Art Vs. Craft

[Nola Seminarian]

A debate we had last night here at school was what is the difference between [i]art [/i]and [i]craft[/i]. brought in was the question of what is beauty (and whether beauty is objective or subjective). this was an amesome debate between two of my brother seminarians, but i don't want to go into too much detail of what they said because i would like this discussion to have its own life and not be a retread of what they discussed last night.

so the question is "What is the difference between art and craft, or is there a difference?"

[Oremoose]

I say art is panting and things in art gallieries things you look at. Crafts are things you use. A painter is artist and a carpender is a craftman.

[CatherineM]

A craft can be taught. You can take two people and teach them the same craft and get similar results. One person may have better manual dexterity or eye or patience, or whatever, but both will produce similar results. Artists also need training, but they have a gift that can take a craft beyond any training.

[Vincent Vega]

There is perhaps some overlap, but there are differences. I guess craft has to be material/tangible. I would consider music to be art, but not craft.

[krissylou]

I think of art as purely decorative and craft is something useful.

Both could be made out ceramic, but a decorative object is art and a salad bowl is craft.

[Nola Seminarian]

the essential question really was what makes something art, not what is an art and what is a craft. i should have made that distinction earlier

Edited December 1, 2011 by Nola Seminarian

[Nihil Obstat]

Real art, I think, is a physical (or aural, in the case of music) expression of the human soul. That is why some art, especially modern art, is twisted and shallow and substance-less - because our culture is suffering from those problems right now. That is why sacred art, iconography, music, architecture, is so important, and why there is such a vast difference between legitimate sacred art and the kitsch that passes for it lately.
That is also why real art can lift the soul up to prayer, contemplation of God, and spiritual peace, whereas twisted art causes despair, anger, hopelessness, and discord.

[Nola Seminarian]

i like that definition of art. the definition we used was that it was something that revealed something about the beauty of God (or something to that effect)

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='Nola Seminarian' timestamp='1322778340' post='2343345']
i like that definition of art. the definition we used was that it was something that revealed something about the beauty of God (or something to that effect)
[/quote]
I was definitely thinking along those lines as well. Nearly the same thing; Man is in the likeness of God, so the soul reflects God's beauty. If art is an expression of the human soul, then it is as well an expression of the beauty of God.

[Luigi]

[quote name='Nola Seminarian' timestamp='1322778340' post='2343345']
i like that definition of art. the definition we used was that it was something that revealed something about the beauty of God (or something to that effect)
[/quote]

You have enough "something"s in this sentence to start a Something Store! or something.

[Socrates]

Craft involves technical skill, but is not necessarily concerned with beauty, or the higher realities and questions of existence and the human condition.

A well-built, but aesthetically ugly machine would be an example of craft rather than art. I do think that there is definitely overlap between craft and art, and the lines can be blurry and subjective. A well-crafted machine can also be beautiful, and approach art.

In a somewhat different sense, craft can be used to describe less purely functional things such as painting and writing, which involve technical skill but don't rise to the level of true art. For instance, there are painters or illustrators who are skilled craftsmen in that they can create very skilled and realistic depictions of things, but whose work lacks the higher aesthetic levels and higher purpose of true art. (A skilled commercial artist would usually be a craftsman rather than a true artist.)

Btw, it's kind of refreshing to see a debate topic not related to politics, sex, or Harry Potter (though I'd probably give it no more than one more page before it veers into an argument over homosexuals, anarchism, or Obama.)

[Luigi]

[quote name='Socrates' timestamp='1322782106' post='2343388']

Btw, it's kind of refreshing to see a debate topic not related to politics, sex, or Harry Potter (though I'd probably give it no more than one more page before it veers into an argument over homosexuals, anarchism, or Obama.)
[/quote]

I think it's fair to say that eveyone agrees with the obvious claim that homosexual anarchists produce the best artistic depictions of President Obama, don't you?

See! It didn't take even [i]one[/i] more page!

[quote name='Socrates' timestamp='1322782106' post='2343388']
Craft involves technical skill, but is not necessarily concerned with beauty, or the higher realities and questions of existence and the human condition.

A well-built, but aesthetically ugly machine would be an example of craft rather than art. I do think that there is definitely overlap between craft and art, and the lines can be blurry and subjective. A well-crafted machine can also be beautiful, and approach art.

