty-third year.) In the early years, place. Closed System (ocean) and Closed System (land) are related many well-known artists applied, and gradually, over to Langley’s outdoor installations with remote source time, their numbers dropped. Of course, the majority of lighting, but they represent a different approach and level those artists were not “household names” in glass in the of control. In my opinion, these images are extraordinary early years but, over time, had built careers and attracted and they fi t in comfortably with mainstream contemporary a following. And many early applicants had disappeared photography (think of Richard Misrach, for example) altogether, having stopped making work, perhaps, or having as well as Land Art. 4 Other works exploring nature that intrigued me were Moving to more abstract representations, I was drawn Nikki Main’s observantly detailed Ash Stones, and Kristin to the organic shapes of Kristel Britcher, Samantha Cuffe, McFarlane’s Genus Typographica. Each of McFarlane’s Emma Varga, and Clare Wilson. Britcher uses what look kiln-formed butterfl ies has non-natural details, such like occhi murrine cubes to form crystalline structures, while as superimposed images and text, which give the work Wilson uses a common bowl to create a memorable, a Victorian spirit of scientifi c documentation, but also segmented insect- or plant-like ring. Cuffe uses silvering, a sense of passing time, and perhaps personal memories which has become very trendy, in a thoughtful way that that might be attached to the insects. With its nested enhances the graceful shapes of her vessels. Varga, who forms, Take T Yusuke’s Three Generations reminds me is again no stranger in glass, has embarked on a new path of some kind of animal skull or plant pod. in her work that is intriguing and rich in potential. From her green “growth” pieces of last year, she has turned Wayne Pearson’s portraits are very well known, but I was to an exploration of white, which removes narrative and especially pleased that his pensive portrait of the artist adds a minimalist quality to the work. Deb Jones made the cut. Pearson demonstrates that it is not enough to be accomplished in technique to make Everything is connected, and the debt to nature of a vivid portrait: you have to really know what making the minimalist works by Brian Corr, Mel Douglas, and a portrait means, whether it is in stone, wood, or painted Richard Whiteley is evident. The forms of the natural on glass. Annette Blair’s Friday Afternoon is a very different world, stripped down to their essences, are geometric, type of work, a trompe l’oeil that evokes pleasant memories and in this group by three recognized artists, we have of visits over tea and coffee. Blair’s technique may be three variants of the circle. Douglas, always elegant, reminiscent of someone like Piero Fornasetti, but she makes careful allusions to light and shadow, as does Corr, deconstructs the fi gure in a way that is less decorative and whose subtle treatments of white on white need careful more personal. All I need to say about Alasdair Gordon, lighting to be properly appreciated.

Load more