Misunderstood

Despite my using the phrase ‘art v craft debate’ yesterday, my post was not intended to be another rehash of that debate, or discussion, if you’d prefer. In fact in earlier posts about this topic I have stated that I think it is a non-issue. I think both are equally valid, equally important; I wasn’t implying that the topic was black and white – of course there are shades of grey, and I think most (all?) would acknowledge that. As I pointed out I don’t care what we call ourselves or label what we do, or make.

I think by focussing attention on one, admittedly ill-considered (and as far as I am concerned the least important), phrase in my post, the point of the post may have been missed. My point was not that art and craft are ‘diametrically opposed’ or even that the point is worth arguing about (falsely or otherwise). Sharonb’s statement that ‘It is possible to define, discuss and tease out ideas without framing the discussion in term of a debate and if done so could lead somewhere provided it is a genuine discussion instead if setting this idea against that idea’, is of course true. It was not however, my intention to continue the debate, discussion or otherwise on this topic. My point was to suggest that the term craft is often devalued. The blog and discussion on craft revolution is not a debate, or even a discussion, about art v craft, and it would be a shame for anybody to infer that, simply because I thoughtlessly used that term in my post.

The discussion on craft revolution is about valuing craft, for craft’s sake, in all its forms – crocheted toilet roll covers to exquisite works of art.