When ist art craft and when is craft art??

[Robert Lane]

Hello,

I have been a member of AAW since 1992 and have come accross the topic above a few times. Early on I think many woodturners were considered craft people rather than artists. Now we have Woodart which is consider art but is it accepted as art in art circles or still viewed as craft albeit high quality. I live in Germany and have had some encounters where artists mostly painters don't want to exhibit with my 'woodart' which they consider more craft than art. Don't painters also have to master technique to achieve their artistic goals. To me art in something which is expresses a personal vision and comes from within showing good technique but not hamstrung by certain rules or mindsets.

Please forgive me if this is old hat but I have been living in Germany for the past 16 years.

Regards,

Robert Lane

 

[Hu Lowery]

in the mind of the bee holder

Art and craft are in the mind of the creator and beholder. I can sell my stuff as craft for under fifty dollars or as art for over one fifty. Same pieces, different markets. Funny thing, I couldn't sell a piece in most craft shows for over a hundred dollars and I couldn't sell a piece in an art show for under fifty dollars, people would turn their noses up at it!

Hu

 

[robo hippy]

From Anthony 'Yak' Yakonick "If it don't hold soup, it is art".

robo hippy

 

[hockenbery]

Robert this an ongoing concern among artists.

Some wood art is reaches the lower edge of fine arts as defined by price as a metric.

Paintings and sculpture typically sell in the $1000 to $millions
The high end woodturning sell in the 1,000 to $30,000 range.
With. very few above $10,000

The main concern among artists in other mediums is whether showing with woodturning is going to elevate their prestige or lower it.

Most woodturning is sold to wood art collectors
Not to art collectors.

People who are looking for home decor art are another category. They want items they like to look at in their homes.
Turned vessels, pottery, glass, low end paintings, photography, all work in the home and few people spend more than a $1,000 each for their home decor items and few people look upon these items as an investment.

There is not real answer just muddy water.

 

[Bill Boehme]

Hello,

I have been a member of AAW since 1992 and have come accross the topic above a few times. Early on I think many woodturners were considered craft people rather than artists. Now we have Woodart which is consider art but is it accepted as art in art circles or still viewed as craft albeit high quality. I live in Germany and have had some encounters where artists mostly painters don't want to exhibit with my 'woodart' which they consider more craft than art. Don't painters also have to master technique to achieve their artistic goals. To me art in something which is expresses a personal vision and comes from within showing good technique but not hamstrung by certain rules or mindsets.

Please forgive me if this is old hat but I have been living in Germany for the past 16 years.

Regards,

Robert Lane

It is purely an artificial and perceptual distinction. I suppose that some people might want to call their work art and refer to the work of someone else as craft as a way of inflating their own ego.

The closest thing to a distinguishing characteristic in my mind would be the creator's own perception. Even then, things are somewhat nebulous. If I made numerous nearly identical things that I sold at a craft show for a very low price would my creations be considered craft items? What if the items were chess pieces that were well made and somewhat unique? I don't think that the terms art and craft are mutually exclusive. We can recognize true genius and amazing talent, but neither of those terms says that art and craft are two separate entities.

When I first started turning a decade ago, I was proud of making something that survived in one piece. I didn't perceive it to be anything more than whatever I intended to make -- a pen, tool handle, table leg, bottle stopper, or dish. None were done very well, but my wife said that they were great. The words art and craft weren't something that I needed to even fret about. I figured that once everybody came to an agreed upon conclusion, somebody would be sure to inform the rest of us. But, if such a thing as an official definition ever came to be, how would it make a meaningful difference anyway.

 

[hockenbery]

This is alway a featured topic in various forms in the AAW discussion panels.

 

[Mark Hepburn]

This is just my rambling from the perspective of an old oil painter (surrealism mostly).

Marcel Duchamp, mostly associated with Dadaism, Futurism and also cubism, once took a urinal, flipped it upside down and signed it "R. Mutt". So is it "art" or nothing at all since it isn't even a craft? It was the repurposing of a found object and, through his own aesthetic, redefining it. He called them "Readymades".

I would argue that it is art, just as Lichtenstein's comic bookish work was or Andy Warhol's soup can. (As an aside, I've done a lot of Jackson pollock knockoffs by using old drop cloths that I framed )

I would argue that it is the creator's intent that rules. I made a bowl to be an art object. It sucked so it wasn't what you would call "good" art but art nonetheless.

