Art v craft
removing the "versus" and finding the value of multiplicity
Over the years I have written multiple times about the problems of the dichotomy of not only play v learning but also art v crafts - and that creating hierarchies is not helpful, but is filled with hidden agendas. What is important is our adult attitude towards what the children are doing, what we offer children and the autonomy we ensure children can enjoy - requiring us to keep our pedagogical and personal agendas under check - are we supporting the children’s autonomous play and learning development or hindering it?
Crafts are charged with knowledge, history, meaning-making, treaties, dreams and beyond. Even the tools used in crafts are charged in this way. When we use scissors, for example, (Johansson, 2021) we are also using the historical wisdom of those who have come before - whether they be surgical scissors, or for embroidery, button-hole making, hair cutting or for children - a great deal of consideration for how these scissors are designed to meet the users needs charge the form of the scissors. This is the same for all the materials we use.
Certain paper types are designed to interact best with other materials and as educators there is a need to reflect on how the children in our care make these relational discoveries. Do we let them use watercolours on paper that is unable to hold the water, with the risk of their creation being destroyed, yet a valuable lesson learned? Or do we provide more absorbent paper so they have creative freedom? Both responses can be appropriate, but often curriculum time restrictions force educators into making choices between one or the other rather than both and further options. These choices also charge the art/crafts activities provided. Time has been something that has been lifted over and over again in my interviews about play, and in many senses time, dictated by policymakers as to how that is spent, time could be seen as politically charged as each government makes the decisions about how much time of the day the curriculum consumes; and, if the curriculum is teacher down, this means it is politics deciding how much autonomy each child has a chance of experiencing.
The Sámi are Indigenous peoples living in Sápmi, colonised by Norway, Sweden, Finland and Russia. Today, the 6th of February is the Sámi National Day. Prior to colonisation Sámi society relied on the transmittance of knowledge either orally or bodily, and not written. This means Sámi objects and clothing bear knowledge (Guttorm, 2001). The gákti, an item of traditional clothing, is not just something that is worn but is also a legal document that plays an important role in the maintenance and governance of the Sápmi judicial system (Finbog, 2020). Duodje (crafts) are charged with power, stories and information.
The templates to create these items are important to know, as they hold power. As societies evolve, stories change and new knowledge is discovered so there also needs to be a creative freedom to translate this in the duodje.
There is no Sámi word for art, only duodje, and by listening to Sámi duodjar (those who craft) speak, we can gain a comprehension of a Western/coloniser judgement of art v crafts which has raised the arts to a higher status and lowered the status of crafts, which often belonged to the Indigenous, the women, and the poor. It is important to remember that these crafts are filled with reflection, care, time and aesthetics. This, though, cannot always be said of the activities children are required to do in early childhood/schools where a copy-paste attitude has become prevalent. It is the copy-paste and lack of reflection that needs to be questioned and not crafts that are charged with stories, purpose and care.
Crafts are not teaching/learning activities where the adult does most of the work and thinking and the children just follow, resulting in a mass of almost identical products. Recognising the difference between crafts and teacher controlled activities is essential in the process of understanding the complexity, beauty and value of crafting.
In Scandinavia, the word didactic is about understanding how teaching impacts the learning - the how, the why, the what and the when; while from the Anglo-Saxon perspective (sadly dominant) this word implies a more teacher-down style of educative control (Harjanne & Tella. 2007). This seems to have greatly impacted arts and crafts in not only the early years but schools too. Instead of a reflective practice of understanding how the children will learn from Activities offered, a more predetermined “they will learn “this” by completing this activity” is provided. The activities, frequently labelled “crafts”, to distinguish them from a more autonomous art, are charged with specific outcomes that many educators accept without critical reflection. Reflection is key to recognising the value and potential of crafts as opportunities for play, learning, joy and storytelling.
I have written activities with both an upper and lower case “A a” - this is an attempt to sort my thoughts about the word…
upper case Activity is about life experiences in action - the child is actively engaged in playing/learning. There are multiple possibilities, multiple goals, that can change as the Activity proceeds, and the process and the product are equally valued
lower case activity is an adult controlled experience with a specific learning outcome and where there is little freedom to explore as there is often a singular goal to reach, neither the process or the product is valued - what is valued instead is how it proves the children have learned.
I am constantly seeking out Indigenous Knowledge to find new perspectives of understanding the world I inhabit, and to find the words to better explain the Original Learning Approach, which strives to be deeply respectful and, of course, immensely grateful of Indigenous scholars and elders who share their wisdom.
References
Axelsson, S. (2023) The Original Learning Approach. Redleaf Press
Guttorm, Gunvor. 2001. «Duoji bálgát – en studie i duodji : kunsthåndverk som visuell erfaring hos et urfolk.» Det humanistiske fakultet, Institutt for kunsthistorie, Universitetet i Tromsø, pp. 49
Finbog, Liisa-Rávná. 2020 «It Speaks to You – Making kin of people, duodji and stories in Sámi museums», Det Humanistske fakultetet, Institutt for kulturstudier og orientalske språk, Universitetet i Oslo, pp. 131.
Harjanne, P., & Tella, S. 2007. Foreign Language Didactics, Foreign Language Teaching and Transdisciplinary Affordances. In Koskensalo, A., Smeds, J., Kaikkonen, P. & Kohonen, V. (eds.) Foreign languages and multicultural perspectives in the European context; Fremdsprachen und multikulturelle Perspektiven im europäischen Kontext. Dichtung – Wahrheit – Sprache. Berlin: LITVerlag, 197–225.
Johansson, M. (2021). Laddad slöjd: Slöjdkunnande och slöjdföremåls meningsskapande. Techne Serien - Forskning I slöjdpedagogik Och slöjdvetenskap, 28(3), 15–31. https://doi.org/10.7577/TechneA.4061
Thank you for this- Lately I have been reflecting on art vs crafts and I appreciate the perspective that it doesnt have to be either or but understanding that both are of value. Completely shutting out the craft leaves out so many options. I think the 2 can live together when reflection happens around what value is of each. Thank you Suzanne!
Thank you for this. I relate to the frustrations of the art v. Craft dichotomy specifically when my daughter-a gifted crochet artist from a very young age-was applying to an arts based high-school here in Canada, and could not use evidence of her multitude of creations as part of her portfolio. As it is considered “craft” and not fine art.
Secondarily, my angry frustration rises as a kindergarten teacher who is watching as the play-based Reggio inspired curriculum of 10-12 years ago is in the throes of being changed and brought “back-to-basics” as the current government calls it.
I feel the impending doom as we slip further into this “teacher directed” non reflective, inorganic process of projects geared simply towards a predetermined outcome to “prove” what the child has “learned”.
The state of publicly funded education is becoming more and more an orwellian novel preparing for the trades and factories and less about human growth and expression.