Get your FREE GUIDE '7 Steps to grow a Quilt Pattern Design Business'
design vs art
What kind of quilts do you make?
diving into the past
Books I’ve been reading lately. So, here’s one I have recently re-read.
design as art
bruno munari | 1966
penguin modern classics 2008
I bought it in London at the TATE Modern museum shop (who doesn’t love a museum shop?) And I think I must have jumped right in and read it straight away, maybe even on the flight home, or something like that. Anyway, there are enthusiastically scrawled comments on a lot of the pages – in pencil – in case there is anyone staunchly anti-book-defacement.
Are you for/against notes in books?
Maybe that is something instilled from school, never to write in books and keep them pristine in case you ever want to give them to someone else… well this time I was like, I am a damn adult and if I want to write in my book, I will! So, I did.
cryptic scribbles
Now don’t ask me what I wrote, or what the notes mean, because they are so cryptic that even future me of the same person as past me who wrote them can’t decipher them. But, they are enthusiastic, or infused with a certain urgency, based on the hasty scribble and the exclamation points. Maybe this was also about my discovery of some of the concepts in the book, or it was related to the sense of validation I got reading in a book, black printed on white, that someone else had similar ideas, and had been able to articulate them and get them published. Not sure.
Anyway, all this to say that while I re-read this book, I had the chance to peer into the past a little and see what things had grabbed my attention during the first reading of the book.
Pretty interesting and a new experience vs a book with no scribbles…
An extra layer of content almost, as I evaluated not only the original text itself, but also what had been of interest to past me, and even whether I still found those same ideas as illuminating or interesting.
your point being….
So what about the book itself, what does it talk about? Well, design vs art, so looking at the divide between art and design and what it means to label something as art vs labelling something as design. This might be something you have considered before. Or maybe not, but where is the distinction between art and design.
Do we need to write Art and Design (capital A and capital D)?
I am no art historian, or fine arts major. I do have a design degree, but by no means am I an expert in this discussion.
What makes a Nancy Crow quilt worth $45,000 and a collector’s piece, and what makes a quilt made by someone else just something to toss on the couch?
some ideas
Here are my two cents: during my foray into the quilting world, I have increasingly seen more and more pockets of this world. There are the traditional quilters, modern quilters, pattern followers, improv-ers, and there is also this whole world of art quilts.
Now, you might think, where is the distinction between a quilt, which is a work of art, and an art quilt?
What makes a piece of fiber art that is constructed like a quilt is constructed, yet hung on the wall and not used as a blanket an “art quilt” and not just “art”?
What makes a finely made quilt used daily on a bed or a couch “just” a quilt and not an “art quilt” or even “art”?
Engineer me began considering this and came up with these diagrams here:
Which one is true? Both? Neither?
art or object or…
Ultimately, a quilt, constructed to provide warmth, and used as an object is a part of the gambit of design, no? An object made for a specific use, a function.
But is it also art?
I am not here to tell anyone what their quilt is, art or design, or blanket, or runway coat, construction piece in a pillow fort, a warm hug from a friend faraway, an heirloom from a distant mother, a remembrance of childhood, a gift to the future, a gift from the past.
Snuggle up with your favorite quilt, or gaze at your latest work hanging on the wall and consider… Art or Design or Art and Design or… Neither?
How do you consider your quilts? Art? Design? Object? Heirloom? Use and abuse? Precious? Quotidian?
leave a comment below
As I read through this, memory is taking me back to my college days. As a BFA student with a concentration in graphic design, there were many debates as to whether designers could or should call themselves artists. Technically speaking perhaps not. But I preferred, and still do, to have a wider view of art as all forms of creative expression. It provides me with a much more visually interesting and thought-provoking world.
I couldn’t agree more. And at the end of the day, those labels are all external. Inside we are (X) – whatever we want to be.
I love museum shops! I have read 3 Bruno Munari books! After writing my comment to your instagram post, I further thought: one author may have a personal need for expression, thus creating the “sending” part of a communication event through e.g. visual medium (made in fabric, in our case!). Then, there is the “receiving” part of the communication. It can be one-to-one (a person receiving your quilt gift, observing your creation and emotionally responding to it). It can be “many to one” (a public that starts to get familiar with your work). If, in the public, there is also recognition from art institutions (prizes – museums – art media such as magazines or critics), then it is well established that a cultural trend exists, recognising a style or an author. Finally, art is consolidated and written into “history”. I’m not super expert of Nancy Crow works and biography but still, from my distant location, I know her work and her place in the teaching community and her role as thought forming in quilt making discourse.
Fabulous to discover we have Munari in common! Thanks for your thoughtful (as always!) post here and on Instagram.
It is really interesting to consider this progression from personal expression, to one-to-one reception of a work, to a wider reception and recognition. That maybe in the growth of a maker into an artist is where a quilt becomes art. I just replied to Alix’s comment here as well, there is a link to a video of Nancy Crow talking about her work and her progression as an artist. You might find it interesting as well.
Thanks for taking my mind off the first of the snow winds and our ongoing election campaign here in Australia; you set a nicely thought provoking question to start the week.
Hadn’t heard of Nancy Crow, so will have to research that aspect further but, that apart, I guess I’d go for quilts being a subsection within the Art umbrella. After all, it was the Gees Bend Collective quilters who paved the way for an end to differentiating between Art and Craft so…..q.e.d, if that’s the right maths term, ALL quilts are ART.
Feel free to quibble and I’ll keep thinking!
Alix, thanks for your comment and I’m glad I can provide some distraction! It’s getting hot over here, so snow winds sound delightful to me! Nancy Crow is a trailblazer of the art quilt, but she speaks best for herself. If you are interested, I found this youtube video to be an interesting introduction (in her own words) to her work https://youtu.be/vWhlOoNN3-g
Haha! Yes, QED indeed! The work of the Gees Bend Collective has done a lot for bringing the art/craft divide into the spotlight for sure. I feel like there is still a division between art and quilt as an object. Maybe it’s in the use/eye of the beholder. There is to be sure an ART to making quilts, and many quilters use quilt making as their artistic expression. I wonder if the intention of the maker makes it art or object or craft?
“What makes a Nancy Crow quilt worth $45,000?”
nothing
Sorry. I’ve thought much about her quilts.
Thanks for your comment Valerija. I guess value is in the eye of the beholder, right? Someone somewhere thought that that work was worth $45,000, so that’s what they were willing to exchange for that piece of work. Value can be so subjective, so personal. Thanks for commenting!