Often what is art being produced in a given period receives little acceptance until much later. Impressionism was reviled. Pop art, abstract and non-objective also. And so on. Perhaps in fifty years wood art will elevate to the status of other fine arts, which I consider turning to be.



Let the arrows fly!

 

[Bill Boehme]

... It sucked so it wasn't what you would call "good" art but art nonetheless.

I like that thought. The notion of art doesn't automatically imply a certain level of goodness.

 

[Gary Chapman]

Hello,

I have been a member of AAW since 1992 and have come accross the topic above a few times. Early on I think many woodturners were considered craft people rather than artists. Now we have Woodart which is consider art but is it accepted as art in art circles or still viewed as craft albeit high quality. I live in Germany and have had some encounters where artists mostly painters don't want to exhibit with my 'woodart' which they consider more craft than art. Don't painters also have to master technique to achieve their artistic goals. To me art in something which is expresses a personal vision and comes from within showing good technique but not hamstrung by certain rules or mindsets.

Please forgive me if this is old hat but I have been living in Germany for the past 16 years.

Regards,

Robert Lane

Robert,
I have taught art for 34 years and I know the drill. I have submitted work ( bowls) to galleries,shows and exhibitions to find that they are not considered art as much as paintings. Time, creativity, materials, or quality does not matter.
Let me put
it this way: those who price their work cheaply to sell do themselves a great disservice. People think that ,let's say a fifty dollar bowl, is of that value. No matter how good it is. Now let's say you have a $300 bowl-now we have a piece of art. If you value it you will pay for it.
I want people to cherish my work for I know it is worth it so I put an artistic price on it. Don't sell yourself short and others won't either. Gary
That is a crude way of putting it but think about it- if you value it, you will pay more for it.

 

[john lucas]

I went through the same thing many years ago with Photography. It wasn't allowed in the "Art" shows (meaning paintings) and it wasn't allowed in the "Craft shows". Well it did eventually get into the craft shows but still isn't allowed in many Art shows which if it isn't painted it's not allowed. Fortunately for many his has worked it's way up to fine art in some circles. I think wood turning is there to some extent as well.
I took a piece of my work to the office one day and someone said "what do you use that for". Wa La, I had made a piece of Art, I was there and the money would roll in shortly. Well still waiting for the money but have made many pieces that would fall into the category of What do you use that for. I usually tell them to put it on the wall or shelf, like you would a painting.

 

[Gary Chapman]

John,'
I love doing pieces with voids and bark inclusions and just holes. I had one on display and a man asked me why. Why what I said. He said" you can't eat out of it". I told him if I had to explain it to you, it would not matter.
If you must explain all of your work ,you are showing it to the wrong crowd. My painter friends at my gallery have accepted my work very well especially since I bring in more income for the gallery than they do. The joke is on them. Gary

 

[Sergio Villa]

The consensus here seems, if I understood well, that price and or intention of the creator is what distinguish craft from art. We must put thing in perspective. Intention and price count nothing, zero.
If this were the case I could be better than Michelangelo having lots of good artistic intentions...

What count is the perception that people, looking at a piece, get from it. Art is something that moves the emotions of the observer, not of the creator or at least non necessarily. Art can be a full symphony but can be also the association of few notes. Three notes and one can easily recognize Verdi, or Bach, or Mozart or Beethoven for the emotions and strength that just those few notes evoke. Many notes and one do not distinguish one from the other in a pool of mediocre composers, all I'm sure were convinced to make art. No emotions, just easy listening here.

Price is obviously a ridiculous way to classify art otherwise Modigliani would have been the last of the atists and instead is one of the greatest. Idem for Van Gogh and many others.

When is that a wooden bowl or other turned object moves the deep emotions of an observer? I do not know. For real emotions I go to painting or music or poetry. For beautiful objects? I can look among turned pieces of wood.

 

[Mark Hepburn]

I went through the same thing many years ago with Photography. It wasn't allowed in the "Art" shows (meaning paintings) and it wasn't allowed in the "Craft shows". Well it did eventually get into the craft shows but still isn't allowed in many Art shows which if it isn't painted it's not allowed. Fortunately for many his has worked it's way up to fine art in some circles. I think wood turning is there to some extent as well.
I took a piece of my work to the office one day and someone said "what do you use that for". Wa La, I had made a piece of Art, I was there and the money would roll in shortly. Well still waiting for the money but have made many pieces that would fall into the category of What do you use that for. I usually tell them to put it on the wall or shelf, like you would a painting.