In a somewhat different sense, craft can be used to describe less purely functional things such as painting and writing, which involve technical skill but don't rise to the level of true art. For instance, there are painters or illustrators who are skilled craftsmen in that they can create very skilled and realistic depictions of things, but whose work lacks the higher aesthetic levels and higher purpose of true art. (A skilled commercial artist would usually be a craftsman rather than a true artist.)

[/quote]

Well said.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='Socrates' timestamp='1322782106' post='2343388']

Btw, it's kind of refreshing to see a debate topic not related to politics, sex, or Harry Potter (though I'd probably give it no more than one more page before it veers into an argument over homosexuals, anarchism, or Obama.)
[/quote]
The State doesn't regulate or define art! This is clearly a heretical travesty! DOWN WITH ANARCHY IN THE ART WORLD! Up with the authoritarian State to define art! Without a State regulator how will we know if we're buying or looking at real art, or just cheap imitations???
THE HORROR! LORD PLEASE SAVE ME FROM THIS AWFUL SOCIETY!

Edited December 1, 2011 by Nihil Obstat

[arfink]

[quote name='Nola Seminarian' timestamp='1322757177' post='2343196']
so the question is "What is the difference between art and craft, or is there a difference?"
[/quote]

I'm gonna be "that guy" and say that I don't believe that art absolutely has to be about conveying truth. I have seen alot of works which I and many others would call art which have absolutely no inherent truth to convey. Look at basically the entire artistic history of Islam until very recently, for example. No flaming for just a moment, let me explain. Islam forbids the making of any graven images. For centuries this was construed to mean that any pictorial representations of anything taken from life was to be prohibited, and so the entirety of their art focused upon forms and shapes which had no relation to anything visible in nature. In certain more repressive caliphates even the use of common symbols that had an immediately understandable meaning was frowned upon, so their art was focused entirely upon colors and geometry. I would still call this art, some of it great art. It conveys no particular discernible truth, except perhaps the truth of the Islamic leadership promoting iconoclasm.

Religious art, of course, must be infused with truth and beauty and Godliness because that's what it's intended for. This inclusion of truth is not by necessity but by intention. We -want- our art to do that, so we make it do that.

Now, just because I say this does not necessarily allow many modern atrocities like the school of brutalism to get their foot in the door. Assigning an intention after the fact, after crafting your work, is not sufficient for your work to be art. The work must be infused with the intent from the very start, and the works artistic merit will then drive both from the intention infused therin and the execution of the intention. An art piece created with evil intent, to cause despair etc. would still be an art. Just an evil art.

EDIT: Likewise, an artist with holy intent to makes a rather lame or poorly painted picture, would be classified as "pious kitsch art." I don't mean this to belittle, but merely to classify. I wouldn't claim to be a great artist myself- my doodles I would class as intentionless, and thus not art, since I don't usually have any formed idea when making them, but simply make.

Edited December 2, 2011 by arfink

[BigJon16]

I think art has to have a certain amount of "Veni, Creator Spiritus" in it. Art has the ability to awe us by beauty, it has the ability to give us "goosebumps", it has the ability to inspire us to be more than just "flesh and bone". Sound familiar? The Holy Spirit gives us these same compulsions.

True art has to be a reflection of the artist. For example, the beauty of nature is a reflection of the beauty of God. It is filled with this "Veni, Creator Spiritus", this Spirit that is God. When you listen to a song like [i]Yesterday[/i] by The Beatles, its almost like you have a glimpse of what McCartney was feeling at that moment.

Music has the ability to speak to us in profound ways. We connect with lyrics and melodies, both of which contain a vast amount of emotion in them. Songs that are more upbeat have a happy, or joyful mood to them. I know that one of the key mediums that The Holy Spirit used to show itself to me and bring me to love Him was praise and worship music and sacred music, especially Gregorian Chant.

Now, I'm not sure about you pholks, but I've never felt this "Veni, Creator Spiritus" by watching my shop teacher build a birdhouse.

Anybody, if they set their mind to it, can build a birdhouse. But only someone who is truly inspired can create "true art." Only someone who has been given talents by God, can create something that is so immensely drenched in emotion that it can move someone to tears, or laughter, or desolation or consolation. But I believe that we all have this talent, this "inspiration", but we just have to find the proper medium that God has destined for us.

Edited December 2, 2011 by BigJon16