1

No Ideas but in Things

Copyright © 2011 Jonathan Patrick Morgan

All rights reserved. No Ideas but in Things by Jonathan Patrick Morgan is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.

More details on the nature of this license and its permissions may be found by scanning the QR code above, or visiting the Creative Commons website listed below:

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/

Originally printed and hand-bound in London, UK, by Jonathan Patrick Morgan on 100% FSC certified paper.

This digital edition made for public viewing through Issuu.com

Any questions regarding this work or to request use permissions beyond those allowed in the license noted above, contact:

Jonathan Patrick Morgan

info@JonathanMorganArt .com

08

Fall

5

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRO 5

DISCONNECT (THE ISSUE AT HAND) 8

ROOTS (HISTORIC CONTEXT) 12

PASSION (TRUTHS ABOUT CRAFT & SKILL) 18

EXPLORATION (PERSONAL INVOLVEMENT) 24

ANTI-SCHISM (CLOSING THE GAP) 28

WORKS CITED 30

APPENDIX 1 (IMAGES) 34

APPENDIX 2 (SUGGESTED READING) 40

INTRO

What are the benefits to be gained by the art world and society at large via the recapturing and revaluing of craft and skill? Craft and art are inextricably linked and I am of the opinion that select negative stereotypes that have developed about the art world and artists are partially due to the distance created by this fact not being acknowledged. Craftsmanship, or at least the capacity for it, is something built into everyone which begins to develop as early as childhood, staying with us throughout our livesi.

Art for artists, meaning work that appeals primarily to those in the professional art world or with some significant degree of formal education in art theory and history, is entirely valuable. However, there seems to be more value placed on this type of work by critics as opposed to work that does not reference theory in a notable way. Such preference for work relevant to those within the field of art can make the art world seem exclusive and elitist to outsiders. Given that many artists wish to interact with or even improve society through their work, it is counterproductive to allow alienation of the public.

In the following sections, I will show that craftsmanship is inextricably linked to art historically and is also a shared capacity amongst people as a result of being human. By embracing craft as essential to making art and just as worthwhile as deep intellectual and theory-driven work, the art world could increase public appreciation and valuing of art itself, as well as the institutions it operates within, by appealing to this common human feature.1

1 It is important for me to note that this essay is from a decidedly Western point of view and concerns itself with the histories of that context and implications valid within it.

i Sennett, Richard. The Craftsman. 1st ed. New Haven: Yale UP, 2008. 268; 272; 285

DISCONNECT (THE ISSUE AT HAND)

One of the best places to find examples of the negative stereotypes I previously mentioned is in popular culture, namely film. Since these cinematic works are mainly written for the general public, the issues and characters are often relatable and reflect clear archetypes or stereotypes. In the 2009 American film (Untitled), we see a rather poignant critique of the worlds of contemporary fine art and avant-garde music. The film has several valuable examples of negative public perception of artists. The main character, Adrian, serves as the critical representative of the "outsider" public, though he himself is involved in the avant-garde music scene. As the young gallery owner, Madeleine, takes him to visit various artists, his reactions can be seen as representative of the kind that many members of the public feel when confronted with contemporary fine art.

The characters who best illustrate what I am referring to here are the possible Damien Hirst caricature Ray and the socially inept and distant conceptual artist Monroe. Ray is an artist who works primarily with taxidermy animals combined with various found and made objects that result in generally disturbing sculptural works (Figure 3). The connection to Hirst is obvious at this point. The important thing to note, which Adrian is keen to point out at Ray's studio, is that he does not actually make anything. Ray even delivers the line, "Why would I learn taxidermy when I can pay someone to do it for me?" This showing of a lack of craft and skill while still reaping a majority of the benefits casts a subtly negative light on Ray, with the apparent goal being to show how such a practice can strike many people as disingenuous and possibly unfair.

