Art or Craft?

[d.huber]

I'm all veclempt. I need a moment. Talk amongst yourselves. Here I'll give you a topic:

Are pipes a product of art or craft?

Discuss.

You're welcome, Micah.

[baweaverpipes]

WTF is veclempt?

Pipes are normally a product of briar.

Thank you, Micah.

[sandahlpipe]

I believe it's spelled verklemmt or verklempt and means confused. Not an unusual state of mind, I suppose.

[jogilli]

Verklemmt also means stopped up.... Which cold be loosely translated to constipation... Get some Metamucil David

Thanks Micah

[e Markle]

Verklempt: adjective
overcome with emotion; clenched; also written ferklempt

And to answer Huber: yes.

[d.huber]

WTF is veclempt?

Pipes are normally a product of briar.

Thank you, Micah.

Veclempt (n): a state in which it is difficult to spell.

[mredmond]

Pipe making is a craft that can be artfully executed.

Thanks/you're welcome,

Micah

[NathanA]

Art has no practical use. It is entirely aesthetic in nature. That is why there are no pipe artists but there are artisan pipemakers (quite a few if you believe all the hashtags on IG). In other words Micah said it best.

Pipe making is a craft that can be artfully executed.

Thanks/you're welcome,

Micah

[d.huber]

Art has no practical use. It is entirely aesthetic in nature. That is why there are no pipe artists but there are artisan pipemakers (quite a few if you believe all the hashtags on IG).

Nicely done, Nathan! This is a first! A thread that started as a derailed train somehow found a track. This thread somehow got railed.

So

How do we define practical use? Do aesthetics serve no purpose?

Pieces of art that hang on my walls serve a practical use. They bring color and energy to a room, break up the empty spaces on the walls, and can define a room's purpose. They engage the senses, remind me of the story surrounding them, and enrich my life through their presence. These purposes are practical uses that art exists for. If art truly had no practical use, I would argue that it would not exist.

On that note, can utility be separated from art? Can art be separated from utility?

[mredmond]

This discussion hinges on whether you think words have specific meanings. One can give alternate meanings to every word possible until we're all worm food. At that point, though, what's even the point of having language if we can all change the meaning to suit our own purposes. In order to continue the conversation we have to agree, to some extent, that practical use means a certain type of use.

That said, I think an object can have meaning without having a practical use. A piece of art can impart significant meaning and emotional depth, but have no other use than to please the viewer aesthetically. Understand that aesthetics are a lot more complicated than "how it looks" and have the ability to significantly affect individuals or social groups. Something being made as a tool is different than that art item, even if it is artfully made, because it was created to be more than a vehicle for meaning/emotion/aesthetics.

If anything, I would suggest that certain types of "art" are actually craft because they practically function as a document and are not intended to stir an emotional or aesthetic response. Certain types of painting, drawing, sculpture, and especially photography fall into this category, in my mind.

[d.huber]

Good points, Micah.

This conversation is always interesting to me because I am unable to separate art and craft. To quote Todd Johnson, they are "fiercely intertwined."

I've been taught and hold strongly to the idea that each of us is naturally creative but are more inclined towards engineering or design. Those who are able to master both are the artists.

[seamonster]

This discussion hinges on whether you think words have specific meanings. One can give alternate meanings to every word possible until we're all worm food. At that point, though, what's even the point of having language if we can all change the meaning to suit our own purposes. In order to continue the conversation we have to agree, to some extent, that practical use means a certain type of use.

That said, I think an object can have meaning without having a practical use. A piece of art can impart significant meaning and emotional depth, but have no other use than to please the viewer aesthetically. Understand that aesthetics are a lot more complicated than "how it looks" and have the ability to significantly affect individuals or social groups. Something being made as a tool is different than that art item, even if it is artfully made, because it was created to be more than a vehicle for meaning/emotion/aesthetics.

If anything, I would suggest that certain types of "art" are actually craft because they practically function as a document and are not intended to stir an emotional or aesthetic response. Certain types of painting, drawing, sculpture, and especially photography fall into this category, in my mind.

well said, well said! mredmond for the win....

cheers,
Jeremy.

[mredmond]

I agree, and it's certainly complex. I think Todd's "fiercely intertwined" is exactly right. It illustrates the complex nature of two concepts forming a larger whole...if one were able to untangle those, we would have an easier discussion on our hands. At the end of the day the reason we have the words art and craft are so we can attempt to differentiate the different qualities of the two. "Shit people make" doesn't quite do the job.

I think it's important to add that I don't think craft is inherently inferior to art. There is a common implication that it is, and I think much of that stems from art world elitism intended to increase the monetary value of art. I think art is one of our most valuable social treasures, and I think those in possession of minds capable of creating beautiful art should be successful. That doesn't mean the best craftspeople aren't deserving of the same.

[e Markle]

I admit my participation here has been infrequent of late, but why are we all thanking Micah?

[mredmond]

1. He suggested the thread topic.
2. The general human psychological condition - we all want to be accepted by our peers.
3. People often think I'm him, so I thought it would be fun to accept the adoration.

[e Markle]

Pieces of art that hang on my walls serve a practical use. They bring color and energy to a room, break up the empty spaces on the walls, and can define a room's purpose. They engage the senses, remind me of the story surrounding them, and enrich my life through their presence. These purposes are practical uses that art exists for. If art truly had no practical use, I would argue that it would not exist.

A particular manifestation or instance of "art" (e.g. a painting) can be used for all sorts of things (kindling, a makeshift umbrella, giant frisbee, etc.), but I believe Armie is talking about "art" on a conceptual level. I can receive some kind of emotional charge from a painting or emotional drain from yet another example of what I like to call "briarrhea" but I can't use the "beauty" of the art (i.e. the essence of the art) to affect the physical world around me. (I assume this is what the Trout-man means when he says "practical use".) The canvas and paint can have a real world impact, but canvas and paint aren't art. Your field of performing art makes that point even better. The art there is absolutely not the human bodies on the stage, it's the expression and usage of those bodies that is art.

[The Smoking Yeti]

Yet many architects are considered artists.

[The Smoking Yeti]

(This thread is escalating quite nicely)

[mredmond]

...and many famous athletes are called heroes by their fans, because they scored the winning points that one time. Does that mean it's true?

Basically, subjectivity makes this an unanswerable question. At least not in any tidy, satisfying way.

[mredmond]

Don't you have some dodecahedron to hand sand?