I was inspired to return to my writing for this blog by a DVD that I checked out from my local library. This DVD presented the first three episodes of the Peabody award winning series “Craft in America” from PBS (http://video.pbs.org/program/1235387271).

I believe it is wonderful that artists are being recognized for their work. So many people contribute to the beauty of our everyday world and need to be thanked for their efforts. By showing how these men and women incorporate craft into their artwork to express themselves, these artists directly respond to my wish to have craft acknowledged as an integral part of the art world.

I hope that this new year will inspire artists and crafters to express themselves in ways that make them happy.

Somewhere along the way, this idea of being able to weave or even embroider an image came to be associated with women and craft rather than art work. During the late 19th Century we saw the rise of the Arts and Crafts movement which again put a premium on decorative textiles. Early in the 20th Century, much of this handmade work fell out of favor for cheap mass produced home furnishing and textiles. And today we see a resurgence of textile work being classed as art.

Is it possible to say that the determining line between what is art and what is craft is then subjective?

      DIY, Art, Craft and Design. New York: Princeton Architectural  

      Press, 2008.

                I’ve been looking forward to reading Handmade Nation for months now. It finally came in the mail the very afternoon I had posted that it was never going to arrive. Since then, I’ve stolen little moments here and there to look at this book. My assessment is that this is a visually interesting book. It is sort of like the kind of book you keep on hand in your bedroom or living room so that you can pick it up in those odd free moments when you aren’t focused on doing anything else. Or when you want to look at some cool pictures for inspiration on your next project.

                This book contains some brief essays on how the Indi Craft movement came to be so popular today. I thought a few of them were really well written. I could have done without a website by website description of how crafters came to connect and sell goods over the internet. That may just be because I am not focused on selling my own artwork at this time.

So what is it that this book has to say? Basically, many crafters see themselves as different from mainstream artists. They see fine art as part of a consumerist culture and indie arts and crafts as being a statement against consumerism. This seems slightly odd to me if there are a lot of sales going on over the internet but who am I to judge? Maybe it is because these artists create without the use of sweatshop or major corporate practices. These are individuals selling their handmade work to other individuals. In a way, it is appealing to think about creating a personal connection between me and the person who is making things for me. I like the unique aspects of handmade products as long as they have as much quality as creativity built into the way they are made.

The philosophy given in this book resonates with my own beliefs. If I had the time, I would make all of my own clothes. But I don’t have that much free time right now. I want to be able to express myself through art and homemade fabrics. I have all kinds of ideas for ways to hand dye fabric and then turn the fabric into clothing items.

In my current art pieces, I am actually examining the consumer culture that has risen out of the latest craft movement. Think about how much money people spend on making scrapbooks. It is not so much the cost of pictures or paper but all the extras that are sold to people so that they too can make unique one of a kind visions of their loved ones. These can then be shared with other people. I am ashamed to think about how much money I alone have spent in the last year on scrapbooking doodads and frou-frous and what -nots.

On the whole, this was an interesting book although I haven’t yet read all of the individual artist bios. But since it is a snowy night tonight, maybe I will curl up on my sofa and look at all the pictures again.  What this book does not do is help resolve the debate between what is art and what is craft. In some ways I think this book helps to promote the division between the two. Indie crafts want to be separate from fine art. I think this is sad when the creative spirit should be recognized and encouraged in any form it takes. We all have something to say to each. It is just that sometimes we have different ways of communicating what we want to say.

Instead I want to offer anyone interested in knowing more about fiber arts or arts and crafts a few places to visit on the web.  I found this link to an Australian publication that is devoted to all arts and crafts. The beauty of Craft Arts International is that visitors to the site may view articles in full to see work and read about different artists.

The website Magnolia Editions offers visitors information about the exciting work that is being done through artist collaborations and new technologies. Last year I was able to view the Magnolia Tapestry Project installation at the Fort Collins Museum of Contemporary Art and was amazed at the technique of transferring prints/paintings into woven panels. We don’t always think about the ways in which technology, especially computer technology can further artwork beyond the boundaries of graphic arts. These artists are truly rich in their expression using both technology and tactile objects. The Galleries in this site are very interesting to peruse.

Finally, I want to offer a shout of praise for one of my former classmates in fiber arts, Wendy Crutchfield. Portions of her work from her Master’s of Fine Arts collection at Colorado State University are highlighted in the latest edition of FiberArts. I have seen much of Wendy’s  work and believe that she is an inspiring influence on my attitude towards fibers. She is creative, evocative and sophisticated in her work. Unfortunately for me, I am nowhere near her level of expertise in the use of direct application dyes.

