Focusing on craft helps my thinking a bit on this. It raises the question
for me, what does insisting on high(er) standards of craftsmanship do for
the person who is engaging in the artistic process? Especially, in an
environment where the purpose is not to create art? My guess is that
insisting on standards of craftsmanship does a variety of things, such as
pushing the person to stay with their senses (which I think is one of the
deep lessons of artistic practice (see
http://digitalcommons.wpi.edu/oa/vol1/iss1/15/ for Claus’ explanation)). I
would also think that there is something valuable in a craft orientation
(see http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10551-014-2116-9#/page-1
for more) and it might help people learn this craft orientation.
And I suspect it may often trigger anxiety in people, the “I’m not an
artist” feeling, “I’m not a writer”, etc. I sometimes ask my students to
use crayons and I tell them, “no one ever created a great work of art with
crayons,” just to reduce the anxiety of asking MBA students to draw.
And I suspect it triggers anxiety in facilitators. I know that I don’t
have the craft skill in drawing to help people to a higher level of
craftsmanship in their drawing, so I don’t try to. In short, insisting on
craftsmanship requires some mastery of that craft. So, I have no problem
in insisting on craftsmanship when I ask students to write and perform
stories because I have some craft skills (developed over many years of
practice) there. I know how to help them raise their level of
craftsmanship and I think something useful happens when I do that.
- Steve
On 6/12/16, 6:03 AM, "Aesthetics, Creativity, and Organisations Research
Network on behalf of Piers Ibbotson" <[log in to unmask] on behalf of
[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>How about this: "Art is a matter of opinion". Craftsmanship maybe not.
>What this conversation has opened up for me is some useful questions
>about the purpose of arts based activities in areas that are not about
>training or developing artists. In my practise I have only been
>interested in the processes and their effects. Respect for the processes
>and discipline when engaging in them are the craft constraints I
>emphasise. I have always been wary of attempts or claims to bring about
>psycho/spiritual transformation. Partly because I am not sure that's what
>I should be doing and also because I am not convinced that engagement
>with artistic PRACTICE necessarily achieves it.
>Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: David Weir <[log in to unmask]>
>Sender: "Aesthetics, Creativity, and Organisations Research Network"
> <[log in to unmask]>
>Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2016 08:34:25
>To: <[log in to unmask]>
>Reply-To: David Weir <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Re: FW: Quality of art products in arts-based methods in
>organizations
>
>What is "high standard"? Who judges this?
>Whose will prevails in matters of artistic standards?
>
>David
>
>David Weir
>
>Hadleigh House
>
>Main Street
>
>Skirpenbeck
>
>York
>
>YO 41 1HF
>
>01759371949
>
>07833366773
>
>[log in to unmask]
>
>
>On Thu, 9 Jun 2016 19:58:32 +0000, "Taylor, Steven S" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> Forwarding this response from Piers - I concur that Jane Hilberry¹s
>>point
>> is about insistence on good craftsmanship and I wonder if that gets us
>>to
>> a different conversation than talking about quality in art products?
>>
>>
>> On 6/9/16, 1:25 PM, "[log in to unmask]"
>> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> >Hmmm. Muddle here about craft and art I think. Well crafted can be
>> >unoriginal. Profound can be, on the face of it rough, but never poorly
>> >crafted. Peter Brook useful here? Poor theatre vs deadly theatre.
>>Artists
>> >very rarely produce good art let alone people in a workshop. An
>> >insistence on good craftsmanship is a very useful constraint when
>>trying
>> >to bring about insight in a group (Jane Hilberry's point I think).
>> >Artists don't make "Art" remember, they make books or plays or films or
>> >paintings and if they are making a living at it, what they make will be
>> >well crafted.
>> >Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device
>> >
>> >-----Original Message-----
>> >From: "Taylor, Steven S" <[log in to unmask]>
>> >Sender: "Aesthetics, Creativity, and Organisations Research Network"
>> > <[log in to unmask]>
>> >Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2016 12:15:47
>> >To: <[log in to unmask]>
>> >Reply-To: "Taylor, Steven S" <[log in to unmask]>
>> >Subject: Quality of art products in arts-based methods in organizations
>> >
>> >Hi, everyone
>> >
>> >Last week at EURAM, Philippe Mairesse spoke about his work with
>> >accounting students and talked about how he pushed the students to do
>> >work that was better art. I am also struck that Jane Hilberry also
>>spoke
>> >about how she pushes students to write better poetry
>> >(http://digitalcommons.wpi.edu/oa/vol1/iss1/6/). This has gotten me
>> >thinking about the question of quality of the art (product/outcome)
>>when
>> >using arts-based methods for leadership/managerial development in
>>short
>> >does it matter if the art is good if we¹re not doing it to produce good
>> >art? I don¹t think anyone would claim that the LEGO sculptures created
>>in
>> >a Serious Play process are good art, or even that the facilitators try
>>to
>> >get people to create better (rather worse) art as part of the process.
>> >
>> >My first take on this is that pushing for better quality art also
>>pushes
>> >farther into deeply embodied and often mysterious knowing and away from
>> >just representing our cognitive processes in visual (or poetic or
>> >whatever) forms. It pushes us into more ambiguous and more interesting
>> >forms that also allow to go to new places (Barry & Meisiek¹s
>>departures)
>> >than something more straight forward and cognitive does. Thus the push
>> >for better art also has a very useful purpose.
>> >
>> >So, what do you think? How does concern for the quality of the art
>> >product/outcome fit into your own practice of arts-based methods in
>> >organizations (if you have one and it does)? How would you think about
>> >this? What questions does this raise for you?
>> >
>> >Regards,
>> >
>> >Steve Taylor
>> >
>> > Steven S. Taylor, PhD
>> >[cid:4FEA4C90-AEE4-4F3C-99DF-657EB4452699]
>> >
|