John,

Photography - FINALLY - has taken its rightful place as a respected and valued medium. Long overdue. The New Orleans Museum of Art by the way has an extensive collection of photographic art - some 8,000 pieces from a multitude of artists. But back to the discussion...

Maybe part of this whole thing is that it isn't considered art because it lacks merit (photography, turning, etc), but because it is hard for people to understand the amount of technique, discipline, practice, inspiration and so on to achieve it. Everyone knows (they think) just how hard it is to be a good painter in any medium. They painted as kids and maybe in high school and know it's hard. People don't understand really what is involved in making a great photo and so they can't appreciate the difficulty, or they now see the point and shoot camera and think well, anyone can do that.

The fact that they are wrong is irrelevant (and I KNOW how hard it can be just to light a bowl to post on this site - a small task to most I would imagine, and certainly an instinctual activity for you).

Likewise with wood, who besides a turner can really appreciate how hard it can be just to not blow a hole in a thin form, or to not have tooling marks on their work (it sure is a mystery to me ). And maybe their daddy was a finish carpenter so woodwork is woodwork and so on.

So for some part it seems to me to be a lack of information on the part of the public - the buyers I guess you would say.

I'm into this to create art and to create functional, every day pieces that could be considered art in their own right. I'd say that a Morris chair or a Hepplewhite piece are clearly considered art, and I do believe that turning (good turning) will achieve the same status.

Like any art form or medium, you have genius, the middle ground - the journeymen if you will - and the hacks. Dali actually signed his name to a bunch of blank paper for lithos back in his day and devalued his own work. He was a genius without question with a brush in his hand, but made himself into a hack of sorts.

</rant>

 

[Mark Hepburn]

The consensus here seems, if I understood well, that price and or intention of the creator is what distinguish craft from art. We must put thing in perspective. Intention and price count nothing, zero.
If this were the case I could be better than Michelangelo having lots of good artistic intentions...

What count is the perception that people, looking at a piece, get from it. Art is something that moves the emotions of the observer, not of the creator or at least non necessarily. Art can be a full symphony but can be also the association of few notes. Three notes and one can easily recognize Verdi, or Bach, or Mozart or Beethoven for the emotions and strength that just those few notes evoke. Many notes and one do not distinguish one from the other in a pool of mediocre composers, all I'm sure were convinced to make art. No emotions, just easy listening here.

Price is obviously a ridiculous way to classify art otherwise Modigliani would have been the last of the atists and instead is one of the greatest. Idem for Van Gogh and many others.

When is that a wooden bowl or other turned object moves the deep emotions of an observer? I do not know. For real emotions I go to painting or music or poetry. For beautiful objects? I can look among turned pieces of wood.

Sergio, you are right that price is a ridiculous way to classify art, but it is the medium by which we assign importance to a piece of work. Hence, a van Gogh or Picasso or Vermeer will sell for millions.

One other point to consider is rarity. There was one James Whistler and only one copy of the famous painting of his mother (actually "Arrangement in Grey and Black No.1"). There is, I think a perception of abundance in photography or turning that also devalues it in peoples' minds. They don't really understand how to evaluate the quality of a turned work or a deeply moving photo.

Personally, I agree with you about evoking emotion. Music can envelope you and a painting can captivate. I take the position that a beautifully turned piece of fine wood, in the right hands can evoke a similar response. Likewise a photo.

Poetry? meh....

(just kidding).

 

[James E Gaydos]

I was told some years ago, that I could never be considered as a real artist, because I never went to art school. This person was a painter, who went to art school for 4 years, Oh did I mention his paintings were not very good. But how would I know a good painting, from a bad one. I never went to art school. Call yourself what you want, and enjoy what you do.
Jim
Happy Turning

 

[Sergio Villa]

Sergio, you are right that price is a ridiculous way to classify art, but it is the medium by which we assign importance to a piece of work. Hence, a van Gogh or Picasso or Vermeer will sell for millions.

