The Role of the Handmade in a Digital Age

INTRODUCTION

For centuries there has been a continuous and explored relationship between the arts and crafts, a fascinating hierarchy in which it is typically concluded that traditional craft is to be perceived as a lower art form. With creativity universally determined by innovation and uniqueness, craft-based activities are consequently dismissed as being, “constrained by tradition and resistant to change,”1 and thus considered stagnant and repetitive. 2

When handmade practices have traversed the well-established line dividing the arts and crafts however, it is frequently following significant periods of societal and technological transformation resulting in the artists of the time electing to utilise tactile practices as a reaction to and rejection of mass production and globalisation. The most notable examples of these returns to craftsmanship3 are during the Industrial Revolution of the late 19th century, the materialistic commercialisation and consumerism of the 60s and 70s and, most recently, the rise of modern digital technology.

It has been suggested that the growth of digital technology is also fuelling this desire to touch and interact with the world physically. Our daily lives have been hugely impacted by electronic devices which use touch in an unconscious way, with our eyes and attention fixed to a screen rather than aware of the activity of our hands, even whilst using touch screens.4

This essay will discuss the renewed relevance of craftsmanship during an age of technological advancement, utilising the work of Susan Collis to exemplify the importance of the time, attention and labour involved within a handmade process. The critical analysis of craft, executed by Richard Sennett, in ‘The Craftsman’ will be referred to throughout.

Furthermore, I will evaluate the current craft renaissance within mainstream society as well as its prevalence throughout the last century. By discussing our oscillation between conformity and the desire for individualism, the subject of mass-produced, assembly-line production versus the poetically, hand-crafted item will be raised, drawing on ideas included in Martin Heidegger’s Thing Theory.

Finally, I will use the work of Ann Hamilton to discuss the notion in which handmade practices may aid us in reconnecting to the world while we are becoming so engulfed in modern technology. Using the work of Vija Celmins, I will also tackle the notion of reproductions through the lens of craft. Jean Baudrillard’s ‘Simulacra and Simulation’ will be a recurring reference as I question the significance of the proliferated images available on the Internet and how this may demonstrate the imperative consideration of tactile activities within modern society.

THE VALUE OF CRAFT

In ‘The Craftsman’, Richard Sennett states that, ‘all craftsmanship is quality-driven work, ’ that ‘the aspiration for quality will drive a craftsman to improve. ’5 This definition of craftsmanship is dependent on acquired skill as opposed to innate talent and invokes ideas of value. The first artist I will introduce is Susan Collis, an artist who juxtaposes quality and craft with the mundanity of quotidian objects.

Susan Collis, 100% Cotton, 2004, overalls, embroidery, 155 x 25 x 17 cm.

Susan Collis, The Oyster’s Our World, 2004, wooden step ladder, mother of pearl, shell, coral, freshwater pearl, cultured pearls, white opal, diamond, 81.3 x 38 x 58 cm. 7

Within her practice, Collis demonstrates the notion of craft and value with multiple approaches. Firstly, the literal, monetary value due to her inclusion of precious materials, such as minerals and gemstones. Second, the use of items already closely associated with labour: overalls, step ladders and brooms, to once more reference craftsmanship. Finally, her employment of small and subtle techniques which often succeed in going undiscovered; an observant audience which detects the hidden labour is rewarded with evidence of her hand, as well as the time, effort and attention taken to create these objects.

It is specifically the trace of the hand that endows quality. Why? Because in the West we no longer manufacture many of our own goods, even by machine, let alone by hand. In a context where labour is prohibitively expensive, the handmade acquires genuine cachet.8

The cachet that the handmade possesses is highlighted by the amount of skill required, by a person, set of people or in this instance, an artist like Collis, to create and so as Sennett describes, ‘skill development depends on how repetition is organised.’9 Various sources debate the duration of time necessary to develop skill, anywhere between 20 hours and 9 years has been cited.10 However, it is evident that the time, practice and contemplation involved within the formation of a crafted item contrasts drastically to the immediacy of mass production.

