I stumbled upon this fantastic video that talks about the history of when art and craft became two different things. Definitely worth a few minutes of your time:
Here's a bit of the content from the video:
It might seem obvious to us today to view people, such as da Vinci or Michelangelo, as legendary artists, and, of course, they possessed extraordinary talents, but they also happened to live in the right place at the right time, because shortly before their lifetimes the concept of artists hardly existed….It wasn't until around 1400 that people began to draw a line between art and craft. In Florence, Italy, a new cultural ideal that would later be called Renaissance Humanism was beginning to take form. Florentine intellectuals began to spread the idea of reformulating classical Greek and Roman works, while placing greater value on individual creativity than collective production. A few brave painters, who for many centuries, had been paid by the square foot, successfully petitioned their patrons to pay them on the basis of merit instead. Within a single generation, people's attitudes about objects and their makers would shift dramatically, such that in 1550, Giorgio Vasari, not incidentally a friend of Michelangelo, published an influential book called, "Lives of the Most Excellent Painters, Sculptors and Architects," elevating these types of creators to rock star status by sharing juicy biographical details. In the mind of the public, painting, sculpture and architecture were now considered art, and their makers creative masterminds: artists. Meanwhile, those who maintained guild traditions and faithfully produced candlesticks, ceramic vessels, gold jewelry or wrought iron gates, would be known communally as artisans, and their works considered minor or decorative arts, connoting an inferior status and solidifying the distinction between art and craft that still persists in the Western world….So maybe it's time to dispense with vague terms like art and craft in favor of a word like visual arts that encompasses a wider array of aesthetic production. After all, if our appreciation of objects and their makers is so conditioned by our culture and history, then art and its definition are truly in the eye of the beholder.
So what do you think? Should we just call it all visual arts? Or do you think it's important to maintain the distinction between art and craft?
Thanks for stopping by!
This is fascinating! I just saw the documentary “Made you Look” about an art forgery scam that showed people paying millions for abstract expressionist pieces they thought were “genuine” – that is, painted by known art superstars like Rothko or Pollock. It made me wonder why on earth a perfectly beautiful painting was suddenly worthless because it had NOT been painted by someone with fame. The pumped-up value of “art” over craft is bizarre.
This is fascinating! I just saw the documentary “Made you Look” about an art forgery scam that showed people paying millions for abstract expressionist pieces they thought were “genuine” – that is, painted by known art superstars like Rothko or Pollock. It made me wonder why on earth a perfectly beautiful painting was suddenly worthless because it had NOT been painted by someone with fame. The pumped-up value of “art” over craft is bizarre.
This is fascinating! I just saw the documentary “Made you Look” about an art forgery scam that showed people paying millions for abstract expressionist pieces they thought were “genuine” – that is, painted by known art superstars like Rothko or Pollock. It made me wonder why on earth a perfectly beautiful painting was suddenly worthless because it had NOT been painted by someone with fame. The pumped-up value of “art” over craft is bizarre.
This is fascinating! I just saw the documentary “Made you Look” about an art forgery scam that showed people paying millions for abstract expressionist pieces they thought were “genuine” – that is, painted by known art superstars like Rothko or Pollock. It made me wonder why on earth a perfectly beautiful painting was suddenly worthless because it had NOT been painted by someone with fame. The pumped-up value of “art” over craft is bizarre.
This is fascinating! I just saw the documentary “Made you Look” about an art forgery scam that showed people paying millions for abstract expressionist pieces they thought were “genuine” – that is, painted by known art superstars like Rothko or Pollock. It made me wonder why on earth a perfectly beautiful painting was suddenly worthless because it had NOT been painted by someone with fame. The pumped-up value of “art” over craft is bizarre.
This is fascinating! I just saw the documentary “Made you Look” about an art forgery scam that showed people paying millions for abstract expressionist pieces they thought were “genuine” – that is, painted by known art superstars like Rothko or Pollock. It made me wonder why on earth a perfectly beautiful painting was suddenly worthless because it had NOT been painted by someone with fame. The pumped-up value of “art” over craft is bizarre.
This is fascinating! I just saw the documentary “Made you Look” about an art forgery scam that showed people paying millions for abstract expressionist pieces they thought were “genuine” – that is, painted by known art superstars like Rothko or Pollock. It made me wonder why on earth a perfectly beautiful painting was suddenly worthless because it had NOT been painted by someone with fame. The pumped-up value of “art” over craft is bizarre.
Yasss! Its so odd. If you liked it before, why dont you like it after its revealed as a forgery?
Yasss! Its so odd. If you liked it before, why dont you like it after its revealed as a forgery?
Yasss! Its so odd. If you liked it before, why dont you like it after its revealed as a forgery?
Yasss! Its so odd. If you liked it before, why dont you like it after its revealed as a forgery?
Yasss! Its so odd. If you liked it before, why dont you like it after its revealed as a forgery?
Yasss! Its so odd. If you liked it before, why dont you like it after its revealed as a forgery?
Yasss! Its so odd. If you liked it before, why dont you like it after its revealed as a forgery?
This reminds me of two things. First, a scene in Mona Lisa Smile where one of the students in an art class claims “art is only art when someone calls it art” where the implication was that “someone” had to be someone with influence and power for it to be considered “art.” Second, an extremely talented friend who is a watercolor painter told me he’d never be able to support himself as an artist because watercolor was not considered an artform that could command high prices compared to oil or acrylic. Who decided that, I asked. He shrugged his shoulders and said “the art establishment that likes to make money on people’s talent. They get to make up the rules.”
Thanks for sharing this Julie. This type of thinking, of elevating one type of artform over another, or labeling what is art vs. craft – no wonder so many have imposter syndrome.
This reminds me of two things. First, a scene in Mona Lisa Smile where one of the students in an art class claims “art is only art when someone calls it art” where the implication was that “someone” had to be someone with influence and power for it to be considered “art.” Second, an extremely talented friend who is a watercolor painter told me he’d never be able to support himself as an artist because watercolor was not considered an artform that could command high prices compared to oil or acrylic. Who decided that, I asked. He shrugged his shoulders and said “the art establishment that likes to make money on people’s talent. They get to make up the rules.”
Thanks for sharing this Julie. This type of thinking, of elevating one type of artform over another, or labeling what is art vs. craft – no wonder so many have imposter syndrome.
This reminds me of two things. First, a scene in Mona Lisa Smile where one of the students in an art class claims “art is only art when someone calls it art” where the implication was that “someone” had to be someone with influence and power for it to be considered “art.” Second, an extremely talented friend who is a watercolor painter told me he’d never be able to support himself as an artist because watercolor was not considered an artform that could command high prices compared to oil or acrylic. Who decided that, I asked. He shrugged his shoulders and said “the art establishment that likes to make money on people’s talent. They get to make up the rules.”
Thanks for sharing this Julie. This type of thinking, of elevating one type of artform over another, or labeling what is art vs. craft – no wonder so many have imposter syndrome.
This reminds me of two things. First, a scene in Mona Lisa Smile where one of the students in an art class claims “art is only art when someone calls it art” where the implication was that “someone” had to be someone with influence and power for it to be considered “art.” Second, an extremely talented friend who is a watercolor painter told me he’d never be able to support himself as an artist because watercolor was not considered an artform that could command high prices compared to oil or acrylic. Who decided that, I asked. He shrugged his shoulders and said “the art establishment that likes to make money on people’s talent. They get to make up the rules.”
Thanks for sharing this Julie. This type of thinking, of elevating one type of artform over another, or labeling what is art vs. craft – no wonder so many have imposter syndrome.
This reminds me of two things. First, a scene in Mona Lisa Smile where one of the students in an art class claims “art is only art when someone calls it art” where the implication was that “someone” had to be someone with influence and power for it to be considered “art.” Second, an extremely talented friend who is a watercolor painter told me he’d never be able to support himself as an artist because watercolor was not considered an artform that could command high prices compared to oil or acrylic. Who decided that, I asked. He shrugged his shoulders and said “the art establishment that likes to make money on people’s talent. They get to make up the rules.”
Thanks for sharing this Julie. This type of thinking, of elevating one type of artform over another, or labeling what is art vs. craft – no wonder so many have imposter syndrome.
This reminds me of two things. First, a scene in Mona Lisa Smile where one of the students in an art class claims “art is only art when someone calls it art” where the implication was that “someone” had to be someone with influence and power for it to be considered “art.” Second, an extremely talented friend who is a watercolor painter told me he’d never be able to support himself as an artist because watercolor was not considered an artform that could command high prices compared to oil or acrylic. Who decided that, I asked. He shrugged his shoulders and said “the art establishment that likes to make money on people’s talent. They get to make up the rules.”
Thanks for sharing this Julie. This type of thinking, of elevating one type of artform over another, or labeling what is art vs. craft – no wonder so many have imposter syndrome.
This reminds me of two things. First, a scene in Mona Lisa Smile where one of the students in an art class claims “art is only art when someone calls it art” where the implication was that “someone” had to be someone with influence and power for it to be considered “art.” Second, an extremely talented friend who is a watercolor painter told me he’d never be able to support himself as an artist because watercolor was not considered an artform that could command high prices compared to oil or acrylic. Who decided that, I asked. He shrugged his shoulders and said “the art establishment that likes to make money on people’s talent. They get to make up the rules.”
Thanks for sharing this Julie. This type of thinking, of elevating one type of artform over another, or labeling what is art vs. craft – no wonder so many have imposter syndrome.
If you have not seen it yet, you might enjoy reading “How Art Works- a Psychological Exploration” by Ellen Winner. She is a professor of psychology, so the work can get a bit dense. But she is trying to answer the questions: can art be defined? how do we decide what is good art? why do we devalue a perfect fake?
If you have not seen it yet, you might enjoy reading “How Art Works- a Psychological Exploration” by Ellen Winner. She is a professor of psychology, so the work can get a bit dense. But she is trying to answer the questions: can art be defined? how do we decide what is good art? why do we devalue a perfect fake?
If you have not seen it yet, you might enjoy reading “How Art Works- a Psychological Exploration” by Ellen Winner. She is a professor of psychology, so the work can get a bit dense. But she is trying to answer the questions: can art be defined? how do we decide what is good art? why do we devalue a perfect fake?
If you have not seen it yet, you might enjoy reading “How Art Works- a Psychological Exploration” by Ellen Winner. She is a professor of psychology, so the work can get a bit dense. But she is trying to answer the questions: can art be defined? how do we decide what is good art? why do we devalue a perfect fake?
If you have not seen it yet, you might enjoy reading “How Art Works- a Psychological Exploration” by Ellen Winner. She is a professor of psychology, so the work can get a bit dense. But she is trying to answer the questions: can art be defined? how do we decide what is good art? why do we devalue a perfect fake?
If you have not seen it yet, you might enjoy reading “How Art Works- a Psychological Exploration” by Ellen Winner. She is a professor of psychology, so the work can get a bit dense. But she is trying to answer the questions: can art be defined? how do we decide what is good art? why do we devalue a perfect fake?
If you have not seen it yet, you might enjoy reading “How Art Works- a Psychological Exploration” by Ellen Winner. She is a professor of psychology, so the work can get a bit dense. But she is trying to answer the questions: can art be defined? how do we decide what is good art? why do we devalue a perfect fake?