How do we sustain the labor of thinking, writing, and sharing—without burning out or disappearing?

That question is at the heart of my new essay, “The Price of Knowledge within Craft Communities of Practice: What Is Worth Preserving?” After more than twenty years of offering my work freely—essays, critiques, and ideas—I recently made a small but meaningful change: I offered an essay for sale for $6.

It is both trivial and momentous. It is trivial because it’s less than a sandwich, but it is momentous, because it marks a boundary for me— it is asking a question of valuation. For me, writing is the hardest thing I do, and perhaps the thing I do best.

These $6 offerings are simply an experiment. With the gesture, I am asking the question: Can a gift and a price coexist without cancelling each other out?

Drawing on Lewis Hyde’s The Gift, the essay offered here, as a follow-up, explores the tension between shared knowledge and economic survival. As Hyde writes, a true gift circulates; it gains meaning through movement. But even in a gift economy, the artist must survive to continue giving.

Today, as academic programs decline and institutional support wanes, we’re left with essential, yet unspoken, work: creating new models of reciprocity that sustain both the commons and its contributors.

This isn’t just about monetization; it’s also an opportunity for a broader conversation about preservation, stewardship, and the value of these efforts.

The contents of this essay are available as a blog post (free), an audio reflection (free), and a downloadable PDF (pay what you wish; suggested $6). I invite you to read, listen, share, support, reflect, and discuss these issues further. I don’t provide easy answers, but I am the guy who is here to ask the hard questions.

→ Download the full essay here.

Walter Benjamin, AI, and craft ethics

This audio feature on Jack Lenor Larsen was crafted by Dennis Stevens of Redefining Craft, drawing from the rich archival materials housed in the Smithsonian's Archives of American Art.

The source material comes from "Celebrating 175: Jack Lenor Larsen, Personal Correspondence, 1958, 1972-1997," part of the Smithsonian's 175th anniversary c…

Read more

At Redefining Craft, we dig into the evolving and hybrid intersections of art, craft, and design, offering a unique perspective. Today, we explore the ideas presented in Herwin Schaefer’s seminal article, "The Metamorphosis of the Craftsman", circa 1958, because we think it might spark an interesting conversation.

Schaefer's astute analysis of the epoch provides a historical perspective on the transformation of craftsmanship, aligning with the podcast's mission to examine the hybrid spaces and moments where disciplines evolve.

Main Theme

Schaefer’s core argument is that the Industrial Revolution radically altered the essence of craftsmanship, making the pursuit of pre-industrial craft ideals not only impractical but also counterproductive to the development of a contemporary aesthetic. He asserts that true craftsmanship now lies within the realm of industrial design and production rather than in the creation of handcrafted luxury items.

Key Ideas & Facts

The End of an Era

Schaefer highlighted the pivotal moment around 1750 when technological advancements began to overshadow handcraft methods, leading to the decline of traditional guilds and the erosion of specialized skills. This shift is crucial for understanding how the boundaries between art, craft, and design began to blur as industrial techniques became integral to the creative process.

"From about 1750 on we have had a revolution in technics which has displaced the man using hand craft methods."

Nostalgia vs. Reality

Schaefer critiques the Romantic ideal of reviving “craft”, pointing out that it ignores the economic and social realities of industrialization. This yearning for the past is seen as an obstacle to embracing a modern aesthetic that acknowledges the contributions of industrial design.

"Even after reaping the benefits of technology for a hundred years...there is still nostalgia for the pre-industrial age and a hankering for the hand crafts."

The Dilemma of the Modern "Craftsman"

The decline of the guild system left contemporary craftsmen without systematic training or clear purpose. Schaefer argues that this lack of structure has produced decorative but largely superfluous items, contrasting with the practical focus of traditional craftsmanship.

"The highly and systematically trained craftsman of the hand craft age produced for the real needs of everyday life, while the ill equipped self-styled 'professional' amateur of today produces useless objects of decoration."

True Craftsmanship in the Industrial Age

Schaefer redefines true craftsmanship as residing within industrial design and production. He champions the roles of artists, designers, engineers, and skilled technicians as the new craftsmen, who shape the aesthetics of the modern world through industrial means.

"If the craftsman has creative imagination, the only way he can apply it and make a contribution to society today is by designing for and working in industry."

The Importance of Embracing the Machine

Schaefer calls for a recognition of the machine as the defining tool of the modern era, emphasizing the creative potential inherent in industrial processes. This perspective aligns with the podcast’s exploration of how digital technologies and contemporary art practices intersect with traditional craft.

"Let us put things and people in their proper places and acknowledge our world as it is...let us meanwhile recognize the compelling reality of our industrial world and its character as the phoenix-like successor to the vanished world of the old hand craftsman."

Conclusion

In the context of Redefining Craft, Schaefer’s challenge to the traditional definition of "craftsman" can be revisited in a contemporary context.

As this podcast provides a platform to discuss how the creative process, informed by diverse human values, continues to evolve in response to technological advancements, Schaefer’s insights encourage a reevaluation of craft, advocating for an aesthetic that embraces the realities of mass production and the transformative potential of industrial design.

This dialogue is crucial for understanding the ongoing metamorphosis of the craftsman in today’s interconnected world of art, craft, and design— even if we feel today, in hindsight, that Schaefer is full of it.

