Question

The Philosophy of Art & Aesthetics.

Moderator: e_dog

Post Reply
User avatar
Lightning Rod
Posts: 5211
Joined: August 15th, 2004, 6:57 pm
Location: between my ears
Contact:

Question

Post by Lightning Rod » January 30th, 2005, 2:16 pm

Question:

Can you have art without craft?
"These words don't make me a poet, these Eyes make me a poet."

The Poet's Eye

User avatar
judih
Site Admin
Posts: 11014
Joined: August 17th, 2004, 7:38 am
Location: kibbutz nir oz, israel
Contact:

Post by judih » January 30th, 2005, 2:26 pm

found art
is art without craft

if we find a piece of driftwood that is simply inspiring
or a fossil

these things are craft, crafted by nature
but no human had to lift a finger in the making.

User avatar
Lightning Rod
Posts: 5211
Joined: August 15th, 2004, 6:57 pm
Location: between my ears
Contact:

Post by Lightning Rod » January 30th, 2005, 2:34 pm

hmmm

driftwood and fossils can be decorative objects, yes
but I don't think they could be classified as art

art is something not that has been arranged by nature
but something that has been re-arranged by man
"These words don't make me a poet, these Eyes make me a poet."

The Poet's Eye

User avatar
bennie
Posts: 185
Joined: September 13th, 2004, 6:49 am
Location: scotland
Contact:

Post by bennie » January 30th, 2005, 2:41 pm

I say yes. Art can exist as an art of ideas, such as Dada. The Dada readymade sculptures were anti art sculptures but they were, ironically, art. There isn't any real craft or skill needed to create these pieces, it's just the idea to call it art.

Readymade sculptures:

Duchamp
http://www.beatmuseum.org/duchamp/fountain.html

http://www.centrepompidou.fr/images/oeu ... I01504.jpg

http://www.centrepompidou.fr/images/oeu ... I01680.jpg

Man Ray
http://www.tate.org.uk/collection/T/T07/T07614_9.jpg


I also think that most art (good art?) is created by people who have a need to do so, rather than a desire to do so. I think craft is something more akin to a hobby; something one enjoys.

I don't particularly enjoy my "art." The process of writing is easy and I like to read what I've written after I write it but within a few days I tend to lose interest in what I've written.

A craft, in my mind, is something that you'd partake of in order to create something that's pleasing.

Art isn't necessarily pleasing.

Its maybe just semantics but I talk about someone "creating" a pice of art as opposed to "crafting" it.

----

PS, I should say that I FUCKING LOVE the "bicycle wheel". I think it's one of the most beautiful looking things I've ever seen. It's incredible.
well I write music review so I do:
http://www.elevationstation.net

User avatar
Lightning Rod
Posts: 5211
Joined: August 15th, 2004, 6:57 pm
Location: between my ears
Contact:

Post by Lightning Rod » January 30th, 2005, 2:54 pm

bennie

let's take pottery for example

god or nature created the material--clay (no relation)

any idiot can pick up a handful of mud and throw it into a fire and call it pottery

but if you want to make a useful vessel, you have to know a little about the craft

you couldn't do the things you do with the language (cartwheels and pirouettes) if you
didn't know the language--that's your craft. Art is the process of elevating the craft to a place
where the craft is invisible.

This was Charlie Parker's advice to young musicians:

1. First learn your instrument (craft)
2. Then learn music (theory--craft)
3. Then forget all that shit and just play (art)
"These words don't make me a poet, these Eyes make me a poet."

The Poet's Eye

User avatar
bennie
Posts: 185
Joined: September 13th, 2004, 6:49 am
Location: scotland
Contact:

Post by bennie » January 30th, 2005, 4:13 pm

when I say craft I think of knitted things
white elephant things
fancy goods on walpaper covered shelves

you craft a pot and there's some artistry involved

I think it's just the word I don't like.

I think of crafts and I think of blue-haired women in a row on a wednesday afternoon at a tea party in the church hall following knitting patterns with their skeletal fingers and creating a little stainless steel jumper out of crow's wool for little Tommy.

I like that Parker thing. I guess I can go along with that. It's why I don't consider myself a musician. I play the guitar adequately but I know fuck all theory (I barely know the names of the chords I know).

But:

1. I learned to write.
2. I learned more words to express myself with and I picked up a few punctuation and grammar points.
3. Then I forgot all that shit and just wrote.

That bastard Ginsberg has a lot to answer for, I'll tell you!




---

Speaking of Parker: I'm planning on expanding my meager collection of Jazz records (CDs, I just prefer the word "record").

