Art versus Craft

[Cathy at the Beach]

I belong to an art club and lately a "lively" discussion has errupted at our meetings.

What constitutes art and what constitutes craft?

Where the problem arises is that this art club began as a painting club. It was a group of water colour- oil- and some acrylic artists.

Now the club has a pottery studio that is very active, has classes in collage and fibre art and many more disciplines.

There are one or two fused glass and stained glass artists and so on.

I do lampwork glass work plus design jewellery. I began designing jewellery to find an end product for the beads I make. Then I branched out to incorporate fresh water pearls, seed beads and hand made copper and brass charms etc.

So, after our last meeting, we were asked to do a little research and come up with a definition of Art.

Ideas have been tossed around saying that to be considered art the componants must be original design- the paintings must be original design- as so with the pottery etc.- no purchased patterns for stained glass.


So, what is you definition of art? Help me out here.

[claire.c]

OK - well to me it seems to work like this:

An artist is a designer, a composer.

A craftsman is a technician, a creator.

Perhaps it is easiest to describe in terms of music, the composer is the artist and the musician who plays the piece is the craftsman. Many artists, particularly in 3D, do not create their pieces but get skilled craftsmen to make them up.

Craft has got a bad name by association with below standard work, it should imply skill. All artists who paint are by definition craftsmen also, their ability to mix and apply paint skillfully is their craft, the composition of the piece is art. Which brings up an interesting question, is someone who paints a landscape from a photograph an artist at all? And I would suggest that if they simply replicate what they see then they are a craftsman, and no shame in that.

[jennakate]

uh, oh, here we go. I go to an art school and this is a common debate. I am a fibre/ jewellery artist, who also does a lot of mixed media. I think craft is completely under-acknowledged.... I've actually been doing some pieces about it. To me, art and craft are very similar, and the distinction seems to be a society made one. Is a well made, unusual teapot art, or is it craft? Is it craft by discipline, because it's ceramic? On the other hand, is a painting art, if it is yet another still life, flowers or a nude in a pose that's been done before? I've decided that my personal definition is that "craft" does not have to have a concept. It can, but it doesn't need to. Neither label is a bad one- there is nothing wrong with being a craftsman, and there's no reason why you can't be both. (You should be both. Your work should be the best it can be, technically and aesthetically)

[Cathy at the Beach]

Thanks for the great responses!!! I do agree with both of you. The problem arises when a club or gallery tries to set boundaries for work accepted.
A fine art gallery (even at a club level like the one I belong to) has to be careful with membership as to what it deems accepable. I think they are trying to eleminate "crafts" such as felt yardstick holders (my mother's past specialty) and croceted scrunchies which usually are considered crafty(just examples). So they try to draw definate lines in the sand over which craft cannot cross to become accepable in an art gallery.

So a problem arises.

[claire.c]

I can see the problem, it is very difficult to set objective standards because aesthetics tend to be so subjective. It's a long time since I studied aesthetic theory but I seem to recall that one theorist set three criteria - unity, complexity and intensity if I remember rightly. So a piece could be considered art if it possessed all of these qualities - which rules out the scrunchies I imagine, but probably also quite a lot of work which most would consider valid. But it does give an objective perspective which is important in your situation, you can't have some people saying "that can't be included because it's a bit naff" as it seems both unfair and elitist.

BY the way, what is a felt yardstick holder?

[Cathy at the Beach]

That sounds like a pretty good criteria Claire- can I quote that?

well...a felt yardstick holder was an item produced in mass quantities by ladies in church circle groups in Canada in the 60"s. You take two strips of felt about 2 inches wide by 40" long - preferably in contrasting colours such as bright yellow and bright green- either glue the edges or sew the edges to gether to form a long very skinny envelope (yard stick shaped
Then you cut out flower shapes or other random shapes and glue them all over the front of the holder. Insert a brass gromet (or any finished hole for hanging) and it can hang in the kitchen with a yard stick in it.
We had many over the years- usually the colour would match the "tea kettle" wall paper in the kitchen. All my friends had them too.
Some forward thinking church circles did a similar design to hold scissors.
Very classy.

[claire.c]

I just looked it up - Monroe Beardsley was the guy who came up with that theory, feel free to quote him, I wouldn't want to steal his glory!

You have painted a wonderful picture of mid 20th century domestic life, how have I lived without these things?!

[Cathy at the Beach]

god only knows!

