Art vs Craft......

[teesquare]

So - I often find myself in a discussion of how to differentiate "art" from "craft". In my pedestrian - non-art-school-grauate observation....it boils down to this:

Art "IS"....meaning its sole purpose is that it exists for no pragmatic purpose. It is there to be evocative. It is meant to provoke thought and or emotion. Period.

Craft....serves pragmatic function. If the item can hold soup or salad....or any practical purpose...it is craft - no matter how "artfully done".

At least - the above is the summation of all o the discussions I have had with people who some might consider "art snobs". I am not judging them, I appreciate their viewpoints.

But- being terminally snarky - and genetically sarcastic....I *DO* like to tweet their noses occasionally.

So, allow mw to explain the piece below. I call it a "Pagoda Platter. It does have a sort of Asian inspired design. And in the right home might make a nice centerpiece for a large table. That might make it art...BUt- if you remove the top 2 layers - you will see that it is also a practical chip and dip platter and a tea light holder. You know...for those romatantic dinners by the TV. Watching football.

 

[bob vaughan]

I would simply call it: Nicely done

 

[Oka]

Bob, I just said the exact same out load before reading your post.

Nicely done, Indeed !

 

[Ricksmi]

Art or Craft I can't say - but I agree with the others, Nicely Done

 

[teesquare]

I would simply call it: Nicely done

Thanks Bob, Oka and Rick!

 

[old and in the way]

Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart had once remarked that while he could not define pornography, he knew it when he saw it. Perhaps the same is true of art.

Tone

 

[Echd]

Perhaps the craft is the base form or object providing the needed function and the art is the embellishment?

 

[Wiley's Woodworks]

Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart had once remarked that while he could not define pornography, he knew it when he saw it. Perhaps the same is true of art.

Tone

Hillary Clinton would say, "At this point what does it matter?" It's made; it's "nicely done"; it's appreciated. Why does the question need to be answered? My way of making this decision: Display it in your home for 2 years. If it gets used for something because someone thought "I can use this...", it's craft. If it gets admired for 2 full years, it's art.

 

[Jack A.]

I think the question "is it art?" is right up there with "is it a sport?" in irrelevance.

My wife is very much an artistic and crafty person. She keeps asking whether something looks "modern" or "old", and my response is always: "Who cares? Do you like it?"

 

[Roy G]

Back in the black and white days of FWW magazine, there was a piece that was a functioning cabinet but the maker then drove a bent nail into the door. So it went from craft to art. Also, Wendy Maruyama made a writing desk that she then scribbled on the top. Again, craft making a statement.

Roy G

 

[WallNutz]

Isn’t craft also a verb? Would thinking of it that way help answer your question, or just create more ambiguity?

No answers from me, just philosophizing. I’m not too good at crafting artful answers.

 

[Cuprousworks]

T - your expertise is probably lost here. Maybe try the Metropolitan Museum of Art, they need to know how much of what they display isn't art

 

[teesquare]

Thank you for all of the responses. I also find it entertaining/philosophical and sometimes frustrating when the art vs craft discussions fire up. One could say - that "emotive moment" was the birthing of the idea for this piece.
So - on THAT basis...it could be interpreted as art. But again....I DO love walking the razor's edge sometimes and dropping a banana peel for someone to slip on and grouse about....

 

[wbarnes]

Very nice piece. Can you describe the finishing process you used?

 

[teesquare]

Sure Will -
Piece was sanded to 1000 grit. Applied black alcohol dye. De-fuzzed with white sctchbrite, blew off with wire - and applied Mohawk sanding sealer. Again - white scotchbrite, air blow. Then applied 2 coats of Mohawk Black Ultra High Gloss Lacquer - with white scotchbrite/air between coats. After 5 days cure time - I made up a liming wax in a metallic teal and applied it to the open grain by hand - just rubbed it into the grain. Allowed to dry about an hour, and gently hand buffed off the excess.

Liming waxes can be made in any color. All you need is a finely ground dry pigment in the color of your choice - and a wax that is free of solvents that may attack the lacquer - causing dull areas. Most of the commercially available waxes have mineral spirits or even "hotter" solvents. The one I use in this process is "G.O.A.T." - sold by Craft Supply. Just a very small amount of pigment in a tablespoon of wax, stirred until consistent in a small measuring cup as one would use for mixing epoxies is all you need.

This method really only works on woods such as Ash, Elm or other wide, open grained woods.

If I can be of any further help please reach out-
T

 

[Wilsoncb]

Beautiful work, very much works of art. I don’t buy your definition for 1 minute. I can name many works of art that serves pragmatic function.
- Sam Maloof furniture is artwork, Lazyboy, not so much.
- Many buildings like the Notre Dame cathedral, artwork, US post office, building, I don’t think so.
- Tiffany vase, artwork, dixie cup to hold flowers, nope.
- 1936 Auburn boattail speedster, artwork, Chrysler K-car, not.
- Many of the creations from the woodworking artist that are members of this forum, yep, Ikea, nope.

I think the only debate is whether an artist creation is sought after by many or few. Or if it’s timeless or flash in the pan. Does it go beyond function by adding visible design that shows creativity.

 

[teesquare]

Thanks Wilson!
No argument from me - as that was not "my" definition - but one that is a accumulation of many "educated" art-people, that I summarized into a simple explanation of the issue.

My thumbing my nose at that establishment thinking - by making something that appears to be "art-like" and then when disassembled into a "craft" item ( their terms...not mine) is kind of a silent protest - and an agreement with you - that a thing CAN be a useful item and still be art.

 

[Mike Davis]

We had this discussion before and it was a toss up.
But, my thought is the things you create that haven't been done the same way before would be closer to art. Many people paint, but few are artists. Just because it is useless does not make it art. And being poorly done does not exclude it from craft. Just try to be as original as possible, make your inner eye happy. Then don't worry about other people they all have their problems as well.

 

[teesquare]

"There is nothing new under the sun".
It is nearly impossible - if not truly impossible to create something "new". The best I think we can fairly hope to do - is put our own twist on something that has been done before at some time and place in history. Just defining how to qualify whether something is truly original is hard enough.
None of that others me - until I make a piece - like the one pictured, and then someone in a gallery says it reminds them of someone else's work. That....is kind of deflating - but it is going to happen.

 

[Gray R]

My two denarii, as an author and singer/songwriter as well as a sometime worker in wood . . .

All art involves craftsmanship, and all craft involves artistry.

Even if the degree of one or the other is small, it's there - not quite like two sides of the same coin, and not at all like balancing on a scale (because the point really isn't to balance the two), but more like two elements that make a compound. Each effort, craft and art, brings into being things that previously were only in the imagination, no matter how simple or fragmentary was that imagining, and as such each is somewhat mysterious (or even miraculous). And as you showed in your sculptural platter, we can pursue evocative beauty even as we produce something for pragmatic use.