Reflections on Assemble 2010
Maker Michael Eden and Researcher Helen Wilkinson reflect on Assemble 2010
Assemble 2010: A Maker’s Perspective
The choice of the 22nd June for the Assemble conference was completely appropriate as I’m sure everybody remembers, it was the day of the ‘Axe and Tax’ emergency budget.
The audience in the lovely, converted LSO St.Luke’s (a former church) was made up of a good number from craft and arts organisations who would have been wondering what effect the Chancellor was having on their immediate futures at that precise moment. I suspect the feelings amongst the makers in the audience were a little ambivalent. For one thing, the conference acknowledged that Craft is definitely out there in the zeitgeist, making is happening all over, from informal groups of pals creating their Christmas gifts for each other, to Louis Vuitton bringing makers of the bespoke into their flagship stores.
The design world now acknowledges craft and some would say, feeds off the hard won skills of makers. You don’t have to travel far down the high street to find industrial ceramics imitating hand thrown pots. But is that necessarily a bad thing? Isn’t it all part of an educational process, awakening the buyer to Craft?
Where does this interest come from? Is it a reaction to the period of austerity that we are apparently entering, or a reaction to the ‘hands-off’ digital world that most people’s lives revolve around? Making stuff, growing stuff, getting your hands dirty isn’t just about economics or fashion; it’s an outlet for an innate force that we all possess. It gives us ‘agency’ as Matthew Crawford articulated in his ‘provocation’. It gives a real shape to our lives; it connects us, both to natural laws and to each other in very real ways. Why are there long waiting lists for allotments? It’s not just about fresh food; it’s about sharing, about human interaction and according to Martin Raymond of The Future Laboratory, it’s about anarconomy.
For CJ O’Neill and Andy Cathery the effects of ‘agency’ were extremely tangible, giving focus and a sense of ownership to young people in Stoke-on-Trent and a future to a group of disaffected youths in Cornwall. Fantastic work, making a real difference to peoples lives, but for the ‘moneymen’ listening to George Osborne, how do you put a value on self-esteem? Maybe we need to adopt the GNH (Gross National Happiness scale) instead of GDP?
We were all in agreement that Craft Matters and Craft has Value, but how do we get that across to an audience ranging from policy makers to the public. The public is largely behind us, as vast amounts of statistics from Gerri Morris of research consultancy Morris Hargreaves McIntyre prove, but the craft items that the public buy are mostly made by practitioners who were trained when Colleges still had workshops and taught material and process knowledge. That still happens in a precious few institutions, but the policy makers have to be made to understand that it is a serious mistake to erode what little there is left any further.
‘Thinking through Making’ is not an empty mantra, it is a fundamental part of the creative process that has brought about robotic arms for the Space Station from a maker of automata, as just one example of the way in which this approach encourages transferable and lateral thinking. If the economy of the UK is to have a significant income from intellectual property, then those closed workshops need to be reopened.
Whilst I’m on my soapbox here’s a few more ideas- There should be a return to subsidised apprenticeships, as away of ensuring the handing on of skills. Independent businesses should pay less business rates than the ubiquitous big names that have helped to make our town centres so anonymous. These suggestions are part of a way to ensure a future where consumers can connect with their locality, where young people can remain or return to the community in which they grew up. This may sound all rosy and middle-class, but aren’t these ways to create a C2C sustainable society?
So how can we make this happen? As Mike Press, the chair of Assemble so passionately said: ‘”We can seize or squander this moment”, and advocated that we all get out there and tell our stories. But to whom, and what stories?
Craft, as Assemble clearly demonstrated is far more than the making of exquisite, hand made objects, consumed by a certain section of society. At it’s most inclusive it is “the desire to do something well for it’s own sake” as Richard Sennett defines it; it’s also an approach, a way of thinking. So the stories that need to be told must demonstrate how Craft shapes our daily lives, how Craft gives meaning to our lives, how we are all dependent are all on Craft, how Craft is fundamental to the sciences as much as the arts, and how Craft is instrumental to most parts of the economy.
Michael Eden
June 2010
Michael Eden and his wife ran a ceramics business for twenty years in Cumbria before Michael undertook an MPhil research project at the Royal College of Art to study how his craft skills could be incorporated with his interest in digital design and manufacturing. One outcome was the Wedgwoodn’t Tureen, an award-winning piece produced on a ZCorp 3D printing machine and then coated in a unique ceramic material that does not require firing – the first time that these materials and processes had been used for commercial production. Michael continues to create new work and is working on a number of related projects such as the design of ceramic street furniture combining traditional and new non-fired ceramic materials and a glass project where the creative freedom of 3D software is combined with traditional materials and skills. He is also in the process of developing a research project to explore the 3D printing of ceramic materials. Michael spoke about his work in the Making and Creative Production Session at Assemble 2010.
Visit Michael’s website here
Assemble 2010: AN OVERVIEW
Assemble 2010 offered new insights into the craft sector, and an opportunity for thinkers and practitioners from across the sector and beyond to debate the future of craft. Intentionally scheduled to follow the General Election, and unintentionally scheduled to coincide with the Emergency Budget, the day’s debates were brought into sharp focus by the challenges of the political and economic climate.
Session 1: Introductions and provocation
Introducing the day, Rosy Greenlees, Executive Director of the Crafts Council, explained that one of the Crafts Council’s priorities was to shine a light on the sector and produce evidence of its importance. Assemble saw the launch of three pieces of research, which all aim to help the craft sector state its case more effectively. Crafting Futures provides evidence about the employment prospects of craft graduates. Consuming Craft explores the market for contemporary craft and Making Value describes the phenomenon of portfolio working and shows the contribution that makers bring to a wide range of other industries and sectors.
Professor Mike Press, Associate Dean of Design at Duncan of Jordanstone College of Art and Design, University of Dundee, and Chair for the day described the conference as an opportunity to define, assert and champion craft’s values. The sector is faced with a choice: in difficult economic times, we can either see craft as alternative and oppositional or try to find ways of connecting it directly with the concerns and interests of the world around us. Disengagement, Press argued, is not an option. The concerns and priorities of the new government – and especially David Willetts’s enthusiasm for craft and technical skill, described here – present the most significant opportunity for craft for a generation. Public spending faces very severe cuts but, in the face of these, the sector must articulate what it is that craft has to offer.
Dr Karen Yair, Research and Information Manager at the Crafts Council, and Mary Schwarz, co-author of Making Value summarised key findings of their research, available here. The report describes the working lives of portfolio making workers, and explores the contributions they make to a range of other sectors, from architecture and film to healthcare, community work and manufacturing.
The report describes how makers’ knowledge of materials gives them an edge in many settings: in industry, for example, they use materials knowledge to problem solve and innovate, while in film and television, they bring an understanding of the emotional resonance of materials and use materials to convey meaning.
In community and education settings, makers help others to experience the rewards that come from mastering a difficult skill, including confidence and an increased ability to focus. They help others to experiment and take risks in order to solve problems, and enable new conversations and connections to develop. In both kinds of settings – commercial and educational – what makers do best is to combine their knowledge of materials with their knowledge of how people react and relate to materials. It is this combination of insights that gives makers an edge over other professionals – an idea explored in more detail in the next session.
Session 2: Making and Creative Production
Dr Jane Harris, Reader and Director of the Textiles Futures Research Centre at Central Saint Martins, University of the Arts, London, chaired the session, and introduced four makers, who all have an interest in digital practice and who had been invited to reflect on how their own practice had developed, and what light their experience might shed on the future of making.
Michael Eden described his own transition from working as a traditional studio potter, to his current practice, which combines traditional approaches and materials, with post-industrial technology-driven approaches.
Andrew Cornell Robinson described how a sense of narrative was key to his practice. He described how he valued his training as a potter for having taught him rigour and the excitement of materials.