[Kerensamere]

Yep, I've been down this path many times before as well. My "favorite" was when a pair of painters tried to say that their work was superior and had additional challenges because they spent hours and hours painting a picture while we "craftsmen" made the same thing over and over again. My group of fellow "craftsmen" pointed out that they get to have their paintings made into prints by the 100's for no additional work on their part that they get to keep on selling. While "craftsmen" have to make each piece individually by hand one at a time. We also pointed out that most of us spend hours creating one original piece at a time and that we do not necessarily limit ourselves to what is commonly known as "production" pieces. And yes, it was a LIVELY discussion!

Our State Guild of Craftsmen hosts several juried fine craft shows each year plus our members can get State Guild Juried (resulting in a feather in your cap, the right to say you are state juried and a very nice certificate -- it pretty much is a panel of peers decide if your work is worthy or needs more work, a good learning experience) . Some of the specific requirements include: no commercial patterns, each piece much be hand crafted by the artist based on their own design, no assembly work (as in you go to the store, buy the parts and put them together and your are done --yep this does illiminate most bead stringers), the bulk of each piece can not consist of pre-manufactured elements you must manipulate the materials in some way or another. They look for overall design quality as well as quality of the craftsmanship that goes into the piece, and cohesiveness within a line of work from one craftsman (if you show them 5 pieces of your work, they need to look like they all came from the same creator). I hope that makes sense.

Perhaps incorporating the term "fine craft" will help you as you try to define what is acceptible, this term helps to keep out the "crafty crafts", plastic canvas tissue holders and fly swatter covers, stuff on a stick (we have another term for that one -- SOS, replace stuff with another 4 letter word), etc.

My local chapter of our State Guild was once turned down by the local Art Center when we inquired about having our meetings at their facility. They only wanted "fine art" programs there. Several years passed and they now offer pottery classes, jewelry and bead making courses, and much more. Needless to say we now meet there for our monthly gatherings.

Things change, perceptions change, we really can find a common ground if everyone is willing and respectful of each others talents!

Jen

[percyt]

Craft is functional-Art is not. Easy.

[ann chavez]

. . . i've heard that one before, and my next question is: what is "functional"?

[claire.c]

Originally Posted by percyt

Craft is functional-Art is not. Easy.

Were it quite that simple a lot of theoreticians would be unemployed. Are you implying that religious art has no function? That there is no art in architecture? That aside, I believe this was not a theoretical question but a search for an answer to a specific problem, how to maintain standards within a group of artists/craftsmen.

[Cathy at the Beach]

LOL! I"m thinking of some of the crafts I've seen. pictures made with cotton pom poms- yard "art" made from recycled pop bottles- sea shell pictures- jewellery made from paper clips- jewellery made from beer can tabs- jewellery made from paper.
Then we move to the iffy ones- collage made from stones or ribbon etc.- paintings on rocks- jewellery made from puchased plastic beads, purchased reject glass beads, craft store findings (with no original components), vintage jewellery from old junk jewellery restrung- tin can sculpture and on and on and on.

Some of these things are art-- some of them aren't. Thats the problem for an art club that is trying to maintain a professional level.
I"m going to post a picuture of a piece of jewellery I made in the summer that was not considered art- I think I agree that it is craft- but I also think it demonstrates the problem somewhat. The problem was that the seed beads were all purchased- as were the pearls. I probably could have had the yellow necklace in there as it had one lampwork bead in the centre.

[Cathy at the Beach]

why did that pic come up twice?

[ann chavez]

Originally Posted by claire.c

. . . I believe this was not a theoretical question but a search for an answer to a specific problem, how to maintain standards within a group of artists/craftsmen.

sorry! not wanting to turn this into a theoretical argument; i was actually just trying to point out that the answer is indeed not "easy", as that poster asserted.

i think it would be a fun project for a group such as Cathy's to bring to meeting things one considers art and things one considers craft and have the group discuss the items and why they would classify them as art or craft. paring the discussions down to specifics might clarify their criteria.

but perhaps they have already done that and come to no agreement . . .

i think my own criteria for "art" would include concepts such as originality/inventiveness, individuality/uniqueness, and personality/character. whether the materials are handmade by the artist would not be a consideration for me (because there again we get into--"did van gogh weave his canvas from fibers? if so, did he spin the fibers, shear the sheep or grow the cotton, etc"--that old argument). but that's just me.

some of the most incredible artwork i've ever seen is made of coats-and-clark's spools of thread:

http://www.devorahsperber.com/brooklyn_musuem/index.html