One other point to consider is rarity. There was one James Whistler and only one copy of the famous painting of his mother (actually "Arrangement in Grey and Black No.1"). There is, I think a perception of abundance in photography or turning that also devalues it in peoples' minds. They don't really understand how to evaluate the quality of a turned work or a deeply moving photo.

Personally, I agree with you about evoking emotion. Music can envelope you and a painting can captivate. I take the position that a beautifully turned piece of fine wood, in the right hands can evoke a similar response. Likewise a photo.

Poetry? meh....

(just kidding).

During their lives many of those painters starved to death. Now they sell for millions but so did the "scream" a mediocre painting the evokes a strong but simple emotion and was pushed by the dealers and other middle men. My opinion of course.
Even Mozart did not die rich, actually in misery.
The great majority of woodturners are amateurs other teach just to survive. Arturo Benedetti Michelangeli, in my opinion the greatest piano soloist practiced 10 hours a day every day. I had the fortune to see many times during rehearsals. One day without playing and it was difficult to reach the previous level, he said.
Let us not confuse beauty with art. Art is emotions, imposed to you by the piece. Leonardo (I believe) once said that for him painting was just taking the emotions out of the subject. Guess were those emotions go?
Let also not forget that education and training are necessary to really appreciate and be open to the emotions created by the art. I'm sure many people in front of the Parthenon will say beautiful and go. Other will spend hours in awe.

 

[Charlie Knighton]

when you win $500 and a ribbon in a mixed media show........it feels good

 

[Mark Hepburn]

During their lives many of those painters starved to death. Now they sell for millions but so did the "scream" a mediocre painting the evokes a strong but simple emotion and was pushed by the dealers and other middle men. My opinion of course.
Even Mozart did not die rich, actually in misery.
The great majority of woodturners are amateurs other teach just to survive. Arturo Benedetti Michelangeli, in my opinion the greatest piano soloist practiced 10 hours a day every day. I had the fortune to see many times during rehearsals. One day without playing and it was difficult to reach the previous level, he said.
Let us not confuse beauty with art. Art is emotions, imposed to you by the piece. Leonardo (I believe) once said that for him painting was just taking the emotions out of the subject. Guess were those emotions go?
Let also not forget that education and training are necessary to really appreciate and be open to the emotions created by the art. I'm sure many people in front of the Parthenon will say beautiful and go. Other will spend hours in awe.

Totally agree with you regarding Michelangeli (Bach cantatas anyone?) But still, props to Horowitz and Serkin for me

I don't know that art has to be beautiful. Look at Picasso's Guernica, or as you said Munch. On the other hand I don't know that must provoke emotion to be art. I would point to Escher. Intriguing, mystifying and some might say nothing more than illustrating. But I don't think one could point to a work of his and "feel". But for me it is art of some substance.

And your point is well taken; many of today's iconic talents lived in poverty and without recognition. By the way, this is a very enjoyable and pleasant thread. I hope others join in. And apologies if I have hijacked it.

 

[Hu Lowery]

answered the question for myself!

I answered the question for myself.

What I turned today was neither art nor craft, it was cuisine!

Beware of six month old puppies.

Hu

 

[Mark Hepburn]

I answered the question for myself.

What I turned today was neither art nor craft, it was cuisine!

Beware of six month old puppies.

Hu

Hey Hu. That puppy will soon be running the show!

 

[Gerald Lawrence]

I think the illustration of Warhol is an accurate picture in our lifetimes of the definition of ART. There is no definition because it continues to change and the hack of today is the visionary artist of tomorrow. So I say if you enjoy it, If you make a living with it , if at least some others like it therefore: it may be art.
As has been pointed out lets see the accomplished painter turn a fine bowl. I am retired and there the question of selling my meager work is not a part of the equation, however I can see the clamor of others to be accepted as art.
Again if you like it and consider it a beautiful creation that is the important part of the whole question.

 

[JeffSmith]

The timber framer and the sculptor use similar tools - chisels and hammers - in their work. Both create objects that, when crafted artfully, will stand the test of time. While the timber framers barn may be art to another who shares his craft, the sculptor's work is art to many more. His craft, good or bad, becomes secondary to his message; even if that message is only "look at the beauty I found inside this piece of stone".

