In the realm of Studio Furniture there hangs a looming question:
The Great Debaters
Is what I am doing art or is it a craft?
Now, I know this subject has been discussed and will continue to be discussed in great length, so I am not about to try to settle the matter in one simple post. In fact, I’m not so sure this question should be settled. What I would like to offer is just my simple and brief observation and opinion on the matter, and then I want to hand it over to you.
Studio Furniture is defined as
“one-of-a-kind or limited production furniture objects designed and built by craftspeople. The work is made in a crafts person’s studio setting as opposed to being made in a high volume factory.”
According to this definition, furniture crafted within an individual shop, or “studio” has certain hallmarks or characteristics that set it apart from its mass produced counterparts. The very nature of the piece as well as the nature of the individual maker seems to elevate it to a particular level.
So, what is this “level?”
Art has a certain “look, don’t touch” connotation associated with it. It brings to mind strolling though a gallery with masterful pieces from centuries long past on display for all to admire. Is this where studio furniture belongs? Do we take our just finished pieces right from the workbench to the display stand of the art gallery for all to view?
Craft, however, seems to conjure up images of a lone individual using traditional tools and techniques to rough out a sort of simplistic folk piece. It describes a utilitarian quality that is contained in handmade items. In certain vocabulary the word “craft” can sometimes have an almost negative use. As if by being made in this manner it’s not quite on the level to be considered art
So, is there a middle ground? Where does Studio Furniture belong in all of this?
Once again, all I am writing here is my simple opinion formed through teaching and limited experiences thus far as a maker of furniture.
I believe that Studio Furniture by its very nature is first and foremost a craft. It is created by individual makers using time tested methods of construction, often executed with the aid of traditional hand tools. The overall function of the piece is evident and expertly executed. Integrity of the work and longevity of the piece are the convictions that drive these makers to use such techniques. It is in this crafting that the piece and the maker are connected through the hands, eyes, thoughts, intentions, and emotions. This is the foundational “why” of what these makers do.
I also believe that Studio Furniture can and does qualify to be art in some instances. An individual maker puts not only their skills into a piece, they put their vision, mind, soul, will, intent, and heart in to it as well. This elevates their work above the pieces produced for the sake of mere production and profit. This does not, however, instantly transform it into a piece of art.
History shows us that great art is considered great because it demonstrates a most masterful command of both technique and vision. For Studio Furniture to be considered art, it must stand out among the craft and show a careful and expert unity of both construction and design. The piece must be a cohesive unit of the maker and the maker’s vision. It stands out from the rest in quiet superiority. Most often it is never the intention of the maker to produce a great work of art. Instead they merely sought to produce what was churning inside their creative and expressive being. We have history to show us that.
So, is it art or is it craft?
Well, depending on the maker’s intentions, and the character and vision of the piece, it can certainly be both.
Now, it’s your turn. I want to know your thoughts, feelings, and opinions on the matter. Whether you’re a woodworker, an artist in another medium, or someone who appreciates the finer things, you have something valuable to say on the subject.
Leave a comment below or contact the Studio and share your thoughts and insights. I look forward to hearing what you have to say.
{ 6 comments… read them below or add one }
I think the distinction between Art and Craft, or “fine arts” and “decorative arts”, is bogus. It’s very Western and relatively recent (post-Renaissance or later); I don’t believe it’s helpful or accurate, and I’d like to do away with it.
I’ll wait to see what other comments may follow before I go on my full rant. What’s your opinion, Adam?
Well, to distinguish art and craft is simply to make a distinction based on the end result as well as the maker. As far as “fine art” and “decorative art,” these two will overlap on occasion, again, based on the object or end result. When one refers to the difference between art and craft, what’s really going on is an underlying distinction being made between the makers or artists. Anyone can put their hand to paint and canvas, but not everyone will produce a masterpiece of Rembrandt’s level.
There must be some sort of distinction or differentiation to prevent the field from being leveled. Just because you undertake an artistic pursuit does not in any way distinguish you as an artist. Throughout history someone considered an artist was in total pursuit of mastery of their art or craft. That pursuit of mastery is evidenced in their work. Again, no one art form or craft is superior to another. It simply lies within the end results. We see masterpieces in all disciplines.
Thank you, Adam, for this interesting post. I could have written this myself many times over during the last handful of weeks, but I’m glad you did; and more effectively than I likely would have!
For me the issue is in how I see myself, and how I project myself to the world. Certainly I could just let my work speak for itself, and let the beholder form their own descriptions of what I create. That’s great, but at the root of it is a philosophy of my work. Certainly our work evolves over time — and in recent times, I have found myself growing beyond my past pursuits. I could only describe this growth as that into the realm of art and artist. I’m not comfortable with that moniker yet, and feel awkward and unworthy of saying that here, but why not.
Now, I doubt that anyone will put my creations behind glass or velvet rope; I would be honoured with that assessment of course, but I would be more greatly honoured, as would most of us, should they be used as they were meant to be while I was creating them at my bench. To think that someone could enjoy the beauty, art or craft of something enough to incorporate it into their lives, keeping it near them for whatever they see in it, is reward enough for me.
I’m still not sure where to host my next show, at the art gallery or the craft council. Hmmm.
Craft is the Jayne Mansfield to Art’s Marilyn Monroe.
There can be beauty in both, talent involved, but American actress, Jayne Mansfield, was referred to as the “poor man’s Marilyn Monroe”. She lacked “it” that Marilyn Monroe had.
So, in both art and craft fields, it is the “it” that goes into the work. Often undefineable, “it” determines excellence and the ability to grab attention. A crafter is no less an artist if their work has the “it” that attracts others. I see a craft as something that can transcend the mere ‘craft show’ if there is the person’s uniqueness or supreme talents (be it attention to detail, mathematical form and function, or use of colors and textures) oozing from the craft/art piece.
This applies to jewelry. This applies to painting. This applies to furniture. This applies to architecture.
@Barry,
Great words, Barry. It does me good to hear of other woodworkers taking a deeper, more introspective approach to the craft. I believe this is the only way to truly fulfill our highest potential within this discipline. I believe, like you, that function and use of our creations is the highest honor a patron can pay us as craftspeople and artists. Glad to have you here.
@Rhiannon
I love that analogy! I would have never thought to make those comparisons! Awesome! The “it” you so perfectly describe is indeed a universal element spanning all disciplines and mediums. Without “it” you simply end up with an object. It is the unique outlook and input of the artist that ultimately separates the work from all others. Terrific insight. Thanks so much!
There may be danger in focusing too extensively on the workmanship of an object, or mastery in craft. Mastery of craftsmanship isn’t always enough to elevate an object. What really brings something up to art level, the “it” we’re talking about here, is the DESIGN component. Or more accurately, the design component coupled with excellence in execution.
One could argue, to continue the analogy above, that Marilyn Monroe was simply better designed than Jayne Mansfield. The “it” factor of design is not always easy to recognize as such.