Study Guide The Metamorphosis Of The Craftsman

78.6KB ∙ PDF file

Download

The attached is a study guide to approach the article, In his 1958 article, "The Metamorphosis of the Craftsman," Herwin Schaefer examines the changing role of the craftsman in a rapidly industrializing world. He argues that the traditional craftsman, trained in a guild system and producing essential objects for daily life, has been replaced by the "artist-craftsman," who often creates luxury items with little practical purpose. Schaefer contends that the true craftsman of the modern era is not the individual artist, but rather the skilled technician working within industry, who produces objects that meet real needs and contribute to the aesthetic environment. He criticizes the tendency to romanticize the past and suggests that the craftsman of today should embrace the possibilities of industrial technology rather than seek to revive outdated practices.

Download

The Metamorphosis Of The Craftsman

690KB ∙ PDF file

Download

Schaefer, H. (1958). The metamorphosis of the craftsman. College Art Journal, 17(3), 266-276. Herwin Schaefer's essay "The Metamorphosis of the Craftsman" explores the changing role of the craftsman in an increasingly industrialized world. Schaefer argues that industrial production has largely replaced traditional handcraft methods, leaving the modern craftsman with a diminished role.

Download

For now, I am going to advance a few projects this way. Each episode will explore craft's evolving definitions and practices, challenging traditional norms while fostering inclusivity and innovation. We’ll explore how digital technologies, contemporary art intersections, and power dynamics shape craft communities of practice. I hope that what emerges will be interesting and different.

Collaborating with our AI hosts, I hope to transform complex information into lively audio discussions that summarize material, draw connections between topics, and even allow for playful banter. You can listen to each episode on the go and/or download it conveniently.

At Redefining Craft, I believe in the power of knowledge— and new ideas are always welcomed. And if you are interested in what else I’m up to, you can check out my other project at:

HEGEMONACO

HEGEMONACO is dedicated to deepening the understanding of the ethical and political challenges in governing AI and Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) within democratic societies.

By Dennis Stevens

Stay tuned, as we’ll see what emerges! Thanks, Dennis

Craft communities of practice are dynamic spaces where individuals come together to share knowledge, skills, and experiences. Within these communities of practice, dynamic conversations are crucial in shaping their members' collective understanding and advancing the practices of making.

This article explores the dual nature of conversations in craft communities of practice, focusing on the interplay between edifying conversations that foster a sense of belonging and shared understanding and disruptive conversations that challenge assumptions and introduce new knowledge.

By examining the balance between these two types of conversations, we gain insight into knowledge exchange and innovation processes within craft communities and the implications for their adaptability and success.

Edifying conversations and their positive impact

Within craft communities of practice, edifying conversations serve as the bedrock, fostering a sense of belonging, shared understanding, and mutual respect among members. These exchanges are characterized by their uplifting, inspiring, and enriching nature, catalyzing personal and collective growth. They provide a platform for members to share their experiences, insights, and expertise, amplifying the community's collective knowledge.

Edifying conversations play a pivotal role in nurturing the bonds that bind communities of practice together. Members develop a deeper understanding of one another's perspectives, backgrounds, and challenges through shared stories. This empathy fosters a sense of camaraderie and strengthens the collective identity of the community. United by a common purpose, members feel a sense of belonging and draw motivation and support from their peers.

Moreover, edifying conversations contribute significantly to the overall well-being and vitality of craft communities of practice. They create a positive and supportive atmosphere where members feel valued and respected. This sense of psychological safety encourages active participation, knowledge sharing, and creative expression. As a result, communities thrive, brimming with energy and enthusiasm, continuously evolving and adapting to the ever-changing landscape of their craft.

The disruptive nature of non-edifying conversations and the need for new knowledge

Craft communities of practice often rely on shared knowledge and techniques, leading to resistance to new ideas and approaches. The comfort of familiarity can hinder innovation and progress, as individuals may be reluctant to challenge established norms.

Non-edifying conversations, characterized by unproductive exchanges or conflicts, can further impede the flow of new knowledge and stifle creativity. These conversations can disrupt the sense of belonging and shared understanding essential to a healthy community of practice. They can also make members feel frustrated and disengaged, ultimately damaging the community.

To foster growth and advancement, it is crucial for communities of practice to embrace disruptive knowledge and perspectives that challenge the status quo. This can be done by encouraging members to question assumptions, experiment with new ideas, and engage in respectful debate. It is also important to create a safe space where members feel comfortable sharing their thoughts and ideas, even if they are unpopular or controversial.

By embracing disruptive knowledge and non-edifying conversations, communities of practice can stay relevant and innovative in a rapidly changing world. They can also attract and retain talented members who are passionate about learning and growing.

Fostering collaboration: nurturing synergies in knowledge exchange across art, craft, and design communities of practice

Collaboration and knowledge exchange are the lifeblood of art, craft, and design communities of practice. These communities create a synergistic environment that fosters groundbreaking innovations and advancements when they come together. One notable example of such collaboration is the Bauhaus movement, which emerged in the early 20th century. The Bauhaus brought together artists, designers, and craftsmen from various disciplines, resulting in a revolutionary approach to art and design that continues to influence contemporary practices, especially in our understanding of how artists and designers should be cultivated and educated.

To nurture this collaborative spirit, creating open platforms and spaces that encourage the cross-pollination of ideas and knowledge sharing is essential. These platforms can take various forms, such as workshops, conferences, online forums, and social media groups. By providing opportunities for members to interact, learn from each other, and share their expertise, communities of practice can cultivate a rich tapestry of knowledge and creativity.

