Skip to page content...

View Submissions

Please choose an option:


Title of Abstract:

Craft Hard, Die Free: Radical Curatorial Strategies for Craftivism in Unruly Contexts (Ref #220)

Date:
26-10-2006 22:02:13
Status:
Accepted with revisions
Rating:
6
Details:
The current academic and popular interest in Craftivism and politically engaged crafting practices calls for discussion of productive strategies to maintain their radical potential.
Including examples from the activist, craft, academic, and fine art communities, this paper will use a contemporary curatorial approach to present the work of several artists/crafters who engage with the following ideas and methods.

While Craft historians, Feminist historians and fine craft practitioners argue for the recognition of craft within art and academic dialogues, crafty supplies are simultaneously mass produced and packaged as hobby-commodities for affluent consumers, and craft practices are appropriated into the mainstream marketing of alternative and DIY 'lifestyles.' In addition, the accessibility of global communication networks have contributed to the increased sharing of craft knowledge and skills, and created an overall democratization of crafting practices. The rise of Craftivism ? which often values the radical potential of a particular craft rather than its finished end product ? shifts traditional emphasis away from polished, professionally-made craft objects themselves and towards the political and conceptual focus, positioning, and deployment of this work. The rapid surge in Craftivist practices offers an opportunity for new approaches and discussions of feminism/crafts(wo)manship, queer crafting, tacit knowleges and skill sharing, DIY, anti-capitalism and activism.

Within this new mélange of re-politicized crafting there is an important and increasing need to critically consider the ways in which new types of craft, hobby-craft, and craft/art-hybrids simultaneously impact and exist outside of current strategies of fine art/fine craft display and discourse.

This paper proposes that radical craft and its intersections with gender, queer, and anti-capitalist politics are necessarily messy and offer productive troubling within the notions of institutional curating. In particular, we will engage critically with the ?dirty underbelly? of craft: the (usually neglected or sidelined) methods of making that include kitsch, DIY, conscious amateurism, pre-packaged kits, and recycled, re-purposed or thrifted materials, and seek an understanding of how/why these materials and practices rankle craft discourses. This discussion will consider the particular strengths of these approaches for use by Craftivists and/or other typically marginalized art-makers, practices and politics, which operate in the face of mainstream commodification of craft activism and do not generally seek legitimacy within fine art/fine craft institutions.

Finally, we will consider if in fact Craftivism and politically charged crafting practices can be riotously, ethically and effectively included in and used to redefine contemporary curatorial approaches. As such, we will investigate the curatorial strategies that seek to maintain unruly spaces as potential locations for Craftivism: artist-run centres, offsite interventions, indie Internet distros, church-basement sales, and performance art festivals and contribute to a re-politicization of these spaces and cultures of display.

Reviewer Comments:

Review #1 : Left on 30-10-2006 11:02:25 #
The issue raised is concerned with craft curation rather than craft practice, and as such, it does not meet the needs of the conference, which is to investigate the arena of future practice.

4
Review #2 : Left on 03-11-2006 16:44:44 #
The issue raised is an interesting one, but at present the argument in the submitted abstract reads as if is at an early stage of development. Contextualisation and articulation of the argument need much work.

The methodology of the research requires clarification. Communication of the methods will ensure that the work does not veer towards the polemical.

6
Review #3 : Left on 21-11-2006 00:41:43 #
This abstract probably provides us with a series of challenging questions - specifically to what extent should we be interested in papers which are concerned with promoting discussion rather than reasoned argument; how open should our definition of craft be; can fine craft and hobbycraft be considered alongside each other? The craftivism phenomena is a relatively new one and a debate of these issues is certainly timely. A more detailed indication of the main findings of the paper would be beneficial i.e. can these radicial craft practices be ethically and effectively included in curatorial practice? and if so how?

6

Public Comments:

Comment left by Missy on 31-10-2006 16:23:59 #
I have to say that I think perspectives on curation are vital to the future of "craft." I think that by shutting out curatorial voices that you reinforce the exile that many are feeling as unvalidated, as it seems that curators have particular power over what is shown and not shown. Radical curatorial strategies offer new perspective on material and they way we view it, and may in fact be an aspect of "craft practice" in an of itself if it is highlighting social practice. I would reconsider your views on the role curation plays in promoting or distancing the public from craft and how it is seen by new generations.
Comment left by Anthea Black on 05-11-2006 05:00:46 #
It should be noted that our working environment within Canada's artist run centre network has fostered hybrid curatorial practices - for the purposes of this abstract we discuss some of these hybrid practices using the umbrella term "radical curatorial strategies" - that deliberately blur the boundaries between artist, crafter and curator. These practices often co-exist happily within the practice of one individual, situating the context for this paper necessarily between craft curation and craft practice, with important impacts for the future of both.