Artist Websites  Artist Websites |  Featured Artists |  Art Marketing  Art Marketing |  Art Contest |  BrushBuzz |  InformedCollector |  FASO Loves You - Share Your Art, Share Life

Blog


« The Crossroads | Main | Jim Camann - spontaneous and bold! »


Follow this Blog



Subscribe to our Newsletter



Quick Links

Artist Websites and Good Design
How to Sell Art
How to Get Your Art Noticed by Galleries
SEO For Artists - The Ultimate Tip

 

Blog Roll

Mikki Senkarik's Blog

















abstract art
acrylic painting
advice for artists
art and culture
art and psychology
art and society
art appreciation
art blogging advice
Art Business
art challenge
art collectors
art criticism
art education
art fairs
art forum
art gallery tips
art history
art law
art marketing
art museums
art website design
art website tips
art websites
Art World
art world problems
artist resume advice
artist statement
artist tribute
artist website tips
artist websites
assemblage
BoldBrush
BoldBrush Interview
BoldBrush Winners
Brian Sherwin
BrushBuzz
Canvoo
Carolyn Henderson
Carrie Turner
cityscape painting
Clint Watson
collage
colored pencil
conceptual art
Connie Tom
copyright
creativity
Daniel Keys
Dealing with art forgery
Deber Klein
digital art
drawing
email newsletters
encaustic painting
etching
exhibiting art online
exposure tips
Facebook
FASO
FASO Art News
FASO Daily Art Show
FASO Featured Artists
figure painting
FineArtViews
FineArtViews Interview Series
functional art
Gayle Faucette Wisbon
glass art
Google
Guest Posts
Holiday
InformedCollector
inspiration
installation art
Instruction
Jack White
Keith Bond
landscape painting
Linda Mikulich
Lisa Call
Lori Woodward
Luann Udell
Matthew Mahler
mixed media
Moshe Mikanovsky
oil painting
online art competitions
online art groups
originality
painting
pastel
photography
Pinterest
plein air painting
politics
portraits
pricing artwork
realism
religion
Robert Genn
Sarah Maple
sculpting
sculpture
sell art
selling art online
selling fine art online
SEO for Artist Websites
social networking
still life art
street art
support local art
Think Tank
tips for exhibiting art
Twitter
watercolor
watermarks
websites for artists
wildlife art




 Archives:May 2013
Apr 2013
Mar 2013
Feb 2013
Jan 2013
Dec 2012
Nov 2012
Oct 2012
Sep 2012
Aug 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
Apr 2012
Mar 2012
Feb 2012
Jan 2012
Dec 2011
Nov 2011
Oct 2011
Sep 2011
Aug 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
Apr 2011
Mar 2011
Feb 2011
Jan 2011
Dec 2010
Nov 2010
Oct 2010
Sep 2010
Aug 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
Apr 2010
Mar 2010
Feb 2010
Jan 2010
Dec 2009
Nov 2009
Oct 2009
Sep 2009
Aug 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
Apr 2009
Mar 2009
Feb 2009
Jan 2009
Dec 2008
Nov 2008
Oct 2008
Sep 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
Apr 2008
Mar 2008
Feb 2008
Jan 2008
Dec 2007
Nov 2007
Oct 2007
Sep 2007
Aug 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
Apr 2007
Mar 2007
Feb 2007
Jan 2007
Dec 2006
Nov 2006
Oct 2006
Sep 2006
Aug 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
Apr 2006
Mar 2006
Feb 2006
Jan 2006
Dec 2005
Nov 2005
Sep 2005
Aug 2005

 

Art and Tolerance

by Donald Fox on 4/25/2011 1:45:56 PM

This post is by guest author, Donald Fox. This article has been edited and published with the author's permission. You should submit an article and share your views as a guest author by clicking here.  We've promoted this post to feature status because it provides great value to the FineArtViews community.  If you want your blog posts listed in the FineArtViews newsletter with the possibility of being republished to our 14,000+ subscribers, consider blogging with FASO Artist Websites.  This author's views are entirely his own and may not always reflect the views of BoldBrush, Inc.