 

[Mark Hepburn]

I think the illustration of Warhol is an accurate picture in our lifetimes of the definition of ART. There is no definition because it continues to change and the hack of today is the visionary artist of tomorrow. So I say if you enjoy it, If you make a living with it , if at least some others like it therefore: it may be art.
As has been pointed out lets see the accomplished painter turn a fine bowl. I am retired and there the question of selling my meager work is not a part of the equation, however I can see the clamor of others to be accepted as art.
Again if you like it and consider it a beautiful creation that is the important part of the whole question.

Hi Gerald. I think your point is well made. A hack in his time becomes visionary. The definition does change and will continue to. Who would have imagined the LED as part of a fixed art installation, or art originating entirely within a computer ?

As for me, I can't paint anymore and sure can't turn a fine bowl. Bit I can appreciate both and as you say, that is an important part of the equation.

 

[Mark Hepburn]

The timber framer and the sculptor use similar tools - chisels and hammers - in their work. Both create objects that, when crafted artfully, will stand the test of time. While the timber framers barn may be art to another who shares his craft, the sculptor's work is art to many more. His craft, good or bad, becomes secondary to his message; even if that message is only "look at the beauty I found inside this piece of stone".

Jeff, that's a really interesting way to frame the issue (pardon the pun). So it comes back to both the intent of the creator and the viewpoint of the observer.

 

[JeffSmith]

Jeff, that's a really interesting way to frame the issue (pardon the pun). So it comes back to both the intent of the creator and the viewpoint of the observer.

Isn't that always true? Way back when I was in school, learning the crafts that I hoped to be able to turn into art someday, (design, photography and writing) art was not what we were learning, but what we aspired to. I was content to learn the rudiments of craft that would need to be nurtured and fed to allow the creation of art.
40 years along now, the craft is still developing, the art is as elusive as ever. As a commercial artist I often produce 'art for the sake of commerce'. It seldom rises to the level of art.
Since taking up turning, I've approached it the same way: I'm content to learn the craft, art may someday result, but that's more by happy accident than design.
Yet there are those who consider what I do art. Just last weekend a knowledgeable visitor to our home complemented me on my work and a discussion arose - she considered it art.
It is always in the eye of the beholder...

Jeff

 

[Mark Hepburn]

Well said Jeff. I certainly can't add to that other than to say I agree

 

[hockenbery]

Art is defined by the maker. The art world is defined by collectors and critics.

There is an old saying that has been mention in the forum before:
A laborer works with hands
A craftsman works with hands and head
The artist works with hands, head, and heart

I think a lot of stumble through those phases when we begin turning.
When we don't know what we are doing we are just using the hand
When we begin to get a basic understanding of of tool control, form and surface we are using our head
when we start making things we envision we have involved the heart.

 

[Odie]

I've been following this thread with great interest. There have been a lot of great opinions and discussion here.....

Whoever said "art is in the eye of the beholder", is just as right when those words were first spoken, as they are now. Art is whatever anyone wants to define it as, and for each individual, whatever they think is art, and they believe it is true.......IS true! Not only is art defined by the maker, but the observer plays a role in the definition, as well. All it takes is one maker, and one observer, to make a connection that is compounded by agreement. However.....agreement, in and of itself, isn't that which defines art......it is defined by opinion......and, only one opinion is necessary. Ten million opinions in agreement, just means you don't have to defend your opinion, but only one opinion of what art is, is all that is necessary for anything to be art.

I am one who believes my turnings are art. I'm well aware that some will agree, and some will disagree. It only matters to those who agree.

Mark......your turnings ARE art, in my opinion. This is mainly because the investment you make from the heart is evident. Sales have nothing to do with it......the heart is the third ingredient to Al's definition.......which I agree with.

I'll add one other ingredient.......motivation. If the motivation is to make money, then "the heart of an artist" can't replace it. I've always rolled my eyes a bit when I hear other turners talk about what they need to make for hour of their time. This will only be a barrier to making art.....and the artistically astute observer can definitely tell the difference. Do your best every single time, take your time, and the layers will eventually peel away to reveal what the real satisfaction is.......producing what the maker can call art, and thus earning belief in oneself through merit.

ooc

 

[JeffSmith]

Art is defined by the maker. The art world is defined by collectors and critics.

