Skip to page content...
View Submissions
- Please choose an option:
- Title of Abstract:
Lost for words, developments in a new language. (Ref #168)
- Date:
- 06-10-2006 11:16:28
- Status:
-
Accepted
- Rating:
- 8
-
Details:
- That there is a dearth of serious writing on the crafts and its methodologies is a sad fact for practitioners working today. The relatively recent groundswell of serious critical debate has for the most part been led by critical theorists with the apparent central agenda of the cultural positioning of crafts practice both within the outmoded hegemonic triangle of fine art/ design/ craft or locating practice within a broader socio-economic framework. And indeed the craft practitioners and makers who engage with critical writing do to a greater or lesser extent map their endeavours onto this critical framework, this does at least provide the voice of the maker in the debate. However this seems to be the current range of discussion available for consumption, the central theme of crafts practice that is suffering from a lack of serious study is the absolute key to it all; that of the intelligence of making. Texts on the subject have been few and far between with heavy reliance for reference and reflection given to the output of David Pye and Peter Dormer.
The time has come for the matter of making to be discussed, analysed and given greater theoretical credence for what it is; a series of intellectual acts rooted in a language of itself.
Derrida?s assertion that western Platonic thought is logocentric; identifying speech as the centre of truth subjugates the value of the graphic in language. Taking Derrida?s broad view of the graphic to include written, cinematic, musical and sculptural forms of notation provides us with the moral justification and the critical framework in which to explore and establish a metalanguage of making.
Craft objects may, as some would prefer, speak for themselves; that the message is in the artefact. This position may or not be true, it is a route of parallel investigation but we should not rest with it or let it deter us: It is the unspoken chain of decisions giving form to the object which needs elucidation. As Wittgenstein stated;
?The limits of my language are the limits of my world? (1921)
We must not limit ourselves or our sphere, craft practice needs more open channels of communication and dissemination across and from it?s fields and locations. Any culture needs it?s language to advance; (a deliberately ambiguous statement). An investigation into a metalanguage of making may re-position the centre of the crafts debate.
Reviewer Comments: