Homework answers / question archive / In their introduction to The New Politics of the Handmade: Craft, Art and Design (2020), Anthea Black and Nicole Burisch, co-editors of the book, state that their anthology 'takes on contemporary craft as a sphere of political action and debate

In their introduction to The New Politics of the Handmade: Craft, Art and Design (2020), Anthea Black and Nicole Burisch, co-editors of the book, state that their anthology 'takes on contemporary craft as a sphere of political action and debate

Writing

Share With

In their introduction to The New Politics of the Handmade: Craft, Art and Design (2020), Anthea Black and Nicole Burisch, co-editors of the book, state that their anthology 'takes on contemporary craft as a sphere of political action and debate.' They write: 'It responds to the last two decades of craft activism, which leveraged the aesthetics and values of handmaking to convey messages of political agency and optimism, collective organizing and anti-capitalist and antiglobalization critique. We begin with the premise that the increased circulation of craft, art and design within current economic, environmental and social contexts demands new modes of criticism and scholarship. Our aim is to use this book to have deeper conversations on the stakes for politicized making and thinking about craft, as it is intertwined with art, design and flows of production-consumption in a transnational and global context.' (Anthea Black and Nicole Burisch, 'Introduction,' The New Politics of the Handmade: Craft, Art and Design, ed. A Black and N. Burisch, London: Bloomsbury Publishing, 2020, p. 1.) They outline their own contribution to this collection of essays, the book's first chapter, 'From craftivism to craftwashing,' where they "(present) the themes that guide The New Politics of the Handmade. In it, we update our text 'Craft Hard Die Free: Radical Curatorial Strategies for Craftivism' to look closer at the emergence of craftivism and indie craft through the early 2000s and trace how these 'movements' became aligned with radical politics and revolution. Focusing on the recent marketing and consumption of craft in contemporary art, craft fairs, museums and advertising, we critically examine how craft now functions as a sign of good affect and moral purity. We use the term craftwashing to describe the use of craft as a marketing ploy that performs political and social engagement while obscuring ethical, environmental and labour issues in the chain of production." (p. 2) In this chapter, Black and Burisch take a critical position towards prevailing assertions, assumptions and motivations, related to politicized craft actions, practices and discourses, interrogating contemporary craft politics and seeking to understand complex relationships of craft to wider political, economic and social systems and structures. (p. 13) As they observe: 'Craft is frequently described as both a fix and foil for the ills of capitalism and alienating conditions of industrialization. Despite a growing body of scholarship on craft's fluid relationship to the economy and industry, recent dialogues of the handmade continue to romanticize craft - and often textiles in particular - as simple, fulfilling, authentic, politically significant and even revolutionary work. Through this lens, we consider the broader implications of how craft functions within capitalist markets - however ethical they may seem. Much of craft activism in recent years has centred on consumption-based approaches or the presentation of craft in the public space, and this text turns a critical eye on these approaches. Through these readings, we are interested in tracing how craft discourses in popular culture, galleries and museums, and academia contribute to the framing of craft as a progressive movement within the current economic and political system.' (pp. 13-14) The authors continue: 'We begin by looking closely at the framing of craftivism and contemporary craft during the 2000s. Craftivism emerged in the late nineties as part of anti/alter-globalization and anti-war activism and gained recognition as a political movement through the early twenty-first century. Indie craft highlighted local craft economies and began to establish new networks that 'rebranded' the handmade as an ethical consumption practice, and a series of museum exhibitions celebrated the re-emergence of diverse forms of craft into contemporary art.' (p. 14) Their essay goes on to consider activist crafting or craft activism - craftivism, and craftwashing. Craftivism was the focus of an earlier essay by Black and Burisch, 'Craft Hard Die Free: RADICAL CURATORIAL STRATEGIES FOR CRAFTIVISM,' published in a 2011 anthology, Extra/Ordinary: Craft and Contemporary Art, where they surveyed internationally 'activities which seek to deploy craft for the purposes of protest.' (Glenn Adamson, 'Craft Hard Die Free in Extra/ordinary and The Craft Reader,' The Craft Reader, Ap. 29, 2012). Writing in a later historical moment, in the 2020 book, they pursue 'a rapid uptake of handmade aesthetics into marketing and consumer cultures' that followed these developments, invoking the term craftwashing 'in relation to marketing that uses craft to perform political and social engagement while obscuring ethical, environmental and labour issues in the chain of production. We outline the shift from craftivism to 'craftwashing' in the first section of this essay and look closely at examples where craft is a shorthand, a supplement, an accessory and sometimes a tool to signify and instigate political action. We consider how craft has been evoked in publications, exhibitions, charity and marketing campaigns of the last two decades, and we call into question the myth of craft as an inherently progressive and democratic political form. Craft's many uses and meanings shift across these contexts, particularly when social and financial capital is exchanged. Where the 'craft' of craftivism depends on well-worn