Part 4 Research point

The textile artist

I have looked at the work of many textile artists and found that the majority have turned to textiles after training in another field of art.  Some have spent a career in teaching and only been able to give themselves fully to their own art in retirement.  It is interesting to look at the different labels that people involved in textiles use to describe themselves and what they do.  There are three labels being used; the designer-maker, the crafts person and the textile artist.

Designer-maker 

This is a fairly new term developed (I conclude) to accommodate the crossover between the crafts person and the artist.  The term describes a  person who designs and makes small quantities and usually markets their work as an independent trader or maybe in a small co-operative.  Gale and Kaur (2002) tell us that the term designer-maker 

helps to highlight the often complex relationship between designing, making and manufacturing in very small...businesses based around one or two creative makers.

A designer maker sees the making of an item as only one part of a broader process and not always the most important one.  A designer-maker may easily decide to use bought in components or use out sourcing to get the job done.  Third party involvement is often because if the design is popular  the volume of work is impossible for one person to fulfil.

Crafts person

Traditionally crafts people retain complete control over the small amount of work they produce; from design to marketing.  The vision and idealism of the maker may be such that any sort of industrial component or contracting out of work is philosophically impossible. There is a hands on attitude that gives the product a cache and status that machine made items don't have.  The emotional commitment of the maker has a value.

Because the crafts person has a large element of choice in what they work on they may explore a whole range of textiles in an experimental way and explore cultural issues and trends (Gale and Kaur, 2002) in a way that creates a personal and expressive style.

Gale and Kaur note the confusion that surrounds the different terms.  They quote Miglena Kazaski who considers herself an crafts person but who uses outworkers to fulfil her orders.  They justify this by saying that her trade can continue to be "craft" because her outworkers use hand techniques rather than industrialised methods.

This all gets very muddy when you consider that artists we now hold with great reverence employed third parties to do some of the work particularly on huge tasks like frescoes.

The textile artist

This part of Gale and Kaur's work is quite provocative and reflects the uncertainties around the definitions we are referring to.  Bearing in mind they were writing over a decade ago (and things move on) it is interesting to note that they say that textile artists "may well experience difficulties of creative identity and status because textile art is as yet an uncertain definition of practice".

The term "textile art" is usually applied to that which seems to have grown from quite lowly origins like weaving and tapestry and therefore has a functional element to it.  This makes me think of the Fijian print I used as a springboard for my own work (Project 4 Stage 2 Ex 1). The fabric was printed with minimal equipment and very rudimentary dyes and has an undoubted functional use. This, according to Gale and Kaur, and me,  is art.

Probably because of this definition the fine art world have found it hard to recognise the value of textile art. Gale and Kaur acknowledge the "friction between the world of fine art and the world of crafts people".  There seems to be a real element of snobbishness and elitism that is getting in the way.  I find this very sad and I would like to think things are changing.  

Conclusion

Gale and Kaur tell us that

The textile craftsperson easily crosses over and shares camp with both the textile designer-maker and the textile artist, yet the designer-maker and the artist hardly ever cross paths.

I'm not sure that is entirely true. Go to any craft fair and examples of all these definitions can be found.  As I've thought about this  whilst writing and I realise how very distinguishable they are.  I can think of stallholders who have clearly "bought in" some of their components and others who have so much emotional involvement you just know that if you didn't buy they would be relieved.

I think the nearer one gets to the emotional content of the work the more one can be considered an artist no matter what the discipline.  I have always responded to textile art positively because I have felt some understanding of the techniques involved.  More recently, as my knowledge has widened, my awareness of the expertise and techniques involved has made me even more convinced that textiles   
have always offered a real contribution to the art world.  The cultural elitism from the fine art establishment has done a lot of damage to the perceived "humble" textile creator.



Gale C. and Kaur J. 2002, The Textile Book, Berg, Oxford