Lynne Murray described a project initiated through a government-funded Knowledge Transfer Partnership, which used augmented reality to find a new way of retailing jewellery. She explained how her background as a jewellery maker gave her the skills to work with brands in this way, with a focus on creating a digital product which resonates with the values of the products themselves.
Tom Gallant described his intellectually dense work which uses traditional techniques of paper-cutting and combines them with pornographic images. He showed work from a collaboration with a fashion designer and described the challenges inherent in translating his work into this form.
A brief discussion explored the compromises inherent in collaboration in general, and in the use of new technology in particular, with Michael Eden emphasising the need to ensure that the maker’s voice was not lost in such collaborations.
Summing up, Jane Harris, suggested that the makers profiled in this session all exemplify an extraordinary moment in time and demonstrate makers’ ability to engage with emerging technology well before its benefits are widely recognised.
Session 3: Consumer Trends
Emily Campbell, Director of Design, Royal Society of Arts, chaired this session, introducing a panel whose members all had expertise in predicting future trends, and analysing the nature of consumption. Campbell challenged the panel and audience to think about what would happen if the sector lowered the walls around craft to permit more fluidity and cross-fertilisation with other fields.
Martin Raymond, Strategy and Insight Director at the Future Laboratory, gave a presentation on future trends in which he asserted that we were living in particularly turbulent times, driven by economic collapse and the environmental crisis. Products and companies that thrive in future will be those driven by the LATTE factor: Locally sourced, Authentic, Trustworthy, Targeted and Ethical. Social corporations will be the most successful companies in future: that is, those that integrate the interests of their employees, consumers and broader society. He outlined the concept of the anarconomy – an alternative to traditional consumer society, which is built on inclusivity, sociability, serendipity and co-operation. Successful companies, products and individuals will, he said, be those with the capacity to astonish. And if that sounded too alarming, he countered that turbulence was revivifying.
Arantza Vilas, director at Pinaki Studios, and trends writer at El Observatorio de Tendencias del Habitat, a Spanish organisation that predicts future trends in how people live, identified a number of current trends with a resonance for the craft sector. Successful products are likely to be those that have longevity, that are easy for consumers to understand, that are practical, that are a good investment and that are unique. These are all values that chime with craft, where the focus is traditionally on authenticity, durability and wisdom. She identified craft as a way of working that was concerned with the relationships between individuals and their communities, as much as being about particular materials or techniques.
Gerri Morris, Principal Consultant at Morris Hargreaves McIntyre, outlined key findings of the Crafts Council’s new Consuming Craft report (summary available here). The market for craft is huge: 16.9m people have bought craft, and a further 9.6m people would consider doing so. And spending intentions have held up relatively well in the face of the recession: although 40% of people describe themselves as less likely to buy craft than before the recession, the drop is less marked than for luxury goods where the equivalent figure is 60%. This enthusiasm for all things craft can be aligned with the resurgent interest in, for example, allotments and gardening. Potential consumers are younger than existing consumers and, for them, craft is associated with a rejection of conspicuous consumption. The report’s findings suggest that the prevailing winds of consumer trends are in craft’s favour.
Daniel Miller, author and Professor of Material Culture at University College London, talked on video about the significance of craft from an anthropologist’s perspective. He described a study, published in The Comfort of Things, which investigated the relationship people had with the things around them, using interviews with 100 people living on a street in South London. People who have good relationships with other people, the study found, tend also to have good relationships with things. These relationships are not very susceptible to consumer trends and take a long time to shift. Consumerism gets a bad press, but Miller’s radical conclusion was that consumption was not inevitably bad, and that science and society should work together so that in future people simply would not be allowed to own damaging things.
Martin Conreen, Senior Lecturer in Design at Goldsmiths University of London, explored the values that animate craft, highlighting durability, sustainability and an emotional attachment to objects. He explored how these work in practice, using a series of objects as case studies. Less optimistic than Daniel Miller, he concluded that the complexities around sustainability will haunt us for ever, and that we make a lot of things that aren’t good for us.
