Woodturning being defined as "art"

[Russ Braun]

Art just requires a “Beholder”…….until an “Expert” shows up!

 

[Michael Anderson]

A few turners have used casting in metal and glass to great effect.I have a Trent Bosch bronze casting I continue to marvel at.

That’s a nice piece, Al. Roberto Ferrar had a small cast bronze platter at the Louisville symposium. I didn’t realize it was cast, as he does a lot of cool surface work. I asked how he achieved his finish and he said it was just polished metal. “Ohhhhhh”, then it clicked.

I’d love to get my hands on one of Craig Lofton’s bronze calabashes.

 

[Rick Moreton]

Hot take: CNC is just digital ornamental turning with g code instead of rosettes.

Being able to make copies or near copies shouldn't matter. Block printing produces many copies. Is only the first print the art?

 

[Kevin Jenness]

Why is woodturning being defined as art important? Let's go back to the original post in which John said I've always believed this definition of art is a part what keeps woodturners under appreciated and undervalued. So, recognition and money? Certainly some of the original AAW movers and shakers like Mark Lindquist and David Ellsworth were interested in having galleries take their work seriously enough to represent them and establish a collectors market separate from and more lucrative than that associated with the more plebeian, functional craft tradition.

 

[John Ames]

Why is woodturning being defined as art important? Let's go back to the original post in which John said I've always believed this definition of art is a part what keeps woodturners under appreciated and undervalued. So, recognition and money? Certainly some of the original AAW movers and shakers like Mark Lindquist and David Ellsworth were interested in having galleries take their work seriously enough to represent them and establish a collectors market separate from and more lucrative than that associated with the more plebeian, functional craft tradition.

Yes…

Money for the artists increases as the “art” of woodturning is elevated to “art status” as defined by the gatekeepers.

Recognition not only for the artists themselves, but for the entire woodturning community. Rising the proverbial tide raises all of our boats…

Representation of any woodturner in serious galleries helps elevate all of our collective and individual “value.” Both perceived and actual value.

It’s nice when someone reaches a level of proficiency and expertise in their creative field that they can feed not only their soul, but also their family.

 

[Larry Mercier]

CNC is a process
Objects are art.

#40 Well said.

 

[John Ames]

As to AI, yeah that deepens the rabbit hole a bit. Does art require a human element? In all of the definitions we’ve seen in this thread, no one specifically mentioned “created by a human”.

Just off the top of my head I know I’ve seen:

Paint sprayed by an elephant on canvas
Raccoon feet dipped in paint and walking on canvas
Pigs wallowing in paint on a canvas
Monkeys finger painting
Birds using paint brushes

All of these were displayed in galleries and I assume sold…. Whether these were serious art galleries or just something like fundraisers for a local animal shelter, I have no idea…

 

[Kevin Jenness]

I would ask those turners who consider themselves artists, what does that mean to you?

 

[Kevin Jenness]

Gradually reading through the American Woodturner archives I came across a couple of articles on the subject of art and woodturning which may be interesting to some: Promoting Our Art by Ron Vavra (vol.15 #4 Winter 2000) and What is Art by Gene Kanga (vol.16 #1, Spring 2001). The first is mostly about marketing, the second more comprehensive and useful for thinking about how art and craft are related (or not). I particularly like Kanga's push for wood artists becoming familiar with art history so as to avoid copying of past work through ignorance of other fields.

I also was interested to see the work of an indigenous Maine basketmaker featured in last Sunday's New York Times art section Jeremy Frey. He has some very elegant pure shapes and geometric ornamentation. It begs the question of what it is that makes his work "art" and also demonstrates how the maker's story can be a part of marketing the work.

 

[Ron Solfest]

Coming to this discussion late, and only skimming the 89 posts so far, I'll offer my two cents from someone who's clearly not an artist.

Over the years as I've read AAW magazines I've often pined for more turning process discussions and craft fundamentals (bowl design for instance). While @Jerry Bennett 's work is beautiful, frankly it's not something I aspire to nor often appreciate adequately. As my skills have grown I've come to appreciate more nuanced understandings of bowls and objects that are 'not too far removed' from the traditional lathe process, as well as embellishments of clearly turned items. My palate has expanded, thanks to the artistic pull of AAW, but is still very parochial.

The definition of 'art' is clearly many things to many people. To me, art requires creativity and understanding the media, process, and human nature in a way to evoke deep connection or meaning in the beholder. I see the discussion around function to be orthogonal to that of art. While I don't venture onto the art plane, I do like to make functional objects that are pleasing to the eye and hand. I'm far from an artist as a creator of turned wooden objects, but I have a couple brothers that have described bowls I've given them as 'art' in their eyes so clearly what's just a nice turning to some can be 'art' to others.

 

[hughie]

Where I live art has been quantified, decided upon etc that anything wood pretty much aint art. There are no museums that hold any wood turned pieces, there are a small number of collectors. What we get paid would many of you shaking your heads

 

[Darryn Achall]

Daily Art Quote:​

“He who works with his hands is a laborer.
He who works with his hands and his head is a craftsman.
He who works with his hands and his head and his heart is an artist.”​

~ Saint Francis of Assisi​

 

[Earl Recker]

This old saying is still best "If it don't hold soup, it's art.

 

[Michael Anderson]

I would ask those turners who consider themselves artists, what does that mean to you?

I turn a variety of things. Sometimes I consider myself an artist, and sometimes a craftsman. Both are on equal levels, in my mind.

• When I'm in the artist mindset, I focus on the narrative of the piece: Primarily, how can I best convey the concept? This dictates things such as scale, finish, colors, textures, etc... Sometimes a theme/concept drives the piece's entire creation, sometimes a concept comes organically mid-creation, and other times it's a matter of fitting the finished object to some theme. Usually, the former two routes apply. The latter usually arises if I'm simply doing something technically interesting/challenging and I like the end result: "what does this object mean to me?" or "how can I best meld my life experiences with this created object" comes after the fact.
• When I'm in the craftsman mindset, my focus is on materials and technique. How is my form? Are my curves continuous? Is my finish appropriate for the wood? Etc... These are things I often also think about with the "artist" approach as well, but for the craft approach they are all I think about. This is especially true if I'm turning a pure, established form (ex. traditional calabash, rice bowl, et al.).

I don't believe you always have to "think like an artist"; rather, it's often better to "think like a craftsman". I love that Ellsworth quote mentioned above: "On a purely personal level, I am proud to be both a craftsman and an artist. And when the two shake hands, I know that I am doing really good work." I mean, does it get any better or truer than that? I think not.

 

[Bill Boehme]

I have 30 years of back issues ….

I feel your pain. I also have back issues … from L2 to S1.

 

[Rusty Nesmith]

A friend of mine has entered many art competitions. He has had judges tell him a turned wood piece will never win. There reason was when you get down too it, it is still just a bowl, it vase or box.ect.

 

[Kevin Jenness]

The more I look into this subject the more I find the evolution of Mark Lindquist's work central to the acceptance of woodturning as an artistic endeavor. Here is an excerpt from a biography of the artist from the mid 90s Revolutions in Wood that makes the case thus:

Mark Lindquist has made so many adventurous departures that the overall configuration of turned vessels has been dramatically changed. Among his contributions are popularizing the spalted wood his father discovered; artificially inducing spalting; developing the natural top bowl; mining the aesthetics of bark inclusions and other so-called imperfections; redefining the turned vessel in sculptural terms; breaking with accepted rules about highly polished finishes in favor of the expressivity of ragged and tooled surfaces; rethinking the craft of wood turning in terms of robotics; making extensive use of the chain saw; and creating large lathe-turned sculptures. During this period he has increasingly closed the gap between artistry and art, and at the same time he has transformed woodturning from handcraft to an art form dependent on the percussion of primitive machines forced beyond their expected tolerance so that they become highly expressive devices. Although his work has been highly lauded, often emulated, and eagerly collected, many of Lindquist's revolutions in wood have been so successful that they have been accepted as truisms of the field and have merged into the standard practices of the modern woodturning movement.

Lindquist himself discussed his early influences as well as his techniques in his book Sculpting Wood and there are a number of video interviews to be found at his website and elsewhere Lindquist Studios. Worth investigating for those who want an historical perspective.

 

[Doug Rasmussen]

Glass art has far eclipsed wood art in our house. Glass shows well in daytime natural light and more focused lighting in the evening hours. The first picture shows some of my wife's glass collection. The second pic is a piece for sale locally. I have no idea what my wife paid for the first three pieces but I'm sure they were expensive. The piece in the second pic originally sold by the artist for $3100.

I just wish glass was as easy to work with as wood.

None of my wood pieces come near the attention grabbing of the glass.

 

[hughie]

Unfortunately, where I am wood turning embellished or otherwise is not really considered art and 'art galleries' that might carry such pieces perhaps could be counted on one hand. Craft galleries fair a lot better . The lack of appreciation across the country is reflected in the prices that pieces sell for, followed by some fairly mercenary commissions practice.

 

[Bill Walzer]

The discussion thread on "embellishment" is the impetus for this post. I did not want to take over that discussion and I thought some people might be interested in this perspective.

Some 15 years ago (or more?) I got into a serendipitous and fascinating discussion with a group of art scholars. These were PhD degree holders and experts in both modern art and art history. I was well out of my comfort zone and they were kind enough to tolerate my mundane and simplistic questions about what makes something "Art." What got me started talking with these folks was an article I had read about an "artist" who had a piece on display at a local gallery that caused a bit of a brouhaha. The art piece in question was an old, glass mayonnaise jar with a figurine of Jesus mounted on a cross made from popsicle sticks then placed inside the jar. The artist then urinated in the jar with the figurine, put the lid on it and displayed it. I knew "art" could get weird, but this one took the cake. I had to ask these art professors about how something like this could be considered "art." I got quite an education that day that has stuck with me. Here are the most important take aways I got from our conversation.

First and foremost, the definition of "art" is fairly straightforward in their world. In order to be defined as "art," that object (and/or performance i.e. dance/music or literature) must solely exist for its own aesthetic. By definition, "art" can have no function or utility. No matter how beautiful, finely crafted, original or breathtaking an object (or performance) might be, it cannot be art if it serves (or even CAN serve) an intended purpose. This kind of blew my mind.... A Jaguar XKE, or Ferrari cannot ever be considered "art." A Rolex watch or fancy clock can never be art. Furniture can never be considered art. And therefore, woodturned bowls/plates/pens or whatever, can never be considered art.

Now for some nuance... If you take that Jaguar XKE, crumple it up, stick it on top of a flag pole... it's art. If you make a chair and put spikes on the seat or otherwise make it unusable as a chair, it is art. If you make a bowl with massive voids so it loses its ability as a vessel, its art.

Jackson Pollock's work is art. The Mona Lisa is art. A drawing in a medical text book defining anatomical areas, is NOT art. A novel or poem is art. An instruction manual is not art. A random tune that someone whistles is art. If you whistle to get someone's attention, that's NOT art. Art can have no function or utility or serve ANY purpose other than to exist for it's own aesthetic.

The term "functional art" has been thrown around for a long time but, technically speaking, there's no such thing. Functional art would be like calling something a square circle.

And so to come around back to woodturning... If you make a bowl and want to call it art, you have to make it useless, or mount it vertically so it can't hold anything. Or put it inside a sealed box somehow (you don't have to pee in it... that's extreme). By definition, the only woodturnings that could be considered "art" are the sculptural types, the ones mounted vertically, the ones with voids and/or piercings, and possibly the hollow forms. No matter how many beads, coves, colors, dyes, resins, or stones we embellish a bowl with, it will never be art.

I've always believed this definition of art is a part what keeps woodturners under appreciated and undervalued. Still, I always smile when someone calls one of my bowls "a work of art" even though I know it isn't.

Please don't shoot the messenger.... I just thought I'd provide some food for thought as it came to me from the people who actually know what art is. These art experts I spoke with also had interesting thoughts on what makes art "good" or "bad" but that's a discussion for another forum on another day.

I think art is in the eye of the beholder. A bowl with a well done sensuous S curve sides may have sides that are art even if the entire bowl could be utilitarian.

Would the Mona Lisa no longer be art if I used it to cover a hole in my wall?

 

[John Ames]

I think art is in the eye of the beholder. A bowl with a well done sensuous S curve sides may have sides that are art even if the entire bowl could be utilitarian.

Would the Mona Lisa no longer be art if I used it to cover a hole in my wall?

You are not alone in your thinking. However, when actually defining what is "art," the scholars I spoke with would unequivocally say, as soon as it served the purpose of covering that hole, it would no longer be art. If you hung it next to the hole, it would be art.

I know it will take a while, but please read through the whole thread. There's a lot of interesting thoughts shared ...

 

[Jerry Bennett]

If you like it and want to buy it then “yes Martha it definitely is art”.

 

[Kent Reisdorph]

I feel your pain. I also have back issues … from L2 to S1.

I have a pain in the neck. I call her Jennifer. But seriously, my C6 and C7 are in pretty bad shape. Currently doing the health insurance merry-go-round to get an MRI.

 

[Kent Reisdorph]

Glass art has far eclipsed wood art in our house. Glass shows well in daytime natural light and more focused lighting in the evening hours. The first picture shows some of my wife's glass collection. The second pic is a piece for sale locally. I have no idea what my wife paid for the first three pieces but I'm sure they were expensive. The piece in the second pic originally sold by the artist for $3100.

I just wish glass was as easy to work with as wood.

