craftsmanship, consumerism, virtue, privilege, and quality

Maybe a really tiny quiver?

in a holster

:D

craftswomanship

enjoying this revive

craftswoman ship

would sail on

I'm interested in how this relates to the uneasy relationship between book arts and scrap-booking. There is definitely a relationship between the two, but many book artists loathe the hobby of scrap-booking, or at least they resent the conflation of the hobby with the art, which is not a popularly recognized art form. Both are overwhelmingly practiced by women.

Interestingly enough, letterpress printing is currently practiced mostly by women, but was dominated by men when it was the height of technology, not that long ago. This is true of most of the book arts, including paper-making and binding.

I'm interested in how these skills have moved from being considered masculine to feminine. Also interested in how the marginalization of the art form affects the uncomfortable relationship between art and craft.

those are really great questions! i do wonder how work vs leisure plays into the shift in gender. i don't know much at all about book arts at all, though.

this weekend i went thrifting as usual and i found a crewel embroidered picture of a weeping cherry tree bonsai (made by a woman) and also a book about how to make and sharpen knives (authored by a man) so take that for what it's worth

Don't think letterpress printing is mostly practiced by women in the UK, fwiw, though it's surely less male-dominated than it was when it was practiced on an industrial scale.

That's an interesting cultural difference. It seems to be a pretty common conceit amongst book artists and letterpress printers over here that the field is dominated by women, with a smaller plurality of gay men and very few straight men. My experience corroborates this. Interestingly, the one letterpress printer from the UK that I've met is one of the few straight men I know working in letterpress and book arts.

I don't know why this is and I don't know why it's different here than in the UK.

i think the gender binary stuff is a good and useful way of thinking about this, but i was just thinking last night about "craftsmanship" vs "craft project" in terms of reproducibility (is that a word?). Being able to be produced multiple times. That is, craftsmanship implies a certain consistency of work, that something made once that can be duplicated with negligible difference through repetition of the same process that created the original. "Craft project" on the other hand, suggests a certain idiosyncrasy. It's made once, and while it may be duplicated, the product will be noticably different each time. Maybe it's more improvised, or not thoroughly planned before it's begun. Its process is more experimental or simply created ad hoc, in the moment, with materials at hand.

i think both "craft projects" and "art" share this uniqueness, which i think is part of the tension between them? maybe.

On a related note, an art professor I know told us her students were into re-discovering old crafts, and while she continued to encourage them to use these techniques and materials, she bemoaned their apparent lack of interest in developing skills. A student might be interested in incorporating crochet or leather-working into a piece or an installation, but would hit this wall early on and not develop a deeper understanding of the actual craft. The way she described it, there exists a genuine appreciation of craft amongst her students that doesn't often go beyond the conceptual.

The result, as she described it was sincere art that, yes, your child could do better.

There's an idea about maturity--being tested and honed--in the course of becoming master of a craft? Only through grinding repetition do you find the improvements and insights and get the thing into your bones, in the way that's being glorified. Cost of being one of these people: your lifetime. Much easier to admire from the outside.

"deeper understanding" = accepting that you will do the same thing every day for 10, 20, or 30 years and any gains after the initial skill-acquisition period will be minute and subtle and not adequately compensated.

I suspect that pleasure factors in there somewhere.

Also, I couldn't draw a diagram of the learning curve, but there's something to be said for an artist who knows how to draw, understands color, can paint, understands the materials, is familiar with the process, knows how to operate a camera, had a depth of knowledge about the software; etc. If you can't sustain an interest in materials and process, why incorporate the plastic arts into whatever it is that you do? I can't tell you how many hours are enough, but achieving some level of skill factors in there somewhere, right?

Pleasure and/or earning a living. Maybe someday there will an argument to be made that surviving office life requires a kind of craft too?

make a little pig out of a pink eraser and some pushpins

Which is fun and has some value, but I won't fund your kickstarter.

software developers can sure attest to a range of craftsmanship, skill, and polish

Reproducibility seems like it might be part of the distinction between art and craft, but printmaking, photography, film and the digital arts are all examples of things that involve reproduction and exist on both sides of that boundary.

The mechanics of the craft might be a part of that distinction, but I suspect it would be hard to find any existing craft, the mechanics of which couldn't be used to create art.

I suspect that at this point in time, intention and social/institutional convention are the only things that drive that distinction.

This is basically the ongoing discussion of art vs fine art.

