|
When
the famous painting by Leonardo da Vinci, known as
La Gioconda became known as an icon to the entire world through the
Media and Art Books, American Pop Artist
Andy Warhol created a
different rendition of the Rennaissance master's work using contemporary
language and technique, as can be seen in Warhol's
Mona Lisa
which subscribed to the same Campbell's Soup can that made the
artist become a significant member of the
American Pop Art Movement
of the
50's and 60's.
This role became a Manifesto of the American Contemporary
Culture which brought much food for thought to the rest of the art world.
While this took place as a natural expression of a young country, thirty
years later, in other areas of culture linked to collectionism, such as
swords, there seems to be a fixation in the past by both contemporary
collectors and makers-protagonists.
While for historic purposes, very serious smiths such as
Vince Evans,
Kevin Cashen, or
Jake Powning,
just to name a few randomly, do historical research and reconstitution,
while the later engages in a compromise type of sword making, be it less
historical or more based on different inputs that some like to call
fantasy, while others dedicate themselves to creating Japanese style swords
with new steels, as new alchemists such as
Howard Clark, others try to
create more close to the original tamahagane or oroshigane swords such as
Louis Mills and perfectionist hamon magician
Anthony DiCristofano,
and Randal Graham the
eternal self procclaimed Master Apprentice, continues his
journey in his very unique way.
It has to be made clear at this point, that this is a non-biased
analysis and it mainly respects the historical and cultural contexts under
which each smith lives, based on the axiom that we are all a product of
our context and ciurcumstance, and that it is this difference that
fortunately originates variety.
We all carry our past experiences and we are also a sum of our
pasts. And while I do very much respect all inclinations I have described
below, I believe they are all substantiated by a choice, a posture.
My choice is that history is a permanent flow, a thread that
unfolds each day. I try to be a man of my times, and I use my past
experiences to do what I do today. I am happy to be what I am, don't want
to be someone else, have respect and admiration for others and prefer to
talk about what really attracts me in the end: thought and controversy in
the most healthy way.
I have my own limitations on versatility, but I refuse dogmatisms
of any kind. This signifies that while I fully respect and admire the
capacity of others to do what I cannot do - and I think it would be a very
low human posture not to acknowledge this admiration for all creative
people - I dare say that I also know exactly what I can do. This is
a simple statement, nothing to do with bragging or self insuflated ego.
Very much on the contrary, the more one's ego is removed, the more void is
made available to be filled.
What I can do is exactly prompted by my professional and personal
interests, which lead me to different sources and paths.
As a man
obssessed with aesthetics I am mostly drawn to an approach derived from
the past, when that is the case, but in a contemporary language.
Beauty has been said to be in the eyes of the beholder. I have
heard it so very often and I do not want to argue. But I do take a
particular interest and would certainly reccomend Umberto Eco's
The History of Beauty as an important book on the notion of
beauty.
Gas forges are things of the present. Modern steels are used for
modern day blades. Why dress up a blade that is born today with fittings
from the past? I do not have any need to reenact anything.
I am not interested at all if a samurai would beat a knight,
if an arrow could penetrate a steel armour or the likes which are not my
existential problems.
I really wonder if it is necessary to continue... |