Al: There are, then, as many definitions of art as there are makers. A quick search on the web will support that theory - there are pages of links to definitions of art. In the case of the visitor to our home, she, the collector, was taking home a piece of art. I, on the other hand, the maker, was fully content to have sent her home with a well crafted sample of my work.
In my view, the artist attempts to use his craft to convey an idea or emotion to the viewer - seeking a response - even if it is only an appreciation of the beauty of the object itself.
In my opinion, training the hand and being able to bring into being that which we envision is still an exercise in craft. Being able to use that craft to evoke a response or elicit an emotion is the distinction that allows craft to possibly rise to the level of art.

 

[Mark Hepburn]

I've been following this thread with great interest. There have been a lot of great opinions and discussion here.....

Whoever said "art is in the eye of the beholder", is just as right when those words were first spoken, as they are now. Art is whatever anyone wants to define it as, and for each individual, whatever they think is art, and they believe it is true.......IS true! Not only is art defined by the maker, but the observer plays a role in the definition, as well. All it takes is one maker, and one observer, to make a connection that is compounded by agreement. However.....agreement, in and of itself, isn't that which defines art......it is defined by opinion......and, only one opinion is necessary to make anything art. Ten million opinions in agreement, just means you don't have to defend your opinion, but only one opinion of what art is, is all that is necessary for anything to be art.

I am one who believes my turnings are art. I'm well aware that some will agree, and some will disagree. It only matters to those who agree.

Mark......your turnings ARE art, in my opinion. This is mainly because the investment you make from the heart is evident. Sales have nothing to do with it......the heart is the third ingredient to Al's definition.......which I agree with.

I'll add one other ingredient.......motivation. If the motivation is to make money, then "the heart of an artist" can't replace it. I've always rolled my eyes a bit when I hear other turners talk about what they need to make for hour of their time. This will only be a barrier to making art.....the observer can tell the difference. Do your best every single time, take your time, and the layers will eventually peel away to reveal what the real satisfaction is.......producing what the maker can call art, and thus believing in oneself through deserved merit.

ooc

Odie, thank you for that. I consider that quite a compliment and appreciate it. For me it is all about the creative process, knowing that I have to develop the skills that will free me to bring an idea to life.

Jeff also has said it very well (in my opinion):

In my opinion, training the hand and being able to bring into being that which we envision is still an exercise in craft. Being able to use that craft to evoke a response or elicit an emotion is the distinction that allows craft to possibly rise to the level of art.

As has Al:

I think a lot of stumble through those phases when we begin turning.
When we don't know what we are doing we are just using the hand
When we begin to get a basic understanding of of tool control, form and surface we are using our head
when we start making things we envision we have involved the heart.

I am blessed to be able to pursue my passion for the art of turning solely for myself. But I confess that I want others to think well of my work and maybe one day to be moved by it.

 

[Odie]

I have a number of shapes and styles that I've developed.....I suppose this is my "signature" style. Lately, I've been concentrating on doing some of these same shapes over, and over, and over again. Luckily, to those who see my bowls, they only see one example.....and not hundreds of them with the exact same theme. For me, it can be boring, but to them......it can be a first exposure to this signature shape. My intention is to develop myself to be the best that I can be, by repeatedly doing only what shapes I've chosen to do. It's sort of like when a painter chooses to do seascapes, when painters in general are doing many other subjects. It's a specialization that is focused on a quest for excellence through repetition.....instead of trying to do everything.

In a way, I'm losing some of the artist's satisfaction, because of the repetition, even though each and every turning has the same goal......to do it the very best I can do from an artistic, and technical, or craftsman's point of view. I do have to focus on the craft part for these repeating themes in my work, and it's not as satisfying as when I explore new shapes. Luckily, I'm forced to explore new shapes quite often......simply because Mother Nature throws in things like cracks, voids, bark inclusions, minor checking, knots, worm holes, discoloration, deterioration/rot, stress cracks, unusual growths, sand, dirt, rocks, nails, and all kinds of other foreign objects.......not to mention the beautiful flowing and artistic grain patterns to the many different species, and individual pieces of wood on this earth!

