The Craftsman versus the Industrial Complex

[DWFII]

Just take a moment to watch this video and then this:

The Conundrum of the Workshops

When the flush of a new-born sun first fell on Eden's green and gold,
Our father Adam sat under the Tree and scratched with a stick in the mould;
And the first rude sketch that the world had seen was joy to his mighty heart,
Till the Devil whispered behind the leaves: "It's pretty, but is it art?"

Wherefore he called to his wife, and fled to fashion his work anew-
The first of his race who cared a fig for the first, most dread review:
And he left his lore to the use of his sons--and that was a glorious gain
When the Devil chuckled: "Is it art?" in the ear of the branded Cain.

They builded a tower to shiver the sky and wrench the stars apart,
Till the Devil grunted behind the bricks: "It's striking but is it art?"
The stone was dropped by the quarry-side, and the idle derrick swung,
While each man talked of the aims of art, and each in an alien tongue.

They fought and they talked in the north and the south, they talked and they fought in the west,
Till the waters rose on the jabbering land, and the Poor Red Clay had rest--
Had rest till the dank blank-canvas dawn when the dove was preened to start,
And the Devil bubbled below the keel: "It's human, but is it art?"

The tale is old as the Eden Tree--as new as the new-cut tooth--
For each man knows ere his lip-thatch grows he's master of art and truth;
And each man hears as the twilight nears, to the beat of his dying heart,
The Devil drum on the darkened pane: "You did it, but was it art?"

We have learned to whittle the Eden Tree to the shape of a surplice-peg,
We have learned to bottle our parents twain in the yolk of an addled egg,
We know that the tail must wag the dog, as the horse is drawn by the cart;
But the Devil whoops, as he whooped of old: "It's clever, but is it art?"

When the flicker of London sun falls faint on the club-room's green and gold,
The sons of Adam sit them down and scratch with their pens in the mould--
They scratch with their pens in the mould of their graves, and the ink and the anguish start
When the Devil mutters behind the leaves: "It's pretty, but is it art?"

Now, if we could win to the Eden Tree where the four great rivers flow,
And the wreath of Eve is red on the turf as she left it long ago,
And if we could come when the sentry slept, and softly scurry through,
By the favor of God we might know as much--as our father Adam knew.

Rudyard Kipling

I have always loved that poem because it is a stark, uncompromising, insight from an Artist (with a capital "A" ).

But I think Kipling is making mock...or perhaps just asking folks to think...of the obsession with self, and self-image and the, ultimately, absurd question of what is art or who is an artist.

Kipling has the Devil posing this question...in all sorts of contexts...deliberately, I think.

And he says quite clearly that in pursuit of such self-justification we invent all sorts of "clever" theories and epigrams that, in the end, only serve to undermine the most essential things about our humanity and our endeavors...to turn them on their head--"to whittle the Eden Tree to the shape of a surplice-peg."

There are times in the life of a "Craftsman" (with a capital "C" ) when he will so lose himself that he taps into a force...a wellspring of creativity...and, having done that, does work that, in a very real sense, he didn't have the ability to do. He transcends himself. Call it the 'divine," call it "divine inspiration," call it serendipity, no one gets there while watching himself.

Kipling understands that, and he ends the poem saying...Ah, if we could only "get real," so to speak, if we could regain our innocence...we might, by the grace of God, "know as much--as our father Adam knew."

[KD Burke]

Having followed this thread with a great deal of interest, I feel that a different perspective is in order.

I submit for your consideration the premise that rather than destroying ctraftsmanship, the "industrial complex" actually creates it. Further, there are more true craftsmen (and women!) working today, than at any time in history!

Consider my father. He was born in rural Georgia in 1927. In his youth he lived a "non-industrial lifestyle." He truly lived connected to the earth. He can describe for you in aching detail the miseries of rural life prior to mechanization. He plowed fields using a mule-drawn plow. He picked cotton by hand. He did not follow a 40 hour work week, but started after breakfast and finished in time for supper, about dusk. Life was very simple: you worked hard or starved. There was no leisure time or disposable income to pursue anything but a hand-to-mouth existence.

As it turned out, after WWII he got a job with a trucking company. He drove mass-produced trucks, pulling mass-produced trailers filled with mass-produced goods to people who wanted and needed them. In doing so, he earned a living sufficient to raise four children, put two of them through college, buy a large suburban house, build a workshop, fill it with tools, and pursue a passion for woodworking until mobility issues put an end to his hobbying. He made beautiful things.

Similarly, most of the brilliant artisans here on XMarks are not "professionals." They do not make a living pursuing their arts. They earn their bread in some "industrial" manner, then put their talents to use in the spare time that modern industrial productivity has created. A few will have the passion, ambition and courage to take the skills they acquired in their leisure hours and develop them into small businesses.

