On Craft, Science, and Art

[Kirk Gittings]

Here is a thought provoking site, pointed out to me by my friend Allen Rumme, that talks about the relationship between science art and craft (in violin making) that has some paralleles to LF photography.

www.cranfordpub.com/otis/craft_science_art.htm (http://www.cranfordpub.com/otis/craft_science_art.htm)

[Struan Gray]

A good read.

Perhaps the single biggest difference is that in violin making you have historic examples of excellent instruments towards which you can strive. In photography there is no such ideal, and most often striving to re-create the excellence of the past is regarded as a sign that you lack talent.
In violin playing the period instrument movement has parallels with the wet-plate and alt process revivals, but I don't know how much the luthiers and bow makers have needed to change their craft in response.

[Nick Morris]

Kirk, thank you for sharing what in my view is an excellent and applicable analysis of the artistic process. It has long been my belief that the creation of great art is grounded in solid craft. I had not thought to incorporate the science component in my view, but completely agree with the author's view. I differ with Struan regarding the striving to re-create the excellence of the past. Assuming it is not the end in itself, I view it as a key part of one's development. It was in the work of past masters that I recognized the potential of photography, and was inspired to make the camera a part of my life. What is learned from emulating the past masters can be incorporated into one's personal vision; a step in the journey toward one's personal standard of excellence.

[John Kasaian]

Thanks for the link to this very interesting website. Funny thing is that somebody asked just the other day how, with all the modern technology now available, no one has been able to duplicate all the qualities of a Stradivarius.

I see a strong relation between the process of making a violin and LF, as they both take time, they both entail esoteric skills that are specific to the respective activity, and there are historical as well technical elements that are part of the process, though
a I see it, terms like "craft" and "science and "art" don't work well with photography outside of very specific and technical usage, at least where my efforts are concerned. Heres an analogy that strikes a chord of truth with me:

Go for a walk outside,
stumble across cardboard box labelled "Light"
Out of curiousity, open the box
what do you see inside?

Ymmv, of course!

[Kirk Gittings]

"and most often striving to re-create the excellence of the past is regarded as a sign that you lack talent."

This is certainly true in some circles, for instance it is true where I teach at the School of the Art Institute of Chicago. For me the first question always is "is it any good" not "is it new". They would reverse that statement. Despite my traditional aesthetic, I have somehow earned the respect of my avantguard associates, by doing what I do well. You are not likely to become a superstar in contemporary art circles doing traditional work, but if you are doing traditional work you are probably not seeking that audience anyway.

[Stan. Laurenson-Batten]

Kirk.

Many thanks for bringing this article to the forum.

I am quite unable to match the artistic style of the writer - save to say:

It supports the theory that a unique syampathetic understanding exists between artists in relation to their respective functions or disciplines.

[Bruce Watson]

I'll concede that it is probably still true that in our technological age we still haven't recreated (that is, fully understood) the great Strads. Then again, neither has any luthier from any time in history equaled his work. IOW, it's not just the fault of the engineers - the luthiers can't do it either ;-)

Last time I checked (about 10 years ago maybe) engineers had come fairly close. I seem to remember a violin that was said to be about 90% of a Strad - made of injection molded plastic. I think I remember an article that said that Perlman had played it and had some quotes from him, but that could be something else - it's been awhile. Anyway, it supposedly felt bad in the hand, but sounded quite good to the ear. They used plastic because wood is so variable.

Digression aside, one of the things this article brings up is the new vs. old idea. As Kirk says, many institutions of higher learning as well as museums and collectors are more interested in new. And since beauty, in paintings, sculpture, music, violins, photography, writing, etc. was what people were after in the beginning, beauty is "old" to these institutions and people.

I find that idea sad and tragic, and refuse to subscribe to it. I guess that puts me square in the category of having a "traditional aesthetic" or, as some will undoubtedly point out, the category of "old fogy." So be it.

[paulr]

" I differ with Struan regarding the striving to re-create the excellence of the past. Assuming it is not the end in itself, I view it as a key part of one's development."

it can be a part of one's development ... but it's not the part that you'll be remembered for. the key part is when you're work starts to look like your work and not like someone else's.

