Facilitate the development of purposeful research towards positional reflection.
Order Summary
Type of assignment:EssayAcademic level:University Level, Bachelor’sReferencing style:HarvardNumber of sources:3Subject:ArtsClient country:United Kingdom (UK English)Assignment extract:
read the files I have add below.
give 3 examples about a range of crafts and/or design practices in relation to a variety of contextual, theoretical and critical perspectives.
2. to stimulate a view of practice as evidence of experience and meaning through critical engagement. ma
3.to facilitate the development of purposeful research towards positional reflection.
Lecturer’s Notes – Lecture 3: The alliance of Humanism with craft through the agency of the human body and decoration. Slide 1: Discuss forth-coming essay – Debates/arguments/questions • A Big subject today with a lot to discuss!!…I will attempt to combine two lectures into one! (3d form/function & decoration and the Body/self) • For this lecture I decided to take off from last week’s lecture, and began by asking myself questions about the different relationship jewellers and Silversmiths had to the body through the work they made or through the processes of making it. • I decided that silversmith/craftsmen’s relationship was not so much a corporeal one (body) as to a different kind of body – as a form of social production for the ‘body’ at large (the fabric of society) So I decided since most of you are SGJ’s to include a section on ‘decoration’. • These topics are not so far apart in fact! As I found many links between DECORATION/DECORATIVE and the BODY….through the ‘SELF/ notions of CORE SELF IDENTITY. • THE SELF = IS THE “PARTICIPANT” IN THE OBJECTS WE DISCUSSED IN WEEK 1 = THE WEARER OR USER • Note:- In the image we see the function of a ‘Ring’ being questioned (by an artist) – What defines Craft as we have discussed is its link to FUNCTION – This means that it always IMPLIES its USER • In the world of Jewellery – Rings and Jewellery always has a ‘gap’ (generally = the hole in the middle)….It is that gap that we will discuss today. Slide 2: • In the crafts there is always a direct link between object-function-body/ or, between Body-function-object . Decoration or the decorative was always regarded as the enemy to Modernist ways of designing and thinking. However, there has since been a re-evaluation of the notion that decoration is supplementary to form. (Adamson = Supplemental thinking…) • Today is an age which has witnessed THE BLURRING OF BOUNDARIES BETWEEN ART AND CRAFT. Slide 3: Q: Do you recall David Pye? His book? His term for surface texture (‘facture’) Now we will look at the origins of this contemporary attitude and promotion of the body (and notions of identity…) (1) FUNCTIONALISM = less is more! / EPHEMERALITY =doing more with less In traditional crafts the body is regarded as ‘facilitator’ the machine that makes the objects. Modernism promoted the concept of the body as machine – the body as tool for making money (in factories for example) – However, (as Liesbeth d. Besten argues in ‘On Jewellery’ p.125) it could be argued that the body is not a neutral bag of cells without its own inherent meaning. Certainly by the late c20th (1960s) attitudes to the body changed… • THIS ALL CHANGED – By the 1960s The body become the subject and not only the object of inquiry. (political/cultural/ etc) • Q: Can you see this?? • The French philosopher Merleau Ponty talked about the ‘Corps Vecu’ (the lived body) – the body as one experiences it, the body that you not only have, but that you are (although there were many bad points about this cultural and political shift towards the self) Slide 4: (2) SELF-ACTUALIZATION Note; The use of the terms – ‘inner self’ or ‘Core-self theory’ (a layered self like an onion with a fixed central core) / ‘self-expressive’ / expressive-self / ‘individuality and emotional products’ / ‘Self-actualization’ / consumer products relation to self-identity…. = The rise of the HUMAN POTENTIAL MOVEMENT (1960s Huxley / Est training USA – Werner Ehrhardt, or exugesis UK)….who believed that there is no fixed self – and that we can be what we want to be (or become)….we just had to escape and break down our socially constructed identities!