Nicolas Bell, Curator of the
Smithsonian’s Renwick Gallery talked about the rise of “Sloppy Craft Movement”
during his talk on influences of the 40 under 40 exhibit (currently on exhibit
thru Feb 3rd 2013). This concept has been talked about in the Glass School for a while, as many of the artists here come from diverse backgrounds - often from outside the glass craft world... and it is a great subject that deserves more attention in the art blogdom world.
“Sloppy Craft” – is this an
oxymoron? I thought that many may not understand the concept of sloppy craft, and a
cynically-minded person, could view much of the work – often designed to maximize
the shock value – as a transparent bid for attention in the contemporary art
world, which has long made a point of embracing my-kid-could-do-that
aesthetics.
 |
Mixed Media/Glass sculpture by the De La Torre Brothers
Einar and Jamex De La Torre derive their gutsy imagery from such diverse influences as Jose Posada, television, the Vatican and the darling of modern comics, the huge eyed Anime characters. |
In 2009, Glen Adamson, the
Deputy Director of Research at the Victoria and Albert Museum coined the phrase
"Sloppy Craft" which he defined it as "the unkempt product
of a post-disciplinary craft education."
The origins of “Post
Disciplinary Craft” begin in the early 2000’s when new ways of thinking
about craft began to form and many saw a need for a more relevant understanding of current craft practice and objects. The
earlier models of understanding craft, which relied on either the
Arts and Crafts Movement or the Back to the Land counterculture movement that had
influenced studio craft in the 1960s and 1970s, would have to be replaced.
The youngsters of craft no
longer felt connected to the past - or rather, are not referencing the history of the mediums - that is not their focus. They
didn't learn in apprenticeships with masters and a growing number had
abandoned classrooms. They weren't wed to techniques or materials. University
art programs found that the students did not want to be categorized as “glass
artists” or “clay artists” and, as the students just want the media skills as part of their repertoire, sought to merge curriculums under the term
“Material Studies”. Young crafters also
learned from other sources - such as their peers or the Internet. The digital age would be to craft
what the sexual revolution was to feminism. This is an approach to craft that resonates with
the times, linking craft to the wider concerns of today's society (ie:
think global,act local; feminism; gender politics; social justice and
ecological concerns). The don't be precious DYI movement
response of current craft students were a couple of other aspects of “sloppy craft.”
One was the recycling of materials — found or “trash” art, one might call it.
It’s everywhere these days, certainly if you looked at the works at DC's semi-annual artfest Artomatic -
and no one bats an eye at the exhibits. The other aspect of this kind of casual
crafting is that it appears most often in assemblages and collage. Assemblages
and collage have clear ancestors, dating back to Picasso through Rauschenberg
and are seen and made by
thousands of people who may not even think of themselves as artists.
 |
Textile art by Josh Faught.
Faught's textiles
appear to have accrued in a piecemeal fashion. To the surface he's appended
labels, nail polish and sequins, all materials culled from the realm of the amateur
crafter.
|
Traditionally, a
craftsperson would spend years polishing their craft, working at the highest
level until one was so good that one could let it go - forgetting technique and working from the heart intuitively; the crafter/artist would
have behind them all the knowledge needed to return to “fineness” if the artwork
required it.
To some extent Josh Faught fits that mold. He self-identified as a
Fibers Major at the Art Institute of Chicago,
while his fellow students in fibers always made clear they were “Fibers-and-…”
“…and performance,” “…and installation,” “…and assemblage,” “…and collage.” But
at some point Faught let go of the fine work of Fiber Craft and turned to rawer
work.
 |
| Einar and Jamex de la Torre |
But making things, it turns
out, is still quite difficult. Indeed, the one thing that seems to bind the
majority of contemporary art together is the lack of skill required to create it. Glen Adamson also explored the popular notion of what defines "craft" and why some may think that craft
always has to be finely made. He states," On the one hand, skill commands
respect. We value the integrity of the well-made object, the time and care it
demands. Therefore, what we most want out of our craft is something like
perfection. On the other hand, though, we value craft's irregularity-- it's
human, indeed humane, character. We want craft to stand in opposition to the
slick and soulless products of systematized industrial production." With
this in mind many people would want to consider something very well made to be
craft and not something considered to be sloppy craft.
What about the name of the
movement – “sloppy craft”? “Sloppy” is really a sound bite kind of name,
irresistible once spoken out loud. The reference was used extensively with textile and fabric art, but examples can be found in all the crafts. “Sloppy” indicates intentionality, which might
not be the case with the art. “Sloppy Craft” is an unfortunate phrase — perhaps
other names like “informal” “casual” or “raw” would be less jarring than
“sloppy” to describe contemporary art that has some base in traditional crafts.
Artists need to examine
these historical approaches and goals –whether it is humility, authenticity, expressiveness, shock value and impact – to see if they are useful in
understanding and contextualizing sloppy and post-disciplinary craft. At the very least, it will help demonstrate
whether contemporary craft is an evolution (of its prior forms) or a
revolution.
 |
| The term impressionist was first used by French art critic Louis Leroy in 1874 based on Monet's painting Impression, Sunrise. Leroy found the term fitting to describe the loose, "sloppy", undefined and "unfinished" style that Monet and several other artists applied to their paintings. Numerous famous artists threw out fineness
a long time ago and we are used to the aesthetic now. |
