Dan Wilson on tue 29 oct 96
The art and craft debate is not unique to ceramists! I just returned from
an aesthetics discussion group in wich they were trying to decide whether
or not to consider all work done in the manner of Dada/Conceptualism,
craft. Even considering the possibility of making ready made conceptual
works into little kits for A&C stores.(this idea appeals to me but I'll not
steal it). When we discuss art and craft it seems to me, we should be
concentrating, concentrating, concentrating on something else. Not the
craftsperson relative to the artist but craft relative to art. I know this
recquires some understanding of each but it really is important to
understand the aim of the discussion and not attatch personal attitudes of
value to it. Man! This sounds just like a lecture....
mayonaise
PJLewing@aol.com on sat 2 nov 96
Art is signed on the front, craft is signed on the back (or bottom). Case
closed.
Paul Lewing, Seattle
Akita-jin \"Lee Love\" on mon 4 nov 96
PJLewing@aol.com wrote:
>
> ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
> Art is signed on the front, craft is signed on the back (or bottom). Case
> closed.
Some craft ain't signed nowhere. :^) I stamp my work with the Japanese
character for Ikiru = To Live, the name of my pottery.
Lee
====================================================
/(o\ Lee Love In "St. Paul", MN ' Come see some pixs of my AkitaPup:
\o)/ mailto:LeeLove@millcomm.com ' http://www.millcomm.com/~leelove
mailto:Akita-jin@Bigfoot.com ' "It gets late early out there."
-Yogi Berra-
Marcia Selsor & Matt Benacquista on mon 4 nov 96
PJLewing@aol.com wrote:
>
> ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
> Art is signed on the front, craft is signed on the back (or bottom). Case
> closed.
> Paul Lewing, Seattle
Gee, Paul. That makes it all so clear!! Thanks. I do get annoyed with
some students who sign the inside of their bowls, though. But now I see
it's ok.
Marcia Selsor :}
--
Marci Selsor
Matt Benacquista
http://www.imt.net/~mjbmls/
mjbmls@imt.net
Doug Gray on mon 4 nov 96
PJLewing@aol.com wrote:
>
> ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
> Art is signed on the front, craft is signed on the back (or bottom). Case
> closed.
> Paul Lewing, Seattle
What about all those wonderful unsigned pieces?
Doug Gray
Alpine, TX
Jennifer Rhinesmith on mon 4 nov 96
Paul, I feel that you have not only affended me, but many others on this
list who do this out of love for the ART of ceramics and just not the
money they get from doing the thing that makes them happy. When I finish
my work for the day I can not wait top put my signiture on the piece,
and not it's not always on the bottom. That is not what makes this an
art anyway, it's the time, patience, practice, and genuine talent that
go into every piece. Yes folks ceramics is an ART!!! Jennifer - Alpine,
TX4
On Sat, 2 Nov 1996 PJLewing@aol.com wrote:
> ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
> Art is signed on the front, craft is signed on the back (or bottom). Case
> closed.
> Paul Lewing, Seattle
>
Sam Cuttell on mon 4 nov 96
At 10:58 PM 11/2/96 EST, you wrote:
>----------------------------Original message----------------------------
>Art is signed on the front, craft is signed on the back (or bottom). Case
>closed.
>Paul Lewing, Seattle
>
>
Case Re-opened
I attended a small local show this weekend (big mistake - but it was to
support the local Lioness Chapter).
So my opinion of art vs craft is as follows:
Craft: That which can be mastered during a 10 week course or (worse yet) a
weekend course :( This group includes applicade (sp?) sweat/T-shirts;
place-mats; pillows for hard-wood chairs, etc. etc. ad naseum
Art: That which one is born with (ie. Mozart) or which one strives towards
for a lifetime (or longer than 10 weeks, whichever comes 1st ;-)
sam - alias the cat lady
Home of Manx cats, Cavalier King Charles Spaniels and the odd horse
Melbourne, Ontario, CANADA
(SW Ontario)
http://www.geocities.com/paris/3110
sutter on tue 5 nov 96
PJLewing@aol.com wrote:
>
> ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
> Art is signed on the front, craft is signed on the back (or bottom). Case
> closed.
> Paul Lewing, Seattle
-
What a blind statement to make, art is never that simple. Nor is craft.
ds.
Have a nice ritual!
Tamsin A. Whitehead on wed 6 nov 96
There are quite a number of potters who put their stamp (signature chop)
on the fronts of their pots - are they therefore artists? Case open!
Tamsin
Nottingham, NH
USA
Thinking about how aesthetically distracting signatures can be.
On Sat, 2 Nov 1996 PJLewing@aol.com wrote:
> ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
> Art is signed on the front, craft is signed on the back (or bottom). Case
> closed.
> Paul Lewing, Seattle
>
Leslie Ihde on wed 6 nov 96
Re: Pauls comment on signatures. I thought it was pretty funny.
Seriously, however, doesn't craft connect with function, and art, which
may be functional, may also not be?
Leslie
Vestal, NY
kevin_hulmes@uk.ibm.com on fri 8 nov 96
Paul Lewings' brief statement was provocative, and was probably intended
as such. But, what did he (and if it's second hand, what did the
originator) mean to convey by it?
"Art is signed on the front, craft is signed on the back (or bottom).
Case closed."
It's one of those statements that people love to wind up conversations
with. It flows easily from the tongue, and appears heavy with authority
and meaning: The grand exit statement, which others won't take up for
fear of feeling foolish. It's only when they get home that they realise
it actually says very little. But conversations in Clayart give one time
to ponder, so its significance as a "killer" statement is lost. We get
the chance to fight back.
This one contains two observations and an assertion which are
meaningless unless placed in a specific context. Neither "Art" nor
"Craft" are defined, and what IS this "case" that is closed? It assumes
that the scene is set, and that we all understand what is meant by these
terms.
The most common assumption was that it meant "Art is superior to Craft",
and it was criticised on that basis. Was this what Paul intended? There
are other interpretations, and my personal favourite of today is:
Art must be two dimensional, because it has to be signed on the front.
If you signed it anywhere else, nobody would see it. Nobody would think
of picking it up, and it's probably in a frame anyway; perhaps even
covered by glass! Craft is three dimensional, and people love to hold
it and look at it from every angle, sharing a part of the maker's
experience. Wherever you sign it, people will look for your mark and
find it, and having done so, will remember it. And the case??? Well,
I'll leave that to you.
In truth, I don't care what Paul meant by it. His contribution provoked
thought, and I'm glad he made it. It also reminded me of another
thought-provoker:
"Defining art and craft and their relative merits is a journey that will
enrich only those who accept there is no destination."
Kevin ..... in an unbelievably warm England. If any of you guys have
our usual nasty November weather, please hold on to
it for a bit longer!
*--------------------------------------------------
* INTERNET: kevin_hulmes@uk.ibm.com
* Phone/Fax/Msgs (0)1926 887003 (UK)
*__________________________________________________
JOE BENNION on fri 8 nov 96
Dear Clayart,
I've been on the road again and have been trying to catch up with
clayart. One thread that I feel compelled to respond to is this discussion of
art and craft that seems to come back just when I thought it was safe to
venture onto the listserve again.
I would like to respond to David Hooker's definition of art as a
method of self expression in which concept determines materials and craft as
a method of self expression in which materials determine concept. This is one
of the definitions that I heard in grad school and quickly discarded as not
working for me. In the book " The Unknown Craftsman" Yanagi Soetsu defines
craft more in terms of its relationship to use. He defines the beauty of
crafts as being inseparable from utility. I would go a step further in
defining craft as art the serves the life of the body. Art , as Suzanne Langer
put it, is the expression of human feelings in perceptible form. We seem to
define all art that is not concerned with the life of the body as fine art.
In light of these definitions the art-craft discussion boils down to a
division between the body and the mind which goes back to the foundations of
western civilization. In patriarchal societies the life of the mind seems to
be accorded more importance than that of the body. This preoccupation with
things non-material ,I think, reveals our culture's anti-feminine bias. I
also believe that the " back seat " status accorded to the crafts is
manifestation of our collective body/mother hate. It is the same point of
view that devalues craft that devalues women and men who are satisfied to
bear, teach and nurture a child.
Some years ago I read an essay in American Ceramics by Janet Koplos (sp)
in which she pointed out the danger and foolishness of potters and
craftspersons seeking after the status of the "fine arts". It made sense then
and even more now. I find no shame or denigration in being a potter or
craftsperson. Craft is just another kind of human endeavor and is neither
above or below the work of other artists.
By the way, who was it on this list who recently used the phrase "merely
craft"? I hope you are reading and I hope you will think about these things.
That sort of talk reminds me of the person I once heard refer a birth as "
just having a baby". Try it some time. It is life changing.
I gotta go. Joe the Potter
Hluch - Kevin A. on sun 10 nov 96
I would second Joe on this and further suggest that everyone go out and
buy this book and read it a few times with a high-light pen in hand.