associations to confront political and economic issues, the 'craft' in craftwashing capitalizes on them.' "Craftwashing also gains power from craft's historical position 'on the margins' of modern art, whether such exclusions have been constructed on the basis of gender, race, ethnicity, class or material. Craftwashing derives further power from whiteness and white liberal norms of property, choice and charity, when the myth of craft's marginality is coupled with cultural appropriation and amnesia about the origins of specific techniques. Later in the text, we expand our case studies to further critique the ways that craftwashing is used in marketing campaigns to perform local, national and global citizenship. As we chart this shift from craftivism to craftwashing from the early 2000s to the present, we are particularly interested in two ideas: that craft is unthreatening and fundamentally good; and that social or political causes often drive consumption of objects that are handcrafted, or made to look and feel handcrafted." (p. 14) Of craftivism, they observe: 'It has been over a decade since the word 'craftivism' emerged to describe the blending of craft and activism. The term has since been applied to projects and actions as diverse as contemporary art works, public knit-ins, embroidered protest banners, yarnbombing, ethical fashion and indie craft sales, small-scale food production, traveling public workshops and pussy hats.' (p. 15) Later, they elaborate: 'Craft's renewed visibility in public spaces, museums, academia and the media is bolstered by the idea that craftivism and contemporary craft are forms of revolutionary political action and democratic participation, particularly in North America and Europe. This framing relies on the above understandings of craft as a marginal and countercultural practice in a state of continual personal reinvention, and in indie craft's positioning as a community that reflects anti-capitalist values and allows for personal critiques of globalization.' (pp. 17-18) Developing their position, the authors continue: 'Further, the framing of craftivism as a local or global movement of individuals working together to address a common cause, ... assumes political unity among people who produce, promote or consume craft.... The idea of a unified, inherently progressive craft movement ignores... specific political and regional conditions that give handmade objects deeper meaning. Instead, when craft is read only through the lens of progressive politics, it operates more readily as marketable sign within local, global or transnational economies. This operation appears in broader public discourse and corporate branding: when handmade objects and raw materials are used to represent morality and charity; when craft is championed as the antidote to historical and contemporary forms of alienated labour; when it is romanticized as an anti- or pre-industrial mode of production and rural lifestyles; or offered as tangible ways to boycott or avoid purchasing unethically produced goods.' "Revolutionary language and aesthetics of politicized craft are not only common within activist craft communities, indie craft and contemporary art. As we describe later, craft also features prominently in powerful marketing campaigns that leverage the political claims of handmaking and channel its affective power into the consumer sphere. In these cases, and in craftwashing broadly, we see the conflation of Arts and Crafts movement ideals with neoliberal language of entrepreneurship and individualism, that together draw significant power from the craftivist claims of the last two decades. These claims have contributed to corporate uptake of craft as a loaded political symbol and an aesthetic shorthand for 'reclaiming' all that is other, outside, oppressed. Marketing products based on these associations enables consumers to access and perform and what Nicole Dawkins has termed 'the moral value of handmade goods.'" (p 18) Black and Burisch then turn their attention to craftwashing, with examples that 'range from multinational fashion brands, to small-scale design groups and non-profit organizations that promote the work of independent craftspeople. As we see, each construct personal consumer choice as an explicitly political process, and allow consumers in various markets to participate in the myth that making, supporting or buying craft is a form of progressive political action.' (p. 18) They establish the term, craftwashing, derived from the more familiar greenwashing, 'branding strategies that make products seem eco-friendly while concealing their negative environmental impacts.' (p. 19) Craftwashing is positioned as analogous to greenwashing, often obscuring dimensions of corporate production behind aesthetics of the handmade. '... (Like) green washing, (craftwashing) capitalizes on the individual consumer desire to do good - or be perceived as morally good - amid overwhelming, irreconcilable political anxiety and impending ecological collapse. By marketing affectively charged handmade objects (or their lookalikes) as solutions to pressing environmental, social and economic justice issues, craft aesthetics are twinned with notions of individual political agency and morality, while leaving existing power systems largely unquestioned and intact." (p. 19) They conclude: "This essay re-evaluates the political claims that surround contemporary craft activism and traces their development over the last two decades. It investigates how the particular qualities of craft, alongside histories of craft activism, have been conflated with notions of authenticity, individuality, citizenship, sustainability and radical politics, in both scholarly and popular understandings. In tracing a recent genealogy of craft activism and its collision with various economic models, we have sought here to identify and challenge the myth of craft as an inherently progressive political movement. We describe how the idea of 'revolutionary