Blenheim Orange Loc: Michigan

I remember vividly an experience many years ago that bears on this question. An musician, an old-timer, a fiddle player I much admired, was being interviewed for a documentary. He was asked how he got started. He said that when he was about 13 he heard this old fiddle player at a local dance, and he kept sneaking back every Saturday night and standing near an open window to listen, often for hours, when he should have been home in bed. There was a long pause, and the musician stared down lost in thought. Then he looked up and said something very interesting with a deadly serious look on his face. "It bothered me" he said. Then he went on to say that from then on it was all he thought about. He had to find a fiddle. He soon did find an old one in someone's closet, fixed it up so it was playable, and then spent every spare minute practicing, practicing, practicing.

What did he mean when he said it bothered him? I think he meant that the music somehow grabbed ahold of him, that it haunted him, that it resonated with him on some deep level. Once that happened, he didn't have to discipline himself to practice - quite to the contrary. It took great effort to pull himself away from it to eat, to sleep, to attend school, to go to work, and he often found himself working out fingerings and variations in his mind when we was in class or at the job.

This leads me to believe that we have two broad categories (with much overlap and variation) of practitioners in the general area of creative endeavor - craftspeople and artists. What is the difference? A craftsperson chooses their craft; while an artist is chosen by their art. That is to say, they each experience it differently. The craftsperson owns their work, literally and figuratively, they think of it that way, while the artist experiences being possessed by their work.

What does a person mean when they ask the question "is this art?" about their work? Do they not mean is my work good, is my work (and myself) to be admired, is it superior, is it at "the next level?" But I don't think an artist would ever ask that question - "is this art?" A craftsperson would, however.

Now, I do not mean to say that art is superior to craft, nor that an artist is superior to a craftsperson.

Those are some of my thoughts on the topic.

Mike

lighthouse Loc: No Fixed Abode

Very good thoughts Mike.
It strikes a very strong chord indeed.

Some added thoughts of mine on the matter.

When you see an artist working with his hands with a chisel, or a 20 ft canvas, or a set of drums, it is easier to see the artist and to tell the difference between them and the craftsman.
But, so much harder to tell the difference when you are watching them operate electronic or mechanical equipment, like a camera, or a sound board etc

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

Very interesting points, Mike! Great food for thought. Thanks so much.

Uuglypher Loc: South Dakota (East River)

Hi, Mike,
Having served on committees and boards of arts councils in three different states I am a blooded survivor of the "What is Art?", "Is photography an art?", and the "Art versus Craft" debates/ battles /wars! The last-mentioned is, of all of them, the one least likely to be resolved before the next "Big Bang" and consequent Universe (with its attendant aggregate of New Rules). I can't wait to see how this is going to be resolved in the here-and-now!

I'm off to make some popcorn!

Dave in SD

Blenheim Orange Loc: Michigan

Thanks, Dave. Your post raises another interesting issue. Why is this question so controversial? Why do you think that it cannot be resolved? I think that it can be resolved, and I think that there is no reasonable basis for controversy.

Looking at something and trying to decide if it is art or not is objectifying it, turning it into a product, judging it within a commercial context as though it were a consumer item.

And why is art considered to be superior to craft, especially given the way artists are treated in our culture?

Mike

Blenheim Orange Loc: Michigan

Thanks, lighthouse. I think your observation is accurate.

I heard that the Canon Tool Company is selling a new improved chisel and mallet set, and promoting it by saying that if you buy it "you, too, can be a great sculptor, just like Rodin and Michelangelo! Unleash your inner artist with our new line of Powersculpt tools and accessories!"

Mike

Dixiegirl Loc: Alabama gulf coast

I'm wondering if it all boils down to gifts and talents. Not to say that someone can't develop a skill for something without the talent. By the way, Mike, I'm going to need your talents AND skills in helping me identify some wildflowers when I post them. :-D

Blenheim Orange Loc: Michigan

Out and about a lot this time of year. Give me a heads up here or by pm or I might miss it.