AP in re your story about the professor and "craft" I think since Warhol there's been a pretty powerful strain of thought in art that goes against craft, skill, the artists' hand, etc., although I personally think there's a difference between learning to paint and then ultimately using a studio or machines or computers to do your painting for you versus never even learning how to paint. Which is not to say that I think you should have to learn how to paint specifically -- maybe your "technique" relates more to design, or color theory, or sewing, or woodwork, or the manipulation of certain materials, or CAD, or whatever. But I think there's been some confusion between the idea that it doesn't matter if you do it yourself and the idea that it doesn't matter if you know what you're doing. That was my second-hand impression from people I knew at my school's art program and in some (but not all) other art programs.

Yeah, I think you're right, Hurting 2. My story is also second-hand, and through the professor's filter, so I won't carry this too far, but I think her emphasis was that she noticed a trend among her students of genuine interest in exploring craft for craft's sake (not surprising, considering that the diy scene has been around for decades), and incorporating the process of doing something manual and not conceptual into their work, but not quite committing to that process. The result was not actually executing a craft so much as it was engaging the concept of craft and writing up an artist's statement about moving away from the conceptual to engage process.

Thought this was interesting:
http://www.aeonmagazine.com/being-human/julian-baggini-coffee-artisans/

Summary: It seems like one of the main arguments in favor of handmade/artisanal products is QUALITY, but if a machine-made product (like Nespresso coffee) can provide sensory pleasure at a consistently superior level, are there still valid reasons to prefer the more "human" effort?

NB: I've barely read this thread, so maybe this has all been discussed to death.

Nespresso doesn't make superior coffee to good baristas for many reasons. I consider myself a black belt expert in the matter.

But if it did, fuck yes I would choose the nespresso. Espresso itself is a way more machine-driven process than pour-over or french-press and I prefer espresso.

I mean, the damning taste test was basically nespresso vs. some bullshit not even fit to use as espresso vs. the hotel's espresso. Maybe the hotel didn't have especially great espresso?

i had a nespresso machine for awhile (it was a gift) and after awhile all the capsules started tasting the same. after the initial novelty it was not that great. i have a $25 aeropress now which delivers faaaaar superior taste, lets me use my own beans, produces no waste and doesn't require an entire machine to heat up.

baffled to learn that AeroPress is a coffee machine from the makers of

http://aerobie.com/images/Pro-Main-ForWeb250.jpg

yes! that is their other product!

In France, Nespresso supplies more than 100 Michelin restaurants, including the legendary L’Arpège in Paris.

this is not surprising insofar as france has famously bad coffee.

wow there is no way i'm finishing that article though

In distant last place came the ground coffee I had brought, a very good quality, single-estate bean, but not roasted for espresso and ground four days earlier

i mean COME ON

four days is an eternity in ground coffee time. plus they dont say how they kept it -- vacuum sealed? in a freezer? also not roasted for espresso and ground "too coarsely" for the machine

aeropress is great y'all

anyway maybe more importantly

Summary: It seems like one of the main arguments in favor of handmade/artisanal products is QUALITY, but if a machine-made product (like Nespresso coffee) can provide sensory pleasure at a consistently superior level, are there still valid reasons to prefer the more "human" effort?

the valid reason i think is basically that we have individual tastes! some people like their espressos w/ different notes, smells, tastes, etc.

some people like funny machines with nespresso logos

In distant last place came the ground coffee I had brought, a very good quality, single-estate bean, but not roasted for espresso and ground four days earlier
i mean COME ON

― max, Friday, January 11, 2013 7:20 PM Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

four days is an eternity in ground coffee time. plus they dont say how they kept it -- vacuum sealed? in a freezer? also not roasted for espresso and ground "too coarsely" for the machine

― max, Friday, January 11, 2013 7:22 PM Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

this. I mean the "ground too coarsely" alone is a really, really big reason why the espresso probably tasted bad, maybe even moreso than the non-freshness. Like why don't you just stick the whole beans right in the portafilter dude, the whole point is to grind it ulrafine and pack it tight to create resistance so the pressure causes the water to extract more.

thinking a lot about privilege and the perceived "quality" of labor

i think there is something i want to say about it that relates to hourly wages vs. piecework but i'm not sure what it is

perception that the laborer is white and lives in north brooklyn

well yes

It's an interesting question, though, because the object and the it's context can create a perception of quality of labor that has no bearing on how it was actually produced. But the perception is important to the brand.

This idea that I own an object that was created by someone who cares as much or more about the object than I do. Same goes for services.

http://gawker.com/5980261/artisanal-manliness-for-fun-and-profit

good crossover with the blogs instruct you how to be a man thread

late capitalism is all about bourgeois folks paying a premium for "experiences" with an aura of authenticity

Yeah, that's pretty much ridiculous. However, if you strip away the narration and the price tag, looks like a fun camping trip.

funny article. French presses are great for camping, though.

artisanal manliness doesn't seem to involve individuality

I bring a french press AND fancy cheese