craft' forms a strong affective foundation for lifestyle-based marketing and branding today. As Arundhati Roy reminds, war and shopping will not save the world - and neither will craft. In our view, craft is neither good nor bad, moral nor immoral, revolutionary nor status quo. We have looked at examples of craftwashing in action - from luxury goods, to indie designers and self-determined craft communities - where the use of craft as a marketing tool can obscure pressing issues of precarious labour, complex global supply chains, environmental catastrophe and the ongoing appropriation and preservation of cultural traditions. By casting 'craft citizens' to perform in a loop of supposedly ethical production-consumption, craftwashing forecloses on important critical questions about the structures that support these systems. Through the recent resurgence of craft as a marketable phenomenon, and the appearance of craftwashing, individual acts of production and consumption may feel charged with political meaning. But political agency must not be confused with buying power or owning beautiful things. In short: if there is something political about craft now, it is not about buying more stuff. Within our current economic system and for a field so deeply connected to objects and materials, it may seem difficult, even impossible, to ask: What are the forms of craft politics that do not focus on the market? What processes and ways of thinking about craft can offer viable alternatives to the continued and destructive expansion of capitalism? We contend that these questions are still worth asking, for craft scholars and practitioners alike. While this text critiques the ways in which the language of craft activism has been used in consumption-based approaches, we nevertheless consider craft as a vital and ongoing frame for understanding the very nature of exchange and survival for all forms of life and matter. We remain hopeful that craft activism can continue to exist beyond the trappings of individual consumption, and instead offer tangible activations of self-determination, bodily autonomy and cultural memory intertwined with global citizenship and justice." (p.27) Black's talk related closely to the recent book and to her earlier contribution to Extra/Ordinary: Craft and Contemporary Art (2011), 'Craft Hard Die Free: Radical Curatorial Strategies for Craftivism,' co-authored with Burisch. Draw on her presentation and the co-authored related texts available to you (on Moodle) to explore their critical position towards radical craft, politicized crafting, and the notion of a unified craft movement, that rest on assumptions of craft as inherently good, politically and socially progressive, and effective in addressing environmental degradation and climate change. Recall the 'case studies,' described by the editors and authors, and discussed by Black in her presentation. Consider the radical potential of craft practices, of politicized craft, its capacity and agency in advancing social and environmental justice and progressive politics. Discuss craftivism and craftwashing. Think about craft beyond the aesthetic object, valued for the skills of the maker. Consider the utility of craft objects - beyond function - thinking about how they circulate and operate more broadly in construction and performance of identity, local and global economies, corporate branding and capitalist markets, environmental politics. Emblematic of a range of values - authenticity, individuality, domesticity, thrift, sustainability, simplicity of pre-industrial times, utopianism, moral good, socially and economically progressive politics - craft and crafting have been mobilized as protest. Craft production, actions and discourses have been instrumentalized in anti-capitalist and anti-globalization movements and environmental politics, at the same time as the aesthetics, materials, traditions of making, and values attributed to craft have been co-opted by capitalist interests, represented in corporate advertising (lifestyle marketing, charity, branding and sustainable fashion). Discuss. Craft has been aligned with progressive - and aesthetic - reform, and moral values since the 19th -century Arts and Crafts movement (John Ruskin and William Morris), defining an idealized vision of pre-industrial production, foundational to modern-day socialist utopian politics. The later 19th-early 20th-century movement has been seen as a reaction to social, economic and environmental effects of 19th-century industrialization and urbanization, and the alienation attendant upon manufacture under capitalism, following the Industrial Revolution. Craft values mobilized in the 19th century in service of social, political, economic reform continue to inform contemporary practice and discourse. Politicized craft practices, and critical and popular craft discourses continue to draw on this history of idealism, and the social and political engagement of craft, manifest in the work and actions of socially and politically engaged craft practitioners and theorists, and craft communities that have formed since the 1990s, in the public realm, museums, online spaces, the domestic realm and the media. Thinking about how craft circulates in the public realm, the museum, the sphere of the individual, community and nation, and globally, enmeshed in larger political and economic systems, comment on its potential - and limitations - for political change and social justice, and action on climate change and unfolding environmental catastrophe. As Black demonstrated, craft can be seen as complicit in global capitalism, with craft values invoked in corporate branding and advertising exploiting attributes identified with craft and the handmade advancing neoliberal ideas of hyper individuality, personal choice, and a sense of political and economic agency exercised through consumption. In this context, think about your own consumer choices. (Make sure all answers a clearly addressed and answered completely.)