Yanagi: "Most useful objects of the present day are too superficial to
answer our daily inner need: they are the victims of the commercialism
that characterizes the contemporary artistic world, for commercialism is
the enemy of man, extirpating all beauty from his culture."
By the way Joe, why do you refer say Yanagi Soetsu instead of Soetsu
Yanagi as it is printed on the book? Which IS is first name?
On Fri, 8 Nov 1996, JOE BENNION wrote:
> ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
> In the book " The Unknown Craftsman" Yanagi Soetsu defines
> craft more in terms of its relationship to use. He defines the beauty of
> crafts as being inseparable from utility. I would go a step further in
> defining craft as art the serves the life of the body.
>
Terrance Lazaroff on tue 12 nov 96
Well said Kevin of England.
I would like to have the quote printed on the back of a business card. Do
you have the name of the author so credit can be given to such a thought
provoking statement?
You have made my day.
Best regards
Terrance F. Lazaroff
St Hubert, Quebec, CANADA!!!!
Andy Roth on tue 12 nov 96
A few thoughts on the matter of signatures and art vs craft....
An Art history proffesser of mine once bid on a panel painting at an
auction. This was listed in the catalog as Dutch 17th century. He got
the painting for $550. As It happened it was signed faintly on the Back,
so faintly that it hadn't been noticed. The Artist (or craftsman, as it
were) obviously didn't feel the need to sign his work on the front.
Who was this master of the "craft" of panel painting?
It was REMBRANT VAN RIJN!
I think of myself as both Artist and Craftsman since both are just labels
which the world needs in order to identify what someone is.
Actually the truth is that I am neither: these are just roles I play.
I play many other roles, father, son, husband, exhibiter, musician, etc.
The work that I produce is art and craft, it is simply a manifestation of
the creative impulse whithin me.
Who is the most famous potter of the 20th century? A man who's name most
people have heard. This man is better known for his paintings but he
created some fascinating works in clay (I don't know where he signed
them). I'm refering to PABLO PICASSO.
He (She) who works with his (her) hands is a laborer
He (She) who works with his (her) hands and head is a craftman (person)
He (She) who works with his (her) hands and head and heart is an Artist.
(Source unknown)
Andy Roth
Saratoga Pottery
Malta, NY
"Rafael Molina-Rodriguez (Rafael Molina-Rodriguez)" on thu 14 nov 96
Kevin :
At one of the colleges where I teach part-time, Navarro College, I've had
the pleasure of having numerous Japanese students enrolled in my
classes. As they learn about clay from me, I try to learn more about their
culture and language.
According to one of my current students, Obayashi Koji, in Japan the
family name is first and the given name is last. The honorific "san" may
also be include after the name. An example would be : Obayashi san or
Obayashi Koji san.
Joe is quite correct in writing Yanagi Soetsu. Other members of the
"mingei" founders would be Kawai Kanjiro, Tomimoto Kenchichi, and
Hamada Shoji.
Rafael
>>> "Hluch - Kevin A." 11/10/96 11:24am >>>
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
I would second Joe on this and further suggest that everyone go out and
buy this book and read it a few times with a high-light pen in hand.
Yanagi: "Most useful objects of the present day are too superficial to
answer our daily inner need: they are the victims of the commercialism
that characterizes the contemporary artistic world, for commercialism is
the enemy of man, extirpating all beauty from his culture."
By the way Joe, why do you refer say Yanagi Soetsu instead of Soetsu
Yanagi as it is printed on the book? Which IS is first name?
On Fri, 8 Nov 1996, JOE BENNION wrote:
> ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
> In the book " The Unknown Craftsman" Yanagi Soetsu defines
> craft more in terms of its relationship to use. He defines the beauty of
> crafts as being inseparable from utility. I would go a step further in
> defining craft as art the serves the life of the body.
>
Pam Myam on mon 15 jun 98
This definition is from _The Devil's Dictionary_ by Ambrose Bierce:
"Art,n. This word has no definition. Its origin is related as follows by the
ingenious Father Gassalasca Jape, S.J.
One day a wag--what would the wretch be at?--
Shifted a letter of the cipher RAT,
And said it was a god's name! Straight arose
Fantastic priests and postulants (with shows,
And mysteries, and mummeries, and hymns,
And disputations dire that lamed their limbs)
To serve his temple and maintain the fires,
Expound the law, manipulate the wires.
Amazed, the populace the rites attend,
Believe whate'er they cannot comprehend,
And, inly edified to learn that two
Half-hairs joined so and so (as Art can do)
Have sweeter values and a grace more fit
Than Nature's hairs that never have been split,
Bring cates and wines for sacrificial feasts,
And sell their garments to support the priests."
======
Lee Love on thu 30 mar 00
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 16:53:41 EST
> From: Helen Bates
>
> ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
> Dear Lee Love,
>
> Thanks very much. The pots were nice to see, and the article was
> informative. I'm someone who likes both well-made and well-designed
> useful items, and many things that are made with other ideas in mind
> than conventional "use". Sometimes these things, such as the Peta Hall
> mini teapot and mug I got at the "One of a Kind" show last fall in
> Toronto are more "whimsical" than "beautiful", but I love them anyway.
<...>
Hi Helen,
Welcome! I like both functional craft and art. I'm married to
a painter and print maker so I'd better! :^) I like to see artistic
merit in functional craft and craft in art. As I heard the late Philip
Rawson say at a lecture at the Walker Art Center, All art use to serve some
function. It is only recently that it has been forced away from function.
But even expression is a function. Also, like Rawson (and Robert Hughes,
who also spoke at the Walker), I'd like to see more craft in art.
My favorite artists are/were craftsmen too. Some of my
favorites (living while I've been alive) are Brancusi, Noguchi, Milton
Avery, Max Beckman and Morandi. Also, my favorite Mingei influenced
craftsmen were true artists: Shoji Hamada and Shiko Munakata.
I don't believe craft & art need to be at war with one & other.
The existence of one does not invalidate the existence of the other.
--
Lee Love
2858-2-2 , Nanai
Mashiko-machi
Tochigi-ken
321-4106
JAPAN
Ikiru@kami.com
Cantello Studios on fri 31 mar 00
I feel the same way. Its like the personality and the soul, when they merge
you hit a zone of intuitive creative force, the one that just carries you
through time, then you look up and wonder where the day went. I love that
space when it s achieved with out help of other substances. Is this not the
highest form of evolution? That's why I'm here. Its Like the perfect cast,
when the fly lands on the water with out making a sound.
-----Original Message-----
From: Ceramic Arts Discussion List [mailto:CLAYART@LSV.UKY.EDU]On Behalf
Of Lee Love
Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2000 10:32 AM
To: CLAYART@LSV.UKY.EDU
Subject: Art and Craft
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 16:53:41 EST
> From: Helen Bates
>
> ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
> Dear Lee Love,
>
> Thanks very much. The pots were nice to see, and the article was
> informative. I'm someone who likes both well-made and well-designed
> useful items, and many things that are made with other ideas in mind
> than conventional "use". Sometimes these things, such as the Peta Hall
> mini teapot and mug I got at the "One of a Kind" show last fall in
> Toronto are more "whimsical" than "beautiful", but I love them anyway.
<...>
Hi Helen,
Welcome! I like both functional craft and art. I'm married to
a painter and print maker so I'd better! :^) I like to see artistic
merit in functional craft and craft in art. As I heard the late Philip
Rawson say at a lecture at the Walker Art Center, All art use to serve some
function. It is only recently that it has been forced away from function.
But even expression is a function. Also, like Rawson (and Robert Hughes,
who also spoke at the Walker), I'd like to see more craft in art.
My favorite artists are/were craftsmen too. Some of my
favorites (living while I've been alive) are Brancusi, Noguchi, Milton
Avery, Max Beckman and Morandi. Also, my favorite Mingei influenced
craftsmen were true artists: Shoji Hamada and Shiko Munakata.
I don't believe craft & art need to be at war with one & other.
The existence of one does not invalidate the existence of the other.
--
Lee Love
2858-2-2 , Nanai
Mashiko-machi
Tochigi-ken
321-4106
JAPAN
Ikiru@kami.com
Tommy Humphries on wed 4 sep 02
Lets not get silly here...if a functional pot cannot be art, then art cannot
be functional???
I dunno about the rest of y'all out there but some of the most artistic
pieces of pottery I have ever seen have been teabowls... are these not art,
do they not carry some form of expression from the maker to the user? Do the
fortunate persons drinking tea from one of these bowls not recieve an
uplifting of the spirit as they USE these bowls? Some of these bowls
command $$$$$+ money definitely reserved for the fine art crowd, not that
the price determines the artworthiness of a piece or anything.
In **my** OPINION there cannot be art without craftsmanship, a well crafted
and designed pot is in itself a work of art...a work of art dosen't
necessarily spring forth from an "artists" hands...there are many natural
"artworks" out there that have not had the touch of a "hand" at all, and
much of what is foisted upon us by "artists" is nothing but amaturish junk,
that barely deserves a sarcastic glance.
