The topic of craft as fine art, can be a controversial one. Artists who work in the medium of crafts today, are not necessarily creating work that is functional, which comes out of the tradition of crafts. One contemporary artist who utilizes and refers to the tradition of craft in his work to create sculptures and installations, is Martin Puryear. Please watch his Art 21 interview, and answer the discussion questions below.
Link to video: https://art21.org/watch/art-in-the-twenty-first-century/s2/martin-puryear-in-time-segment/
Puryear talks about his respect for craft and the role of the craftsman in the creation of formal beauty rather than artistic beauty. Are there distinctions between art and craft? What are they?
Can an object created for a functional purpose achieve the status of art? Use an example from the text to support your answer. Please provide the full title, artist name and image number of the piece you are referring to.
Where do you stand on this issue of whether the crafts are fine art? Should crafts be considered a fine art, or in a category of its own? Please justify your answer with examples.
Sample Solution
regards to the osmosis of pieces into lumps. Mill operator recognizes pieces and lumps of data, the differentiation being that a piece is comprised of various pieces of data. It is fascinating to take note of that while there is a limited ability to recall lumps of data, how much pieces in every one of those lumps can change broadly (Miller, 1956). Anyway it’s anything but a straightforward instance of having the memorable option huge pieces right away, somewhat that as each piece turns out to be more natural, it very well may be acclimatized into a lump, which is then recollected itself. Recoding is the interaction by which individual pieces are ‘recoded’ and allocated to lumps. Consequently the ends that can be drawn from Miller’s unique work is that, while there is an acknowledged breaking point to the quantity of pieces of data that can be put away in prompt (present moment) memory, how much data inside every one of those lumps can be very high, without unfavorably influencing the review of similar number>
GET ANSWER
regards to the osmosis of pieces into lumps. Mill operator recognizes pieces and lumps of data, the differentiation being that a piece is comprised of various pieces of data. It is fascinating to take note of that while there is a limited ability to recall lumps of data, how much pieces in every one of those lumps can change broadly (Miller, 1956). Anyway it’s anything but a straightforward instance of having the memorable option huge pieces right away, somewhat that as each piece turns out to be more natural, it very well may be acclimatized into a lump, which is then recollected itself. Recoding is the interaction by which individual pieces are ‘recoded’ and allocated to lumps. Consequently the ends that can be drawn from Miller’s unique work is that, while there is an acknowledged breaking point to the quantity of pieces of data that can be put away in prompt (present moment) memory, how much data inside every one of those lumps can be very high, without unfavorably influencing the review of similar number>
