An excerpt from Wiki.Answers
"The concept of craft is historically associated with the production of useful objects and art well, at least since the 18th century with useless ones. The craftsmans teapot or vase should normally be able to hold tea or flowers, while the artists work is typically without utilitarian function. In fact, if an object is made demonstrably useless if, to cite a famous example, you take a teacup and line it entirely with animal fur it has to be considered as a work of art, because there is nothing else left to consider it as. The crafts tend to produce things which are useful for various human purposes, and though they may be pretty or pleasing in any number of ways, craft objects tend to exhibit their prettiness around a purpose external to the object itself. To this extent, the crafts arent arts, according to a idea which found fullest expression in the aesthetics of the great Enlightenment philosopher Immanuel Kant. Works of art, Kant said, are intrinsically final: they appeal purely at the level of the imagination and arent good for any practical utility, except and Ill return to this except the cultivation of the human spirit."
My comment: I can accept the definiton of a craft as being utilitarian. I still question the idea that craft is not art.
An excerpt from suite101.com
"A craft is usually a cookie-cutter or close-ended activity. The craft activity is based on a formula or recipe and all participants follow the same directions and end up with roughly the same result every time.
An art activity is more open-ended. So for example, in a drawing project all participants may start with the same materials of paper and pencils and maybe they are asked to create drawings that represent their family. The results of this project will create many different drawings and therefore many different solutions to the same problem. While the end result may not always be considered art, the possibility of creating an original drawing that transcends it's parameters and materials is always possible, and that, to me, is the definition of art."
My comment: I feel this is a very loose opinion and I don't think it puts any clarifcation on the question asked.
An excerpt from The Getty
"I think knowing the difference between art and craft is what matters. Craft follows directions with a specific outcome or product, often somewhat copied from an example or sample. Art has more emphasis on process and the result of exploring
and experimenting with materials. "
My comment: To me this is saying if a utilitarian object is made from a 'mould' then it is a craft, whereas if you have added your own touch it is then considered art.
An excerpt from Yahoo! Answers (jaipurjo)
"An accepted distinction is that craft produces an object that is valued for it's practical use, while art is valued for it's creativity and imaginative content. This is not to say that in craft there can not be art! A master craftsman can produce a piece that is not only functionally sound but combines imaginative and creative forms and is able to give pleasure on both levels. "
My comment: I think this definition says it all - that it cannot be defined!
2 comments:
So, being useful makes it not art? I don't buy that.
The gargoyles on Notre Dame are very artistic, but they're ultimately drain spouts.
I say art, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. For instance, the bead you had on this post is most definitely art!
I couldn't agree with you more! The reason I researched this subject was after receiving an email in reply to an equiry for a 'call for submissions' for an exhibition of 'all media' , where I sent a piece of my wearable art for their consideration. The reply I received- "sorry we don't accept crafts". I was at a loss at how they defined this (and still am), especially when they were accepting all media.
Post a Comment