“Blurred Boundaries”? Rethinking the Concept of Craft and its Relation to Art and Design

Philosophy Compass 7 (4):230-244 (2012)
Abstract
Art world talk of “blurred boundaries” and “hybrids” between art and craft, suggests that the philosophy of art needs to rethink the concept of craft. This can best be done by adopting four strategies: first, distinguish between craft as a set of disciplines, and craft as a process and practice; second, keep in mind the differences among craft practices such as studio, trade, ethnic, amateur, and DIY; third, recognize that craft’s relationship with design is as important as its relationship to art; fourth, attend to the role digital design and fabrication are playing in craft and art today. At the core of the craft process are three contested characteristics found in most craft practices: hand, material, and skill, although these are better understood as body, medium, and mastery. After discussing a fourth contested characteristic of many craft and design practices, function, I show that none of the four characteristics is a requisite condition for artistic practice today, yet none are excluded from contemporary art, despite its current “post‐studio” or “post‐disciplinary” tendencies. I conclude that the boundary between art and craft conceived as a set of disciplines defined by materials and techniques has not become blurred, it has all but disappeared. On the other hand, I show through an analysis of some references to “mere craft” by Stephen Davies and Arthur Danto, that craft conceived as a process and practice can be understood as distinct from art, but in a non‐invidious sense
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
 
Download options
PhilPapers Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 14,009
External links
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library
References found in this work BETA

View all 17 references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Similar books and articles
Ben Tilghman (2006). Crossing Boundaries. British Journal of Aesthetics 46 (2):178-191.
Keith Allen (2013). Blur. Philosophical Studies 162 (2):257-273.
Timothy Williamson (2003). Vagueness in Reality. In Michael J. Loux & Dean W. Zimmerman (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Metaphysics. Oxford University Press.
Juliet Steyn (ed.) (1997). Other Than Identity: The Subject, Politics and Art. Distributed Exclusively in the Usa by St. Martin's Press.
Richard Shusterman (2003). Entertainment: A Question for Aesthetics. British Journal of Aesthetics 43 (3):289-307.
Johan de Smedt & Helen de Cruz (2011). A Cognitive Approach to the Earliest Art. Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 69 (4):379-389.
Nick Zangwill (1999). Art and Audience. Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 57 (3):315-332.
Analytics

Monthly downloads

Added to index

2012-03-20

Total downloads

34 ( #72,574 of 1,696,633 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

7 ( #80,942 of 1,696,633 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature


Discussion
Start a new thread
Order:
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.