I challenge you to say that a board of freshly made bowls sitting near an
open window, being brushed with the morning, or evening sun, is not art. It
is incedental art, but art none the less...made more precious by the
fleeting moments of its life...for as the light changes, as the clay looses
its sheen, the scene will also change...making the moving into the mundane.
Art is special... It is something that speaks to you, individually. What is
art to me may in no way be art to you! And the opposite is true, too. Love
it or leave it.
To separate art and craft, would be to kill both...to me good art is well
crafted, and a well crafted work is definitely artful...no matter what the
medium, paint, clay, steel or stone.
sending with no spellcheck, to fuel that "other" thread...
Tommy
Chris Rupp wrote...
"These pieces are made with a different purpose in
mind, to be used, not displayed as artworks. I would have to say that if a
potter is making strictly functional ceramics, to be used, plates, vases,
mugs, etc...then they are craftpersons. If they are making work to be
displayed as art, they are artists, and most potters do both."
knik at kodiak on thu 5 sep 02
Hello from Alaska,
Hey! That's not right. My outhouse (For real, that's what we use!) may
not be a work of art but that doesn't mean I'm not an artist. Since I'm
a beginning potter, I'm not yet an artist but it has nothing to do with
my outhouse! (How do you guys put those yellow smiley faces right here?)
Marilynn, the midnight potter
It's getting dark by 9pm and my one year old is amazed at darkness. He
didn't notice it last winter and we didn't have much (darkness) this
summer.(Yellow smiley face)
claybair wrote:
>Hi Kathi,
>Soooo........
>if pottery displayed on shelves is "craft" & pottery displayed on pedestals
>is "art"....
>does that mean that potters that use an outhouse (shelf) are crafters and
>those that use porcelain (pedestal) are artists??? Makes sense to me....
>whew...thanks for clearing that up !->
>
>Gayle Bair
>Bainbridge Island, WA
>http://claybair.com
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: KLeSueur@AOL.COM
>
>Pottery displayed on shelves is "craft". Pottery displayed on pedestals is
>"art".
>
>Kathi LeSueur
>Ann Arbor, MI
>
>____________________________________________________________________________
>__
>Send postings to clayart@lsv.ceramics.org
>
>You may look at the archives for the list or change your subscription
>settings from http://www.ceramics.org/clayart/
>
>Moderator of the list is Mel Jacobson who may be reached at
>melpots@pclink.com.
>
>______________________________________________________________________________
>Send postings to clayart@lsv.ceramics.org
>
>You may look at the archives for the list or change your subscription
>settings from http://www.ceramics.org/clayart/
>
>Moderator of the list is Mel Jacobson who may be reached at melpots@pclink.com.
>
>.
>
KLeSueur@AOL.COM on thu 5 sep 02
Pottery displayed on shelves is "craft". Pottery displayed on pedestals is "art".
Kathi LeSueur
Ann Arbor, MI
Paul Lewing on thu 5 sep 02
on 9/5/02 11:05 AM, KLeSueur@AOL.COM at KLeSueur@AOL.COM wrote:
> Pottery displayed on shelves is "craft". Pottery displayed on pedestals is
> "art".
Very good, Kathy. Much like my definition, which is "Art is signed on the
front. Craft is signed on the back (or bottom)."
Now can we please, PLEASE (yes, I'm shouting) not have this discussion
again. Look in the archives. Look in any of the magazine letters columns
for the last 30 years. I guarantee no one on this list, or anywhere else,
has anything new to say on the topic.
Paul Lewing, Seattle
claybair on thu 5 sep 02
Hi Kathi,
Soooo........
if pottery displayed on shelves is "craft" & pottery displayed on pedestals
is "art"....
does that mean that potters that use an outhouse (shelf) are crafters and
those that use porcelain (pedestal) are artists??? Makes sense to me....
whew...thanks for clearing that up !->
Gayle Bair
Bainbridge Island, WA
http://claybair.com
-----Original Message-----
From: KLeSueur@AOL.COM
Pottery displayed on shelves is "craft". Pottery displayed on pedestals is
"art".
Kathi LeSueur
Ann Arbor, MI
____________________________________________________________________________
__
Send postings to clayart@lsv.ceramics.org
You may look at the archives for the list or change your subscription
settings from http://www.ceramics.org/clayart/
Moderator of the list is Mel Jacobson who may be reached at
melpots@pclink.com.
Jeff Tsai on fri 6 sep 02
Someone wrote:
"Pottery displayed on shelves is "craft". Pottery displayed on pedestals is
"art"."
So what happens when you put it on the floor?
Ababi on fri 6 sep 02
Yes Kathi
After reading your letter I emptied Aftosa, Axner big ceramic stores and others: I will
put all my works on pedestals might give me luck!
---------- Original Message ----------
>Hi Kathi,
>Soooo........
>if pottery displayed on shelves is "craft" & pottery displayed on pedestals
>is "art"....
>does that mean that potters that use an outhouse (shelf) are crafters and
>those that use porcelain (pedestal) are artists??? Makes sense to me....
>whew...thanks for clearing that up !->
>Gayle Bair
>Bainbridge Island, WA
>http://claybair.com
>-----Original Message-----
>From: KLeSueur@AOL.COM
>Pottery displayed on shelves is "craft". Pottery displayed on pedestals is
>"art".
>Kathi LeSueur
>Ann Arbor, MI
>____________________________________________________________________________
>__
>Send postings to clayart@lsv.ceramics.org
>You may look at the archives for the list or change your subscription
>settings from http://www.ceramics.org/clayart/
>Moderator of the list is Mel Jacobson who may be reached at
>melpots@pclink.com.
>______________________________________________________________________________
>Send postings to clayart@lsv.ceramics.org
>You may look at the archives for the list or change your subscription
>settings from http://www.ceramics.org/clayart/
>Moderator of the list is Mel Jacobson who may be reached at melpots@pclink.com.
Liv Antonecchia on fri 6 sep 02
Opened up a can of worms! Wasn't going to divulge this info
before but what the hell. I have happily sold MANY pieces of Le Suers work
off of our wooden SHELVES. Most customers comment something like, "oh look
at this swirl the artists does, love the glaze, great price"... etc. To the
general public we sell handcrafts made by artists. In any case if your
work sells- that's great, they could call me an artists, craftsperson or
potter. I was in an art school but a crafts major. Yes, people have a good
laugh, "they actually give you a degree in that!?" The word has a bad
rap.The good news is craft is getting more respect as more of the public go
to more shows, galleries and becomes familiar with what artists working in
the craft mediums can produce.
There is no right definitions for "art" and "craft" but
that is just my observation.
Kathi- thanks for your advice about the studio!
p.s- sorry about my grammar!
LA
----- Original Message -----
From:
To:
Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 3:05 PM
Subject: Re: ART and CRAFT
> Pottery displayed on shelves is "craft". Pottery displayed on pedestals is
"art".
>
> Kathi LeSueur
> Ann Arbor, MI
>
>
____________________________________________________________________________
__
> Send postings to clayart@lsv.ceramics.org
>
> You may look at the archives for the list or change your subscription
> settings from http://www.ceramics.org/clayart/
>
> Moderator of the list is Mel Jacobson who may be reached at
melpots@pclink.com.
>
Snail Scott on fri 6 sep 02
At 12:15 AM 9/6/02 EDT, you wrote:
>So what happens when you put it on the floor?
below 20 pounds = doorstop
above 20 pounds = traffic bollard
-Snail
Jeremy/Bonnie Hellman on fri 6 sep 02
When I put mine on the floor, it gets broken. (Sorry-- couldn't resist.)
Bonnie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Tsai"
To:
Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 10:15 PM
Subject: Re: Art and Craft
> Someone wrote:
>
> "Pottery displayed on shelves is "craft". Pottery displayed on pedestals
is
> "art"."
>
> So what happens when you put it on the floor?
>
>
____________________________________________________________________________
__
> Send postings to clayart@lsv.ceramics.org
>
> You may look at the archives for the list or change your subscription
> settings from http://www.ceramics.org/clayart/
>
> Moderator of the list is Mel Jacobson who may be reached at
melpots@pclink.com.
>
>
Les Haworth on fri 6 sep 02
Good morning everyone. Please remember my favorite quote of all time. It
applies to all who read it. "The title of Artist is Self Proclaimed." ~Les
H. Have a great Friday.
Lester R. Haworth III
Sales and Technical Support
Laguna Clay Co.
14400 Lomitas ave
City of Industry, CA 91746
1(800) 4-LAGUNA ext. 229
(626)330-0631 ext. 229
les@lagunaclay.com
www.lagunaclay.com
The fire is my faithful servant and my demanding master. My most brilliant
collaborator and my harshest critic. ~David Hendley
nik wrote:
Hello from Alaska,
Hey! That's not right. My outhouse (For real, that's what we use!) may
not be a work of art but that doesn't mean I'm not an artist. Since I'm
a beginning potter, I'm not yet an artist but it has nothing to do with
my outhouse! (How do you guys put those yellow smiley faces right here?)