Ray is also portrayed as wildly egotistical, especially in his nearly irate claims that his work belongs in

museums, that the collectors who purchase his pieces are “heroes,” and when he says, “History doesn’t influence me. I influence it.” This is a seemingly perfect representation of the artist who becomes drunk with success and begins valuing his or her own work so much that they see themselves as being better than not only other artists, but people in general. This idea has its roots in the Renaissance, as I will discuss later on.

The character I think best represents the most common source of alienation of the public from the art world is Monroe. He is a character who has nearly no social skills and the descriptions he delivers of his work make little to no logical sense:

I want my work to have the whole world in it, and I want it to mean everything to everyone. But, I don't want to add anything because there's already too many things.i

The final aspects of the film to tie into this popular reading of the art world involve Madeleine, a gallery owner, and Adrian’s brother Josh, a commercial artist. His works are technically intense abstract paintings that are all incredibly similar to each other and seem to use a conceptual language light enough to be accepted by many people, as evidenced by their constant sales. This is a strong contrast to Monroe’s enigmatic themes and Ray’s artificial inspirations, as exemplified by the disconnect between one work consisting of several dead possums climbing on a crystal chandelier and its title: Intelligent Design in a World of Enlarged Prostates.

However, though Madeleine is selling his work through her gallery she refuses to give him a show and conducts the sales from the back room of the gallery. Her hiding of Josh's work is clear evidence of the shame she

feels for selling work that conflicts with her beliefs or morality about art. This division of principles is made clear when she says to Josh after he asks repeatedly for a show, "A gallery has a front room and a back room. Never confuse the two." While refusing to show the work of a popular commercial artist who seems to be getting a good reception with the general public, Madeleine goes to great lengths to describe the work of Ray and Monroe, who both get shows at her gallery. In this way Madeleine attempts to increase the value of works the public rejects while keeping more popular works out of the world of high art. The writers’ implied question is: Should we praise art that seems to require a deep explanation and knowledge of art theory to carry any value? Furthermore, should art be made for the art world or the general public?

A worthwhile example of the problems with such artworks comes from Peter Dormer’s The Art of the Maker. He relates an example from the British philosopher Andrew Harrison. Harrison presented an ashtray and stated that it represented the Pope. He placed the ashtray on a table under a single light that represented the presence of God and the Pope’s connection to it. Then, he placed and upturned trashcan over the ashtray blocking the light to represent the cardinals’ incompetence shielding the Pope from true divine insight. With such an in depth explanation, the assemblage makes sense. Without it, it resembles nothing more than an office during a cleaning by a janitor and is thus “aesthetically arbitrary”ii.

This style of art is an obvious threat to the valuing of craft and skill. Unfortunately, these ideas have been in decline since Word War II with genres like Minimalism, Conceptualism, Performance, Installation and Video Art increasing in popularity. Since the 1960’s, the decline has been increasing at an alarming rate and putting the conservation of craft knowledge bases in jeopardyiii. Due to

the individualistic and competitive nature of the art world, there is no system in place or widely accepted for the transmission of this knowledge. Dormer argues that without a system of apprenticeship for such knowledge that it will be lost entirely. Furthermore, he draws a connection between the increased preference to acquire only segments of skill to complete single goals – a continuation of the Modernist idea that technique is nothing more than a tool used to express and idea – and an increase in the rate of loss of such knowledgeiv.

i (Untitled). Dir. Jonathan Parker and Manfred Baumann. By Cathrine DiNapoli and Jonathan Parker. Perf. Adam Goldberg, Marley Shelton and Eion Bailey. Parker Film Company, 2009. ii Dormer, Peter. The Art of the Maker. London: Thames & Hudson, 1994. 34 iii Dormer. 25 iv Dormer. 30

ROOTS (HISTORIC CONTEXT)

When put into an historical context, art and craft share a common, though troublesome root that stretches all the way back to Ancient Greece. Historic research points to a clear prejudice against artists in Ancient Greece. Because artists had to work with their hands and labor for their money, they ranked on the same level as slaves in the social standings of the time. Even in Plato and Aristotle�s theories of beauty, they leave out artists while including musicians and poets, who need not labor to create their works. This stigma was so great, that even when Stoicism claimed artists to be capable of inspiration and ecstasy the Platonic tradition never caved completely. It was so pervasive that Lucian wrote a dream sequence about the spirit of Education coming to him in the night to warn him against becoming a sculptor, as he would be considered dumb and lowly, illustrating how people of the time thought artists to be anti-intellectualsi.