Technology is pivotal in facilitating seamless collaboration and knowledge exchange among geographically dispersed communities in the digital age.

Virtual platforms, cloud-based storage, and video conferencing tools enable members to connect, share resources, and engage in real-time discussions, irrespective of their physical location. This digital connectivity breaks down barriers and allows for creating and cultivating global communities of craft practice, where diverse perspectives and experiences converge to foster a vibrant and dynamic exchange of ideas.

Furthermore, inclusivity is paramount in fostering a thriving community of practice. By embracing diversity in terms of backgrounds, perspectives, and skill sets, communities can tap into a wider pool of knowledge and creativity.

This inclusivity enriches the collective understanding and encourages members to challenge their assumptions and explore new possibilities. When communities foster an environment where all voices are valued and respected, they unlock their full potential for innovation and growth; social hierarchies can often hinder innovation, shared learning, and growth.

Exploring antagonism: navigating conflicting perspectives in craft practices

Conflict and disagreement are natural parts of any community dynamic, and craft communities of practice are no exception.

These communities are formed by individuals passionate about the specific domain in craft practice and often have strong opinions about the best ways to practice it and protect it. As a result, disagreements will inevitably arise.

However, it is essential to remember that these disagreements can be a source of growth and innovation rather than a hindrance to progress.

When different perspectives and ways of knowing are engaged constructively, they can spark new ideas and lead to breakthroughs that would not have been possible otherwise. The key to successfully navigating these disagreements is fostering a respectful dialogue and active listening culture.

This means creating a space where everyone feels comfortable sharing their thoughts and opinions, without fear of judgment or reprisal. It also means being willing to listen to and understand the perspectives of others, even if they differ from our own.

Of course, this is not always easy. Disagreements can be emotionally charged, and it can be difficult to remain calm and objective when our strongly held beliefs are being challenged. However, it is important to remember that the goal is not to win the argument but to find a solution that works for everyone involved. This requires empathy, emotional intelligence, and a willingness to compromise.

When disagreements are handled constructively, they can lead to many positive outcomes. They can help to strengthen the community by building trust and rapport among members. They can also lead to new ideas and innovations that can benefit the entire community. Finally, they can help develop the emotional intelligence and conflict resolution skills of the individuals involved, which can benefit them personally and professionally.

In conclusion, conflict and disagreement are natural parts of community dynamics, and craft communities of practice are no exception. However, when these disagreements are handled constructively, they can be a source of growth and innovation rather than a hindrance to progress. By fostering a culture of respectful dialogue and active listening and by developing empathy and emotional intelligence, communities of practice can navigate these disagreements successfully and reap the benefits that they offer.

The Dual Imperative: Seeking External Knowledge in Art and Design Practice

To achieve transformative growth, craft communities of practice must embrace the dual imperative of seeking external knowledge and challenging internal assumptions.

They can access fresh perspectives, innovative methodologies, and diverse skill sets by venturing beyond their existing boundaries of craft communities of practice. This infusion of external knowledge catalyzes disruptive innovation, allowing communities to break free from conventional thinking and explore uncharted territories.

One notable example of this dynamic is the integration of digital technologies into traditional craft practices. Initially met with skepticism, the introduction of 3D printing, laser cutting, and other digital fabrication techniques has revolutionized how craftspeople design, prototype, and produce their work. These technologies have expanded the creative possibilities and opened up new avenues for collaboration and knowledge exchange, connecting craftspeople from different corners of the globe.

Another compelling illustration is the fusion of traditional crafts with contemporary art forms. Street art, social practice art, mixed media, and multimedia installations have challenged the conventional definitions of craft and pushed the boundaries of artistic expression. By embracing these disruptive influences, craft communities have revitalized their practices, attracting new audiences and generating fresh creative energy; taking the object off the pedestal is a primary challenge to advancing craft practice as we understand it.

Furthermore, it is equally important to include diverse perspectives, such as those from indigenous cultures or marginalized communities, that can bring valuable insights and practices that enrich and expand the collective knowledge base. By actively seeking and integrating external knowledge, craft communities of practice can foster a dynamic environment that catalyzes innovation, adaptability, and sustained growth across shared knowledge domains.

Balancing Stability and Transformation

Maintaining a delicate balance between stability and transformation is a perennial challenge for craft communities of practice. Preserving cherished traditions and techniques while embracing innovation is a complex dance requiring careful navigation.

Resistance to change is a natural human response, and it can be particularly pronounced in communities deeply rooted in tradition. Overcoming this resistance requires a nuanced approach that combines empathy, effective communication, and a shared vision for the future.

Fostering a culture of edification while embracing constructive disruption is essential for the long-term vitality of craft communities of practice. Edifying conversations build trust, camaraderie, and a sense of shared purpose, while disruptive conversations challenge assumptions and spark innovation. Finding the right balance between these two types of conversations is an art.

Encouraging open dialogue, active listening, and mutual respect can help cultivate an environment where edification and disruption coexist harmoniously.

Adaptability is the key to successfully navigating the ever-changing landscape of community dynamics. Craft communities of practice must be willing to evolve, to embrace new technologies, and to adapt their practices to meet the needs of a changing world. This requires a commitment to lifelong learning, a willingness to experiment, and a capacity for self-reflection. By continuously seeking external knowledge and challenging internal assumptions, craft communities of practice can maintain their relevance, vitality, and ability to contribute to the broader cultural landscape.