Finally, I would argue that no industry is ever truly "lost." As long as the knowledge exists, the market demand will be fulfilled. The classic example is the buggy whip makers being driven out of business by the advent of the automobile. Alas, it is untrue! A few minutes research will yield any number of artisans who can deliver the desired article. The productive capacity has reduced to match the demand. The market works as it should.

[tripleblessed]

This thread is a real gift. The post (DWFII) above alone is worth the price of admission. I'm thoroughly enjoying reading someone else's posts I might have said myself. But I enjoyed several paths of work, and as a result would not say I mastered any, or achieved Artist status. I did regularly do stuff thought impossible by the guys I worked with, and work beyond my skill and understanding levels. Does it count as points toward artistry that a lot folk who worked with me thought me something of a diva (divo?)?

Paradox has always been a favorite area for me, as well. As a result, I feel compelled to insert here, in Rocky's defense (not that he needs my defense), his customer satisfaction record. Even when everything was hand-made, not everyone had stuff made by a master craftsman. The local blacksmith did his best to turn out usable, in quantity enough that folk had as many as they needed. Rocky appears to be at about the top of the food chain in the arena in which he plays, and his perspective is valid.

I am happy to see DWFII say these things, as at least I know someone else still cares, and hope grace allows me room in the wallet to attempt to persuade him to keep working long enough to make a pair for me.

[CMcG]

Quality is about intent. To be realized, it must be implemented with skill...and intent. Ourouboros.

Conflating quality with intent is very interesting but I don't think the dictionary definition of 'quality' would agree. Quality is the characteristic of something that is a grade of excellence. As such, there is plenty of room for different levels of quality and it doesn't come down to a binary of either good or bad. There is a continuum of quality rather than a simple 'craftsman vs. industrial complex' opposition.

The advent of factory made goods has been both a blessing and a curse. If we look at the clothing industry in general, the upside is that even poor people can now afford to wear shoes and have more than one change of clothing. If the only option available was bespoke, a lot of people would either have to go without or maybe try to do it themselves.

The downside to industrial production or even workshops is that it puts a lot of pressure on craftspeople. And I won't even touch on environmental or social problems associated with factories. Being able to continue making things at the level of quality that DWFII is talking about would seem to require a different type of work than it used to...

One would need to first promote and market their products to people who can afford to pay for them. Assuming that is successful and there is continued demand, then they would need to ensure that the raw supplies necessary would be available. If companies that supply the raw goods are in trouble, one would need to proactively re-source or otherwise secure the supply line. It would probably also require making sure to either document their craft or pass it on to an apprentice to ensure that the skills aren't lost.

This is a kilt forum, so perhaps that is the best example. The internet allows all of our advertisers to access a much wider market. How many of them would be able to survive if it wasn't for a worldwide customer base?

People like Matt Newsome are very active in promoting and educating about tartans and kilts and that probably helps sustain him as a craftsman. RockyR has diversified his business to offer a whole range of kilts from entry level PV casual up to 'tanks.' He has stated that a lot of people start with an inexpensive kilt and eventually buy a top quality one, but that those same people wouldn't start with an expensive kilt because they don't know if they like kilt wearing. The owner of Scotweb recently bought D. C. Dalgliesh weavers in order to keep that old-style mill open. Barb T. wrote a book on kiltmaking and has thus ensured that those traditional skills are passed on and widely distributed.

It's a different world than it was a hundred years ago. Bemoaning the change isn't particularly productive. I think there will always be people who value quality and that there is room in the market for both factory produced goods and hand made items. Being competitive in today's market requires creativity in order to achieve the intended goals of any given business.

[artificer]

Even when everything was hand-made, not everyone had stuff made by a master craftsman. The local blacksmith did his best to turn out usable, in quantity enough that folk had as many as they needed.

I was thinking this exact thing for the last three pages but haven't had the chance to chime in until now.

Interesting fact not well known to the general populace-

Your "Masterpiece" was, in fact, not your crowning glory, but the piece of work which proved you had achieved the skills to qualify you for the status of Master in your chosen craft/guild/apprenticeship (a step up from Journeyman).

So if you keep producing Masterpieces, you must be re-submitting your work for review over and over
ith:

[CMcG]

Just take a moment to watch this video and then this:


[CENTER]The Conundrum of the Workshops

<snip>

Thanks for the link and poem DWFII. Good stuff!

For anyone who is interested, John Lobb has a very slick website:
http://www.johnlobb.com/

[DWFII]

Several quick remarks...no one in mind, nor answers specifically directed to remarks made by others.

I accept the definition of "quality". I didn't say the "meaning" of quality was intent, I said it was about intent. Big difference. Especially in the mind of those who...as Craftsmen...pursue quality lifelong.

No offense to anyone, but I suspect there's also a difference between a Craftsman (and, just for the sake of refining the idea, let's stipulate a capital "C") and a hobbyist. I am not taking anything away from the hobbyist. That's where the passion begins. But the hobbyist never really has to answer for his work; never has to embark on that never ending search for excellence; never has to face...or believe in the idea of "good, better, best."