 This book describes how rich women with the free time were trained in making embroidered works of art. This needlework was seen by the women as work meant to be displayed in their homes for others to take notice of their skill. In some cases, the person doing the needlework drafted the image or commissioned an artist to draft the image for them. This also suggests that each work of embroidery was unique in content. Does this not indicate a conscious choice and artistic intent making these pieces works of art? Or do we simply assume that a decorative piece made by a woman contains less aesthetic value than a painting, sculpture, etc crafted by a man? Does it have more to do with the final product or assumptions about gendered work? My thoughts are that because on average female work of any kind is less valued than male work, there is a connection to female produced artwork. Our culture continues to promote the idea that images made by women are not as valuable as images made by men.

What are the influences from our modern culture that may relate to how we view historical needle works from the past? I think that because, in part, modern needlework is closely related to commercialized products we value them less today. For example, if I were to purchase a needlepoint kit at my local craft store and follow the directions exactly, I would not be making a work of art. But, if I were to purchase canvas, thread/yarn and create my own image that I transferred onto the canvas, I am making a work of art. What if I were to purchase the kit but change the color of thread to be different from what was provided in the kit? If I did this on purpose, would this be art since I am making a statement about the original design through my changes? This idea becomes complicated when I think about the formal aesthetic ideal that art is supposed to interact or move the viewer of art. So what if I make a needlepoint pillow with a picture of flowers for my couch? Is this just as artistic as an embroidered image of Rosie the Riveter being forced out of the factory after WWII? How much impact does purpose have on the audiences’ reception of a work of art and craft?

I realize now that I have brought up a number of questions for this week without giving many answers. I think this is important to encourage readers to think about how they would answer these questions. I already have my own beliefs about art. That doesn’t mean that I assume my beliefs to be the only valid ones for the art world. For me, it is the idea, image, content and intent that combine to imbue a piece as a work of art no matter what the media used to create it.

Why do I consider this to be the early stages of a work or art instead of an interesting use of a repeated pattern? My reason lies in the deliberate choices that I’ve made intended to create contrasting impressions to my audience (that is, anyone interested enough in looking at my work when it is finished). First of all, I deliberately picked out rough textured cotton that has weight to it. This combined with the somber color contrast with the images from the two stamps that I have chosen to use. These images would normally suggest being paired with light and smooth fabrics and bright colors. They are suggestive of something cheerful. Instead, I want them to make the audience ask why I am using these images to create a monochromatic and heavy design.

In the end, these “prints” will be used in combination with other elements in a series of works aimed at questioning our increasingly commercialized culture. I will have more to say about this later when I have a finished piece to present. For now I think it is important to understand that pattern is part of the whole concept that I am aiming for in trying to explore what makes a design commercial or gives it mass production appeal. My focus currently is how we negotiate the surface presentation of ourselves versus what we truly experience, think, and feel. What do we chose to hide about ourselves? Why do we spend so much effort on only presenting the best possible image of ourselves? In effect, I want to use craft techniques that involve dyed, inked and transferred images on fabric to communicate these questions others. This is the element that brings my work into the realm of art and takes it beyond the display of a mastery of a craft associated skill. Another way of saying this is that I want people to look at my work and see more than just a pretty arrangement of images on fabric.

So, what is pattern? For me, it goes beyond a single repeated design. Pattern in many cases, creates a foundation for an entire piece that I am working on.In the pictures I have posted here I show first a failure to follow a coherent pattern. The silkscreen image is too haphazard in its placement to convey a coherent theme. Thus, as it stands, this work has no meaning. At some point in time, I will figure what needs to be added (most likely some kind of embellishment) that will work with the piece to create a unified image. I just have to figure out what to do first. Until then, this is merely an example of a learned skill but not an artistic expression. In a way this piece shows how the application of craft does not always create a work art.

The second and third pictures show two different uses of repetition to convey meaning. Pattern and meaning is established in my batiks through using the same semi-circle throughout the space. What keeps this from being boring is the use of different colors for contrast. The cloth with the almost checked border shows one of my favorite dye techniques. The suggestion of a regular pattern fools the eye into thinking that all of the squares are uniform and even in size and placement. Close up, breaks and variations in the size of the squares are easy to see. I like this technique because it exemplifies how the mind tries to establish uniformity even when it is not there.

Pattern is not the only concept involved in creating art. Some art does work without the use of any pattern at all. For my purposes, though, I like having the structure and framework provided by a pattern base. Once a pattern is established, I can play with it and push the boundaries. Can I get away with breaking free from a pattern for effect or does the image need the foundation to work? The answer is different for what I want each piece to say. In many cases it starts with establishing a framework and then working to break out from the frame.