Conclusion

Communities of practice thrive on the intricate dance between edifying and disruptive conversations.

Edifying conversations act as the glue that binds members together, fostering a sense of belonging, shared identity, and mutual trust. They reaffirm the community's values, experiences, and expertise, creating a strong foundation for the collective communities to secure and cultivate their shared knowledge and ways of making.

On the other hand, disruptive conversations serve as catalysts for change and innovation. They challenge conventional wisdom, introduce new perspectives, and push the boundaries of knowledge. Disruptive conversations create a fertile ground for experimentation, allowing the community to evolve and adapt to a constantly changing landscape and allowing new ways of making and forms of expression to emerge.

The key to thriving craft communities of practice is finding the harmonious balance between these two seemingly opposing forces. Overemphasis on edifying conversations can lead to complacency and stagnation, while excessive disruption can cause conflict and hinder progress. The art lies in fostering a culture that encourages respectful dialogue, active listening, and a willingness to embrace diverse viewpoints.

When this delicate equilibrium is achieved, communities of practice become vibrant hubs of collective intelligence, innovation, and adaptation. They harness the power of shared knowledge, driving advancements in their respective fields and making significant contributions to the broader domains of expression that we collectively understand as the confounding and sometimes confusing hybrid intersections of art, craft, and design.

At Redefining Craft, my focus has previously been on exploring communities of practice and their dynamics, including how these communities form, bond, and share ideas through a common vocabulary and a set of tools and technologies.

To build on this work, I’ve begun to explore the tension arising from shifts in ways of knowing, particularly concerning artificial intelligence. This domain raises questions about our relationship with technology and the varying attitudes toward its acceptance or rejection. My perspective addresses these issues by advocating for a conciliatory ideology fostering common ground and reconciliation.

In the past, I developed a website called Hegemonaco, which initially related to my creative visual work in art and design. This led me to think about why this was important and how I could be most effective in facilitating a conversation about the ethical and political challenges in governing AI and Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) within democratic societies.

Here’s some context in a video:

The concept of developing a new conciliatory ideology allows us to comprehend the possibility of extending our own ways of knowing beyond specific communities of practice.

But, this entails setting aside biases, striving for objectivity, looking beyond differences, and actively building bridges to promote harmony. It emphasizes the importance of constructive dialogue and mediation, fostering an environment where diverse perspectives can coexist and collaborate toward common goals. This broader vision aims to transcend the boundaries of individual communities, promoting understanding, cooperation, and mutual respect among different groups.

If you haven’t read it, Maria Elena Buszek's (Editor) 2011 book Extra/Ordinary: Craft and Contemporary Art explores how contemporary artists use craft media and processes to transform craft media into extraordinary conceptual art. Before this book’s publication by Duke University Press, few art critics or scholars had previously explored the significance of craft in contemporary art in this depth.

Buszek’s text filled a gap in a groundbreaking way by reflecting on what craft means in the contemporary moment and provided new craft theories in relation to art. The book explains how activist crafting operates and describes and contextualizes various institutional changes that continue to evolve. Buszek’s work has stood the test of time, and it is now reference material for new ways of understanding the emergent frontiers of craft contexts.

The book covers various media, from quilts to ceramics, and includes perspectives from artists, curators, and scholars. It also offers an introduction to the concept of craft culture referenced and celebrated by artists who have promoted new ways of thinking about the role of craft in contemporary art.

I am one of the authors of this text. I contributed a chapter titled Validity Is in the Eye of the Beholder: Mapping Craft Communities of Practice.

Validity Is in the Eye of the Beholder: Mapping Craft Communities of Practice

1.79MB ∙ PDF file

Download

From Extra/Ordinary: Craft and Contemporary Art, ed. by Maria Elena Buszek. Duke University Press, April 2011. ISBN 9780822347620

Download

I include a .pdf of my contributed chapter above because this topic is the focus of a panel discussion that I will moderate:

Craft Matters: Communities of Practice, hosted by the Center for Craft on Feb 23rd, 2023 1:00 pm–2:00 pm ET.

Here are a few relevant core concepts that I address in the essay:

• the validation of a maker's work has become merely a matter of where one chooses to look and what one considers to be their field of practice

• to be recognized as a professional within the field of craft, one must produce within specific frameworks of expectation that are limited by and often at the mercy of recognized sources of validation, among them the museum, the media, and the marketplace

• the field of craft consists of multiple communities of practice, as each group organizes itself according to the materials and associated processes of the domain.

I hope that you will join us for the free, online conversation.

Status can significantly impact power, control, and the power structure within craft communities of practice as knowledge, beliefs, and norms are constructed and maintained through community members' interactions and agreements.

The distribution of power and control within a craft community of practice can shape the collective understanding of needs and priorities and determine who gets to shape and maintain that understanding.

Status is an important factor that can impact the distribution of power and control within a community. Members with higher status within the community, such as those with greater expertise, experience, prestige, knowledge, or financial resources, often have more influence over and access to the community's shared knowledge, norms, and practices.

They may also have greater access to resources and opportunities that shape the collective understanding of the community’s needs and priorities. And ultimately, more access yields more influence to maintain their dominance within the community.

Other factors, such as gender, race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status, can also influence the distribution of power and control.

We understand well the power and influence that curators, writers, donors, and collectors can wield within a community of creative people seeking recognition and support.

The intersection of these factors further shapes the structure of power within a craft community of practice and, thereby, impacts how the community's norms, practices, and goals are constructed and maintained.