With the authorship and authenticity of automated production addressing the thoroughly investigated question of man versus machine once more, a recent modification to the advertisement of mass-produced designer goods has occurred, placing craftsmanship at the fore front. Becoming increasingly prevalent is the exposing of behind-the-scenes manufacture, satisfying ‘the desire to reveal the process and not just the finished object.’11 Globally recognisable brands like Alexander McQueen published countless images of their designers and seamstresses tackling the next collection, along with the irony of Levi’s ‘Craftwork’ campaign, to name a few. Launched within the last decade, the Levi’s campaign strived to reinstate the importance of the individual and their craft whilst advertising one of the most mass-produced products available on the market. Writer, Justin McGuirk, explains further that, ‘these are not-so-subtle messages reasserting the value of the handmade over the machinemade. ’12 The value in question being the apparent human presence that is lacking in typical assembly-line production.

Alexander McQueen, toile making and embroidering, 2020, photographed by Liam Leslie and Olivia Arthur.

Alexander McQueen, pattern cutting and hand sewing, 2020, photographed by Adama Jalloh and Chloé Le Drezen.14

Levi’s Craftwork Campaign, 2010, Mark Haylock.15

Acknowledgement of the disconnect, exemplified by such advertisement, between the individual and the multiplicity of products accessible to the individual as well as the attempt to re-establish the individual maker within the production process, has provoked somewhat of a revival of craft and the handmade within mainstream society. A gesture denoting a rejection of the over-consumption of products; a rejection that has been repeated infinitely since the last century, only with the unprecedented addition of digital technology to now contend with also.

HANDMADE CULTURE IN MODERN SOCIETY

The continuous cycle, spanning this last century, of contented conformity of the general public followed by their rebellious individualism against a consumerist society was examined by Adam Curtis in his documentary, ‘The Century of the Self’. He described how the writings of Sigmund Freud, concerning the unconscious, were utilised by capitalists to transform advertisement entirely to target the desires of the masses rather than their needs, perpetually fulfilling their lives with endless products. Once this was recognised, a counterculture formed, during the 60s, practising individualism by rejecting any acceptance of assembly-line production. Inevitably however, manufacturers became cognisant that they could provide the vast amounts of products necessary for individuals to fulfil their longing for expression and identity with the introduction of mass-market production.16

In recent years, we have perhaps witnessed another recurrence of this cyclical sequence with a rise of thrifting and up-cycling within popular culture which undoubtedly contributes to the notion of the handmade.17 Although you could argue that this will be a fleeting trend, a trend that has coincided with the ever-increasing popularity of collecting vinyls, cassettes, Polaroids and other apparent grasps at retro nostalgia. It is undeniable that thrifting and DIY culture could be a reaction to fast fashion, its environmental impact and the exploitation of cheap, foreign labour as well as a collective rejection of global consumerism and capitalism, with the added benefit of the desirable individualism it often provides with the opportunity to obtain more unique items.

Nevertheless, we must address the opposition between the poetically crafted, handmade item and the machine-made object once more. Within one of Martin Heidegger’s most seminal pieces of writing,

‘What is a Thing?’, he presented the Thing Theory and discussed the distinguishable differences between objects and things.

But things are also compliant and modest in number, compared with the countless objects everywhere of equal value.

Direct parallels can be drawn from his concept of ‘thingness’;19 the handmade labelled the thing and the mass-manufactured delegated to object. Bruno Latour expands on Heidegger’s ideas by stating that, ‘the latter is abandoned to the empty mastery of science and technology, only the former, cradled in the respectful idiom of art, craftsmanship, and poetry, could deploy and gather its rich set of connections.’20 Our enthrallment with, and consequently our overconsumption of, the mass-produced object is remedied by our idolisation of the individuality of the handmade.

With the youngest generations in society demonstrating high levels of cultural, environmental and political awareness accompanied with, and assisted by, the exponential acceleration of a technological society, it is unsurprising that we are observing another repetition of the cycle discussed previously. This reiteration differs however, because while we acknowledge that craftsmanship appeals to our aspiration for ethical consumption, ‘technology remains an “object” of our desire.’21 McGuirk, continues:

While we still covet our shiny machine-made technological objects, we feel conflicted about them. Our consumption is more self-aware, more neurotic than it used to be –we know some Chinese labourer has probably been exploited in their production, we know they’ll end up as landfill… The beauty of craftsmanship, however, is that we can lust after it with no inner conflict. As a society, we place craft on a pedestal in part because it makes us feel better about ourselves. 22

It is evident that with the induction and consequent dissemination of digital technology into the everyday, we have discovered a new object to occupy our adoration. The divergence on this occasion, however, lies within the simultaneity of our hypocritical consumption and the conscious acknowledgement of said hypocritical consumption.