After the fall of Rome, the visual arts were pushed into complete obscurity. Up through the Middle Ages, they were excluded from liberal arts education entirelyii. The place where they survived was the guild house. In the Middle Ages and Medieval times, trade guilds covering the areas of carpentry, masonry, weaving and other crafts were common in cities across Europe, with larger cities like Paris having as many as 350 guilds during the fourteenth century. They were also indispensable as they were, in fact, the heart of the feudal town. Not only did they serve as a commercial entity, but they also acted as a fire service, performed guard duty for the town, and had societal functions involving community serviceiii.

Here, crafts were honed and refined over generations in a long and patient process. The work produced by a workshop led to increased honor for the guild with individuals sharing in that collective prideiv.

That sense of honor was the chief reward for a craftsman2. They followed a set path for their career which, as the origins of the word “career” suggest, was a journey focused on development of skill over a person’s lifev. This led to the individual focusing on the prolonged development of themselves through their work. When the work progressed, they moved further down their career path towards one day being a master. Essentially, the work was a direct reflection of that craftsman’s skill which dictated their level of authority, position in their professional life, and who they were as a personvi. In fact, in Born Under Saturn, the Wittkowers make a very important point regarding this sense of fulfillment:

No document has come down to us indicating that [Medieval artists] were dissatisfied with ranked on a level with embroiderers, locksmiths and watchmakers. [Their] manuals and Medieval aesthetics suggest that, like tailors, weavers and other craftsmen, artists found fulfillment in the technical perfection of their work.vii

Up to and through the transition of the early Renaissance, there was no widely recognized difference between artists and other craftsmen. There was no “mystique” surrounding an artist who was viewed simply as highly skilled in their specific trade. They were seen as part of a community of craftsmen working collectivelyviii. As Renaissance Humanism became a shaping force for European society, this would begin to change.

2 For the purposes of this essay, I will use the word “craftsperson” to remain gender neutral. When the term “craftsman” is used, it is to accurately reflect the historic context of guilds and the trades associated with artists as being male dominant as well as this particular instance as the term appears in the reference source.

During the Renaissance, significant emphasis was placed on two ideas: subjectivity and originality. These ideas, along with the changing economic climate of Renaissance Europe, gave rise to the artist as a separate role in society. Again, craftsmen of the Middle Ages prided themselves on good quality work. The masters who ran the guild judged this quality on a standard collectively set and agreed uponix. However, as the Renaissance artist developed as a role, this system could not be applied in the same wayx.

The beginnings of the role of the artist as separate from that of a craftsman occurred when masters would break away from the guild and make a name for themselves. Two strong examples of such an event are those of Brunelleschi and Giovanni Battista Paggi. In the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, these two managed to get legal exemption from guild membership in their hometowns of Florence and Genoa through cunning intellectual argumentsxi. Once away from the traditions and rules of a guild, a craftsman was able to explore new venues with a large degree of comparative freedom. Though artist guilds did come into existence with time, they did not always provide the stability of more traditional guilds. Many cities had artists joining related guilds instead with sculptors sometimes joining stonemason and carpentry guildsxii. This also reinforces the link between the artist and the craftsman as early artists essentially carved out a niche in the craft world for their work.

Instead of relying on a network of professionals vouching for the quality of the work and drawing in new contracts, liberated craftsmen created a difference between art and craft: they claimed originality. It was in the Renaissance world that the artist began to develop the image of the talented geniusxiii. The idea that each piece of work made by a particular craftsman, now an artist, was only available from one man replaced the value created by a professional guarantee of quality. With the upper classes seeking to embrace the humanist ideals of the timexiv and

demonstrate their understanding of culture, originality became one of the most valuable traits a piece of work could carry. One may even be tempted to view this as the beginnings of the brand name being applied to art. This led to artists of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries potentially acquiring huge sums of wealth through claims of ingenuity and artistic genius rather than direct laborxv. It was with the rise of humanism that individual artists were able to make their own personal touch and implied genius a valuable thing in the eyes of the educated upper class, which would pay for such uniqueness. Through Neo-Platonism of the time, it was easy to claim that the work of an artist reflected their unique self in the way that a person�s body was a mirror of their soulxvi. This praise of the individual and their greatness, the precursor to modern fame, has long been considered a defining trait of the Renaissancexvii.

As Levey states, “...man himself is the Renaissance preoccupation”xviii. From the rather socialistic arena of the guild – where individuals did not focus on personal fame, but on the guild’s honor and collective well-being – the Renaissance managed to create a subjective and isolated world, with solitude becoming a common artistic traitxix. The maker became as important as their work, defining the artist against the craftsman.

i Wittkower, Margot, and Rudolf Wittkower. Born Under Saturn: The Character and Conduct of Artists. New York: New York Review, 2007. 4; 6 ii Wittkower. 8 iii Rutenburg, Viktor I. Feudal Society and Its Culture. Moscow: Progress, 1988. 27; 29; 30 iv Sennett, Richard. The Craftsman. 1st ed. New Haven: Yale UP, 2008. 53 v Harper, Douglas. "Career." Online Etymology Dictionary. vi Sennett. 61 vii Wittkower. 14

viii Martindale, Andrew. The Rise of the Artist in the Middle Ages and Early Renaissance. London: Thames & Hudson, 1972. 9 ix Martindale. 12 x Wittkower. 22-23 xi Wittkower. 10-11 xii Cole, Bruce. The Renaissance Artist at Work: from Pisano to Titian. New York: Harper & Row, 1983. 20 xiii Tomory, P. A. Foundations of European Art. Norwich: Jarrold & Sons, 1969. 106 xiv Martindale. 97 xv Wittkower. 24-25 xvi Wittkower. 93 xvii Burckhardt, Jacob. The Civilization of the Renaissance. London: Phaidon, 1944. (Via Wittkower 43) xviii Levey, Michael. The Early Renaissance. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1967. 25 xix Wittkower. 63

PASSION (TRUTHS ABOUT CRAFT & SKILL)

Shifting from the workshop to the studio led to new ethics. These developed over time and vary so much that it is impossible to apply a unified set to all artists. Craftwork is different; built into everyone, from an early age, are principles essential to being a skilled craftsperson. Patience, objectivity, and material consciousness are important aspects that are more complex then their names may suggest. As each strengthens, it quickly becomes apparent how connected they are.

The patience involved in craftwork is developed out of a preexisting capacity in people for concentration. Concentration is a basic skill learned as a child, and the ability to focus on a problem and stay with it throughout difficulties must be developed before venturing into craftwork as a foundation for the demands craft will place upon a personi. This looping enhancement of patience is further motivated by the fact that craft knowledge is a disciplined knowledge much like applied science ii . Craftwork solidifies and strengthens this patience as one realizes its importance in enabling and enhancing commitment to good work. With a steady pace, hidden issues in a problem or task can be uncovered and new methods of dealing with them imagined. The result of such an approach is refined work that reflects great care on the part of the maker. While not exclusive to craftwork, the process is essential to a skilled craftsperson. This kind of dedication requires not only patience, but objectivity as well.

By objectivity, I mean the practice of mentally stepping outside of oneself. In the specific act of making, the focus is on the object or task, not the individual. One’s full attention is placed on what they are doing, allowing for a focused and dynamic approach. It would be a mistake to read into the phrase of “stepping outside of oneself” as

meaning that less complex questioning and problem solving are going on. As Heidegger succinctly put it, “[…] true thinking is never an activity performed in abstraction of reality […]”iii. This objectivity is about maximizing one’s ability to analyze the issue before them through tangible interaction with material. Craftwork is never without at least a surface evaluation of the event to take place and this feeds back into the conceptual aspects of the event to give a more comprehensive understanding. In the moments of creation and execution, this is an essential tool at the disposal of the craftsperson. When coupled with a commitment to good work, it becomes an accelerant. As Sennett puts it, “[…] the routines by which craft proceeds take people out of themselves”iv. By remaining objective and thinking primarily about their work, a craftsperson can increase their commitment to it.

Material consciousness is unique in relation to the previous principle, and for this paper, I expand it to a sort of material awareness. This is an awareness of the various materials used in one’s craft, and is at its peak once a level of expertise has been reached. Over the years, a craftsperson will learn the different properties of wood, metal, or other materials common in their work. This awareness of how to manipulate materials can lead to personal revelations regarding new and exciting ways to use them. One can begin to identify with the materials; new attributes are assigned to each in an anthropomorphizing process. This can facilitate an emotional connection between the craftsperson and the elements of their work.

British brick makers in the eighteenth century would often talk about “honest” bricks relating to the color and structure of the brick not being covered up by stuccov. These craftsmen viewed it as a disservice to the material to cover it up with another to simulate stone, for example. The brick itself obviously does not care, as it is

incapable of doing so. Nevertheless, the craftsmen acted as if it was their duty to defend the material and display its properties. They empathized with the bricks and viewed them to be just as beautiful as the stone or marble others would attempt to mimic by covering them up. Moreover, covering the bricks belied the hard work of the craftsperson by hiding hand made work under a shoddy veneer.

This kind of thinking can be seen in art, as well. When someone says they have seen a great impressionist painting, like Monet’s Water Lilies, but only in a photograph, one may feel that they have not truly experienced it. In such work, the subtle definition of the brush strokes and the texture of the paint and canvas can play a huge role in the overall experience of the work. The difference is that craftwork can be more demanding of one’s material consciousness and curiosity than the discipline of art as much of it deals heavily with the creation of objects. Formally, material consciousness addresses a curiosity about material and the exploration of its properties and manipulation, and this curiosity is essential for good craftworkvi. Here, I go one step further to propose that material consciousness results in an emotional connection to the material, and therefore the work as well.

This can all be linked back into the development of tacit knowledge – what I have also referred to as craft knowledge in a more specified sense. Dormer quotes the philosopher Alan Janik defining tacit knowledge as linked “to those aspects of experience which are wholly knowable self-reflectively … but by their very nature are incapable of precise articulation”vii. We might tend to think of such knowledge as being simple or unimportant due to the high level of dependence our species has developed in regard to language. We praise those who can speak well and best

explain things to others. We even use such explanatory skill as a means to test and justify ideas and arguments, like the ones I am putting forward in this essay.

The truth of the matter is that language is an invention of humanity to synthesize thought into a sharable medium. Tacit knowledge, I would argue, resides more so in that realm of pure thought and understanding and does so in such a way that results in our difficulty in transferring it into invented language. Antonio Stradivari, for example, seemed to naturally possess originality due to a seemingly perfect approach to lutherie overall and specifically violin making. Such originality was sometimes cultivated as a need for survival, but, as is the case with Stradivari, can occur organically due to a level of skill so prodigious that it seems impossible for a pupil to adequately learn and reproduceviii. Many artists, however, make a concerted effort to create an aura of originality around their work in order to lend it value and increase their personal “brand.” Stradivari was a highly skilled craftsman whose tacit knowledge had a depth so great that many attributed it to genius and originality, but in fact it was his pursuit of the craft with patience, objectivity, a commitment to good work and material consciousness and awareness that made him the master he was. 3

i Sennett, Richard. The Craftsman. 1st ed. New Haven: Yale UP, 2008. 220 ii Dormer, Peter. The Art of the Maker. London: Thames & Hudson, 1994. 17 iii Heidegger, Martin. The Question Concerning Technology, and Other Essays. Trans. William Lovitt. New York: Harper Torch, 1982. xxii iv Sennett. 254

3 For further reading regarding the fascinating individual that was Antonio Stradivari, see Appendix 2.

v Sennett. 138 vi Sennett. 120 vii Dormer. 21 viii Scott, Marion M. "Antonio Stradivari: Violin Maker." Music and Letters 18.4 (1937). 340

EXPLORATION (PERSONAL INVOLVEMENT)

One of the things that drew me to fine art as opposed to strictly craft was the experimentation that takes place within the discipline. I have always been a person with many hobbies and varying knowledge. I think this kind of exploration of different topics, techniques, and the like can help to underscore areas of focus in a person’s life and give them a more complete sense of their world. The techniques I have so far used in my work reflect this love of intellectual exploration, and the different styles of work I make further affirm this part of my personality. I have tested my hand at brazing, modeling, carving, CNC manufacturing, block printing, graphic design, CAD software, electronics, ceramics, metal casting and others. Each time I learn a new technique it opens my eyes to new possibilities in other areas in which I had already experimented.

There has always been a two-part constant in my life regarding art and making: woodworking and lutherie. This is an area where I feel especially craftsman-like. I have dedicated almost nine years to the study and design of the guitar and the amazingly wide array of tools and disciplines needed to make these versatile and influential objects. I am still striving to reach that magic “10,000-hour” mark of expertise someday because I cannot imagine the day will come when I do not feel driven to further my lutherie knowledge. Maybe it is that drive which has allowed me to see the merit in craftsmanship in general. The dedication in furthering something bigger than one person, a craft that reaches beyond an individual’s lifetime, is awe-inspiring to me. It is also source of inspiration for me (Figure 4).

One artist that I happen to know and look up to is Kiva Ford, a glass artist from the United States, who shares this fascination with me. In a recent video produced by Etsy.com profiling Kiva, he discusses his attraction to

the material properties of glass, the excitement he feels in exploring new techniques (Figures 5 & 6), and the connection he feels to ancient craftspeople through his continuation of the glassblowing tradei. It is in the words and actions of studio craftspeople like Kiva that I find my inspiration to reconcile craft with fine art in a meaningful way. In another video produced by Etsy, residents of the town of Marfa, TX, talk about how the craft night is their “church”. They also mention how they teach each other crafts that “a whole generation has missed out on” and one can see how much excitement they get from this preservation of craft knowledgeii. I try to find ways of making works that continue my love of the culture surrounding craft while simultaneously being accepted as works of art. My goal is to open people’s eyes to the artistic qualities of handicrafts.

Another two artists I find particularly interesting in this pursuit are Jake and Dinos Chapman. Their “Chapman Family Collection” series (Figures 7 & 8) is a perfect example of craft meshing into the art world. Their use of materials and the skills they acquired as essential elements to the message of the piece regarding consumerism is right in line with what I try to do. Craftsmanship may not have been their focus for the work, but the Chapmans’ method incorporates the ideals of craftsmanship to benefit their art rather than limit it.

I identify with craftspeople and lesser-known artists like George Peterson, rather than against major artists. Peterson is an American sculptor who self-describes as self-described as a “working class artist”iii and works in wood to create pieces that are fascinating in texture, subtle colors, and reminiscently aggressive forms. His projects (Figures 9 & 10) show a deep understanding of the material he utilizes with and a desire to push it and his craft into a new realm of his making.

Most of my work involves the monuments and artifacts humans make and the last monument that remains of us - the skeleton (Figure 11). These objects define us both in life and death: the body which is our self in life and a monument to us in death, and artifacts which are the work of people in life and remain long after their creators’ deaths. I find that the skeleton is an ideal subject for discussing craft as it can be used not only to represent death and an ending, but also something incapable of or resistant to death. Though craft and skill have been marginalized as I discussed, artists like Peterson and Kiva preserve their craft by working with it and finding new ways to develop it. I am attempting to do the same through my work and research, but in regards to craftsmanship in general, or the “soul” of craft and skill as I would call it.

i Handmade Portraits: Kiva Ford. Dir. Alex Rappoport. Perf. Kiva Ford. Blip.tv. Etsy.com, 11 Apr. 2011. ii No Place Like Here: Marfa Texas. Dir. Karen Berstein. Blip.tv. Etsy.com, 26 Apr. 2010. iii Suqi, Rima. "Attitude." Circle Factory :|: The Works of George Peterson. Circle Factory/George Peterson, 2009.

ANTI-SCHISM (CLOSING THE GAP)

The title of this paper, a phrase coined by William Carlos Williams, is “No Ideas but in Things.” I do not consider this type of statement to be a slogan for a person’s life; rather, I have chosen it because of the idea at which it hints through Williams’ sentiment praising “the things touched by the hands during the day.”i The very bedrock of civilization in any anthropological sense is craft. Specialization is a keystone feature for groups becoming complex and organizing into a budding civilization, and even leading to basic economies and social hierarchiesii. Without brick makers, there would be no buildings. Without blacksmiths, there would be no complex tools. Without tailors, there would be no clothes. We live in material reality, and thus largely rely on material goods.

Look at how perfectly suited craft and art are for one another. Dormer cited an increase in people in the West looking to “commercially obsolete” trades to add meaning and fulfillment to their livesiii. As a professor of mine, John Cussans, pointed out in several lectures, Art is inherently useless in a practical sense. Artists make objects with little to no utilitarian value. Is it a coincidence that commercially obsolete trades are the most attractive to people looking to enrich their lives? I would argue that it is this lack of, or at least lower concern with, utilitarian value that draws people to both art and craft due to the freedom of expression it encourages iv . These two practices are already perfectly geared to help remind the public of their societal and cultural value.

Without craft, there is no art. Most people already realize this on some level, even if they do not articulate it. Artists should strive to be more actively aware of that fact and, most importantly, share that awareness with the public. If the art world continues to give the impression of craft

being anything less than essential to and on an equal level with art, then people may see it as disingenuous and that could fuel resentment. This is not a stance on art or craft being superior to each other. This is a plea to find common ground so that art can work together with craft in a dynamic way. Each one can fortify the other as a pair of cultural features receiving the respect and consideration they deserve.

i Williams, William Carlos. Imaginations. New York: New Directions Pub., 1970. 110 ii Hirst, K. Kris. "Craft Specialization - A Primer on Craft Specialization." About.com. The New York Times Company. iii Dormer, Peter. The Art of the Maker. London: Thames & Hudson, 1994. 13 iv Dormer. 72

WORKS CITED

Books

Burckhardt, Jacob. The Civilization of the Renaissance. London: Phaidon, 1944. Print.

Cole, Bruce. The Renaissance Artist at Work: from Pisano to Titian. New York: Harper & Row, 1983. Print.

Dormer, Peter. The Art of the Maker. London: Thames & Hudson, 1994. Print.

Heidegger, Martin. The Question Concerning Technology, and Other Essays. Trans. William Lovitt. New York: Harper Torch, 1982. Print.

Levey, Michael. The Early Renaissance. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1967. Print.

Martindale, Andrew. The Rise of the Artist in the Middle Ages and Early Renaissance. London: Thames & Hudson, 1972. Print.

Rutenburg, Viktor I. Feudal Society and Its Culture. Moscow: Progress, 1988. Print.

Scott, Marion M. "Antonio Stradivari: Violin Maker." Music and Letters 18.4 (1937): 335-42. Digital.

Sennett, Richard. The Craftsman. 1st ed. New Haven: Yale UP, 2008. Electronic.

Tomory, P. A. Foundations of European Art. Norwich: Jarrold & Sons, 1969. Print.

Williams, William Carlos. Imaginations. New York: New Directions Pub., 1970. Print.

Wittkower, Margot, and Rudolf Wittkower. Born Under Saturn: The Character and Conduct of Artists. New York: New York Review, 2007. Print.

Websites

Harper, Douglas. "Career." Online Etymology Dictionary. Web. 12 June 2011. <http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=career>.

Hirst, K. Kris. "Craft Specialization - A Primer on Craft Specialization." About.com. The New York Times Company. Web. 12 June 2011. <http://archaeology.about.com/cs/artifacts/a/craft.htm>.

Suqi, Rima. "Attitude." Circle Factory :|: The Works of George Peterson. Circle Factory/George Peterson, 2009. Web. 17 July 2011. <http://circlefactory.com/attitude.php>.

Videos/Film

Handmade Portraits: Kiva Ford. Dir. Alex Rappoport. Perf. Kiva Ford. Blip.tv. Etsy.com, 11 Apr. 2011. Web. 17 June 2011.

No Place Like Here: Marfa Texas. Dir. Karen Berstein. Blip.tv. Etsy.com, 26 Apr. 2010. Web. 17 June 2011.

(Untitled). Dir. Jonathan Parker and Manfred Baumann. By Cathrine DiNapoli and Jonathan Parker. Perf. Adam Goldberg, Marley Shelton and Eion Bailey. Parker Film Company, 2009. Web. Netflix. Web. 12 June 2011.

Images (those not taken from films)

White, Stephen. Chapman Family Collection (Detail). Digital image. Tate Britain, 2006. Web. 15 July 2011. <http://www.tate.org.uk/liverpool/exhibitions/jakeanddinoschapman/guide/room7.shtm>.

Chapman Family Collection (Detail). Digital image. Jing Zhou on Myspace. MySpace Inc., 11 July 2008. Web. 15 July 2011. <http://www.myspace.com/secretmood/blog/413928925>.

Peterson, George. Lingo (Detail). Digital image. Circle Factory :|: The Works of George Peterson. Circle Factory/George Peterson, 2009. Web. 17 July 2011. <http://circlefactory.com/products.php>.

Peterson, George. Torn Trio. Digital image. Circle Factory :|: The Works of George Peterson. Circle Factory/George Peterson, 2009. Web. 17 July 2011. <http://circlefactory.com/products.php>.

APPENDIX 1 (IMAGES)

Figure 1 – Stil l from the fi lm (Untitled) . One of Ray’s works on display at Madeline’s gallery involving a stuffed lamb laying on the ground near a tarnished and broken children’s bike as if in an accident . Other works on display included pheasants that appeared to have been used as throwing darts and an elk in a barber’s chair with surgical apron on giving itself a macabre hair cut by using surgical implements i t cut portions of its ears and antlers .

Figure 2 – Stil l from the fi lm (Untitled) . One of Monroe’s works on display in his home showing the extreme level of self -referential ity that the writers are crit icizing.

Figure 3 – Stil l from the fi lm (Untitled) . Adrian with a look of disdain on his face as he hears Madeline flattering Monroe in regard to his practice .

Figure 4 – Lineage of the Electric Guitar . Jonathan Morgan. Acetone transfers on wood. 74”x50”x4”. 2011 . A wall piece tracing the development of the electric guitar from its roots in prehistory through several millennia to its recent forms.

Figures 5 & 6 – Stil ls from Handmade Portraits : Kiva Ford. Kiva working on one of his encapsulated blown glass pieces using a technique he developed himself .

Figures 7 & 8 – Chapman Family Collection (Detail) . Jake and Dinos Chapman. 2002.

Figure 9 – Torn Trio . George Peterson.

Figure 10 – Lingo (Detail) . George Peterson.

Figure 1 1 – Skelitar Mk.2 . Jonathan Morgan. Wood, bronze wire and acrylic . 32”x12”x2”. 2010 .

APPENDIX 2 (SUGGESTED READING)

Hill, W. Henry, Arthur F. and Alfred E. Antonio Stradivari: His Life and Work. New York: Dover Publications Inc., 1963.

Faber, Toby. Stradivari�s Genius. New York: Random House, 2004.

Fetis, F.J. Notice of Anthony Stradivari. West Sussex: Music for Strings, 2005.

Marchese, John. The Violin Maker. New York: Harper Collins, 2007.