Status plays a significant role in impacting power and control and the power structure of craft communities of practice.

Understanding and evaluating the dynamics of power and status within craft communities is vital for critically examining and challenging dominant narratives, promoting a democratic ethos, and ensuring inclusivity in craft communities of practice.

I recently had the privilege of attending a Buhurt competition held at a multi-purpose complex of a local land grant university.

Their versatile facility is designed to accommodate a variety of events and functions— it serves as both a livestock arena and an expo center. And in this grand setting, on a dirt floor, I witnessed a competition that was an unforgettable experience.

I was delighted and privileged to get a glimpse into the passionate and dedicated world of Buhurt.

Buhurt is a medieval-style full-contact combat sport conducted in a ring. Participants wear metal armor and carry medieval-style weapons, such as poleaxes, halberds, swords, shields, and maces. They engage in melees, as individuals or in teams. The objective of the sport is to be the last person or team standing; the rules are— once you’re down, you have to stay down.

The sport attracts participants from all walks of life, including historical enthusiasts, martial artists, and anyone looking for a unique and challenging new experience involving the opportunity to strike another person and the risk of personal physical injury.

The medieval-styled, custom-crafted armor costs each competitor at least $6000. The rigorous training and preparation required for participants, combined with the strict safety guidelines and regulations, make this sport a test of skill, athleticism, and physical fitness. The tournament format of Buhurt includes one-on-one duels, team fights, and battles with up to thirty-two fighters in the ring at the same time.

While watching the Buhurt match, I marveled at the spirited and honorable nature of the competition. I whimsically imagined that Don Quixote would have been drawn to the medieval-style combat of Buhurt.

Don Quixote's interest in the sport might stem from his desire to live out the ideals of chivalry, to prove himself as a true knight, and to test his skills and bravery in a controlled and safe environment.

I imagined that Don Quixote’s romanticized view of the world may have led him to see Buhurt as a way to bring the ideals of chivalry to life and to experience the thrill of medieval combat.

The point is that there’s a lesson worth examining — it’s in the connection between the reasons for doing things and the identity and purpose of the individual doing the thing.

Our personal beliefs, values, experiences, and goals significantly influence our motivations for doing things.

When our values align with these things, they lead to fulfilling experiences and feelings of authenticity. Hobbies (e.g. Buhurt or a craft practice) play a crucial role in allowing people to express themselves, build relationships, and find meaning and satisfaction in their daily life.

The passion of the Buhurt community provides insight into the richness of hobbies and interests, and reflecting upon this community objectively from the outside can help craft communities better understand themselves.

How do craft communities of practice look to professional practitioners from the outside?

What would anthropologists discover in a study of our various craft-related communities of practice?

If we can reflect on Buhurt objectively, perhaps, we can examine our own community’s quirks from a renewed perspective.

As a hobby and a sport, Buhurt provides an exciting way for people to connect with others who share their interests; that’s what communities of practice are all about. And in this example, the intersection of hobby and passion in communities of practice highlights the importance of being intentional and reflective about why we do what we do.

It is important to understand how our motivations shape our sense of self, our purpose, and how we define ourselves in terms of our external identities; the connection is in meaning, purpose, and passion— and how these core concepts are integral to maintaining an authentic sense of happiness.

Craft Matters: Communities of Practice 

February 23, 1 – 2 pm ET
Free virtual discussion (Register Here)
‍
The Center for Craft's new strategic direction, Craft Matters 2023-27, spotlights the idea of communities of practice as a way to consider broader access and inclusion for craft. How will we recognize and value the contributions of diverse communities and the individuals who build them? Answers will change how these contributions are recognized and valued in the future.
 
Join the Center for Craft's Executive Director Stephanie Moore and moderator Dennis Stevens of RedefiningCraft.com for a lively panel discussion to include Tanya Aguiñiga, Juliana Barton, and Steven Lee as they share their knowledge and passion for a fuller understanding of craft in the United States.

This event is free, accessible, and open to all. 

Event Registration

Postmodernism is a way of thinking about the world that differs from how people thought about things during modernity. While it is hard to pinpoint exactly, the consensus is that the postmodern era began after World War II and continued through the latter part of the 20th century.

Postmodernism was a reaction against modernism's grand narratives, universal truth claims, and epistemological certainties and instead emphasized the fragmented and contingent nature of knowledge and experience. As a result, it has been seen as a historical process that reflects the shifting cultural, political, and intellectual conditions of the 20th century and beyond.

During postmodernism, people started to doubt big ideas and became more open to different ways of seeing things. They didn't believe that there was only one correct answer to everything, and they began to appreciate more that people could bring their unique perspectives based on lived experience.

The postmodernist perspective advocated against the idea that one group should have all the power and control over everyone else’s thoughts and actions. As I understand it, there is a sense in which the American Craft movement has generally rejected the notion of a universal aesthetic; however, I still have questions about the permanence of this idea in terms of how broadly it has been adopted in the various craft communities.

Certainly, we can identify examples where the craft field has embraced a celebration of diversity and pluralism that aligns with the postmodern view.

But to what extent can we find examples of unconventional materials and techniques being used in a way that we can understand as inherently postmodern aesthetics?

I have questions about the extent to which the effect of Postmodernism has been felt in the broader domain of academic discourse; there’s some resistance to letting go of Modern ideals entirely.

