# The case against craft: An outline The Reinventing the Wheel project of developing an association for craft knowledge is premised on the belief that craft needs to be justified as a serious activity. This document attempts to outline the prejudices that consign craft to a lower status. ### Capitalism The “commodity fetish” that is essential to consumer capitalism elevates brand identity and obscures the means of production. This leads to higher values for art products, which are framed by the heroic story of the artist. But where the meaning lies in the production process, particularly the skill of the maker, it has less value. Outcomes: - Works by artists have far higher prices than those made by craftspersons, with no relation to the amount of labour or skill involved - If artists use craft materials, such as clay, they are lauded for their “freedom” from the constraints of technique - Artists often hire technicians to make their work without acknowledging their names in museum labels - The renaming of departments from “craft” to “design” - Do craft advocates also value capitalist success? ### Logocentrism Western civilisation is founded on the hierarchy of matter and form that was developed by ancient Greek philosophers, particularly Plato and Aristotle. In this, the abstract is seen as more powerful than the concrete. Outcomes: - The rise of priestly religions which focus on heavenly realism and vilify the flesh - A society of spectacle that consumes the world in two-dimensional forms such as paintings and screens - The rise of the management class that institute regimes of form-filling - Craft advocates desire a formalized ‘craft history’ and even ‘craft theory’ in many academic scenarios ### Patriarchy Today, craft is increasingly seen as a domestic activity that is pursued for reasons of “comfort” rather than serious meaning. It is associated with ugly handknits or macramé produced within the home. The revival of interest in “artisanship” in the Western middle class is often identified with effeminate hipsters. Outcomes: - Patronising bylines about “arty-crafty” revivals - Demeaning phrases such as “the institute of basket-weaving” ### Developmentalism One of the ideologies that underpinned colonialism is the idea of a universal linear model of progress based on industrialisation. Traditional crafts were viewed as “backward” that inhibited the development of global markets. Developmentalism is aligned with the privileging of the “contemporary” that reflects a “presentism” that presumes that the current time is exceptionally freed of past constraints. This is founded on a cumulative model of knowledge in which it ever-grows, as opposed to a model of living knowledge that can wither if not sustained. Outcomes: - The association of “fetish” with child-like primitivism - The simplification of craft into the souvenir form for tourist consumption - The shame of many colonised peoples about making work by hands and wish for children to work in formal industries - The language in Indian government of craft as a “sunset industry” ### Language There are many ways that language conventions devalue craft. This can be in subtle ways, such as the adjective “mere”. While an object could be “mere craft”, it is less meaningful  to say it is “mere art”. The terms “artist” and “designer” have status and are not gender-specific. However, “artisan” is limited to a specific kind of craft and “craftsperson” is slightly bureaucratic. Outcomes: - Craft practitioners will more readily identify as artists in public - The diminutive of “handy” as in handicraft as opposed to the more serious “handcraft” - The mystical concepts of the digital revolution, such as “automagical” and “frictionless”. ### Egalitarianism From this perspective, while craft seems to celebrate the humble artisan, it is essentially an elite pursuit of the upper-middle class. The case against William Morris is that his work could only be afforded by the bourgeoisie. Today, the craft world is dominated by events for wealthy patrons, such as the Santa Fe Folk Art Market, Loewe Craft Prize and the Michelangelo Foundation. Some of this criticism may indeed be right, but it ignores the more everyday experiences of craft found in weekend markets and evening classes. And maybe we should accept that craft has often flourished with this kind of patronage, such as in royal courts in both East and West. Outcomes: - People who are committed to social justice see craft as irrelevant. - Philanthropists move their support away from craft heritage to more direct programs such as health and education. ### Anti-colonialism According to this argument, the value of craft in modernity was defined specifically in nineteenth-century England as a reaction against industrialisation. The romantic narrative of the Arts & Crafts Movement was then exported to the colonies where it took on local forms. It either framed local nationalism, such as Gandhi’s symbol of the charka or provided missionaries with a means of consoling those dispossessed by colonisation. This is fed by the “world craft” movement which sets up a noble savage myth of the crafts which consigns colonised cultures in a romantic box, denying the potential to compete as equals in the business of development. Economically, this is supported by the tourist industry who provide a market for “authentic” souvenirs. Outcomes: - Post-colonial theorists and activists don’t consider crafts to play a role in their understanding of the necessary struggle for emancipation. - Non-western governments withdraw support for heritage crafts.