….You just had to invent a ‘Self’ = Be what you want to be. = the rise of ‘SELFISH-NESS’ (and Neoliberalism/ ‘Greed is good’ mantra of 1980s) • arose out of the counterculture milieu of the 1960s[1] and formed around the concept of cultivating extraordinary potential that its advocates believe to lie largely untapped in all people. The movement took as its premise the belief that through the development of “human potential”, humans can experience an exceptional quality of life filled with happiness, creativity, and fulfillment. As a corollary, those who begin to unleash this assumed potential often find themselves directing their actions within society towards assisting others to release their potential. Adherents believe that the net effect of individuals cultivating their potential will bring about positive social change at large. • 37MINS + = JERRY RUBIN / YIPPIES AND WALTER EHRHARDT THE ARSEHOLE FROM EST!!….NOTE – THE CHANGES FROM A SOCIAL SELF TO A SELFINDULGENT SELF Slide 5: Q: IS DECORATION ESSENTIAL/ FRIVOLOUS OR SUPPLEMENTARY? 1960s NETHERLANDS = AN ARGUMENT ABOUT WHAT CONSTITUTES ‘GOOD JEWELLERY’ (the place where the beliefs of Modernism had its deepest roots!) Gijs Bakker & Emmy van Leersum – The NJM (New Jewellery Movement) where jewellers sought AUTONOMY FOR THE CRAFTS / His early work focused on a more ephemeral form of slight jewellery/ Bakker was always a MODERNIST – (calm/sober/minimalist) The works travel from concept to materials in a traditional MODERNIST manner. (Less is more and conceptually idea-led) Q: Can you see the argument??? (probably not until I explain Bakker’s work in particular…) • Bakker disliked ‘Schmuck’ (Gr) as it was sentimental/ expressive and lacked ‘meaning’ (and was ‘smart’/= use of gold). • SMIT produced a form of jewellery that was SO NOT DUTCH! He sought a more collective form of DECORATIVE WORK where instead of ‘less is more’ = more is better!! (Venturi) • He believed that decorative can also be a statement and include specific conceptually tight meanings! This 2008 work – The Real Series. Is where is collected several pieces of midc20th ‘costume jewellery’ and had them copied (often in a scale smaller) in gold/silver and precious stones. The hybrid objects that resulted are quite disarming to look at? (genuine and ‘fake’ combined – a questioning of value?…Adamson describes them as a ‘suspension of the value system of jewellery’ (Thinking Through Craft p.36) Slide 6: ORNAMENT: SEARCHING FOR A UNIVERSAL ORDER As nouns the difference between decoration and ornament is that decoration is the act of adorning, embellishing, or honoring; ornamentation while ornament is an element of decoration; that which embellishes or adorns. As Liesbeth Den Besten writes in her book (ON JEWELLERY) – In ancient Greece ‘Kosmos’ and ‘Ornamentum’ held equivalent meanings to one another. • ‘Kosmos’in Greece means both ‘Order’ and ‘world’. • THE DUAL ROLE OF ORNAMENT: • ‘Ornamentum’ was seen as an ordering of the whole to the detail….where every small part is connected and integral to the whole (‘Holism’) • In medieval readings of biblical texts they clearly distinguish between god making mountains and then filling the world with birds as an example. • Gestalt Theories of perception = Mind/perception/form & shape. Nowadays critiqued as being limited to perception without taking into account so many other factors like genetics (more fashionable nowadays) • Lastly of course we should not be too EUROCENTRIC and recognise the broader humanitarian use of symbols – The symbolic function of ornament is something integral to our existence! • Q: RECALLING YOUR POSTMODERNISM IDEAS – What are the benefits of DECORATION? (HUMANISM/WARMTH/COMMUNITY/SHARING/SYMBOLIC/OPENENDE D MEANINGS ETC.) • Q: Where do you see decoration in your lives? ( this links to next slide…) Slide 7: In Crafts now we see the resurgence of: – ‘Floral’ / ‘Filigree’ / ‘Drops’ /’bows’… etc. Silver speaks exhib. May 2017 / and Bonhams auction later. (markets opening up now…) Right up until the 1980s ornament was a real NoNo!