Re:"Tricolor gum printers" deconstructed

[Sandy King <sanking@clemson.edu>]

Judy Seigel wrote:

> But whether or not, the "survey" strikes me as carefully contoured to,
>
> 1. make Katherine the arbiter of *real* gum printing and
>
> 2. exclude, downgrade, and/or trump Chris.
>
> There have been signs of this campaign for months (eg, the "eating 
> dichromate" claim), but this is so raw (and anti-art, not to mention 
> bad for the list), I'm moved to protest. The tepid list response is 
> a good sign, but history suggests the behavior will continue, even 
> escalate, unless it's, let's say, "deconstructed." (Possibly even if 
> it is, but newcomers might appreciate the heads up.)
>
> Judy

When I saw KT's survey my first reaction was, why in the hell would 
someone think it important to make a distinction between "true gum" 
prints and full color gum prints that use a cyanotype layer? Then I 
thought, wonder if this has anything to do with the fact that Chris 
Anderson uses a cyanotype layer in her three-color prints, and she 
also is an unabashed proponent of the use of carefully designed 
curves?

I have no idea what Katherine's true motives are, but hopefully she 
will at least provide the list with her definitive definition of a 
"true gum".

Sandy King