Another important element of pattern is that I try to come up with images, designs and uses of pattern that are unique. Even if I want to make something that is reminiscent of someone else’s work, I try to change the image to make it my own. Otherwise, I am just copying someone else’s work. I could do that if I wanted to show off the achievement of a skill. At the same time, I cannot call it my own artistic idea or work if I directly copy someone else’s idea.

In a way, this viewpoint of art may help to explain why there still remains a division between the perceived value of art and craft. In other words, our past perceptions regarding the value of art and craft determines our present valuations of the same.

I thought that it was about time to introduce my audience to an example of my own artwork that blurs the lines between formal art and craft. This is a grouping of thermal neck wraps (think spa item) that I handmade. I created a unique surface design for each piece using fiber reactive dyes and resist techniques. I am proud of these pieces because they do have a functional purpose while they also function as works of art. 

Check out this poem that I found recently by Claes Oldenburg. I thought this was an appropriate contrast to the aesthetic theory text I discussed for this week.

Coming up next week: A look at pattern and its uses.

                                     Xenobia Bailey, Surface Design (Summer 2009)

The question came up in a comment to my most recent post about where to draw the line between what is art and what is craft. I want to respond to this by saying that I do and I don’t know. My purpose in writing this blog is to try to find out why there are no clear cut answers about what is art and craft. I think that there are definitions of both terms based on perceived and intrinsic value of a work. [I tend to try to exclude from this discussion any attempts at  being obtuse and discussing paper, paste and glitter projects that very young children might make before they understand the idea of what is art.]

I believe that there is a remaining tension between activities that are considered to be domestic “arts” and fine art. The one is meant to be confined to the family and the home thus it’s communal value was deemed to be much less than it’s sentimental or emotional value.  My understanding of this is that to a degree we pass off the skilled work produced in the home for use in the home that does not intend to communicate to anyone as a simple exercise of craft with no art.  But this idea becomes problematic when others express the opinion that craft is a submerged yet relevant form of art.  According to the head of graduate studies at the Victoria and Albert Museum, Glenn Adamson, “craft is easily rendered the silent supplement to other disciplines.”

I will say in reference to the posted comment by Cierra that yes, it may take some skill to transfer an image onto a sweatshirt but this is not necessarily art.  When does it become art?  For me it happens when the person transferring the image wants to do more than create interesting or cute clothes for his/her family.  When the image contains a thought, feeling, statement that is being communicated between the creator and viewer, I start to see a sense of the intersection between art and craft. For a visual example of this, check out Mark Newport’s latest installation at the Smithsonian American Art Museum’s Renwick Gallery.   Newport takes a skill like knitting to communicate ideas about masculinity and perceptions of masculinity. In this instance and individual is using a craft to push at the boundaries of our understanding of gender and gender roles that persist in our society. In my own experience, I have crafted objects such as scarves that are really just the copy of a commercial pattern where I picked the colors. I don’t consider these to be works of art. At the same time, I have created scarves using hand woven fabrics or surface designs applies to commercial fabrics that were meant to initiate a dialogue with others who may have seen me wearing that scarf. Is art then based on an intentional application of a craft? This tends to be where I fall into my understanding of the debate but there are so many grey areas that I don’t want to be pinned down by absolutes. What happens if I buy a commercial paint by number kit but purposefully choose to paint outside the given lines or use colors that do not match the ones indicated? Is this an artistic statement about modern remix culture or a throwback to ideas generated by pop art? Is this even art?  I don’t know.

What do I base this on? My own belief is that art is a form of craft. That is, it takes skill, practice/experience, knowledge, and thinking processes to produce a work of art.  If the mind is not creatively engaged in the production of a work of art, how do we expect to derive meaning from the work?  Yes, art does have meaning that the artist is attempting to convey to an audience.  Without that exchange between artist and audience there is little purpose to making art public. It is the application of a craft or skill that allows an artist to engage in that dialogue between creator/consumer.  For example, many people view oil paintings as fine art if the artist is able to create an image that the audience can respond to when looking at the canvas. At some time, the artist had to learn, through being taught or trial and error, how to use oil paints on canvas. In the same way, when I dye fabric, I have to know ahead of time what dye process I want to use to apply an image/effect onto the fiber. It is in this way that I employ craft/knowledge to communicate what it is that I want to say artistically through my work. It is the direct use of a skill or craft that allows an artist to create. In my mind then, the terms art and craft are so interrelated that we can’t truly have one without the other.