To get this conversation started, here is a list of preliminary evaluative criteria:

Decentering the Subject
Postmodernism critiques the idea of a stable and coherent self and instead highlights identity's constructed and fragmented nature. This has challenged traditional academic theories that privilege the subject as the source of meaning and knowledge.

Rejection of Grand Narratives
Postmodernism rejects grand narratives that purport to explain universal truths and experiences. This has led to a rejection of essentialist and universalist academic theories that seek to explain the world in simple terms.

Emphasis on Discourse and Representation
Postmodernism highlights how language and representation shape our understanding of the world. This has focused on the discursive construction of knowledge and examining how power and politics are embedded in academic theories and practices.

Pluralism and Diversity
Postmodernism celebrates diversity and pluralism and has led to a recognition of the importance of multiple perspectives and experiences in academic theory. This has challenged dominant and oppressive academic theories and practices and opened new avenues for inquiry and understanding.

Interdisciplinary Approaches
Postmodernism blurs boundaries between disciplines and encourages interdisciplinary approaches. This has led to a growing recognition of the importance of interdisciplinary research and the development of new theoretical frameworks that bring together multiple perspectives and methodologies.

By way of example, we find expressions of postmodern aesthetics in Marvel Studios’ WandaVision:

In conclusion, the discourses of postmodernism have challenged traditional academic theories, encouraged new and diverse ways of thinking, and opened up new avenues for inquiry and understanding, but— to what extent can we understand that the discourses of Postmodernism have impacted the Craft field?

I believe that this is a conversation worth having. I hope other academics within the craft field will take this on as a project so these questions can be more broadly interrogated.

As I have mentioned, the primary challenge in the broader craft community is the apparent tension between criticism and cheerleading— this is how communities of practice get stuck.

So, to extend this challenge further— what happens when a knowledge community only listens to ideas and information from a small group and doesn't learn from others? This is a problem because other communities of practice often have different experiences and ways of thinking.

Reflectivity refers to the extent to which an individual or a group can reflect upon and critically examine their own experiences, beliefs, and practices.

There are several types of reflectivity:

1. Personal Reflectivity involves self-reflection on one's experiences, thoughts, and emotions.

2. Social Reflectivity considers the impact of social and cultural factors on an individual's experiences, beliefs, and behaviors.

3. Theoretical Reflectivity involves using theoretical frameworks and concepts to understand and make sense of personal and social experiences.

4. Political Reflectivity considers the political and power dynamics that shape an individual's experiences, beliefs, and behaviors.

5. Interpersonal Reflectivity involves reflection on the dynamics of interpersonal relationships and how these shape and are shaped by an individual's experiences, beliefs, and behaviors.

6. Systemic Reflectivity involves considering the larger systems and structures that shape an individual's experiences, beliefs, and behaviors, such as economic, legal, and cultural systems.

These types of reflectivity can be used individually or in combination better to understand one's experiences, beliefs, and behaviors and to assess, understand and interpret a community's inherent attitudes, beliefs, and values.

If you only listen to one community, you miss out on learning from other people and might not have all the information you need to make good decisions. Listening and learning from different ideas and perspectives is essential to building a well-rounded understanding of the world and, thus, a broad-reaching and fluent vocabulary to engage with the broader society at large.

The American Craft Council is hiring a new executive director and, the organization also needs to update its current strategic plan. Therefore, dialogue with an examination of the broader craft community is needed.

The purpose of this post and my last is to advance the critical conversations on the needs of the craft community in relationship to the need to enhance the critical discourse.

Primarily, the craft community needs to understand what the members of the community all have in common-- and then, a new narrative will develop from this new shared understanding. At the same time, this new shared understanding should have the ability to connect to the broader discourses in art and design.

Therefore, the leadership should work towards updating the definition of what craft is to align with the broader diversity of values of the community while also, leaving space for other types of practitioners to enter into and participate in the craft community.

This requires the administration to fully understand all of the values at work beneath the surface and, this requires looking beneath the surface to examine these core values in relationship to the broader values of the society-- this requires examining and understanding the deeply held and divergent beliefs, perceptions, attitudes, and assumptions of the craft community.

These values do not always align among all community members. The Council needs to be accountable to the craft community on the diversity of their values, and, to do that, the Council needs a clear understanding of what these divergent values are.

There is a need to distinguish craft advocacy from craft activism.

Craft advocacy strives to influence and persuade; craft activism aims to transform. Craft advocacy is a byproduct of a marketing and public relations campaign, whereas craft activism directly results from a broader progressive movement.

Craft advocacy is neutral; craft activism is politically progressive, and, not all members of the craft community are politically progressive; this is an important consideration that requires the community to become more reflexive.

Craft advocacy helps the Council to acquire new members and, it should strive to define and advance the broader meanings that craft carries in society. To this end, the Council's membership will need to be expanded in traditional communities, while the Council also examines how it can reach new audiences.

The effort to build membership should be sensitive as not to alienate the audiences that it currently has while at the same time not closing the definitions to members from outside of the community. In this sense, it is essential to consider attitudes, beliefs, and values on technology and its presumptive relationship to the handmade object.

The outreach that is needed can use technology to harness social and online media. This effort will evolve from a new, persuasive marketing and public relations strategy.

However, as we examine the current state of social media use by the American Craft Council, it is clear that we need to deeply explore emerging trends and understand how our community can better harness that power.

The messaging of a new strategic plan should align with the core values of the entire craft community.