…. DESIGNERS NOW READILY DRAW FROM HISTORY / DISCUSS AND PREDICT ‘COLLECTIVE MEMORY’ / AND ARE NOT ASHAMED TO SEDUCE WITH DECORATION. SEDUCTION IS NOT AS STAKE TODAY! = EMPOWERMENT FOR VAST COMMUNITIES (SINCE THE AIDS QUILT OF THE 1980s CRAFT HAS NOT HAD SO MANY COMMUNAL RESPONSIBILITIES (ESPECIALLY IN AGE OF TRUMP ETC) Most importantly as we will discuss is Craft’s ability to ENCHANT / !!! (RESEARCH AND USE THIS WORD!) Discuss: ORNAMENT & CRIME (ADOLF LOOS) Slide 8: QUESTIONING CRAFTS SUPPLEMENTARY ROLE (Adamson) • Droog = not a group but a curated shop set up early 1990s/A’dam. (See: M.Wanders carbon fiber macrame chair and Tejo Remy’s Rag chair– early designs better than recent one-liner/gimicks) • A shift in the 1990s in the way designer’s solved problems = No longer was Craft reactionary – BUT a craft based practice built on combining FOUND & HANDMADE (1) Newly acquired interest in NEW MATERIALS (2) Found objects (eco-recycling) Like Ridley Scott’s alien – this object shows hybrid object composed of an antique chair and an adaptation added by the c21st designer. (Called ‘Prosthetic’) The chair has been RESTORED (DISCUSS…..the notion of ‘restoration’) The definition of restoration (sympathetic restoration) is the same as in medics = DO NO HARM. (Unlike David Clarke’s work we looked at last week_) NOTE: HOW IMPORTANT SOCIAL MEANINGS ARE HERE = COLLECTIVE MEMORY. = MAKING AS PART OF THE VERY FABRIC (LITERAL & METAPHORIC) OF SOCIETY. = NOT CONFINED TO ‘SELF’ IN THE SELFISH WAY THAT INDIVIDUALISM AROSE IN MANY QUARTERS IN THE LATER C20th!!! Slide 9: Lois Walpole (USA) from exhibition ‘Urban baskets’ Recycled. Here quite clearly we see a definitive role for the crafts carved out for itself in the context of todays world. (inspiration for ‘Craftism’ / Crafting movements?) ALTHOUGH FAIRLY SIMPLE OBJECTS THESE OBJETS ARE (1) COLLECTIVELY AND SOCIALY DETERMINED (2) = SOCIAL PRODUCTION AND SHARED CONSCIOUSNESS Slide 10: Recent copies of the ‘Crafts’ magazine. Dialogue with ornament / tradition (Betty Brown teapot) / and function (using Risatti’s concepts of the ‘Ghost of function’) Slide 11: In silversmithing since the 1940s there has been a continuous stream of makers exploring the sensuous qualities of the human body can often be explored in the sensitivity to surface, its form and decoration. Makers like Dutch jeweller Gijs Bakker expresses what a lot of silversmiths feel which is that metal and silver in particular is surprisingly malleable to work with and can be used easily to mimic skin… …….NOW WE COME TO THE BODY! (PART 2?) To represent the warmth and softness of flesh in a material that is by nature hard and cold To create a piece of silverware that is tactile and sensual, and invites interaction…made through touch, inviting touch. The similarities of form and shape that appear within nature; and in the marriage of organic and structured form. This link between the skin of the object and the skin/touch/skill of the maker is often paramount and a high priority recognised by the maker – Some say that ‘Touch is the mother of all senses’! Touch is the sensory mode that integrates our experiences of the world back to us. Merleau–Ponty’s concept of the “Flesh of the World” is the great metaphor for touch. Touch and vision often work together – Pallasmaa writes that “The eye sees and informs and the hand goes there and reports back” Many silversmiths prefer to work instinctively and fluidly with the metal, without having any preconception of the outcome…this can help to create a more spontaneous and natural form. Other makers prefer to design and prepare 2D images/photos and sketches as preparation for the outcome. Bowls and vessels are created by raising and sinking flat sheets or discs of silver, using a variety of metal and wooden hammers and stakes. The spontaneous nature of the work means that each picture
Answer preview:
word: 2,500