 

“The highest result of education is tolerance.” – Helen Keller 

 

I have had the privilege of meeting many artists over the years, but I have seen far more art than the number of artists I can claim to know. Of those artists I have met, however, about the only thing they have in common is a love of the arts, whether they be visual, musical, kinetic, or literary. Most of them passionately believe in one’s right to express one’s self without restriction or without regard as to how the expression may be received. Quite a few would impose self-restrictions, however, because of personal beliefs that may be colored by spiritual, political, or social ideas and experience. With very few exceptions, I would hesitate to call any of them anything other than artists. Their personal beliefs almost always seep into the work, but these are not what define them as artists.

 

Lately, especially within the United States, there have been attempts to politicize the arts along with just about everything else. Education, libraries, the internet, religion, books, the media, practically every aspect of society has been pulled into this political maelstrom. Underneath it all lays a single motivation, which is fear: the fear that someone or some group will gain the upper hand and exert control over everyone else. In short, the conspiracy theorists, be they on the right or the left, are in their heyday.

 

Personally, I’ve been attracted to the arts because in their various forms they give me ways of seeing and understanding the experience and thoughts of others. I can step outside of my own limited understanding and get a glimpse of the world from a different perspective. Literature is perfectly suited for this. For example, I can take real life journeys along with Joan Dideon in The Year of Magical Thinking or Annie Dillard in An American Childhood. I can travel the seas via whaling ship through Herman Melville’s Moby Dick or in a lifeboat with a tiger in Yann Martel’s The Life of Pi. If I go to a good art museum, I can peruse the art of numerous cultures within the space of an afternoon, or I can visit various galleries to see what current artists are doing and displaying. When I engage with the work, I learn something about the artists and about myself. My world is enlarged rather than diminished even if what the artist shows me is limited in range or contrary to my own world view, for that world view has just been altered by the encounter with the art.

 

Maybe I don’t like what I see or read or hear. I can critique whatever is before me at any given moment. The artist knows this as well as I. No one is forcing me to look, and I choose the moment to engage or disengage. I also have the option to respond in some way limited only by my own imagination. I may become an avid networker promoting artwork or artist or show through word of mouth or by way of some social media platform. I may critique in the same manner. My own experience will always take precedence over what others may think or feel about certain work although I may consider their opinion, especially if it is thoughtfully presented.

 

Where I personally draw the line, however, is when an artist, viewer, or critic attempts to impose a particular belief or to infringe on my right to experience for myself. Having educated myself in artistic expression and having chosen to continue that process, I am willing to look and listen, but I always reserve the right to judge for myself. That judgment may sometimes be tempered through dialogue, but I trust that it is always, insofar as possible, informed by an educated eye and an openness to learning something new. In my estimation, the best art will support inquiry while also supporting new ways of seeing and understanding. I strive for my own artistic expressions to do as much.

 

------------------------------

Editor's Note:  You can view the original post on Donald's blog.



[Services:
FASO: Want Your Art Career to Grow?  Set up an Artist Website with FASO.
FineArtViews: Straight talk about art marketing, inspiration - daily to your inbox.

InformedCollector: Free daily briefs about today's finest artists in your inbox.

BoldBrush Contest: Monthly Online Painting Contest with over $6,000 in awards. 

Daily Art Show: Daily Show of Art that reaches thousands of potential collectors.

Backstory: About Clint. Email Editor.  Submit a guest post.  Twitter. Republish. ]


Related Posts:

A FunnyThing Happened On The Way...Reproductions Rant (Take #3)

A World Without Art

Social Conditioning: Do Art Professionals Unknowingly Fuel Sexism in the Art World?

The Destruction of Andres Serrano's 'Piss Christ' fuels Debate and Hate due to Piss Journalism

Andy Warhol + Religion = Contemporary Art World


Topics: FineArtViews | Guest Posts | inspiration 

What Would You Like to Do Next?
Post your comment Join Email List Follow via RSS Share Share

 17 Comments

Nicole Hyde
via faso.com
Thank you for this. I really appreciate your sentiments and positivity and am in agreement.

Lorraine Khachatourians
via faso.com
Hear, hear!

Control, repression, extremism; these can occur under any guise, anywhere. In an open and democratic country, we have the right see, read, talk, discuss, explore. That doesn't mean we can become complacent about our rights and freedoms. Fear is easy to spread, particularly in uncertain times, and with fear comes control, repression and extremism.

