I was on that same ACC call but left before the breakout sessions even started, feeling strongly that I was in the wrong place.
As someone who appreciates art and even considered a career as a studio artist before becoming a designer, I'm struck by the profound difference between the contemporary artist's practice of staking claim to his very specific niche (and then needing to defend and evolve it) and the craftsman's freedom to make for the value of the thing made.
This isn't precisely a comment on the objects themselves and yet very often when viewing contemporary art I feel drawn into its striving whereas when living with handcraft I feel my place in the world is affirmed. When I'm making, that sense is deepened further.
On a different note, I really appreciate the way you talk about being granted permission. I've come to find that very important in my own life at different hinge moments. I look forward to seeing where this leads.
I can relate. I've just been reading about this situation in art. It's easy to get sucked into believing that all contemporary art is about that striving to stake claims, art about art. That's been my take more or less too. Lots of galleries, museums, critics, brokers, auction houses, artists do a lot of work pushing that narrative. But it's just a slice of what's going on. There's plenty of art doing stuff like affirming your place in the world. And probably a lot of craft striving to stake claims, craft about craft. I'll be exploring this stuff a lot more.
I appreciate the way you're reframing this. I've known that I was a little cynical about Art but having you remind me that there is also another way is very helpful (and challenging) for me.
Of course, I didn't believe that every artist feels they must stake out their ground but, from my limited perspective, it has seemed to be the general approach of the larger Art machine.
Back when I was doing lots of writing, I was also doing a ton of reading. At some point it occurred to me that reading, itself, is an act that completes the writing, and it happens each time we read, each time we think about what we’ve read, and we can “write” a story we’re reading (or living!) differently each time we consider it. It happens through our individual ways of perceiving, our general and momentary perspectives, our cultural and educational training, our unconscious frames of reference, etc. Criticism, in some ways, feels like the act of fixing and making opaque the frame of reference. I think there’s value in this, in that allows me to see differently, and to recognize that I, too, have my own limited ways of seeing. I think, though, it’s important to remember that even the most intelligent and intellectually rigorous criticism also has its limits. Lastly, as a personal choice, I’m uncomfortable with the idea of making for the critic, and I tend to be less interested in art of any sort that’s produced with the critic (or even an audience) in mind - it has the feeling of “product.” I know this is a fuzzy zone. I recognize that commerce has demands, and that artists and crafts folk need to survive.
Anyway, Dawson, thanks for doing this, and thanks for providing the opportunity for conversation.
I see your point. I think that's true of some critics, but not all critics. My favorite criticism leaves me feeling more open to the subject, rather than more decided. I'm also drawn to criticism that's commenting more generally on an era or on a scene rather than specific artists or specific objects. I also think making for the critics could become problematic.
Interesting lines to follow along with, hope I can learn some things along the way. I’ve often wished for more critique of my own work to help me refine and improve, but find social media isn’t really well suited for this, nor (is my current perception of) art critics and what really often seems like pretentiousness. Looking forward to where you may take this conversation
My wife spent years in an MFA program constantly working through workshops. Now that school is done she relies on some of her former classmates and other writers to serve as readers. I envy her professionalism in critical reading. I would like to develop dialogue around folk craft.
Something like that could be useful, but at the moment, I don't think I'm as interested in specific personal critique of specific objects as I am in more general cultural critique of the scene.
It certainly can get pretentious, but there's definitely stuff that's not if you give it a chance. I agree on the social media front. I don't think I'm as interested in specific personal critique of specific objects as I am in more general cultural critique of the scene.
Lovely! Is doing "craftwork" our new radical form of experimentation? Not just with the work itself, but with one's values and how those can be expressed through lifestyle and one's personal character. Sorry if you are already familiar with the work, but just want to make a reference here to Peter Korn's book on craftsmanship and his views on its relationship to art and art criticism as they are likewise insightful.
This part of that piece stuck out to me:
"What began with Pop and Warhol looked like a break from modernism, but it also extended modernism’s fetishizing of novelty and a canon of iconoclasts."
"Modernism is not headed for the dustbin, but in terms of experimental one-upmanship and the conviction that each new work could break and redefine all of art history, a page is finally turning — slowly, a bit, at least."
I recently read Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi's 1996 book on Creativity where he defines creativity as any act which changes culture, essentially comparing it to a "meme", or something worth passing along (like genetic information) but which contains cultural information. For Csikszentmihalyi, creativity with a capital C is whatever is recognized by the culture as "creative" or original or new or changing the culture in a new direction. To me it seems like with Modernism, they finally realized this aspect of needing to invent new ideas, making Art actually closer to Science in the sense of making new discoveries that are worth sharing with others. This amounts to a desire to always overturn the current paradigm to get the credit for ushering in a new way of thinking because that gives power to that individual and casts them as a creative genius. However, Csikszentmihalyi admits that most "creative" people don't seek creative acts for creativity's sakes as if it was some object that could be possessed and "hacked"; instead they just do what they like and try to do a good job for its own sake and somehow some of the people who do this get lucky and their work gets recognized as "creative"; in Modernism's case in the ArtWorld with its own mechanisms, it seems like it is just about creativity for creativity's sake and everything now has become a meme. This might also mean that our culture is just more receptive to new ideas rather than being rigid. Take for example, the recent fascination with the the duck taped banana that sold for a good chunk of change (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comedian_(artwork)).
I was on that same ACC call but left before the breakout sessions even started, feeling strongly that I was in the wrong place.