That's something a true Craftsman has to face every day--the possibility of failure...not only in the eyes of the public but in comparison to any objective, Traditional/historical standard.

You get your report card daily. and if you're really objective, you'll not only never get all "A's", more than occasionally you'll get a big fat "F" And that's with only yourself grading your work.

"It's pretty but is it Art?"

Another thought...and I am sure some will think this elitist. But until you've actually made a pair of shoes (shoes as a metaphor for Craftsmanship), you really don't know what you're talking about. Until you've spent your whole life pursuing mastery...mastery of one Trade and many, many techniques...it's all speculation and supposition and fantasy.

Without any real self-congratulations, I am as near to an expert on shoemaking and to a lesser extent on Craftsmanship as anyone most here will ever meet.

Note I did not say "more of an expert" nor would I classify myself as a "Master." [although for several hundred years "master" in the US, and I think Britain, has meant very simply the owner of the business]. But I am not a master in the "masterpiece" sense either. I have "mastered' (or come close) many techniques with regard to shoemaking and leather. I am still struggling with some.

And I am a far remove from being an expert in any field save shoemaking. I ken that fine.

Without "good" there is no "better," without "better," no "best."
And without the recognition that there is a hierarchy of excellence in all things, nothing rises above the level of mundane.

[RockyR]

I can understand the 'art' comparison. I understand the pursuit of 'perfection'... of the masterpiece. However, most (many? all?) artists are not paid what they're 'worth' in the real world.

It's fine to have discussions about art and what is or is not true craftsmanship... what is or isn't done with which technique. I think it's very telling that the devil is the one in the story to constantly needle us (and drive us insane) with the question "is it art" b/c we will never all agree. He may also drive the master craftsman nuts with that question if there is no 'bar' set. We can all talk in circles until we're all blue in the face disagreeing.

If all artists were paid what they were worth, we'd all be broke and not many people would own items of clothing, shoes, etc. Also, where would that leave the rest of us 'non artists / masters of our craft' in regard to employment? There will always be varying degrees of quality, even within the same field using the same technique.

Instead, down here in the real world (no offense was meant by that... just there's a difference between idealistic discussions and reality), we must shop within our means and live within our means. It may mean hanging paintings by local 'craft' painters instead of a Van Gogh. It may mean wearing a $200 kilt, instead of a hand stitched custom woven heir loom kilt costing $1500. It may mean wearing $150 shoes instead of having custom made ones.

The masses can not afford 'elite pieces of art' (whether it be clothing, shoes, paintings, etc). We live within our means or we live without. To only purchase 'pieces of art' on an average person's salary would be irresponsible.

[KD Burke]

No offense to anyone, but I suspect there's also a difference between a Craftsman (and, just for the sake of refining the idea, let's stipulate a capital "C") and a hobbyist. I am not taking anything away from the hobbyist. That's where the passion begins. But the hobbyist never really has to answer for his work; never has to embark on that never ending search for excellence; never has to face...or believe in the idea of "good, better, best."

I'm not at all certain that I can agree with the distinction. The term "amateur" has a negative connotation these days, while "professional" has a positive one. That is unfortunate. The word "amateur" derives from "ama" literally "love." It describes someone who pursues an art for the love of the art, rather than strictly for monetary gain. A "professional" on the other hand works, day in and day out to satisfy the market.

In that sense, the "professional" works to be good enough, while the amateur works to be as good as possible.

Now, I am certain, DWFII, that you are an "amateur" in the sense that you truly love your craft and work to see that each and every piece is as fine as you are capable of producing.

As you have pointed out , the current market is filled with "good enough" professionals. They succeed because for most people, most of the time, "good enough" is sufficient.

Thankfully, there are still people who work for the love of the art. Also thankfully, there are people who are sufficiently appreciative of their efforts to support those endeavors. You are a rarity in that your life's work coincides so well with your passion.

It is not be possible, in all cases, to earn a living in one's chosen form. As a case in point pipers who earn a living playing the pipes are vanishingly rare. But witness the massed bands at your local games and you'll see that there are many talented, dedicated amateurs. To deny that these folk are craftsmen is, in my opinion, a false distinction.

[RockyR]

I like KD Burke's point here.

The artist who creates in pursuit of becoming a master and for no other reason is noble in the fact that they are only answerable to themselves... they have no REAL outside pressures on their creation if they don't want it. If they choose to subject their creation to review, then that is a pressure they add themselves.

Those who create for a marketplace are put under additional pressures of price / quality scrutiny. They create their own external pressure.

The problem with this model is that the first person may become a master, but must have another source of income to sustain him/herself as hobbies for hobbies sake won't pay the bills. Those who CHOOSE to do it for a living are under pressure, by their own design. As it is their own decision, do they really have a reason to complain about wages / income? Did they not understand the realities of capitalist market before hanging out their shingle?