Leland G. Hall on sat 7 sep 02
well i guess it might be considered a can of worms by some. not me. i make
lots of small to mediup pots, raku. i make thrown, 18 to 28 inch pots
converted into raku table lamps. sell them for 200 to 350 $ in fine art
galleries. art? craft? also make large raku tryptichs for the living room
walls of fine homes. sell them for 400 to 600 $ in same galleries. art?
craft? i don't care. i'm legaly disabled. approach potting/clay like
special olympics. ignore pain. give 100%. study hard. work when i can.
rest when i have to.
focus on making it pretty. live for beauty. if it's pretty, it pays my
property taxes. if it comes out ugly it is shards. road fill. art?
craft? i don't care.
study clay art all the time. learn all i can. buy books. give back to clay
art when i can. this is how i live. this is my life. everyday.
now i see why mel writes like this. i like it. simple. honed to a fine
edge. if someone objects in a way that i can believe matters, i'll stop.
i love clay art. it helps me pay my taxes. thanks. but i don't say much
because so many here know so very much more than me. questions get
answered better than i could. not time for debate here. but i will help
if i can. give back. thanks again to all.
Leland Hall
Before The Wheel Enterprises
La Pine, Oregon
97739
Janet Kaiser on sat 7 sep 02
"Craft is what you bump into when stepping back from reading the label", so
whether on a pedestal or on the floor, it will be bumped into and/or
kicked. Either way, it must still be "craft"! It will be more expensive
than the rows of pots on the shelves, but then again, if it is on a
pedestal it is also possibly more unique, even one-of-a-kind. That again
elevates it into the Art ideal... Innovation and originality now being the
only prerequisites for the ultimate accolade: "It is Art".
Thankfully the concept "Art hangs on the wall, whilst Craft just hangs
around" (shelves, windows, floors, foyers, gardens) is outmoded, although
sadly not yet dead. However, I do believe that the public is sick to death
of art totally sans any craft skills (=3D craftsmanship) so we may soon see
a turnabout. The "real artists" will one day be GLAD to be able to claim
craft skills, so that their work is taken seriously by an increasingly
disillusioned public.
Remember that I am in the front line here and there is an increasing
feeling that artists are really ripping off their public with work which
lacks integrity. This frustration is reflected in the dropping number of
people who even try to interact with and relate to what is on exhibition.
Unfortunately an aging population means that young artists are being
short-changed by the system which allows them to become artists with no
craft skills. Europe does not need that many berger flippers or shelf
packers...
Janet Kaiser
The Chapel of Art =95 Capel Celfyddyd
8 Marine Crescent, Criccieth LL52 0EA, Wales, UK
Tel: 01766-523570 URL: http://www.the-coa.org.uk
*********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********
On 06/09/02 at 00:15 Jeff Tsai wrote:
>Someone wrote:
>
>"Pottery displayed on shelves is "craft". Pottery displayed on pedestals
is
>"art"."
>
>So what happens when you put it on the floor?
Janet Kaiser
The Chapel of Art =95 Capel Celfyddyd
8 Marine Crescent, Criccieth LL52 0EA, Wales, UK
Tel: 01766-523570 URL: http://www.the-coa.org.uk
steve graber on sat 26 nov 05
everyone has that spark in them, it's just a fortunate few who locate it.
see ya
'
steve
Geoffrey Gaskell wrote:
Ann Brink succinctly wrote:
> In my opinion, Art is an object created with imagination and executed
with
> skill and craftsmanship. To have relevancy through time, either it's
> subject matter or grace of form must resonate with archetypical standards
of
> belief and/or beauty. These may have a wide variance in different
cultures.
In view of everything said on this subject heretofore, I think this is as
good a summary as anyone is likely to achieve using words. In their
differing ways I think several people including Mel, Lee, Elizabeth, Vince,
Malcolm, Steve & Philip in particular have contributed very useful food for
thought to satisfy anyone who besides just getting on with the doing of art,
cannot help but have a sense of wonder that anyone does this at all &
therefore asks "Why?" For many people perhaps the simplest answer is "Why
not?"
Geoffrey Gaskell
http://www.geoffreygaskell.co.nz/
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 267.13.8/183 - Release Date: 25/11/05
______________________________________________________________________________
Send postings to clayart@lsv.ceramics.org
You may look at the archives for the list or change your subscription
settings from http://www.ceramics.org/clayart/
Moderator of the list is Mel Jacobson who may be reached at melpots@pclink.com.
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Music Unlimited - Access over 1 million songs. Try it free.
mel jacobson on sat 26 nov 05
this is never a controversy. it is fact of being alive.
in my opinion..after years of teaching art;
real artists are born, they have visual sense
that is built in. they have a desire to create
from nothing. in most cases they have an energy
source that comes from the deep part of the human
condition.
or:
as frank lloyd wright said one time..(i was in the audience)
`artists have an engine that runs 24 hours a day...inside of them.
it is the reason they drink...they try in some way to just shut off
the engine from time to time.`
skill and craft are learned with time.
it is taken in as information and used
to make the creative process come alive.
it is the frustration that folks that have been in left brain
jobs their entire life...then as they age they want to do
art....often they cannot do it...so they turn to craft and
learned behavior. it works to a degree, but often frustration
drives them nuts...as they do not `see` very well.
it is always the seeing that fails them.
`what do you mean my ring foot is too big, looks fine to me?`
or, `what painting ground?`
an artist can `see` millions of hues of color. then add the concept
of gray/tinting and shading...and it compounds beyond belief.
average folks see a few thousand. or as i tell students...the attorney
says...`why that swamp is gray.` oh my god...there are at least
25,000 variations of that swamp right before your eyes. it is really
hard to train a person to see beyond normal reality.
you can teach them that something does exist...but to get them
to see it, and understand it, then repeat it...is very difficult.
not impossible, just difficult.
skill and craftsmanship are learned behavior over time. those that
want to be really good, foster craft and skill and combine it with
`ART AND DESIGN`. they are total and complete partners.
as teachers we can always teach craftsmanship...be the guide.
technique, how to get the job done...it is what teachers do.
imagination, seeing, creativity becomes the job of the artist.
it is what many of us have squawked about. if you only teach the
creative side of art, never the technique...the student is left without
the basic elements of `doing` art. the work lacks quality and last/ability.
it does not measure to time. the teacher is the task master to see that
good craftsmanship is held to account. if the teacher allows sloppy,
poor craft and a lack of technique and passes it off as unimportant....well
we see the result every day. it is what some call `crap`. i call it
unthinking, immature/ poorly crafted work. it will never stand the test of
time.
even a month in many cases.
if art is only being based on metaphor or smart and not skill/maturity and
technique
it will always be shallow.
mel
from mel/minnetonka.mn.usa
website: http://www.pclink.com/melpots
Malcolm Schosha on sat 26 nov 05
I don't think so, Mel.
Artists are like everyone else, and there is nothing special about them aside from their skill in specialized work. The pride they take in doing good work, and wanting the recognition of the public, is pretty much the same pride as welders, mechanics, MDs, top salespeople, etc.
Some artists love to think of themselves as special cases of humanity, and above other people. This is a delusion. Unfortunately, this delusion is actually encourage these days as an identifying characteristic of artists; something that an artist should have, and actually needs to have. That amounts to encouraging delusions of grandeur, and self glorification.....not pretty qualities.
It is the philosophers (in the old use of the word) who are different, because they live life by different values. Perhaps there are more artist-philosophers, but still not very many. All other artists are just ordinary people.
As for Frank Lloyd Wright, he would have a hard time convincing me that his drinking was superior to that of any other drunk.
Malcolm Schosha
..........................................................................
mel jacobson wrote:
this is never a controversy. it is fact of being alive.
in my opinion..after years of teaching art;
real artists are born, they have visual sense
that is built in. they have a desire to create
from nothing. in most cases they have an energy
source that comes from the deep part of the human
condition.
or:
as frank lloyd wright said one time..(i was in the audience)
`artists have an engine that runs 24 hours a day...inside of them.
it is the reason they drink...they try in some way to just shut off
the engine from time to time.`
skill and craft are learned with time.
it is taken in as information and used
to make the creative process come alive.
it is the frustration that folks that have been in left brain
jobs their entire life...then as they age they want to do
art....often they cannot do it...so they turn to craft and
learned behavior. it works to a degree, but often frustration
drives them nuts...as they do not `see` very well.
it is always the seeing that fails them.
`what do you mean my ring foot is too big, looks fine to me?`
or, `what painting ground?`
an artist can `see` millions of hues of color. then add the concept
of gray/tinting and shading...and it compounds beyond belief.
average folks see a few thousand. or as i tell students...the attorney
says...`why that swamp is gray.` oh my god...there are at least
25,000 variations of that swamp right before your eyes. it is really
hard to train a person to see beyond normal reality.
you can teach them that something does exist...but to get them
to see it, and understand it, then repeat it...is very difficult.
not impossible, just difficult.
skill and craftsmanship are learned behavior over time. those that
want to be really good, foster craft and skill and combine it with
`ART AND DESIGN`. they are total and complete partners.
as teachers we can always teach craftsmanship...be the guide.
technique, how to get the job done...it is what teachers do.
imagination, seeing, creativity becomes the job of the artist.
it is what many of us have squawked about. if you only teach the
creative side of art, never the technique...the student is left without
the basic elements of `doing` art. the work lacks quality and last/ability.
it does not measure to time. the teacher is the task master to see that
good craftsmanship is held to account. if the teacher allows sloppy,
poor craft and a lack of technique and passes it off as unimportant....well
we see the result every day. it is what some call `crap`. i call it
unthinking, immature/ poorly crafted work. it will never stand the test of
time.
even a month in many cases.
if art is only being based on metaphor or smart and not skill/maturity and
technique
it will always be shallow.
mel
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Music Unlimited - Access over 1 million songs. Try it free.
Ann Brink on sat 26 nov 05
Malcolm wrote:> Artists are like everyone else, and there is nothing
special about them aside from their skill in specialized work. The pride
they take in doing good work, and wanting the recognition of the public, is
pretty much the same pride as welders, mechanics, MDs, top salespeople, etc.
>
I think there are several things that are different about artists, including
artists in many fields of endeavor:
1. Creativity- they often think "outside the box"...where the average
person may see left & right roads ahead, an artist may take to the air, or
carve a new path to a goal, just for the experience.
2. Imagination- an artist's thought processes are set in motion by the
sight of raw materials- and things may be "raw material" to an artist which
would pass unnoticed to someone else.
3. This ties in with Mel's comments about "seeing"...I believe many
artists, as they go through their day, take that extra millisecond to give
things a deeper look, more than a passing glance.
So, I have to say that I identify more with Mel's comments about artists
than your rather limiting description of skills. Definitely skill in
execution is important, in fact, for me is half the equation of "What Is
Art?": (leaving aside music, literature, theatre )
In my opinion, Art is an object created with imagination and executed with
skill and craftsmanship. To have relevancy through time, either it's
subject matter or grace of form must resonate with archetypical standards of
belief and/or beauty. These may have a wide variance in different cultures.
Ann Brink in Lompoc CA
steve graber on sat 26 nov 05
actually i think both you guys are dancing around the same understanding. when one has a passion for their work & they take their work to the higher levels they are artists. after getting hooked on clay a bunch of years back my vocabulary changed & i've been seeing art in many areas. the easy ones to see are movies. maybe i should calll them films now. same with music. but i also *see* art from some key radio personalities, newspaper writers, some political people. at work i'm impressed with people in the "customer satisfaction" field who can tame an irate customer in seconds. the ones who can invoke feelings, control feelings, emotions, etc from just "talking" on the radio, addressing a topic, etc. i happen to be really strong on computer aided design & there are some products i've done that i feel have crossed the line from mechanical design into an art arena.
~ of course like the prior thread of *what is crap* one has to be sensitized & intimately familiar to particular areas to see art in them.
see ya
steve
Malcolm Schosha wrote: I don't think so, Mel.
Artists are like everyone else, and there is nothing special about them aside from their skill in specialized work. The pride they take in doing good work, and wanting the recognition of the public, is pretty much the same pride as welders, mechanics, MDs, top salespeople, etc.
Some artists love to think of themselves as special cases of humanity, and above other people. This is a delusion. Unfortunately, this delusion is actually encourage these days as an identifying characteristic of artists; something that an artist should have, and actually needs to have. That amounts to encouraging delusions of grandeur, and self glorification.....not pretty qualities.
It is the philosophers (in the old use of the word) who are different, because they live life by different values. Perhaps there are more artist-philosophers, but still not very many. All other artists are just ordinary people.
As for Frank Lloyd Wright, he would have a hard time convincing me that his drinking was superior to that of any other drunk.
Malcolm Schosha
..........................................................................
mel jacobson wrote:
this is never a controversy. it is fact of being alive.
in my opinion..after years of teaching art;
real artists are born, they have visual sense
that is built in. they have a desire to create
from nothing. in most cases they have an energy
source that comes from the deep part of the human
condition.
or:
as frank lloyd wright said one time..(i was in the audience)
`artists have an engine that runs 24 hours a day...inside of them.
it is the reason they drink...they try in some way to just shut off
the engine from time to time.`
skill and craft are learned with time.
it is taken in as information and used
to make the creative process come alive.
it is the frustration that folks that have been in left brain
jobs their entire life...then as they age they want to do
art....often they cannot do it...so they turn to craft and
learned behavior. it works to a degree, but often frustration
drives them nuts...as they do not `see` very well.
it is always the seeing that fails them.
`what do you mean my ring foot is too big, looks fine to me?`
or, `what painting ground?`
an artist can `see` millions of hues of color. then add the concept
of gray/tinting and shading...and it compounds beyond belief.
average folks see a few thousand. or as i tell students...the attorney
says...`why that swamp is gray.` oh my god...there are at least
25,000 variations of that swamp right before your eyes. it is really
hard to train a person to see beyond normal reality.
you can teach them that something does exist...but to get them
to see it, and understand it, then repeat it...is very difficult.
not impossible, just difficult.
skill and craftsmanship are learned behavior over time. those that
want to be really good, foster craft and skill and combine it with
`ART AND DESIGN`. they are total and complete partners.
as teachers we can always teach craftsmanship...be the guide.
technique, how to get the job done...it is what teachers do.
imagination, seeing, creativity becomes the job of the artist.
it is what many of us have squawked about. if you only teach the
creative side of art, never the technique...the student is left without
the basic elements of `doing` art. the work lacks quality and last/ability.
it does not measure to time. the teacher is the task master to see that
good craftsmanship is held to account. if the teacher allows sloppy,
poor craft and a lack of technique and passes it off as unimportant....well
we see the result every day. it is what some call `crap`. i call it
unthinking, immature/ poorly crafted work. it will never stand the test of
time.
even a month in many cases.
if art is only being based on metaphor or smart and not skill/maturity and
technique
it will always be shallow.
mel
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Music Unlimited - Access over 1 million songs. Try it free.
______________________________________________________________________________
Send postings to clayart@lsv.ceramics.org
You may look at the archives for the list or change your subscription
settings from http://www.ceramics.org/clayart/
Moderator of the list is Mel Jacobson who may be reached at melpots@pclink.com.
---------------------------------
Yahoo! DSL Something to write home about. Just $16.99/mo. or less
Malcolm Schosha on sat 26 nov 05
Ann Brink wrote:
>So, I have to say that I identify more with Mel's comments about artists
than your rather limiting description of skills. Definitely skill in
execution is important, in fact, for me is half the equation of "What Is
Art?": (leaving aside music, literature, theatre )
That's fine. We see things differently.
>In my opinion, Art is an object created with imagination and executed with
skill and craftsmanship. To have relevancy through time, either it's
subject matter or grace of form must resonate with archetypical standards of
belief and/or beauty. These may have a wide variance in different cultures.
I do not think that I said anything about the creative process, which I consider just a part of an artists skills. What I am saying is that the creative ability an artist has (if any) is no reason for a head trip. Artists have personalities like other people, not some special personality type. Most artists, like people in general, are pretty average people. Occasionally there is an artist who has an almost saintly personality, such as Fra Angelico. Occasionally, also, there will be a vicious murderer, such as Caravaggio. Most artists, however are average people. If you read some of the late letters of Michelangelo you get the impression that he was more interested in his real estate investments than art...very typically Florentine really.
Malcolm Schosha
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Music Unlimited - Access over 1 million songs. Try it free.
Vince Pitelka on sat 26 nov 05
Ann Brink wrote:
> In my opinion, Art is an object created with imagination and executed with
> skill and craftsmanship. To have relevancy through time, either it's
> subject matter or grace of form must resonate with archetypical standards
> of
> belief and/or beauty. These may have a wide variance in different
> cultures.
Ann -
Nicely stated, with one exception. Not to flog this thing to death, but the
above statement would be more accurate if it said "good art is an object
created with imagination and executed with skill and craftsmanship." If a
person who fancies him/herself an artist manipulates media with the
intention of creating art, then the resulting product is art, by definition.
Lacking substantial imagination, skill, and craftsmanship, the work is
probably also pure schlock, but none of us have the criteria to say
definitively that it is not art.
Best wishes -
- Vince
Vince Pitelka
Appalachian Center for Craft, Tennessee Technological University
Smithville TN 37166, 615/597-6801 x111
vpitelka@dtccom.net, wpitelka@tntech.edu
http://iweb.tntech.edu/wpitelka/
http://www.tntech.edu/craftcenter/
Elizabeth Priddy on sat 26 nov 05
Nothing I or mel have said indicates that artists
are above anyone in society. Some that I have met
are truly reprehensible people with no friends and
no social skills whatsoever. Their lives can be
bitter and short. It's what they feel compelled to
do that makes them what they are, with a lot of problems
that are not inflicted on the rest of society. I
think it is easier not to be an artist, and probably better.