None of my wood pieces come near the attention grabbing of the glass.

View attachment 68192

View attachment 68194

That one in the second picture is fugly, in my opinion. To each their own.

 

[Tom Gall]

That one in the second picture is fugly, in my opinion. To each their own.

I agree ... wouldn't allow that thing in my home.

 

[John Grace]

From my perspective...if anyone is willing to pay me a decent amount for one of my pieces, they can then call it whatever they want.

 

[David Shombert]

I read somewhere once - wish I could name the source - that the internationally acclaimed Chinese artist Ai Wei Wei once said that in order for a work to be considered art, it had to "make a statement about the human condition". Well, I’ve made a lot of stuff on the lathe, some functional and some not, but none of it ever made that kind of statement. But I don’t think I’d want to argue the point with the likes of Ai Wei Wei.

When someone asks me if my work is art, I tell them “It’s woodturning. You can decide if it’s art or not”.

 

[Bill Boehme]

None of my wood pieces come near the attention grabbing of the glass.

Well, it certainly was attention-grabbing.

 

[Doug Rasmussen]

That one in the second picture is fugly, in my opinion. To each their own.

Yeah, I guess it is to each their own. I saw that piece as a colorful, kinda goofy and fun piece. Art? I don't know or care

 

[Kevin Jenness]

duct -taped banana

Since the banana can be eaten, can it possibly be art? Does its sale price and venue (Sotheby's, Art Basel Miami Beach) validate its status as "art"? Is "absurdist art" more or less real art than "decorative art"? How does the work maintain its reality as the banana rots or is eaten and the duct tape loses its stickum and is replaced? Is the wall an essential part of the work? Asking for a friend. "Ceci n'est pas une pipe"

The artist, who sold the "original" editions for far less than the collector, was thrilled. “Honestly, I feel fantastic,” Mr. Cattelan wrote. “The auction has turned what began as a statement in Basel into an even more absurd global spectacle.” He added: “In that way, the work becomes self-reflexive: The higher the price, the more it reinforces its original concept.”

 

[Jerry Bennett]

There is my art, your art, pop art, shock art, blob art, craft art, abstract art, realism art, cubist art, cartoon art, video art, primitive art, dark art, and absurd art. I left out several others. Pick one.
There are just as many religions. Pick one.
… and get on a soap box and orate.
Money never follows common sense.
Be careful what you associate the word “is” to, including this post.
😀

 

[Michael Anderson]

How does the work maintain its reality as the banana rots or is eaten and the duct tape loses its stickum and is replaced? Is the wall an essential part of the work?

The banana piece is a funny one. It’s entitled “Comedian” and indeed is a (or started as a) commentary on the absurdity of valuing the quality and/or monetary worth of contemporary art. The original piece that sold for millions is not necessarily the piece itself (the banana was always intended to be replaced); the purchaser (collector) received a certificate of authenticity that allows them to duct tape a banana to a wall and use the name “Comedian”. Of course, like Kevin’s quote states, this further reinforces the concept statement. Controversial, yep, but/and interesting…you bet!

Here is another article about the piece:

How a viral, duct-taped banana came to be worth $6.2 million

www.voanews.com

 

[hockenbery]

The banana piece is a funny one. It’s entitled “Comedian” and indeed is a

I asked bing to relate that to woodturning - surely this is worth a million or two

 

[Kevin Jenness]

The banana piece is a funny one. It’s entitled “Comedian” and indeed is a (or started as a) commentary on the absurdity of valuing the quality and/or monetary worth of contemporary art. The original piece that sold for millions is not necessarily the piece itself (the banana was always intended to be replaced); the purchaser (collector) received a certificate of authenticity that allows them to duct tape a banana to a wall and use the name “Comedian”. Of course, like Kevin’s quote states, this further reinforces the concept statement. Controversial, yep, but/and interesting…you bet!

Here is another article about the piece:

How a viral, duct-taped banana came to be worth $6.2 million

www.voanews.com

Thanks for the explanation of what was actually sold. Somewhat like a non-fungible token or a software license, with the option of making it "real" with the addition of a banana, a wall and a roll of tape. It's hard to tell if the buyer fully appreciates his role in the joke. H. E. Justin Sun

 

[Kevin Jenness]

Beating a dead banana Crypto entrepreneur eats banana

The artwork owner is given a certificate of authenticity that it was created by Cattelan, as well as instructions about how to replace the fruit when it turned bad.

As well as the now-eaten banana, Sun reportedly bought the rights to recreate the artwork by duct-taping any banana to a wall and calling it Comedian. Sun has not yet said if he plans to do so.