Concerned Artist
via faso.com
"Underneath it all lays a single motivation, which is fear: the fear that someone or some group will gain the upper hand and exert control over everyone else. In short, the conspiracy theorists, be they on the right or the left, are in their heyday"

The defining art of our culture is controlled. You are right in saying that it happens because of fear. Saying that fear should not be a concern is great but until our museums take the same position with the art of our times there is cause for concern.

* Think of the number of anti-Bush themed exhibits that took place in museums across the country during the last decade. The same happened with Daddy Bush and Reagan. It all started with Nixon.

* Think of how Clinton and Obama have yet to be examined in the same way by a public funded museum aside from a few obscure exhibits that receive little media press. If a Republican had lied about as many things on the campaign trail it would certainly been visually explored in a museum by now. Anti-Bush exhibits started to pop up within one month of Bush taking office.

* Think of the number of museum exhibits that blamed conservatism for 9/11 and portayed the terrorists as victims of Republican politics.

* Think of the number of public funded exhibits involving pro choice compared to pro life. I can only think of 3 exhibits with a positive view of pro life and one of those exhibits took place in 1986.

* Think of the art that major musuems have purchased since 1980. Most of those works involve strict liberal themes that dominate the extremes of the left.

* Think of the religious themed art purchased or exhibited by museums today. There is a tendency for those works to make a mockery of one religion.

* Think of the number of art critics who boldy support one political party leading up to elections. The culture pundits of our day shapeshift into political pundits at the drop of a hat. If a critic opposes views that are strongly supported by a political party it is not hard to see that the same critic may ignore those same views expressed in art. Historically influential critics impact museum purchases and exhibits.

* Buy an issue of a popular art magazine (Art in America, Artnews, Frieze, Art forum)and fear can be seen. These magazines impact museum considerations and several have working relationship with major museums throughout the country. There is a fear of anything that goes against the mentality of the extreme left.

* Look at the art created by the most famous artist of our time. I dare you to research their political affiliation, the political affiliation of their dealers and the political affiliation of the notable art critics who have written about their work.

* Attend SCOPE, Art Basel, Frieze, Red Dot, Aqua or any other international art fair and the political fear will stare back at you. These fairs impact the global art market.

I agree that fear is an obstacle.

"I can critique whatever is before me at any given moment. The artist knows this as well as I. No one is forcing me to look, and I choose the moment to engage or disengage."

Can you critique a contemporary idea expressed visually if it is not present in art museums which are designed to serve the public at large? Art museums are not offering the option to view opposing political views. The public is not being served. That attitude has infiltrated the arts in the United States.

* Think of the number of art students (past and present) who have claimed that political bias exists at their college.

* Look at the work by artists who received NEA grants when individual grants were still available.

* Think of the number of organizations that champion artists who fall outside of accepted and expected trends of left extremes. There is a Christian foundation for artists that was founded in 1973 because of the obstacles those artists faced. This is not a recent problem.

* Think of the number of writers (including yourself) who call people with these concerns and experiences conspiracy theorists. Just because you have not experienced prejudice does not mean that others are exaggerating. It does not mean that they are jealous of those who have been successful fitting in the system or finding a scapegoat to explain the difficulty they have had. If you think that they are I'm curious to know if you think that ethnic minorities are conspiracy theorists because of the obstacles they have rised against.

This is what I think.

* I think people who are happy with the way the arts have been are uneasy that new voices are speaking out against the gate keepers and accepted vanguard.

* I think that those voices would have never been heard if the internet did not exist. Print is dieing and no longer has a stranglehold on information. What is written in art magazines can and will be challenged openly by public opinion.

* I think that the art community is feeling guilt for silencing viewpoints for so long. I think there is guilt for allowing the arts to become so politically and socially exclusive. The first stage of guilt is denial. They have become the beast they were afraid of.

I'm enjoying the topics on Fine Art Views!!! I wish I had been aware of this blog last semester.


Donald Fox
via faso.com
You're right. Paranoia is definitely a form of fear.

Brian Sherwin
via faso.com
I was going to stay out of this debate until more opinions were present-- that said, I must ask who were you replying to Donald? Nicole, Lorraine, or Concerned?

You know my thoughts on higher education, museums, and sections of the contemporary mainstream art world. Paranoia spurred by fear is definitely something to consider-- as you implied it comes from all angles. That said, I don't think it is wise to write concerns off as just paranoia-- or to call individuals with concerns "conspiracy theorists".

Just because you don't agree with the opinions people-- including myself-- have about education, media, and other factors where bias can, and likely does, exist does not mean everyone is being paranoid by having those concerns. To quote President Obama I'd say that your use of "paranoia" in the face of debate is a "distraction from real issues". I for one am tired of these distractions.

If it is just "paranoia" there has to be a trigger for it-- can you go into further detail about what you think that trigger is? For example, are artists who happen to be female 'just paranoid' when they speak out against gender gaps? Are aging artists 'just paranoid' when they speak out against apparent ageism? Are artists who happen to be a part of an ethnic minority 'just paranoid' when they speak out against assumed racism within the professional art world? OR -- are you saying that only artists who speak out against what they view as religious or political bias are 'just paranoid'? Explain please.

Lorraine Khachatourians
via faso.com
Brian, thanks for your reply. I was agreeing with your observations. My feeling is that, as with anything, education is the cornerstone, an education that explores all - all the world, all the governments, all the religions, all the arts, all societies. An education that encourages people to go outside their own communities to see and hear and talk to the other people who share our small little space rock. That is when you find the stereotypes falling away, where you begin to understand someone else's point of view, someone else's history and how it affects both them and you. You can learn to appreciate various art forms - you may not want to participate personally, but you can appreciate the passion and work that others put into it. Exploring museums and libraries and universities and historic sites, small or large, gives us perspective and appreciation for what and who have come before. When you know about something, then you can talk intelligently about it, and if you learn how to learn, you can then continue to find ways to get real information to expand your knowledge all your life. Then you can discuss and debate, not shout and yell slogans. Then you can more easily weigh and balance what you see and hear. Helen Keller's quote is bang on.

Donald Fox
via faso.com
I've written several responses to both you and concerned artist – odd that he or she would remain anonymous with such strong convictions (I even considered it was your alter ego) – but then decided it wasn't worth it. A few comments here have been reasonable, but your kind of debate has little interest for me. However, I expect that we are more in agreement than you think. Mostly I don't like the tone of many comments – yes, paranoia is a hot button word but was meant more tongue in cheek; sorry the joke fell flat or inflamed. There's a tendency to make assumptions about what people believe and then cast them into a group with the opposition, usually derisively. Both you and concerned artist took statements of mine and bounced off them in your own directions for your own purposes. Fine. That's your prerogative and part of my initial point. I'm not interested in following those streams of thought because my original blog was about how art has become politicized when art, as I see it, is about the experience of being in the world, of learning, and becoming tolerant. So, again, I'm not interested in others trying to impose their viewpoints be they liberal, conservative, or androgynous. Neither of you know anything about my background, my experiences in life, or my beliefs relating to politics, spirituality, or life on other planets. To assume otherwise is quite arrogant and insulting.

Personally I don't care much for the mainstream art world. I've watched it decline for decades along with both the Republican and Democratic parties. Leaders on both sides of the aisle have disappointed time and again. Even so, I still have hope that the efforts of individual artists, just by doing what they love to do, will have a grass roots impact that will be felt worldwide. We've certainly seen evidence lately of what grass roots movements can do politically. So, carry on if you like, but I'm not ‘debating' your issues.


Brian Sherwin
via faso.com
Donald -- I have no need for an alter ego-- my opinions have been made very clear on FAV. That people may agree with some or all of what I say does not mean that it is me using an alias. Talk about being paranoid.

If you choose to refuse answering my questions that is fine. That said, I do think you are wrong for calling people with concerns "conspiracy theorists" just because YOU don't agree with them-- which I must say is an obvious jab at me due to recent articles I've posted that you have not agreed with and debates that we have had about said articles. On those grounds your article is little more than a contradiction-- if not a glaring example of hypocrisy.

I respect you as an individual-- but on these issues I must say that your twisted view of tolerance is insulting sir. Being tolerant does not mean avoiding concerns that others have by labeling them as "conspiracy theorists" just because YOU don't agree with them. That so many artists are concerned that the art they love to create is blacklisted because of who they are or what the art explores should concern you-- if anything as a fellow human being.