EP
--- Malcolm Schosha wrote:
> I don't think so, Mel.
>
> Artists are like everyone else, and there is nothing special about
> them aside from their skill in specialized work. The pride they take
> in doing good work, and wanting the recognition of the public, is
> pretty much the same pride as welders, mechanics, MDs, top
> salespeople, etc.
>
> Some artists love to think of themselves as special cases of
> humanity, and above other people. This is a delusion. Unfortunately,
> this delusion is actually encourage these days as an identifying
> characteristic of artists; something that an artist should have, and
> actually needs to have. That amounts to encouraging delusions of
> grandeur, and self glorification.....not pretty qualities.
>
> It is the philosophers (in the old use of the word) who are
> different, because they live life by different values. Perhaps there
> are more artist-philosophers, but still not very many. All other
> artists are just ordinary people.
>
> As for Frank Lloyd Wright, he would have a hard time convincing me
> that his drinking was superior to that of any other drunk.
>
> Malcolm Schosha
>
>
Elizabeth Priddy
Beaufort, NC - USA
http://www.elizabethpriddy.com
__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
http://mail.yahoo.com
2ley on sat 26 nov 05
From: "Geoffrey Gaskell"
> In view of everything said on this subject heretofore, I think this is as
> good a summary as anyone is likely to achieve using words. In their
> differing ways I think several people including Mel, Lee, Elizabeth,
> Vince,
> Malcolm, Steve & Philip in particular have contributed very useful food
> for
> thought to satisfy anyone who besides just getting on with the doing of
> art,
> cannot help but have a sense of wonder that anyone does this at all &
> therefore asks "Why?" For many people perhaps the simplest answer is "Why
> not?"
Wow. I'm honored to be included in such a group. My response to "Why?" is
almost as simple - "Because."
Philip Tuley
Lee Love on sun 27 nov 05
On 2005/11/27 6:03:47, vpitelka@dtccom.net wrote:
> Nicely stated, with one exception. Not to flog this thing to death,
but the
> above statement would be more accurate if it said "good art is an object
> created with imagination and executed with skill and craftsmanship."
Art does not require an artifact, as in the case with dance or performed
music, poetry and drama. The the "object" is not a universal aspect of
art. What are we left with? Creation, imagination, skill and
craftsmanship. Inspiration and genius goes in there too (the Muse.) And
a minimum of two minds to communicate these qualities.
--
李 Lee Love 大
愛 鱗
in Mashiko, Japan http://mashiko.org
http://seisokuro.blogspot.com/ My Photo Logs
http://ikiru.blogspot.com/ Zen and Craft
"With Humans it's what's here (he points to his heart) that makes the
difference. If you don't have it in the heart, nothing you make will
make a difference."
~~Bernard Leach~~ (As told to Dean Schwarz)
Vince Pitelka on sun 27 nov 05
Steve Graber said:
> everyone has that spark in them, it's just a fortunate few who locate it.
This is a clear and succinct way of putting it. I think that the potential
to make great art is in every single human being. It is just a question of
whether circumstances, environment, and experience steer them towards making
art with sufficient passion, commitment, and message. One might assume that
the chances are far greater if they live in a culture and family where
art-making is encouraged, but some of the greatest artists struggled with
tremendous discouragement, frustration, and adversity.
There are certainly people who are born with a certain temperment that gives
them a singular drive and focus, and perhaps some sort of internal torment
or angst that finds an outlet through art-making. The following story
certainly does not apply to all great artists, but it might parallel the
experience of quite a few. My wife and I have a friend named Nancy who is a
very fine and prolific artist. There is a history of mental instability in
her family, and her own mother was in and out of institutions throughout her
life. Nancy started making art as a young child, at every opportunity
available, using any material she could find, to the point where her family
began to see it as an obsession. But what exactly is an obsession? Nancy
has passionately pursued the making of art for over 50 years, and
acknowledges that for her, art-making is the alternative to insanity.
- Vince
Vince Pitelka
Appalachian Center for Craft, Tennessee Technological University
Smithville TN 37166, 615/597-6801 x111
vpitelka@dtccom.net, wpitelka@tntech.edu
http://iweb.tntech.edu/wpitelka/
http://www.tntech.edu/craftcenter/
Geoffrey Gaskell on sun 27 nov 05
Ann Brink succinctly wrote:
> In my opinion, Art is an object created with imagination and executed
with
> skill and craftsmanship. To have relevancy through time, either it's
> subject matter or grace of form must resonate with archetypical standards
of
> belief and/or beauty. These may have a wide variance in different
cultures.
In view of everything said on this subject heretofore, I think this is as
good a summary as anyone is likely to achieve using words. In their
differing ways I think several people including Mel, Lee, Elizabeth, Vince,
Malcolm, Steve & Philip in particular have contributed very useful food for
thought to satisfy anyone who besides just getting on with the doing of art,
cannot help but have a sense of wonder that anyone does this at all &
therefore asks "Why?" For many people perhaps the simplest answer is "Why
not?"
Geoffrey Gaskell
http://www.geoffreygaskell.co.nz/
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 267.13.8/183 - Release Date: 25/11/05
Deborah Thuman on mon 20 dec 10
Why can't craft be beautiful? Why can't art be well done? Why does
there have to be a split between the two?
I'm arthritic. The handle on the mug is critical to me. I'm an artist.
The appearance of the mug is critical to me.
There's a huge group of people in the US who prove every day that
functional can be beautiful - these are the folks who make quilts.
Ever snuggle up under a quilt? It's warm and cozy. Ever look at a
quilt and admire the color choices, needlework, and eye for detail the
quilter has? There are some gorgeous quilts out there that exist only
to keep someone warm.
Ever drink tea, coffee, cocoa from a well made mug? Notice how
comfortable the handle is. Think about the engineering that went into
making that handle and keeping that handle on the mug. Does the mug
keep your beverage hot? Think about the engineering that went into
shaping that mug to keep the contents hot. Now... look, really look,
at that well engineered mug. Is it pretty? Is it attractive? Is it
outrageously gorgeous? Does it make you think you need to do more with
glazes?
That's both art and craft. Take away the art, and the mug is ordinary.
Take away the craft, and my tea gets cold, the handle falls off, and
when the handle was attached, it was uncomfortable in my hand.
Deb Thuman
http://debthumansblog.blogspot.com/
http://www.etsy.com/shop.php?user_id=3D5888059
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Deb-Thumans-Art-Page/167529715986
Randall Moody on mon 20 dec 10
Craft can be beautiful and still not be art. Art can not be "well
done" and still be art. Not all art is beautiful. I would posit that
there are more people out there in the US that prove that functional
doesn't equal beautiful. I think that we need to apply filters to
individual works rather than groups of medium. I have seen a great
deal of painting that is not 'Art' but we hesitate to look at a
painter and tell him or her that what they are doing isn't Art. It may
be "art" but that is about it.
--
Randall in Atlanta
http://wrandallmoody.com
On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 9:23 AM, Deborah Thuman wrot=
e:
> Why can't craft be beautiful? Why can't art be well done? Why does
> there have to be a split between the two?
>
> I'm arthritic. The handle on the mug is critical to me. I'm an artist.
> The appearance of the mug is critical to me.
>
> There's a huge group of people in the US who prove every day that
> functional can be beautiful
Lee Love on mon 20 dec 10
On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 8:23 AM, Deborah Thuman wrot=
=3D
e:
> Why can't craft be beautiful? Why can't art be well done? Why does
> there have to be a split between the two?
I've always thought the war is artificial and one I don't recognize
personally. In Japan, it doesn't exist the way it does here. I
don't know why potters fall for it.
I remember when John Kantar talked to our class after he returned
from a stay at Banif. He told us, that one of the most useful
things he learned from Warren MacKenzie, was that the forms of
functional pottery and sculpture can be judged by the same criteria.
On Pop Art: Claus & Coosje Oldenburg, Jim Dine, Peter Max,
Roy Lichtenstein, Andy Warhol, and Jasper Johns. They all do
interesting stuff. I can't dismiss them simply because they are
labeled "pop art." What matters is: Is the work good? That's
all.