As someone who appreciates art and even considered a career as a studio artist before becoming a designer, I'm struck by the profound difference between the contemporary artist's practice of staking claim to his very specific niche (and then needing to defend and evolve it) and the craftsman's freedom to make for the value of the thing made.
This isn't precisely a comment on the objects themselves and yet very often when viewing contemporary art I feel drawn into its striving whereas when living with handcraft I feel my place in the world is affirmed. When I'm making, that sense is deepened further.
On a different note, I really appreciate the way you talk about being granted permission. I've come to find that very important in my own life at different hinge moments. I look forward to seeing where this leads.
I can relate. I've just been reading about this situation in art. It's easy to get sucked into believing that all contemporary art is about that striving to stake claims, art about art. That's been my take more or less too. Lots of galleries, museums, critics, brokers, auction houses, artists do a lot of work pushing that narrative. But it's just a slice of what's going on. There's plenty of art doing stuff like affirming your place in the world. And probably a lot of craft striving to stake claims, craft about craft. I'll be exploring this stuff a lot more.
Alright, I'm open. ;)
I appreciate the way you're reframing this. I've known that I was a little cynical about Art but having you remind me that there is also another way is very helpful (and challenging) for me.
Of course, I didn't believe that every artist feels they must stake out their ground but, from my limited perspective, it has seemed to be the general approach of the larger Art machine.
I look forward to the exploring!
Back when I was doing lots of writing, I was also doing a ton of reading. At some point it occurred to me that reading, itself, is an act that completes the writing, and it happens each time we read, each time we think about what we’ve read, and we can “write” a story we’re reading (or living!) differently each time we consider it. It happens through our individual ways of perceiving, our general and momentary perspectives, our cultural and educational training, our unconscious frames of reference, etc. Criticism, in some ways, feels like the act of fixing and making opaque the frame of reference. I think there’s value in this, in that allows me to see differently, and to recognize that I, too, have my own limited ways of seeing. I think, though, it’s important to remember that even the most intelligent and intellectually rigorous criticism also has its limits. Lastly, as a personal choice, I’m uncomfortable with the idea of making for the critic, and I tend to be less interested in art of any sort that’s produced with the critic (or even an audience) in mind - it has the feeling of “product.” I know this is a fuzzy zone. I recognize that commerce has demands, and that artists and crafts folk need to survive.
Anyway, Dawson, thanks for doing this, and thanks for providing the opportunity for conversation.
I see your point. I think that's true of some critics, but not all critics. My favorite criticism leaves me feeling more open to the subject, rather than more decided. I'm also drawn to criticism that's commenting more generally on an era or on a scene rather than specific artists or specific objects. I also think making for the critics could become problematic.
This process of indignation, reflection, discovery, freedom seems all too familiar and one I believe to be necessary for our growth.
Props to you for not fossilizing on indignation.
Interesting lines to follow along with, hope I can learn some things along the way. I’ve often wished for more critique of my own work to help me refine and improve, but find social media isn’t really well suited for this, nor (is my current perception of) art critics and what really often seems like pretentiousness. Looking forward to where you may take this conversation
I would gladly support a peer review group.
My wife spent years in an MFA program constantly working through workshops. Now that school is done she relies on some of her former classmates and other writers to serve as readers. I envy her professionalism in critical reading. I would like to develop dialogue around folk craft.
Something like that could be useful, but at the moment, I don't think I'm as interested in specific personal critique of specific objects as I am in more general cultural critique of the scene.
It certainly can get pretentious, but there's definitely stuff that's not if you give it a chance. I agree on the social media front. I don't think I'm as interested in specific personal critique of specific objects as I am in more general cultural critique of the scene.
Lovely! Is doing "craftwork" our new radical form of experimentation? Not just with the work itself, but with one's values and how those can be expressed through lifestyle and one's personal character. Sorry if you are already familiar with the work, but just want to make a reference here to Peter Korn's book on craftsmanship and his views on its relationship to art and art criticism as they are likewise insightful.
This part of that piece stuck out to me:
"What began with Pop and Warhol looked like a break from modernism, but it also extended modernism’s fetishizing of novelty and a canon of iconoclasts."
"Modernism is not headed for the dustbin, but in terms of experimental one-upmanship and the conviction that each new work could break and redefine all of art history, a page is finally turning — slowly, a bit, at least."
I recently read Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi's 1996 book on Creativity where he defines creativity as any act which changes culture, essentially comparing it to a "meme", or something worth passing along (like genetic information) but which contains cultural information. For Csikszentmihalyi, creativity with a capital C is whatever is recognized by the culture as "creative" or original or new or changing the culture in a new direction. To me it seems like with Modernism, they finally realized this aspect of needing to invent new ideas, making Art actually closer to Science in the sense of making new discoveries that are worth sharing with others. This amounts to a desire to always overturn the current paradigm to get the credit for ushering in a new way of thinking because that gives power to that individual and casts them as a creative genius. However, Csikszentmihalyi admits that most "creative" people don't seek creative acts for creativity's sakes as if it was some object that could be possessed and "hacked"; instead they just do what they like and try to do a good job for its own sake and somehow some of the people who do this get lucky and their work gets recognized as "creative"; in Modernism's case in the ArtWorld with its own mechanisms, it seems like it is just about creativity for creativity's sake and everything now has become a meme. This might also mean that our culture is just more receptive to new ideas rather than being rigid. Take for example, the recent fascination with the the duck taped banana that sold for a good chunk of change (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comedian_(artwork)).