With that I'll ask this series of questions to anyone else who does have the courage to answer-- Are artists who happen to be female "conspiracy theorists" when they speak out on gender gaps within the art world? Are aging artists "conspiracy theorists" when they speak out against apparent prejudice due to ageism? Are artists who happen to be part of an ethnic minority "conspiracy theorists" when they speak out against what they feel is racism within the professional art world? Or -- are artists only "conspiracy theorists" if they choose to speak out against what they view as religious or political bias within specific aspects of the art world-- especially if those specific religious or political views are generally not tolerated by professionals within the mainstream art world?

Donald Fox
via faso.com
Excuse me, Brian, but once again you're simply taking the opportunity to promote your own views without accepting what someone else has said and making assumptions in the process. Again, you know nothing about me or battles I may have fought in the past or the present for civil rights, civil justice, women's rights, consumers' rights, artists' rights, free speech, children's rights, students' rights, rights of the elderly, or basic human rights. To suggest that my expressions are hypocritical makes me wonder if you understood anything I said here or elsewhere. Nowhere have I called any artists conspiracy theorists. Nowhere have I accused any Christians of being conspiracy theorists. In fact, some of those you mentioned like the 9/11 artists-conspiracy theorists are ones I would also include as being among that fringe element. Others would be people blaming Blacks or Jews or Muslims or Hispanics or any different racial, ethnic, or religious group as being responsible for the ills that beset this country or the world. I grew up in a racially divided South and saw first hand the bigotry that existed even within my own family. There were no reasonable answers coming from anywhere including the church. That divisiveness was one of the things that led me to be an educator and an artist. A coward? Ha. You have no idea what I have faced. What I do recognize is when an argument reaches a level of emotion over reason there is no point in pursuing the argument further. Emotional commitment to ideas/beliefs is very powerful and reason will not sway it.

I stand by what I said before that no one can impose their beliefs on me, nor should they on anyone else. Can I be persuaded? Possibly. So far you've failed to do that.


Brian Sherwin
via faso.com
Donald, you say, "Nowhere have I called any artists conspiracy theorists."

In your article you say, "Lately, especially within the United States, there have been attempts to politicize the arts along with just about everything else. Education, libraries, the internet, religion, books, the media, practically every aspect of society has been pulled into this political maelstrom. Underneath it all lays a single motivation, which is fear: the fear that someone or some group will gain the upper hand and exert control over everyone else. In short, the conspiracy theorists, be they on the right or the left, are in their heyday.”

Allow me to again repeat part of what you said-- "In short, the conspiracy theorists, be they on the right or the left, are in their heyday.". So just who are these conspiracy theorists? Can you be more clear on that?

You mention "attempts to politicize the arts" and then later imply that those individuals are "conspiracy theorists". In light of recent debate on FAV-- including debate that you have taken part in-- I'd say your message is clear.

“9/11 artists-conspiracy theorists” -- what the heck are you talking about?

Brian Sherwin
via faso.com
What are these "attempts to politicize the arts" that you are talking about? Again, in light of recent debate on FAV there are several ways to interpret the intention of your article.

I do agree with some of what you say in this article-- I do think that fear is an issue. That said, I have a feeling that you and I have very different opinions about who is afraid.



Sari Grove
via faso.com
I see the addition of the political aspect to art, metaphorically, as the addition of usefulness to art, rendering it craft...
Not meaning to give it a positive spin though...
When you see a beautiful object, you say "Ah"- and then someone says to you: " and look, it is a bowl too! It is useful"...Now the art object has become craft... Craft is pretty and has purpose... Craft can be made in multiples and thus can be sold more cheaply than art...
Adding politics to art turns it into craft...Look a pretty picture and it has a message, or, we can use it to fundraise, or, we can...
This phenomenon is a wartime phenomenon... Propaganda art/craft is big during wartimes... Artists can make a buck and buyers can write off the expense better...
I'm not sure fear is the only motivation, but I get what you are saying... Governments use art in wartimes to appease and comfort as well... But yes it all feels a bit Big Brother if you don't like government speaking to you directly...
I think propaganda art is ok... But, more from a historical looking back perspective, where it is more comfortable...
When whatever this decade has been is over and we stop fighting for whatever it is we have been fighting for, art will experience a Renaissance of sorts- maybe the hippies again, not sure the form...

Donald Fox
via faso.com
Sari,
Thanks for the post. Some interesting thoughts about craft becoming political statement.

