The Intriguing History Behind Art vs. Craft

When you think of art, iconic paintings like the Mona Lisa or grand sculptures might spring to mind. But what about a beautifully crafted vase, a cozy quilt, or a meticulously made violin? Are these also art, or do they fall into a different category: craft? The distinction, it turns out, is more complex than you might think.

The Shifting Sands of Definition

It's easy to assume a clear line exists between art and craft. After all, a simple spoon can be exquisitely designed, while a towering monument might lack inspiration. However, the reality is far more nuanced. Not every musical instrument serves a purely practical purpose, and not every painting is created solely for aesthetic appreciation. So, why do we even bother separating art from craft in the first place?

A Historical Turning Point

The division between art and craft is largely a product of specific historical circumstances. Today, we readily recognize figures like Da Vinci and Michelangelo as artistic geniuses. Their extraordinary talent is undeniable, but they also benefited from living in a particular time and place. Before the Renaissance, Western artists received little individual recognition for their work.

Imagine stepping into a medieval European workshop. Whether it belonged to a stonemason, goldsmith, hatmaker, or fresco painter, the scene would be remarkably similar. A master craftsman, bound by strict guild regulations, would oversee apprentices and journeymen. These individuals progressed through the ranks over years of dedicated practice, mastering established traditions and passing them on to future generations.

Patrons of the time viewed these makers collectively rather than as individuals. Their creations, from Murano glass goblets to Flemish lace, were valued as symbols of social status, prized for their beauty and adherence to tradition. The person who commissioned and paid for the work – be it a chair, sculpture, necklace, or entire building – often received more recognition than the artisans who designed and built it.

The Renaissance Shift

Around 1400, a significant shift began to occur, particularly in Florence, Italy. The emergence of Renaissance Humanism, a cultural ideal emphasizing classical Greek and Roman principles, led to a reevaluation of values. Florentine intellectuals championed the revival of classical works, placing greater emphasis on individual creativity over collective production.

Painted works had been paid by the square foot, but painters successfully petitioned their patrons to be paid based on merit instead. This marked a turning point in how artists were perceived and compensated.

Giorgio Vasari, a friend of Michelangelo, published "Lives of the Most Excellent Painters, Sculptors and Architects" in 1550. This book elevated these creators to celebrity status, sharing intimate details of their lives and solidifying their image as creative masterminds.

Painting, sculpture, and architecture became recognized as "art," and their creators were celebrated as individual artists. Meanwhile, those who adhered to guild traditions, producing candlesticks, ceramics, jewelry, and iron gates, were collectively known as artisans. Their works were often considered minor or decorative arts, implying a lower status and reinforcing the distinction between art and craft that persists in the Western world.

Beyond the Western Lens

If we consider a painting by Rembrandt or Picasso as "art," where does that leave an African mask, a Chinese porcelain vase, or a Navajo rug? The truth is that the emphasis on innovation in art history is more of an exception than the rule.

In many cultures around the world, the distinction between art and craft simply doesn't exist. In fact, some works that might be classified as "craft" in the West – a Peruvian rug, a Ming Dynasty vase, or a totem pole – are considered the most important visual forms of their respective cultures.

Challenging Western Bias

When 19th-century art historians observed that the art of some non-Western cultures remained unchanged for centuries, they often labeled these works as "primitive." This implied that the makers were incapable of innovation and, therefore, not true artists. However, this perspective failed to recognize that these makers were not striving for innovation at all. The value of their work lay precisely in preserving visual traditions, not in altering them.

In recent decades, there's been a growing recognition of the importance of these previously marginalized art forms. Quilts, ceramics, and wood carvings are now more frequently included in art history textbooks and displayed in museums alongside paintings and sculptures.

A Broader Perspective

Perhaps it's time to move beyond the limiting terms of "art" and "craft" and embrace a more inclusive term like "visual arts." This would encompass a wider range of aesthetic production and acknowledge the diverse cultural and historical contexts that shape our appreciation of objects and their makers. Ultimately, the definition of art is subjective, shaped by our individual perspectives and cultural backgrounds.