[Ken Lee]

"As Kirk says, many institutions of higher learning as well as museums and collectors are more interested in new. And since beauty, in paintings, sculpture, music, violins, photography, writing, etc. was what people were after in the beginning, beauty is "old" to these institutions and people."



Amen !



In a technological culture, Newness is a surrogate for Beauty.



Newness is easier to market and sell. It requires no special inspiration and talent. It can be manufactured.

[John Kasaian]

More thoughts:

A violin is a tool, so is a camera, but a photograph as a tool is difficult for me to fathom (evidence? medical x-rays? rare applications that probably don't apply here)

Big difference when referring to historical excellence as something to shoot for. Perhaps a more fitting comparison would be between violins and LF cameras, rather than violins and photographs.

[Ralph Barker]

Interesting article. Thanks for sharing the link, Kirk.

While I can understand the (profit-motivated) desire to make great-sounding instruments repeatably (and inexpensively) manufacturable, taking human skill and craft out of the equation is lamentable. This probably falls into the category of things we might be able to do, but shouldn't.

[paulr]

"This probably falls into the category of things we might be able to do, but shouldn't."

on the other hand there are plenty of kids in the world who might turn out to be brilliant violinists, but we'll never know with the current price of entry where it is.

there's a reason this generation's musical culture has moved from piano and violin lessons to turntables. it's not degeneracy, it's money.

[Struan Gray]

Paul, I don't think it's just money. Playing the violin or the piano takes a lot of grind and effort to reach a stage of mere competence. These days the opportunity cost of dedicating that much of your leisure time to a single persuit is unattractive to many at any price. Then there's the general move away from making your own entertainment to simply consuming it. Given a choice between listening to my redition of "Killing me softlly" and the Fugees' I think even the most die-hard Roberta Flack fan would take the latter, even if my version strives to be closer to the original. If you can have the world's best musicians in your living room, why settle for me?

FWIW I too have a huge respect for craft. My first loves in the arts are applied and industrial, particularly ceramics and glass, and I have never understood the lofty distain with which the fine arts regard those supposedly lower down the scale. Stonemasons, potters, weavers and woodcarvers all seem to be able to elicit the same response in me that painters and sculptors do, so my own personal pantheon is a very inclusive one. But eclectic inclusiveness is not how the art world operates, and neither is it how canonical histories are compiled. I don't think I am just pushing a truism about cliquishness and fashion in the arts; I think there is a fundamental difference between a good violin and a good photograph.

One of the things I liked in the original article is how it explicitly stated that 'good' is a matter of taste, even within the constraints of violin making. You don't have to be a Hardanger Fiddle afficionado (or Viola D'Amore if you want to stay classical) to recognise that the same amount of skill can go into the construction of very different instruments. Even Strads have been physically altered during their lifetime to switch from the gut-stringed baroque to the romantic concert sound: it is fascinating that they are still regarded as 'best' even when rebuilt to make a completely different noise.

[Ralph Barker]

Paul - I guess what I was lamenting was the trend toward trying to simulate craft via computer for mass marketing versus encouraging human-based craft. I see that as a parallel to the difference between computer-generated/enhanced prints and traditional printing methods, perhaps with a few sprinkles from the discussion of print pricing. Sociologists looking at the instant-gratification generation might have interesting insights, as well.

Obviously, economics plays a major role. It's tough to garner interest in a young person to learn a craft if they compare income potential - especially in a world-trade environment. Thus, U.S. or European kids may be more likely to go into marketing so-called third-world products, or get a job with a mega-company trying to synthesize traditional analog quality. That effort might not be needed, though, because the music needs only to sound OK on an iPod, anyway. ;-)

On the photographic front, given sufficient computer power, a random tree-generator program might eventually rival Ansel (rocks and mountains are even easier than trees). Thus, we'd no longer need photographers and we'd no longer need to "be there", either. Then, we could close down Yosemite, and let the park rangers get jobs as Walmart greeters. ;-)

Struan - if you were to record your version of "Killing Me Softly" I'm sure it could be spruced-up digitally, so you'd sound almost like the original. ;-)

[Struan Gray]

There are several extent bootleg recordings of me singing U2 hits on my stag night. Clears a room faster than Sarin.