I lived through the sixties and hippie period and managed to survive. Some friends did not. The times weren't all music and flower power. There was the Civil Rights movement and the assassinations of JFK, RFK, and MLK, Jr. There was the Viet Nam War. Many say there are parallels to current times.

Donald Fox
via faso.com
Ok, Brian. Tempers seemed to have cooled a bit, so I will respond to your questions over several posts. Time is a bit tight for me right now with work related projects, which forces me to parcel my responses.

First, in a recent post from you there was the suggestion that Art and Tolerance was directed at you. Not so. This issue has been a concern of mine for many years. Some of the recent exchanges between us related to other articles have certainly got me thinking more about personal free expression and personal responsibility especially with respect to art. So I should actually thank you for that.

The roots of political correctness go back nearly 200 years. As I understand it, the original idea was to accurately describe the people vis-a-vis the government. As it evolved into meaning the avoidance of language that might offend people on the basis of sex, gender, physical or mental challenges, religious beliefs, etc., unintended consequences ironically often produced more restriction than freedom. A case in point is that for people of faith, they are often prevented from free expression of that faith in public (government) settings because that might infringe on someone else's different belief. This is one (but probably not the only) reason that Christian artists or those with art that contains religious symbolism have been so restricted over the years. I'd like to see a study of when Christian iconography began to disappear from mainstream American art. Or was it ever a significant part of the mainstream? It was definitely so in European art well into the 18th century, and early American artists certainly looked to Europe for training and recognition. Anyway, these are just some random thought spin-offs. More later.


Sari Grove
via faso.com
Two cents to the spin-off...(and thanks for the reminder about the 60s- so easy to forget the serious parts)...(and glad you made it through)...
I entered into art at a place (at least here in Canada where I live), where Christian iconography in mainstream art was represented by the abstract voice... The Christian perspective as I absorbed it was the avoidance of likeness in various forms... I still see this as the expression of, well actually not just Christianity, but all big religions in the mainstream...
(Not just abstract, but really any attempt to mute the realistic view)...

Brian Sherwin
via faso.com
Sari, I don't agree with your suggestion that political messages reduce art to craft. If we are to adhere to that opinion then we must look at some of the greatest works of art throughout history as just craft. Art history and the history of politics walk hand-in-hand.

Donald, as for political correctness-- in regards to religion and art I find it interesting that so many find it acceptable to spend tax dollars exhibiting a work involving an image of Christ in urine-- as has happened in the past-- while those same individuals would be up in arms if a state ran museum exhibited work involving an image of Muhammad submerged in oil.

I'm not suggesting that religious figures should be protected-- just pointing out that it is odd how one work of art involving a religious figure is acceptable while another work of art involving a different religious figure is viewed as hateful.

I'd go as far as to say that the majority of private galleries would never exhibit Muhammad in oil-- even though it would have context based on current world events-- but would race at the chance of exhibiting Andres Serrano's 'Piss Christ' after it is repaired.

Sari Grove
via faso.com
(I think) I am referring to the distinction between Orphic art, art that can be gleaned without reference, and art that needs reference to the subject to be understood...
In times of war, the message or subject of the art may be used as a political tool, may be mass produced, may serve a purpose that is unrelated to the artist's quest-like getting votes for Obama by producing a painting traced from a photograph of him...
I was using a metaphor...Sure politics and art cross over, but I think when the goal is politics and art is merely the tool, it changes the nature of the beast...
If I pee on something iconic, then the message or subject is more important than the work...
Again, Orphism speaks to this issue clearly...
But this distinction is not black and white-I was merely trying to agree with the blog author and try to understand why he might have been sussing up a trend right now and offer some ideas and maybe a positive spin to lighten his mood...
Yes, art can be political...Of course...But I don't think we were referring to great art that is political...More the trend towards being political minus the art part...Spray painted swear words on an old brick home...More about the message than the art...










 

FASO Resources and Articles

Art Scammers and Art Scam Searchable Database

 

FineArtViews, FineArtStudioOnline, FASO, BrushBuzz, InformedCollector, BoldBrush
are Trademarks of BoldBrush Technology, LLC Licensed to BoldBrush, Inc. 

Canvoo is a registered trademark of BoldBrush Technology, LLC Licensed to BoldBrush, Inc

Copyright - BoldBrush Technology, LLC  - All Rights Reserved