Karen Shapiro's Cans are a scream!
http://www.rakukaren.com/
And Richard Notkin Skull Teapots are pretty cool.
http://123nonstop.com/biography/Notkin,_Richard
I don't like Jeff Koons' Michael And Bubbles, but his balloon
sculpture in interesting:
http://www.google.com/images?q=3D3Djeff+koons+balloon+dog&um=3D3D1&ie=3D3DU=
TF-8&s=3D
ource=3D3Duniv&ei=3D3DaXgPTcf3LaTenQevtZmTDg&sa=3D3DX&oi=3D3Dimage_result_g=
roup&ct=3D
=3D3Dtitle&resnum=3D3D1&ved=3D3D0CCUQsAQwAA&biw=3D3D981&bih=3D3D653
--
=3DA0Lee, a Mashiko potter in Minneapolis
http://mingeisota.blogspot.com/
=3D93Observe the wonders as they occur around you. Don't claim them. Feel
the artistry moving through and be silent.=3D94 --Rumi
DJ Brewer on mon 20 dec 10
I love big fat brutal handles about as big around as my thumb and
squeezed with my grip so that its imprint is on the whole handle. They
are dog-ugly but SO COMFORTABLE. And of course, they fit perfectly in
my hand!
much love
DJ
On 12/20/2010 8:23 AM, Deborah Thuman wrote:
>
> Ever drink tea, coffee, cocoa from a well made mug? Notice how
> comfortable the handle is. Think about the engineering that went into
> making that handle and keeping that handle on the mug.
Steve Mills on mon 20 dec 10
Quote:
"Who works with their hands is a Labourer.
Who works with their hands and their head is a Craftsman.
Who works with their hands and their head and their heart is an Artist.
Attr. St Francis of Assisis.
Yet again, I rest my case!
Steve M
Steve Mills
Bath
UK
>
gwynneth rixon on tue 21 dec 10
To which one may add
Skill is the unified force of experience, intellect and passion in their
operation.
John Ruskin
Gwynneth
Wales
On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 11:12 PM, Steve Mills m
> wrote:
> Quote:
> "Who works with their hands is a Labourer.
> Who works with their hands and their head is a Craftsman.
> Who works with their hands and their head and their heart is an Artist.
> Attr. St Francis of Assisis.
>
> Yet again, I rest my case!
>
> Steve M
>
>
> Steve Mills
> Bath
> UK
> >
>
DJ Brewer on wed 5 jan 11
Craft and art are one. Cooking is an art. Dance is an art. Even Life
can be an art.
I've seen this discussion emerge and flow through conversations here
like the waves lapping the shore of the sea. It's a wonderful topic. I
like people's heartfelt explanations about it. But in my mind, always,
craft and art are one. Art constitutes human creativity. That's a
pretty broad brushstroke of inclusion. But that's my take on it. Even
a 2-year-old's creative manipulations with the "truth" can be an art.
(Parents, grandparents, aunts and uncles KNOW what I'm talkin' bout!)
I cannot divide craft and art. A matrioshka is a work of art. A paper
plate covered in glitter, drooly glue, poor handwriting that says "I
love mom," and fading construction paper hearts badly cut -- that is art.
One can discuss art's quality, appeal, mastery, category -- therein lies
endless debate.
But under Art's banner, craft snugly sits, in all its practicality and
functionality (or lack thereof!)
much love
DJ
On 12/20/2010 8:23 AM, Deborah Thuman wrote:
> Why can't craft be beautiful? Why can't art be well done? Why does
> there have to be a split between the two?
>
> I'm arthritic. The handle on the mug is critical to me. I'm an artist.
> The appearance of the mug is critical to me.
>
> There's a huge group of people in the US who prove every day that
> functional can be beautiful - these are the folks who make quilts.
> Ever snuggle up under a quilt? It's warm and cozy. Ever look at a
> quilt and admire the color choices, needlework, and eye for detail the
> quilter has? There are some gorgeous quilts out there that exist only
> to keep someone warm.
>
>
> Ever drink tea, coffee, cocoa from a well made mug? Notice how
> comfortable the handle is. Think about the engineering that went into
> making that handle and keeping that handle on the mug. Does the mug
> keep your beverage hot? Think about the engineering that went into
> shaping that mug to keep the contents hot. Now... look, really look,
> at that well engineered mug. Is it pretty? Is it attractive? Is it
> outrageously gorgeous? Does it make you think you need to do more with
> glazes?
>
> That's both art and craft. Take away the art, and the mug is ordinary.
> Take away the craft, and my tea gets cold, the handle falls off, and
> when the handle was attached, it was uncomfortable in my hand.
>
> Deb Thuman
> http://debthumansblog.blogspot.com/
> http://www.etsy.com/shop.php?user_id=3D5888059
> http://www.facebook.com/pages/Deb-Thumans-Art-Page/167529715986
>
Snail Scott on wed 5 jan 11
>
> On 12/20/2010 8:23 AM, Deborah Thuman wrote:
>> Why can't craft be beautiful? Why can't art be well done? Why does
>> there have to be a split between the two?
Art and craft are both valuable concepts, but are not
interchangeable. They describe different ideas.
Of course craft can be beautiful (or not) and art can
be well-made (or not). Trying to create a firm line of
demarcation with some sort of DMZ in the middle is
patently absurd.
(I'm going to sidestep the implication that art is defined
by its beauty, or that craft is by definition well-made.)
Any made object can possess the attributes of craft to
a greater or lesser degree. It may also possess any
(or many) of the attributes of art. Some things have
much of both, and some have little of either. Some
have a lot more of one than the other. It's a continuum,
not a dichotomy.
Craft is not one thing with a single defining characteristic,
nor is art. Rather, we might better consider each term to
represent a range of related traits. Moreover, few objects
can be placed solely in one category or the other.
One could think of it this way: draw a Cartesian coordinate
system. Put 'Art' (with all its myriad attributes) on one axis,
and 'Craft' (in all its varied forms) on the other. Some
objects are going to lie quite far up on the 'Craft' axis, but
not very far in the 'Art' direction. Many traditional crafts like
barrel-making, and skilled trades like sheet-metal work,
fall into this category. It might include both impeccably
executed objects which don't call for significant personal
interpretation, as well as things which are skillfully
constructed but poorly designed in aesthetic terms.
Other objects may lie quite far out on the 'Art' axis but
not in the 'Craft ' direction. This would include many
conceptual artworks in which workmanship is largely
irrelevant to the success of the outcome, as well as work
in which a fine concept and design are not adequately
supported by skilled or suitable execution.
Some objects would be placed pretty low on both scales,
lacking either much art or craft, either because it is both
inadequately made and poorly conceived (like a student
project knocked out three hours before final critique) or
because the nature of the object requires little of either
(like the tied rope that keeps dogs out of my trash can.)
There are objects, of course, that would place quite highly
on both scales, such as a Raphael fresco or a Momoyama
screen, which by most standards incorporate both a high
level of art and an equally high level of craft. Most made
objects fall somewhere on both axes to a greater or lesser
degree, partaking of some aspects of each.
I am not going to try to enumerate all the possible traits to
be accorded to either art or craft; that's a discussion for
another day. It seems clear, though, that nothing is served
by trying to categorize any object as being 'Art' or 'Craft' as
though these are oppositional categories. It is scarcely
better, though, to treat them as indistinguishable from one
another. Each brings a distinct and nuanced way to consider
and make objects, and it would be a shame to simplify their
distinct and useful meanings into a homogenous mush.
-Snail
Randall Moody on wed 5 jan 11
Interesting that you start with the idea that "craft and art are one"
and yet end with "but under Art's banner, craft sits".
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 7:58 AM, DJ Brewer wrote:
> Craft and art are one. =3DA0Cooking is an art. =3DA0Dance is an art. =3DA=
0Even =3D
Life
> can be an art.
>
> I've seen this discussion emerge and flow through conversations here
> like the waves lapping the shore of the sea. =3DA0It's a wonderful topic.=
=3D
=3DA0I
> like people's heartfelt explanations about it. =3DA0But in my mind, alway=
s,
> craft and art are one. =3DA0Art constitutes human creativity. =3DA0That's=
a
> pretty broad brushstroke of inclusion. =3DA0But that's my take on it. =3D=
A0Ev=3D
en
> a 2-year-old's creative manipulations with the "truth" can be an art.
> (Parents, grandparents, aunts and uncles KNOW what I'm talkin' bout!)
>
> I cannot divide craft and art. =3DA0A matrioshka is a work of art. =3DA0A=
pap=3D
er
> plate covered in glitter, drooly glue, poor handwriting that says "I
> love mom," and fading construction paper hearts badly cut -- that is art.
>
> One can discuss art's quality, appeal, mastery, category -- therein lies
> endless debate.
>
> But under Art's banner, craft snugly sits, in all its practicality and
> functionality (or lack thereof!)
>
> much love
> DJ
>
> =3DA0On 12/20/2010 8:23 AM, Deborah Thuman wrote:
>>
>> Why can't craft be beautiful? Why can't art be well done? Why does
>> there have to be a split between the two?
>>
>> I'm arthritic. The handle on the mug is critical to me. I'm an artist.
>> The appearance of the mug is critical to me.
>>
>> There's a huge group of people in the US who prove every day that
>> functional can be beautiful - these are the folks who make quilts.
>> Ever snuggle up under a quilt? It's warm and cozy. Ever look at a
>> quilt and admire the color choices, needlework, and eye for detail the
>> quilter has? There are some gorgeous quilts out there that exist only
>> to keep someone warm.