I have discovered a couple of errors in previous posts, so take what I say as a starting point not as the last word. ;) Always learning.

Mike

Dixiegirl Loc: Alabama gulf coast

We're all learning..hopefully. Will do, Mike.

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

Think back to our childhood days. Arts and crafts were an activity for kids to engage in besides athletics. Arts and crafts were blended into a single activity.

Fast forward a couple of decades and you will find craftsmen (and women) actually producing something that can regularly generate a cash flow. The craftsman will likely turn out many copies or versions of the same creation, so long as it sells.

Meantime, artists are starving and vaguely hoping that what they produce will "catch on" so they can strike it rich, if they even care. They may only produce one copy of each creation. Since it does not sell, they think about it and try something different. Maybe the thought that art is superior comes from the attitude that, "I just do this because I like what I am creating." Being poor is a badge of honor, elitist.

When an artist produces a work of art but then proceeds to replicate it according to a relatively standard procedure, he becomes a craftsman. That's where Ansel Adams may have crossed the line from artist to craftsman.

Then along comes a curator and hangs a piece of Adams's nicely crafted work in a gallery. It then reverts back to being art, else it would not be worthy to hang in the gallery.

So the confusion is natural. A photograph is easily replicated and its creation may not have been all that difficult in the first place. Hours spent facing a monitor moving sliders does not seem like the work of an artist, just the toil of a computer geek. Does that diminish photography as an art form? Does clicking a shutter make art? Probably not.

But doing the research and preparation beforehand and knowing how to deal with the medium to produce something interesting that people want to look at for more than a brief time takes some thought and insight. I suggest that it makes that photograph art and that photographer an artist.

Blenheim Orange Loc: Michigan

Interesting observations, thanks.

Are you sure that being poor is a badge of honor, or elitist? In modern society it seems to me to be more like a badge of shame, and seen as just cause for being ignored and dismissed.

Mike

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

An artist may be poor and still have an ego. Being elitist may be self-deception.

lighthouse Loc: No Fixed Abode

Sounds more like a craftsman to me.

Blenheim Orange Loc: Michigan

I think those ideas may be the product of a particular time and place, the culture in which we are immersed in modern times, and be limited because of that.

Art, and craftsmanship existed long before and still exist outside of the modern US commercialized context. The commercial world, as expressed here and now, seems to me to be at war with culture. There is a lot of confusion as a result.

I was talking with a friend last night about some Latin musicians, now in their 80s and 90s. They had at one time 40 years earlier been famous - airplay, recordings, etc. They were now being "rediscovered." Some of the things he said perfectly illustrate the confusion in the modern mind between culture and commercialism. He asked "if they haven't played for 40 years, how can they still be so good?" In other words, he assumed that since they weren't commercially successful over those 40 years, they must not have been playing at all. Then he asked what happened to their careers. I said that the commercial music industry moved on to the latest fad to hype and cash in on. He then said "well, if they are so good, why can't they just find someplace to play, then gather a following, and be successful?" Sigh. People are simply unable to see that the commercial world preys on and exploits both artists and their audiences, even though the evidence for that is right under their noses.

Mike

minniev Loc: MIssissippi

I understand what the old timer fiddler meant about the "bothering".

It relates more to writing, for me. Writing is my second vice. A story will arrive, develop itself, take on life, and demand to be written down. It will bother you relentlessly until you give in. Once recorded, whether it is ever published or not, it will at least quieten down and let you rest.

In photography, there are some scenes, particularly those with certain kinds of light, that take my breath and impact me so strongly that I feel almost a hunger to record them in-camera and bring them to life in software so that they make me feel again what I felt when I saw them. It is a great reward if another viewer feels something similar but that isn't necessary in order for me to keep enjoying the image. And the anticipation of someone else enjoying it (or buying a print of it) does not enter my mind when I am physically at the scene. All I want at that moment is to hold onto it and recreate it.

And I have no idea whether that has anything to do with art or not :-D