Craft is ubiquitous | Intellect Skip to content
1981
Craft Sciences
  • ISSN: 2040-4689
  • E-ISSN: 2040-4697

Abstract

This Special Issue presents a selection of contributions that seek to extend the idea of what craft practice and research can be. They stem from the conference presentations in the (), held online during 4–6 May 2021. This conference was initiated by the Craft Laboratory in Mariestad city, which is affiliated with the Department of Conservation, University of Gothenburg, Sweden. What counts as craft, and what does not, has been discussed with the general consensus that craft often evades definitions and instead thrives as an adhesive between other domains. In this editorial we claim that craft practice is ubiquitous, since acts of ‘crafting’ are infiltrated in most aspects of society, from the industrial workplace to the home. In addition to being a professional domain, craftmanship is also an attitude and a way of life. Craft making further facilitates shared reflective platforms which can carry and sustain cultural associations, or even social resistance, over time. We hope to invite readers to extend the notions of what crafts can be, by discussing issues related to such various topics as plant propagation, crystal growing, neuroscientific activity tracking, multimodal presentations of craft research and hybrid forms of digital and handmade craft processes. We also present an overview of educational contexts of crafts and discuss the role of the craft practitioner in heritage studies such as traditional boat building or industrial lace making.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1386/crre_00076_2
2022-09-01
2024-04-14
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/crre/13/2/crre.13.2.211_Groth.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1386/crre_00076_2&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Arendt, H.. ( [1958] 1998), The Human Condition, , 2nd ed.., Chicago, IL and London:: The University of Chicago;.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Bacic, R.. ( 2014;), ‘ The art of resistance, memory, and testimony in political arpilleras. ’, in M. Agosín. (ed.), Stitching Resistance: Women, Creativity, and Fiber Arts, Kent:: Solis Press;, pp. 6574.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Biennial International Conference for the Craftsciences (BICCS) ( 2021;), ‘ Home page. ’, https://biccs.dh.gu.se/2021. Accessed 8 June 2022.
  4. Dormer, P.. (ed.) ( 1997), The Culture of Craft, Manchester:: Manchester University Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Korn, P.. ( 2013), Why We Make Things and Why it Matters: The Education of a Craftsman, Jaffrey, NH:: David R. Godine;.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Kouhia, A.. ( 2012;), ‘ Categorizing the meanings of craft: A multi-perspectival framework for eight interrelated meaning categories. ’, Techne Series A, 19:1, pp. 2540.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Molander, B.. ( 2022;), ‘ Freedom of thought and the longing for reality: About “theory” as an idea, a concept, and rhetoric. ’, in T. Westerlund,, C. Groth, and G. Almevik. (eds), Craft Sciences, Gothenburg Studies in Conservation, Gothenburg:: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis;, pp. 37495.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Niedderer, K., and Townsend, K.. ( 2010;), ‘ Editorial. ’, Craft Research, 1:1, pp. 310.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Niedderer, K., and Townsend, K.. ( 2012;), ‘ Tracing the essence of craft: Editorial. ’, Craft Research, 3:1, pp. 39.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Niedderer, K., and Townsend, K.. ( 2014;), ‘ Designing craft research: Joining emotion and knowledge. ’, The Design Journal, 17:4, pp. 62484.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Pye, D.. ( 1968), The Nature and Art of Workmanship, Cambridge:: Cambridge University Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Risatti, H.. ( 2007), A Theory of Craft, Chapel Hill, NC:: The University of North Carolina Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Salomon, O.,, Nordendahl, C., and Johansson, A.. ( 1907), The Teachers Handbook of Slöjd, , 3rd ed.., Boston, New York and Chicago, IL:: Silver Burdett Co. Publishers;, https://archive.org/details/teachersbookofsl00saloiala/page/n5/mode/2up?view=theater. Accessed 12 June 2022.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Sennett, R.. ( 2009), The Craftsman, London:: Penguin Books;.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Thorbjörnsson, H.. ( 1994;), ‘ Otto Salomon. ’, in Prospects: The Quarterly Review of Comparative Education, XXIV:3&4, pp. 47185, https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000103087. Accessed 12 June 2022.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Tin, M. B.. ( 2013;), ‘ Making and the sense it makes. ’, FORMAkademisk, 6:2, Manifesto , pp. 15.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Westerlund, T.,, Groth, C., and Almevik, G.. (eds) ( 2022), Craft Sciences, Gothenburg Studies in Conservation, Gothenburg:: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis;.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1386/crre_00076_2
Loading
  • Article Type: Editorial
Keyword(s): craft domains; craft science; education; heritage; multimodality; reflection; society
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a success
Invalid data
An error occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error