>>
>>
>> Ever drink tea, coffee, cocoa from a well made mug? Notice how
>> comfortable the handle is. Think about the engineering that went into
>> making that handle and keeping that handle on the mug. Does the mug
>> keep your beverage hot? Think about the engineering that went into
>> shaping that mug to keep the contents hot. Now... look, really look,
>> at that well engineered mug. Is it pretty? Is it attractive? Is it
>> outrageously gorgeous? Does it make you think you need to do more with
>> glazes?
>>
>> That's both art and craft. Take away the art, and the mug is ordinary.
>> Take away the craft, and my tea gets cold, the handle falls off, and
>> when the handle was attached, it was uncomfortable in my hand.
>>
>> Deb Thuman
>> http://debthumansblog.blogspot.com/
>> http://www.etsy.com/shop.php?user_id=3D3D5888059
>> http://www.facebook.com/pages/Deb-Thumans-Art-Page/167529715986
>>
>
--=3D20
Randall in Atlanta
http://wrandallmoody.com
DJ Brewer on wed 5 jan 11
On 1/5/2011 10:07 AM, Snail Scott wrote:
> and it would be a shame to simplify their
> distinct and useful meanings into a homogenous mush.
DJ replies:
But I'm afraid the two ARE interchangeable -- mush notwithstanding.
There are nuances of both that both separate and/or blur any
distinctions between them. Any separation lies only in the mind of the
person thinking about them. They are well connected through the
continuum you describe, and in my mind, they resonate as one. I wrote a
reply personally to Randal who noted that I put craft under the category
of art -- but upon rethinking it -- I realized both terms could be used
to describe the same actions. I initially thought that acting, dance,
and cooking would not be considered under the category of "craft" -- but
in fact, they would. All are endeavors of human creativity.
Of course, in my mind, I can and do separate the Mona Lisa from kids'
refrigerator art -- but both art art and both are craft. I am using the
broadest definition possible -- that of human creativity. Under that
banner, just about any action can be considered art or craft. A
machinist hones his craft to a fine artform. The form he turns on a
lathe or CNC mill is perfectly crafted. There are those who look at a
car engine and see pure beauty. Human creativity is the purest
definition of art -- perhaps the only difference is craft is the verb
that creates the end product of art. (Though craft is also a noun!)
Randal Moody observed
Interesting that you start with the idea that "craft and art are one"
and yet end with "but under Art's banner, craft sits".
Here's my reply to him:
Things can be one but not be the same. A husband and wife can be one --
and not the same. Parents and children can be one -- but not the same.
I put craft under art because it is not dance or acting or cooking --
but perhaps those things too, come under the category of a craft.
Either way, the statement [craft and art are one] still stands. :-)
much love
DJ
Lee on wed 5 jan 11
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 6:58 AM, DJ Brewer wrote:
> Craft and art are one. =3DA0Cooking is an art. =3DA0Dance is an art. =3DA=
0Even =3D
Life
> can be an art.
The split is artificial, promoted by the non-wage earning art
investment crowd.
As Philp Rawson said, today's art could be much improved if it
learned more from craft.
Or as Hamada said, quoted from the Tweed Museum webpage:
"At the age of fifteen Hamada happened upon a quote by the French
post-Impressionist painter Renoir, which inspired him to dedicate his
artistic ambitions to the study and creation of useful objects: =3D93If
half the would-be painters in France were transformed into craftsmen,
it would benefit both painting and the crafts; the number of painters
would be decreased, and the decorative arts would get able people.=3D94
http://tweedmuseum.org/collections/the-language-of-art/shoji-hamada/
--
=3DA0Lee Love in Minneapolis
http://mingeisota.blogspot.com/
=3DA0"Ta tIr na n-=3DF3g ar chul an tI=3D97tIr dlainn trina ch=3DE9ile"=3D9=
7that is, =3D
"The
land of eternal youth is behind the house, a beautiful land fluent
within itself." -- John O'Donohue
James Freeman on wed 5 jan 11
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 1:35 PM, DJ Brewer wrote:
> On 1/5/2011 10:07 AM, Snail Scott wrote:
>
>> and it would be a shame to simplify their
>> distinct and useful meanings into a homogenous mush.
>>
> DJ replies:
> But I'm afraid the two ARE interchangeable -- mush notwithstanding.
> There are nuances of both that both separate and/or blur any
> distinctions between them. Any separation lies only in the mind of the
> person thinking about them. They are well connected through the
> continuum you describe, and in my mind, they resonate as one.
>
DJ, Snail, Randall, others...
I read a few years ago of an artform popular amongst the court scholars in
not so ancient China, wherein they would dig up intricate and interesting
pieces of tree root, carefully clean and dry them, then display the pieces
as high art. I cannot now recall what they were called, though I shall
continue to search my memory banks. In any case, these pieces of root were
clearly held up as "art", yet there was no craft involved whatsoever.
Likewise, a year or two ago I shared with clayart the story of the winner o=
f
a national art competition in New Zealand. The winning artist entered
nothing at all. He asked the museum staff to set aside all of the wrapping=
s
and packaging from the other "actual" entries, then to heap this rubbish in
a pile in the gallery. The rubbish pile won the competition, so is clearly
"art" (as was argued by many on this list, myself excluded), yet, again,
there is absolutely no craft component.
Conversely, the handmade blades of high quality Japanese wood planes are at
the absolute pinnacle of craft. They are lovingly made, one at a time,
using specialized skills accumulated over generations. They are
phenomenally expensive and phenomenally beautiful (in a plane blade sort of
way), yet they are clearly not "art". Though they are certainly capable of
rendering emotional a suitably attuned observer (something I feel is a sine
qua non of "art"), such was not the intent of the maker, who endeavored onl=
y
to make a fine tool.
It seems clear, therefore, that craft can exist without "art", and that
"art" can exist without craft. One could be more specific, perhaps, and
argue that a painting or sculpture cannot be "art" if it is not also craft
(and I would personally agree with this statement, though the vast majority
of those who are involved with the arts would vehemently disagree). One
could not, however, make the converse argument that a clay or treen bowl,
for example, cannot be craft unless it is also "art".
Before anyone makes the obvious argument, though the plane blade can
possibly have an art-like effect on a certain rarefied subset of the
population, it is still not "art" in any conventional sense. There are
subsets of the population who are rendered emotional, who experience
art-like effects, from all sorts of decidedly non-art things, to which some
of the more reprehensible sites on the internet can attest. The "art" must
flow not only from the actual piece, but also from the intent of the maker
(and yes, we must fathom that intent).
It is said that a haiku is like a pebble that one tosses into still water.
The "art" resides not in the pebble, but in the ripples that flow through
the mind of one touched by the haiku. The haiku is "art" to the extent tha=
t
it's creator's purpose was to render the audience emotional, and to the
extent that he or she was successful. Thus, "art" requires two parties, th=
e
one who attempts to elicit an emotional response through an indirect appeal=
,
and the one who in fact receives and experiences that emotional charge. If
I jump out from behind a doorway, catch you unaware, and frighten you, ther=
e
is obviously no "art", only a direct and shallow stimulus/response. On the
other hand, I might paint a picture, perhaps an angst-ridden man, "alone" o=
n
a crowded bridge, held captive by his own terrible thoughts. You look at
this painting, and it triggers in you an emotional response, perhaps
releasing or inflaming suppressed feelings of your own. You are frightened=
,
not by the painting qua painting, but by your own thoughts which the
painting released. There was thus "art" present, a conscious attempt to
elicit or capture an emotion, and a successful transmittal or elicitation o=
f
that emotion in the audience. 'Art" is intercourse; craft need not be.
Lots more to say on this topic, but this post is already getting long. Jus=
t
a few of my thoughts.
All the best.
...James
James Freeman
"...outsider artists, caught in the bog of their own consciousness, too
preciously idiosyncratic to be taken seriously."
"All I say is by way of discourse, and nothing by way of advice. I should
not speak so boldly if it were my due to be believed."
-Michel de Montaigne
http://www.jamesfreemanstudio.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jamesfreemanstudio/
http://www.jamesfreemanstudio.com/resources
<#>
<#>
<#> <#>
Kanika Sircar on wed 5 jan 11
Yes, it is Mastering the ART of French Cooking (by Julia Child et al). Ask
any Frenchman.
KS
--------------------------------------------------
From: "DJ Brewer"
Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2011 1:35 PM
To:
Subject: Re: Art and craft
> I put craft under art because it is not dance or acting or cooking --
> but perhaps those things too, come under the category of a craft.
> Either way, the statement [craft and art are one] still stands. :-)
>
> much love
> DJ
>
Jeanie Silver on wed 5 jan 11
Snail,
That was the best and most succinct elucidation of the 'art/craft'
discussion that I have read in a long time. I really like the clarity with
which you write. And an eerily appropriate bonus is that I got a clear
visual image of the matrix of intent and realization in which made objects
exist...thanks
Jeanie in Pa.
| |
|
