Subject: Biddle letter and the Anvil's Ring

From: Andy Quittner <[email-masked]>
Date: 04 Jan 96 13:37:50 EST

I am responding to the various letters generalted with regard to the controversy
surrounding Greg Biddle's letter.  It is unfortunate that Biddle took so much
heat in the Anvil's Ring - and elsewhere - but in part whenever you make a
public comment, you set yourself up for various forms of attack.  I agree that
the attacks were unfair -- on should comment on ideas --not the person who
presents them.  However, from the E-mail that I have read, there is obviously
some misconceptions , and a complete lack of understanding, with regard to the
Anvil's Ring editorial policy (as well as some misconceptions regarding other
aspects of the Anvil's Ring).  For example, the Anvil's Ring is NOT a "large"
chapter nesletter.  The only resemblance is that no one (as of yet) is paid for
writing an article.  But, that is not important.

The editorial policy for the Anvil's Ring has been in effect for at least 10
years -- it has not changec, nor would I recommend that it do so.  The policy is
simply this:

  "Letters received on a subject (by the issue deadline) are printed.  All
comments, if any, to the letter that are received PRIOR to the next issue's
deadline will be published, verbatim.  After the next issue (immediately
following the issue in which a letter appears) no other comments are printed."

The purpose is to give some form of open dialog without beating a dead horse;
hence the one issue limit.  The problem that occurred with reference to Biddle's
letter - at least from my personal standpoint - is that a response was printed
(Toby Hickman's response) in the original issue with Biddle's letter.  Toby's
letter should have waited until the next issue.  (Robert Owings, editor, also
responded - but that is his editorial perogative).  The point is that letters
are not solicited or selected - what is received is printed.  

>From a cold look standpoint this is how we operate.  Hence, NO MORE letters on
this subject will be printed, either for or against.  That is the general
policy.  [Maybe after a couple of issues, the subject matter may again be raised
and discussed].

As to the content of the Anvil's RIng, this is a more complex subject - a
subject that has been debated by the Board for a number of years.  Again, there
are some misconceptions floating about.  Yes, the Anvil's Ring does not cater,
as much as some would desire, to the beginning smith.  This has been an ongoing
problem -- some due to philosophy, some due to lack of writers.  On the other
side of the issue, the Anvil's Ring has become somewhat renowned for its
artistic quality and for pushing blacksmithing in general.  This is very much
desired because, financially speaking, it helps ABANA by increasing ABANA's
credibility with the population in general.  Personally, I am an amateur smith,
now probably of intermediate ability.  When I joined ABANA, I was a rank
beginner.  I joined ABANA specifically to get the Anvil's Ring, not for the
beginner's articles (because there weren't many) but specifically for the
pictures (the art) and the ideas and talents from which I could look, read and
strive towards.  As for learning to smith, that I got from my local chapter
(which I helped to found).  It is hands on work that is by far the best teacher
-- as the guilds and apprentice systems have long shown -- you learn best by
doing.

On the other hand, the Board has long recognized that ABANA's function is to
educate.  We knew that the Anvil's Ring was NOT meeting the goal of educating a
large portion of the membership.  This problem was debated and several solutions
were discussed (and evaluated in depth).  The Board wanted to have its cake and
eat it too -- that is we did not want to substantially change the Anvil's Ring
-- but we wanted, very much, to present more for the large number of beginning
smiths.  The result was The Hammer's Blow -- which I believe is meeting this
need even more than we could have done in the Anvil's RIng.  You must remember
that beginning smiths DO NOT WRITE how-to articles.  ABANA MUST DEPEND on the
professionals (and others with more skill) to help the beginners.  To do this,
we must also cater to the needs of the professional, even if (in numbers) they
are a small percentage of the ABANA membership.  This is the only way that ABANA
can survive in a successful manner.  I believe that this is working.  Since the
institution of The Hammer's Blow, membership has increased at a more rapid rate.
As chairman of the pUblication's committee, I have overseen the production of
The Hammer's Blow from the very first issue.  Each year, we have increased the
amount of material being printed in The Hammer's Blow.  This year is NO
exception.  When you receive your next issue, I believe that you will be more
than surprised (and exceedingly happy) with what you get.

I know that there will always be grousers.  But look at what you get for you
ABANA membership --The Anvil's Ring - a premier (albeit somewhat artsy) magazine
read, and respected, throughout the world.  A magazine that exhibits the latest
and best in blacksmithin.  You also get The Hammer's Blow -- dedicated to
bringing technique and process to the beginning and intermediate smiths.  Two
good publications (and others - such as plans) for the SAME DUES that you have
been paying for 10 years!!  Think about that -- with all the inflation,
increased costs, etc. etc.  The ABANA Board has managed to increase membership
benefits, substantially, without ANY increase in membership dues.  I challenge
any of you to find ANY other organization that has done the same.

This response is not intended to squelch any comments or criticisms -- the
intention is only to inform -- so that you better understand what is going on
and why certain things exists as they do.  Comments and criticism are necessary
-- after all, we need to hear from the membership in order to serve it.  Keep it
up.

Happy Hammering,

Andy Quittner, Chairman of Publications Comittee

---

From: [email-masked] (David Hoopes)
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 1996 20:42:50 -0600

[snip snip] 
>artistic quality and for pushing blacksmithing in general. 

I think that the problem goes far beyond not having beginning articles.  I have
always felt that the Anvils Ring was focused EXCLUSIVLY on ART (nose in the air
when you say that).  And that there is a definate snobby attitude about anyone
who considers themselves to be a blacksmith, but does not consider themselves 
to be an artist.

I for one do not think of AR as "pushitn blacksmithing in general."  I think
it pushs ART, and completely ignores other aspects of the craft.

I guess I really don't want the focus changed.  I would just like to see some
inclusion or acknowlegement of the craft being applied to other then ART.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
David Hoopes
[email-masked]
Lenexa, Kansas (Near Kansas City, Mo)