To draft a new strategic plan, the American Craft Council needs to work very hard to understand the complexity of the attitudes, beliefs, and values within an emergent, not yet defined, understanding of "craft" in the 21st Century.

A deeper examination of this topic is available in this 20-minute video presentation:

Redefining Craft with Dennis Stevens

Welcome to the Agon: Episode 2

Watch now (19 min) | I have developed this video presentation on the long-term strategic planning needs within the craft community. My hope is that this video will jump-start and advance the dialogue on this topic; this video presentation builds on three essays that I have recently published on Redefining Craft. If you haven’t already read them, I recommend reviewing these …

Read more

4 years ago · 1 like · Dennis Stevens, Ed.D.

Socially engaged art is an artistic practice that focuses on social effect.

It can critique broader social and political issues through creative expression rather than directly conveying meaning. Socially engaged artists operate in the context of a social and political climate. Their work is not simply intended to be functional, nor is it intended to sit in a gallery on the wall or a pedestal so, in this sense— this work differs from the traditional understandings of art, craft, and design.

Socially engaged artists often operate in the margins, in the uncertain, and they emerge from unpredictable places and their art operates alongside and within other networks, most obviously through grassroots activism.

To paraphrase UK artist Ian Nesbitt, socially engaged art can coax new shared understandings out of the darkness and confusion; a good example of socially engaged art in the craft context is the ceramic work of Ehren Tool:

Socially engaged art practice is interactional.

It is an art form that is influenced by a social context. The practice is affected by the conditions in its environment; and, social engagement is at the heart of its art practice, and, for this reason, it is less focused on the object itself, although, in some cases, the object can be the outcome.

There is no complete agreement on what constitutes a meaningful interaction or social engagement, but, what characterizes socially engaged art is its dependence on social intercourse as a factor of its existence.

Socially engaged art engages the community for a significant purpose.

Socially engaged art falls within the tradition of conceptual process art but, it does not follow that all process-based artists are also socially engaged. So, socially engaged art is a type of art practice that ties contemporary art and contemporary art criticism together.

Socially engaged art is a form of art that is created for personal or social action, combining a form of activism with the visual arts.

Socially engaged art requires understanding, participation, and accountability.

It is generally understood to involve artistic production that interacts with and is responsive to, social issues. Socially engaged art for the uninitiated, however, usually means art that in some way engages society or social movement.

The term 'socially engaged art' can refer to a wide range of works, including actions that challenge, expose, protest or intervene.

For more information on socially engaged art in the craft context, you can check out these artists:

https://sociallyengagedcraftcollective.org/artists/

After more than a decade of celebrating and championing craft, the unmet challenge for the American Craft community remains-- to provide thought leadership and cultivate critical thinking about craft discourses in relation to other discourses of making within art and design, particularly around attitudes, beliefs, and values in relationship to technology.

In recent years, the American craft community has shifted its discourse inward towards itself. The flow of stories has been expansive, and in terms of broader trends at the highest level, craft narratives have become increasingly diverse. 

This move has been positive and, these adjustments have been in response to the demands of our time and, they seem to be in response to the harsh dichotomies in American politics. As authoritarianism, fascism, and arguably, seditious conspiracy, emerged on American soil for the first time in our history, the craft community turned inward and embraced progressivism.

These shifts in the American craft community represent a vital political shift toward social and racial justice. And, to the community's credit, it is clear the United States' political dynamic has not been able to adjust as well.

The communities of craft have changed course over the last decade and the craft community has focused on the importance of inclusiveness. In these dynamic conversations, the American craft community has demonstrated the value of diversity and inclusion.

A decade ago, we discussed the importance of making space for those community members whose voices have been previously underrepresented, and it appears that at least some of the necessary changes have occurred. 

Craft's Celebratory Turn 

There were several moments in the early 2010s that made it clear to me that the craft leadership was focused on the celebratory and was not going to engage with the critical. Although I didn’t understand the broader implications at the time, I call this craft’s celebratory turn.

On one level, this was a turn back towards tradition but, in retrospect, it seems it was an effort to solidify the community against the broader complexity and confusion in the external world. The marketing effort was led by the American Craft Council and this 2014 thread on Critical Craft Forum captures my frustration.

Craft is a word that stirs up passionate enthusiasm in many people.

It's a vague term that can have a vast range of meanings to different people -- it's a word that means different things to different people with different ideologies; different people have different ideas and different truths about what constitutes craft.

To this end, here's what the American Craft Council established in 2016:

Here’s a summary of some of what was conveyed in the above video:

The word "craft" has been co-opted by marketers worldwide, but in our world, craft is a handmade object that is at that wonderful intersection between art and design pieces that have functional DNA.

What seems to happen now is that the word "craft" describes not necessarily an end product but a means to an end. 

Craft is something that demands creativity, problem-solving, attention to detail, diligence, and passion. When people ask what craft is, they're asking about the differences between art and craft. 

At the time, the American Craft Magazine stated that they were less interested in parsing differences between art and craft than in continually reminding people of the possibilities that creative living holds for all of us.

The marketing angle was— No matter your creative interests or position, creative living is something that you can do.

At this time, the marketing focus of the American Craft Council was about:

Celebration. Gatherings. Culture. Work. Learning. Sharing. Doing.
In this way, craft can serve all of our desires for lifestyle.

The marketing strategy, promoted through American Craft Magazine and the American Craft Council, was focused on inclusion and celebrating the community. The marketing goal of American Craft Magazine, at the time, was to connect people and places in the global creative journey.