There I go, rambling again.......darn it......I'm going out to the shop!

ooc

 

[Gerald Lawrence]

repetition

I have a number of shapes and styles that I've developed.....I suppose this is my "signature" style. Lately, I've been concentrating on doing some of these same shapes over, and over, and over again. Luckily, to those who see my bowls, they only see one example.....and not hundreds of them with the exact same theme. For me, it can be boring, but to them......it can be a first exposure to this signature shape. My intention is to develop myself to be the best that I can be, by repeatedly doing only what shapes I've chosen to do. It's sort of like when a painter chooses to do seascapes, when painters in general are doing many other subjects. It's a specialization that is focused on a quest for excellence through repetition.....instead of trying to do everything.

In a way, I'm losing some of the artist's satisfaction, because of the repetition, even though each and every turning has the same goal......to do it the very best I can do from an artistic, and technical, or craftsman's point of view. I do have to focus on the craft part for these repeating themes in my work, and it's not as satisfying as when I explore new shapes. Luckily, I'm forced to explore new shapes quite often......simply because Mother Nature throws in things like cracks, voids, bark inclusions, minor checking, knots, worm holes, discoloration, deterioration/rot, stress cracks, unusual growths, sand, dirt, rocks, nails, and all kinds of other foreign objects.......not to mention the beautiful flowing and artistic grain patterns to the many different species, and individual pieces of wood on this earth!

There I go, rambling again.......darn it......I'm going out to the shop!

ooc

Everyone develops a style and things they prefer to turn. I get bored with the same thing even tho I do get better and better with the repetition. I did about 30 of the same thing each year for several years before retirement, as Christmas gifts. I still do this each year however it is just not as many since not doing for coworkers. Always a relief to get through.
I do get bored doing the same over and over. Also I believe that doing different things gives a better artists eye (not that mine has made it there) than repetition. I do not sell my work and I know that the commercial turners look for their nitch for what will sell and repeat it. To me I try to look at the blank and decide what would come out of it the best. Not all pieces are like this and sometime go in with a plan.
Which bring up a thought. This week I spoke to a machinist and he told me: "you fellas that work in wood make a mistake and you have to repurpose the item . If I make a mistake I can fix it" . Of coarse we call it design opportunity or artistic license.
Just some thoughts to keep the thread going, because we are all different.

 

[Odie]

Everyone develops a style and things they prefer to turn. I get bored with the same thing even tho I do get better and better with the repetition. I did about 30 of the same thing each year for several years before retirement, as Christmas gifts. I still do this each year however it is just not as many since not doing for coworkers. Always a relief to get through.
I do get bored doing the same over and over. Also I believe that doing different things gives a better artists eye (not that mine has made it there) than repetition. I do not sell my work and I know that the commercial turners look for their nitch for what will sell and repeat it. To me I try to look at the blank and decide what would come out of it the best. Not all pieces are like this and sometime go in with a plan.
Which bring up a thought. This week I spoke to a machinist and he told me: "you fellas that work in wood make a mistake and you have to repurpose the item . If I make a mistake I can fix it" . Of coarse we call it design opportunity or artistic license.
Just some thoughts to keep the thread going, because we are all different.

Hi Gerald.......

Ah yes, there is that boredom thing that we have to deal with when repeating a shape over and over!

I don't think it can be avoided.....that is, if the thought that repetition really does improve, or refine the quality of the end result. I've also found that the techniques used for one particular shape, may not work for all species, or grain patterns of wood, so even though there is repetition of final shape, the methods used to arrive at that shape aren't necessarily universal......and, all of the different possible ways to do it need to be known like the back of your hand, if the quality of the end result is expected to be the same.

Yes, you are absolutely right about the refinement of the "artist's eye" not being cultivated with repetition. This is what, if I'm assuming the meaning of your words correctly, is the cause of your boredom, and mine as well. From my point of view, this is a necessary step in the total journey, not just what level of satisfaction one can get out of the turning of the moment. I'll tell you this, though.......even though the shape might be something I've done many times before, and I'm no longer getting much artistic inspiration from repeatedly doing the same general shape, the end user will see the 100th bowl I make with the same regard to artistic creativity as I would get with a first effort.....in other words, I won't get the same thrill, but the buyer will.

It's very common to have certain shapes a highly regarded turner is known for. Repeatedly doing the same things isn't a new concept......off the top of my head, I think Bob Stocksdale and David Ellsworth among many others. It's just something we all have to do......if becoming the best at what we do is part of our personal goal.