CRAFT, COPIES AND CRAFTED COPIES

The continuous opposition between the handmade and the digital world has become increasingly apparent in recent years. It is supposed today that we consume approximately 4,000 to 10,000 images of digital advertisement each day, and so, consequently, we encounter more images in a single day than previous cultures would have experienced in their entire lifetimes.23

In his most notable piece of writing, ‘Simulacra and Simulation’, Jean Baudrillard investigates the significance of proliferating imagery and reproductions, the signs they convey and the point at which these signs are threatened by impending simulacra. He states that the omnipresence of imagery creates a ‘system of signs,’24 in which a false perception of what is reality may eclipse the reality itself. Baudrillard goes on to outline the four stages of reproduction in which an image can be placed; the four successive phases of the image are as follows:

It is the reflection of a profound reality; It masks and denatures a profound reality; It masks the absence of a profound reality; It has no relation to any reality whatsoever: it is its own pure simulacra.25

It is understood that the first phase is a faithful copy, a ‘good appearance’, a reproduction that truthfully reflects reality. Second, is a copy that has ‘an evil appearance’, that is to say a reproduction that does not truthfully depict reality. Thirdly, a reproduction that attempts to conceal the fact that it is not at all reality; it ‘plays at being an appearance’. The fourth and final phase states that this copy possesses no original, no basis in reality and therefore is to be considered entirely simulation.26

Using the particular piece named, ‘To Fix the Image in Memory’, I would like to introduce the artist Vija Celmins to exemplify the question of copies. Furthermore, as a fellow artist who has concerned herself with imitation and simulation, I will also deduce comparisons to Susan Collis’ work.

Vija Celmins, To Fix the Image in Memory, 1977-82, stones, painted bronze, dimensions variable.27

As seen above, the piece consists of 22 components: 11 of which are real rocks discovered and collected by Celmins herself, while the remaining 11 are in fact rendered from bronze. By casting the stones and creating bronze counterparts before meticulously painting the surfaces with exact precision, Celmins created reproductions that are unidentifiable from the originals. To contrast, I have selected Susan Collis’ ‘Jimmy’, to demonstrate how these two examples of copies compare and what that means for their respective placement into Baudrillard’s phases of the image.

Susan Collis, Jimmy, 2010, coloured biro inks, graphite, paper, 50 x 32.5 x 28cm.28

Composed simply of paper, biro and graphite, Collis created an object that, from afar, appears only as a laundry bag. Upon closer inspection however, there is an inevitable realisation that the object is not merely a laundry bag, but a reproduction of a laundry bag, once more emphasising the patient and perseverant nature of the artist’s practice.

In order to determine a position for these two artworks in Baudrillard’s four phases of the image, it is necessary to acknowledge the manner in which they differ. Both pieces utilise materials different to the originals, the rocks and the laundry bag. Furthermore, both pieces have been fabricated directly from the hands of their respective maker, Celmins creating casts from the original rocks before attentively painting the copies by hand, and Collis drawing every stitch onto the surface of the paper. Celmins herself confirms the importance of this when she states that her process was ‘to affirm the act of making: the act of looking and making as a primal act of art. ’29 The fundamental distinction between the two, however, is that Collis presents her single copy in complete solitude and anticipation to be mistaken for the real. Whilst Celmins, on the other hand, places her copies within the company of the originals, with the aim to disguise them among the real, rendering it impossible to identify the real from the reproduction. Thus, the latter situates the copies adjacent to the originals; the former imitates the original entirely. Therefore, we can conclude that while Celmins’ work falls within the first phase of Baudrillard’s order, a faithful copy, Collis’ is placed within the third phase, a copy that attempts to disguise the fact that it is not the original.

These copies exemplify the notion in which our perception of what is original, of what is reality, can be deceived. Dependant on the phase within which the reproduction in question falls, our understanding of the real could be distorted by a negative representation.