Their pitch was "craft expresses authenticity, the authenticity of the maker, the authenticity of materials and authenticity of the process-- that's what makes it valuable."

In many ways, their idea follows Walter Benjamin's appealing notion that art changes with mechanical reproduction because the authenticity of the work of art is no longer reproducible. 

The artwork's authenticity is the essence of everything transmissible, from its beginning, ranging from its substantive duration to its testimony to the history the object has experienced-- people in the craft community like to hear this stuff— it resonates.

In 2015, I wrote a note to myself that I set aside for future reference; it said:  

"It is becoming painfully clear that craft institutions cannot maintain the same cloistered "us against the world" mentality that the craft community currently supports. As I have stated previously, there's an enormous gap in craft community discourse between supporting the celebratory and engaging with the critical and mediating this divide has always been the role and responsibility of the American Craft Council. 

But, after ten years of celebrating and championing craft-- providing thought leadership, and cultivating critical thinking about craft discourses in relation to other discourses of making within art and design, largely remains an unmet challenge."

I wrote down this note, and then, I stepped away for seven years. 

Now, I'm back to look around and evaluate what happened concerning where we started in 2006. If we choose to take a look under the hood of the craft community, we will find a difficult question: 

Has the community's expansion towards ensuring diversity and inclusion been entirely positive, or does this focus come with costs? What are these costs and, what are the emergent priorities?

In my view, starting around 2009 or so, the craft community pulled together and situated craft marketing to advance progressive activism and solidify the community. However, craft's well-intended inclusiveness may have had the unintentional impact of further insulating and isolating the craft community from the outside world and further distinguishing craft discourse from the discourses of art and design.

Leadership and the Future of the American Craft Council

I believe that it is critical that we capture what craft means to all of us moving forward. I am not sure of the current state of satisfaction among the national and international craft community, but that survey is a meaningful conversation. 

American Craft Magazine and the American Craft Council should provide leadership to create a new marketing language that illustrates the breadth and depth of the craft community's endeavors.

And, the leadership should expand the audience through fluency in aligning broader discourses of making to include art, design, and a deep examination of attitudes, beliefs, and values around technology. 

Looking beyond the achievements

Craft's rhetoric of inclusiveness has a strong emotional appeal, it evokes progressive ideals and social justice, and it does an excellent job of positioning craft as a community. But, this has further enabled the community to become even more insular; this communal insularity is craft’s Achilles heel.

I believe it is vitally important to reconcile the community’s attitudes, beliefs, and values in relationship to technology and it is important to parse the related questions around concerns for the authenticity of the handmade object; in order to do this, community building has to connect to the discourses of art and design. This requires transcending external divisions and opening upon the discourse towards the challenge of growth.

We live in a world filled with values, but there are problems. As Jean-Paul Sartre famously alluded, "Hell is other people." This is the crux of the challenge that the craft community still faces.

How do we define our values in a modern world saturated with brands, products, and new technologies that are changing the fabric of existence?

How do we communicate our values while also accepting the world as it is?

Redefining Craft seeks to identify and communicate the values at the heart of craft practice and stay true to these core values while also making it possible to interact with and learn from others with divergent aesthetics.

While most craft-focused online content centers around a practitioner's work, Redefining Craft is centered on the manifestation of values through people and their projects.

In 2004, I launched Redefining Craft as a blog to document the divergent aesthetics at art, craft, and design's hybrid intersections. Redefining Craft covered a lot of ground in its early years of publication which ended around 2009. And since that time, the diversity of voices within the field has grown exponentially. I'm thrilled that through the efforts of others, we now have a platform for a variety of diverse voices to be heard.

But, despite these positive changes and growth, some complex questions remain-- How far can we extend our sense of shoulds, musts, and oughts into the world with divergent values?

And, to what extent can we expect that others will understand (or even care about) what it is that we value? Likewise, to what extent do we know (or care about) what other people love?

How do we address the disconnect between our values and the values of different communities in art and design?

These are essential questions. The answers require reflexivity-- awareness of our feelings and values as they relate to others and our communities; this is at the core of the craft community's growth as a community of practice.

In recent years, the craft field has done an exceptional job of working beyond the monologue and the binary. But, the organizations that represent us seem to be reluctant to take charge of the language used to define the various craft communities of practice.

Perhaps, it is a matter of not knowing how to proceed with all this diversity and change in the world. Perhaps, this response is due to a steadfast marriage to a tradition. Maybe the fear derives from the knowledge of the diversity of definitions (and identities) outside the community that seeks to change it.

So, who is the organization that claims to represent the needs of a well-defined craft community?

I ask this question because it is the responsibility of the core leadership of the community to grapple with the question: is it more critical for craft to cling to historical contexts of craft or to be more intentional with how we define ourselves?

Cultural change is a complex problem. It is a problem of consistency versus inconsistency and rigid versus malleable values. Furthermore, it is a problem that requires attention, focus, hard work, and thought leadership.

As I have mentioned above, craft is a cultural and historical tradition based upon the pursuit of values. As a national and international community, we need to confront something that seems irreconcilable-- the struggle of divergent cultures and a clash of values.

This clash is a situation in which conflicting parties attempt to force the other to accept one's position, contrary to the wishes of the other. Over the past few decades, this has become a significant issue, and it is something that we need to confront as a community to be consistent and grow.

Read more