In discussion, panel members explored the question of the relationship between craft and luxury brands. One of the speakers described how luxury brands have appropriated not just the language of craft, but have even annexed makers, with one famous brand paying makers to come and work in its flagship store. Craft, the participants concluded, needs to reclaim the language and authenticity in danger of being lost to the big brands.
Session 3: Making and social change
Chaired by Dr Tiffany Jenkins, director of the arts and society programme at the Institute of Ideas, this session opened with an eagerly anticipated polemic from Dr Matthew B Crawford, author and Research Fellow at the University of Virginia. Crawford outlined the thesis of his recent book The Case for Working with your Hands. Within Western society people have become less manually competent: everyday things from cars to washing machines are designed in a way that makes them hard to repair. It is no longer expected that people will tinker with things that they own. Crawford sees a moral lesson in this: society is being reformed in the direction of passivity and dependence, with less expectation that we will all take responsibility for the world around us. Being human requires the idea of individual agency: that is, the experience of seeing a direct effect of your actions in the world. Tinkering with real things is an important part of growing up, not least because failure in working with real things is unambiguous and cannot be explained away. This ethos contrasts with consumerism, which is all about defining yourself through the choices you make, rather than things you make and do.
The next three speakers all described projects that aimed to realise these benefits of making, and craft’s potential to engage young people. Cj O’Neill described a project working with young people in Stoke on Trent, which combined ceramics and graffiti, Claire Harris described the Stitch in Time project, which worked with young people who were not in employment, education or training in Coventry, and Andy Cathery spoke about Xtra-vert, a project in Cornwall that aimed to engage young people in training and introduce carpentry skills by building skate ramps. Common themes emerged from the descriptions of all three projects: the importance of discipline and commitment to a skill, and the pleasure in seeing ideas made manifest in the finished product.
Commenting on the programmes, Crawford noted that the strength of these programmes is to offer young people the chance to do something that is real and concrete. Adults are always trying to flatter young people with empty praise to boost their self esteem but what young people really need is the chance to succeed where failure has real consequences: if you fail to build a skate ramp correctly, skaters fall over. If you are the skater, you fall over.
Session 4: audience-led discussion
A series of informal discussions towards the end of the afternoon were planned to explore themes suggested by participants. As it turned out, the discussions focused entirely on higher education, an indication of the importance of the relationship between craft and HE. The issue of course closures energised participants. But while people agreed that the loss of courses was a matter of serious concern, opinions were divided about an appropriate response. It was acknowledged that people working in craft have to be realistic about the economic pressures shaping the higher education sector: it is not going to be possible to maintain expensive and under-subscribed courses. But there are things that can be done to make courses more relevant, especially by encouraging links with industry, and to stimulate demand, including by encouraging making in schools. Other discussions focused on the importance of helping makers build skills as educators and ways of encouraging makers into research careers.
Session 5: Closing plenary
Some key concerns from the day were debated in this closing session. Participants discussed hybridisation and concluded that – far from being a threat to core skills – it was an essential element of the evolution of craft. Other speakers identified better links with industry as being essential for the future, and suggested that makers need better entrepreneurial skills. But while many participants agreed that the sector should do more to make people in diverse fields aware of the potential of craft, the challenge is to do this in a way that championed the specificity of craft. The day closed with a discussion about what could be done to champion practical knowledge. Speakers were clear that the focus should be on working with schools and bringing material experience back into the lives of younger people. Showing people that they can do things with their hands, do things for themselves, and shape the world around them could be highly pertinent to the age we live in. The challenge for the craft sector is to tell the stories that demonstrate the power and potential of craft.
Helen Wilkinson
June 2010
Helen Wilkinson is a researcher specialising in museums and the broader cultural sector. She led the Museum’s Association’s work on policy development from 2002 to 2009 and was the author of the major 2005 report Collections for the Future which has helped to set the agenda for a range of new approaches to collections and collecting. In the autumn, she will be beginning to work on a full-time PhD at the University of Leicester writing a history of expertise in the 20th Century Museum.