Returning to the inquiry of digital media, Baudrillard further explored the function of the copies we confront in everyday life, stating that, ‘we live in a world where there is more and more information, and less and less meaning.’30 With the accelerating dissemination of digital images and information, and therefore digital copies and misinformation also, an inevitable increase has occurred in digital advertising and propaganda as well as the cultural phenomena

known as ‘fake news’. 31 Our collective dependence on digital media ensures that our reality is mediated by the information and images we consume. The danger, however, between the crafted copies discussed previously and the ubiquitous digital copies we encounter daily is that the handmade has materiality – the digital does not.

IN CONTENTION WITH THE DIGITAL

While we find ourselves battling the effects of a digital society on our comprehension of reality, artists such as Ann Hamilton have tasked themselves with discovering methods in which to parry its impacts. Employing an emphasis on a textile practice, Hamilton claims that, ‘the tactile keeps us present. ’32 It is perhaps the reason for why this medium is so valuable to artists like Hamilton, for it provides the tactility that the digital world so lacks.

Ann Hamilton, The Event of a Thread, 2013, installation, James Ewing.33

‘The Event of a Thread’ was an immense, immersive installation piece. Taking place over several days, Hamilton explains in the press release that, ‘we attend the presence of the tactile and perhaps most importantly – we attend to each other.’34 The many intertwining and temporal components encouraged the participants to attend to their own presence in reality.

It was Heidegger that declared, ‘all distances in time and space are shrinking,’35 due to the relentless influence of digital technologies – the immediacy of the Internet enables infinite quantities of information to be disseminated around the globe in seconds. Hamilton proposes a ‘resetting [of] our sense of time,’36 as she encourages sensual interaction between participant and installation, thus contributing a mode in which to situate oneself within the present moment.

If it is materiality that separates the handmade from the digital, we must use that tactility to provide, as Sennet states, ‘an anchor in material reality,’37 as well as an opportunity to reconnect to a world that is becoming increasingly distanced from us because of the ubiquitous nature of digital technology.

CONCLUSION

To conclude, this essay has illustrated the role of the handmade in contemporary society, particularly with regards to the inception and consequent escalation in digital technology we have experienced. I have evaluated the value of craft within the art industry as well as in wider society by introducing the work of Susan Collis and referencing Martin Heidegger’s Thing Theory respectively. Furthermore, using the writing of Jean Baudrillard and the work of Ann Hamilton, I outlined the notion of copies, enabled by the availability of the Internet, the way in which digital media composes our understanding of reality and finally, the method in which we may use tactile practices to counter this.

I began this essay by discussing the value of craft in isolation to this present digital era, invoking ideas of quality, as well as time, effort and contemplation. Establishing the maker within the making, the age-old question of automated production compared with handcraft was brought to attention and the subject of authorship and authenticity was discussed. I referenced Alexander McQueen and Levi’s to exemplify the way in which high-end and mass-production based brands use advertising to re-instate the maker within the process, contributing to the craft-fetishism that has become increasingly prevalent in recent years.

Second, I examined handmade culture within current society as well as previous cycles of apparent countercultures rejecting mass-production in the 20th century, thus situating craftbased activities within the wider context of this period of modern, technological and digital advancement. The question of man versus machine was encountered once more and through the lens of Heidegger’s Thing Theory, comparisons were drawn between his writing of objects and things and our consideration of the handmade and the digital. It was discovered that the multiplicity of objects and the individuality of things directly paralleled the multiplicity of the digital and the individuality of the handmade. I concluded this section by highlighting our adoration of the handmade and regretful, but conscious, over-saturation of digital media which has consequently taken the baton from mass-produced objects in facilitating the engrossing of our desires.

As our consumption of the Internet begins to eclipse our consumption of physical products, the issue of proliferating images was raised as I continued this essay by discussing the four phases of the image outlined by Baudrillard in ‘Simulacra and Simulation’. Utilising the work of Vija Celmins and Susan Collis, I demonstrated the different stages of reproduction and what

this meant for the way in which images and copies compose our understanding of reality in quotidian life.

Finally, by conducting this essay, I have explored the way in which we can use tactile practices in art to reconnect to the present moment. As Bertrand Russell states, ‘it is touch that gives us our sense of “reality”,’38 a sense of reality that has become increasingly threatened by our reliance on and credulity of digital media. Awareness of the sense of touch has only been elevated during this global pandemic and so we have an opportunity to use this heightened consciousness to reconsider the importance of tactility in confirming our existence in present reality.