I have only three in my collection :|
But I love them all a whole lot. So if you can recommend others based on these:

John Coltrane - Love Supreme
Charles Mingus - Mingus Ah Um
Art Blakey and the Blues Messengers - Moanin'

thanks.

EDIT__
re pottery. Yes there is a definite craft to learn. I vaugely rememember several techniques from school. But what you create is utilitarian. You create a tool to carry liquid. It may look pretty and, in the case of Grayson Perry, who won the Turner PRize a few years ago, it can also be considered art, but that isn't its initial function. I don't think you need to know about craft to create art. Children paint fascinating things and they are fucking idiots, man, they know fuck all about anything.
well I write music review so I do:
http://www.elevationstation.net

perezoso

Post by perezoso » January 30th, 2005, 4:31 pm

As with virtuosos such as Charlie Parker or Coltrane, the real writer knows his craft and knows the tradition. And tho some fuzzy minded dreamers would not like it, Bird is superior to cheesy hip hop; Pynchon's writing is to be ranked above, well, the stories and verse featured this month in Reader's Digest. Unlike music however, writing is also about putting forth thoughts and arguments; thus the writer much also be capable of yes, logic, and have some knowledge of intellectual history--whether politics, science, literature, philosophy etc. The Beats and romantics were fond of believing that great poet-visionaries were "born" (or found in the street) without education or culture, but that is not usually the case; Joyce was a highly educated person as were most decent writers--education was either gained in college or by their own studies.

AS far as the art of found objects: do not see these as art but they may be beautiful or evocative, surreal, etc. Perhaps putting a toilet in an art museum is interesting and funny but it doesn't seem to be art in the sense that Rodin's sculptures are. Really the word "art" itself has so many connotations it is almost useless.. IN fact is quite an ugly little word.

User avatar
bennie
Posts: 185
Joined: September 13th, 2004, 6:49 am
Location: scotland
Contact:

Post by bennie » January 30th, 2005, 5:35 pm

perezoso: this to me is the typical intelectual response, which sickens me a little: the idea that artists have to be intelectual, as you say, "knowledge of intellectual history--whether politics, science, literature, philosophy etc."

this is incredible, even though I just did an internet search and this is one of the first things I found. (i know fuck all about rodin except that, he's an old dead guy.)
http://www.ibiblio.org/wm/paint/auth/rodin/iris.jpg

the readymade sculptures I listed above (or below? I can't remember how the posts are displayed) are, to me, infinitely more fascinating. I'm fascinated by motives behind putting an iron with nails in it in an art gallery. It's just more exciting and provocative to me.

I agree that it's good to know your art but what do you mean by tradition? Do you mean that as a writer I should know about all styles and all the history that led to their development?

The thing about these types of discussion is that I usually disagree with most other people. I don't think you NEED to know the tradition or even NEED to know the craft. If you know YOUR craft, YOUR style then I think that's enough. If you're a true maverick you can't expect to be influenced by the past, so why is it neccessary to know about it?
well I write music review so I do:
http://www.elevationstation.net

perezoso

Post by perezoso » January 30th, 2005, 5:56 pm

benski:

I wasn't really referring to visual or "fine" arts: it's now such a weird strange scene: people smear their bodies with blood and then rub themselves on walls and say its a masterpiece--or stick bullwhips in their arse and take pictures that hang in guggenheims..not my scene. It would seem real artists should know how to draw, but I'm not an artist so what do I know.

But in terms of writing, I think the real writer knows the tradition, at least to some degree--knows what to avoid and what to steal or tweak---

wank on lad!

mtmynd
Posts: 7358
Joined: August 15th, 2004, 8:54 pm
Location: El Paso

Post by mtmynd » January 30th, 2005, 10:43 pm

elrod - it's been said that craft serves a purpose, i.e., a pot holds something, versus art, which serves no purpose other than to inspire.

bennie - Sketches of Spain (Miles Davis)

P-zoso - it takes an intellectual to intellectualize art, it takes an intellect to create art.

perezoso

Post by perezoso » January 30th, 2005, 10:53 pm

M: wow. you summed it all up in one statement, man! you are so deeeeep...unfortunately quasi-navajo sand paintings and crystals are not art....

mtmynd
Posts: 7358
Joined: August 15th, 2004, 8:54 pm
Location: El Paso

Post by mtmynd » January 30th, 2005, 11:06 pm

p-zoso - a"quasi-texZen hand painting"... without crystals -


Image

perezoso

Post by perezoso » January 30th, 2005, 11:13 pm

Not bad, really, mteemind

i remember some of yr art on LK and enjoyed it

Post Reply

Return to “The Anti-Academy”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest