• Letter to NY Arts – by NY Arts

    Date posted: April 28, 2006 Author: jolanta

    Two points were made in the editorial comment of your last New York Arts .

    Letter to NY Arts

    by NY Arts

    Two points were made in the editorial comment of your last New York Arts

    Magazine Newsletter:

    * According to some critics, craft has been assimilated by fine art

    * Are craft persons nicer people?

    Critics have never been the best judges of what is. . . Contrary to

    critical propaganda, craft has not been assimilated by fine art. It

    has always been its foundation. Nonetheless, over the past century, the

    effort demanded by craft was abandoned by many. Because of this, those who

    have not assimilated the craft of art, have succumbed to the inevitable:

    producing loud, adolescent, navel-gazing, non-grammatical, non-poetic,

    art-therapy . It’s simply easier to "do". Express whatever you want,

    however you want, despite your lack of ability has become the norm. That

    there is more art in craft is undeniable. Craft worthy of recognition is

    impossible to achieve without skill. The visual arts have tried to do

    without. It hasn’t worked. Students are desperately demanding it of

    teachers. Critics know this – but then, they’re part of the charade. How

    could they ever admit it?

    Are crafts people "nicer"? Definitely. As a group, they generally don’t

    have the hang-ups or the "attitude" so prevalent in the "awtistic"

    milieu. When you’re secure in the skills of your craft, (or your visual

    art), arrogance, snobbishness, clannishness or cliquishness or titles such

    as "artist" are unnecessary. Crafts people have a confidence in their

    skills base, a confidence which frees them to express themselves

    poetically, imaginatively and creatively without fear. Crafts people

    identify with their work not their angst. "Being" an artist is not an all

    consuming obsession with them. "Being" an artist has become nothing more

    than a "status" symbol for those who can’t "do" art that is relevant to

    anyone other than the "self".

    How intriguing it is that a dancer proudly states he/she is a dancer. A

    potter calls himself a potter, a sculptor, a sculptor, a writer a writer. A

    musician without hesitation states what instrument he/she plays, a singer

    readily admits to singing. . . Isn’t it bizarre that only the visual

    artists have an insatiable need to be called "artist" rather than

    "painter". . . Why this evident neuroses? Why can’t painters simply and

    proudly admit: I paint. But then. . . This emphasizes "doing" which

    implies work, skill, craft. . . labor.

    Once, a long time ago, the title of artist was a crown bestowed only upon

    those who had proven themselves worthy . Because they had achieved BOTH a

    high level of craftsmanship AND an even higher level of self-expression,

    they were universally acknowledged as masters of their CRAFT. Now, everyone

    is an artist, not through recognition, but through appropriation of the

    implied "mysterious genius" title.

    Being an artist, (or master crafts person), has little to do with "being"

    and everything to do with "doing" it better than anyone else in your

    sphere. The rest of us should simply and humbly admit that we are

    passionate students in a world in which we do "art work" as best we can in

    the hope that one day it may be perceived as ART. The Fine Arts will regain

    their once proud status when we realize this. Then and only then will the

    lowest common denominator implications disappear.

    Consequently, crafts people ARE nicer. They are less into themselves and

    more into excellence. It’s that simple.

    Bernard Poulin,

    a painter

    Ottawa, Canada

    Comments are closed.