Design opportunity, or artistic license......it's important to all of us. I tried to address this by mentioning that Mother Nature makes each and every piece of wood different in some unique way. Because of that, many turnings necessarily require artistic license......and because this happens quite often, I have to roll with what she throws my way. I can't change Mother Nature, so my only option is to work within the boundaries she gives me!

ooc

 

[John Tisdale]

Value of Artwork Rooted in Assumptions

"The value of an artwork is rooted in assumptions about the human performance underlying its creation" – Denis Dutton

"He who works with his hands is a laborer, he who works with his hands and his head is a craftsman, he who works with his hands, his head and his heart is an artist" - St Francis of Assisi

While I'd never argue with St. Francis, I think it is Dutton that better defines the question at hand. To be "valued", there must be appreciation. A wood bowl on a table is one thing. A wood bowl in the hands of the "maker" who is describing why he cut the bowl from the crotch, how he seeks chatoyance, the effort and soul required, is a much greater thing. A turning standing on its own that pleases the senses can be sublime.

Are we "artists" and is our work "art", I guess that depends on the definer. I say don't worry about it. To corrupt Thoreau: If you find you belong to the race of pygmies, don't despair - just be the biggest pygmy you can".

 

[Mark Hepburn]

"The value of an artwork is rooted in assumptions about the human performance underlying its creation" – Denis Dutton

"He who works with his hands is a laborer, he who works with his hands and his head is a craftsman, he who works with his hands, his head and his heart is an artist" - St Francis of Assisi

While I'd never argue with St. Francis, I think it is Dutton that better defines the question at hand. To be "valued", there must be appreciation. A wood bowl on a table is one thing. A wood bowl in the hands of the "maker" who is describing why he cut the bowl from the crotch, how he seeks chatoyance, the effort and soul required, is a much greater thing. A turning standing on its own that pleases the senses can be sublime.

Are we "artists" and is our work "art", I guess that depends on the definer. I say don't worry about it. To corrupt Thoreau: If you find you belong to the race of pygmies, don't despair - just be the biggest pygmy you can".

Eloquently put, John. I agree in particular with your last points in that it depends upon the definer.

I define who I am and what is the true nature of my work. If the rest of the world appreciates or agrees with me then it may accept my work on my terms. It may establish a value for it and that will probably be monetary, because that is the blunt tool societies most often use to indicate approval or acceptance.

Or it may not. But as you say, dont worry about it. I think part of this is the same thing that hs plagued artists and artisans throughout time. We seek validation, and look for external cues that we can reconcile to our inner voice. And it may not happen but that doesn't mean we aren't "creating art".

 

[Robert Lane]

I would just like to thank everyone who have contributed to the discussion. It has given me some food for thought but as said seems to be 'muddy water'

Best, Robert

 

[Mark Mandell]

Hi Robert,

I've stayed out of many of these discussions because I've seen a sort of sub-silentio theme run through most of them that, on some basis, "Art" is "better" than "Craft" hence artists are somehow more worthwhile people than crafts people. There is a prejudicial cache revealed and attached to the words and I've seen, time and again, people struggling to arrive at definitions that include what they do in the Art category as a means of improving their own self-image and respect. As a classically trained sculptor, I never consider whether I make art; I do sculpture. Whether or not what I make is considered art is for someone else to decide for themselves. I decline to be held to someone else's concept of art is or should be, I leave the pigeon holes to the art historians (they trained for that), and I don't really care if anyone wants to put a capitol A on the word. Of course gallery owners do, as do collectors and art investors, but their standards are money-driven.

In my view, art and craft are two sides of the same coin; each needs the other and whether an object falls in one or the other is a mere flip of that coin.

m

 

[Owen Lowe]

Whether or not what I make is considered art is for someone else to decide for themselves.

In my view, art and craft are two sides of the same coin; each needs the other and whether an object falls in one or the other is a mere flip of that coin.

m

Words to turn by. Well said, Mark.

 

[Mark Hepburn]

Mark,

I agree with Owen. You certainly put it more succinctly than I was able to with all my ramblings.

 

[Mark Mandell]

Mark,

I agree with Owen. You certainly put it more succinctly than I was able to with all my ramblings.

Ha Ha. That's what a couple of art degrees will do for you! My "art-speak" has, however, gotten very rusty after 30+ years practicing law and abiding by my Old Man's lesson to "Keep it simple. That judge you're talking to may be an idiot."