Aesthetics vs Practicality

[Ambrocio]

So... I've been noticing something about myself... I don't like to consider practical or functional purposes when creating a work.

I'm studying Jewelry/Metal Arts, however my background is in drawing and painting. And I'll be honest, I miss the godliness you have when drawing/painting. The freedom to depict something physically impossible to enhance the work (whether that be ignoring gravity, changing the way light works, etc). However, in crafting something, you have to consider the physical properties of the material... and also sometimes the purpose.

I like to create wearable pieces (not because I like jewelry, but because I love the body and site-specific works). However, they are not usually practical and/or functional. It is easy to misshapen or break most of the things I create and others restrict the wearers movement.

I think it works for me and my aesthetic. I like that art doesn't need to serve a purpose, I like the feelings, subjectivity, and the idea of art as an experience (someday, I want to move in the direction of the physical work being just a prop). I just need to take it to the next level to clarify: this is my statement as an artist.

Discuss...

How does your background affect your craft? (background in this case may include your actual background in life. Like coming from a very family or community orientated place, or whatever)
Is your background in something other than craft? If so, what is it?
Why do you create works? (what do you value in art? What is your voice; what is your statement?)
Do you think practically? Or just about appearances? Do you consider both?
Or whatever else you can pull from this.  

[x3-S-u-n-s-h-i-n-e]

Well, to me art is most definately a form of expression and is meant to be aesthetically enhancing at the same time. The function of it is almost always aesthetically aimed, and even if it does serve some practical role... It's never completely practicle because there will be some aspect I won't want damaged, covered, or overshadowed. I do work in some jewelry, but that's mostly just for the sense of not having the same necklace as everyone else and the fact that it can go with my outfits better. Most of my 3D art has been non-practical, such as a found object sculpture of a digital camera. It doesn't function - it just looks cool.
As to why I create works, it's more for my own well-being. When I'm not expressing myself creatively, it'll end up being expressed through yelling or some sort of self harm (ie, anorexia a few years ago)... It really helps relieve stress, make me feel accomplished, and vent any feelings. As to how I think, i think almost always aesthetically unless I have some function I really really want my piece to perform. And even in that case, I'm going to want it to look good. If it's totally aesthetical, it's still serves some function to me anyway... It makes me happy and in a generally more open mood.

In short : Aesthetic > Practical. It makes me happy.  

[Jana Lyneu]

For me, a lot of it depends on what I'm doing. For non-functional pieces, like drawing or even some sculpture, anything goes... I love tweaking gravity and depicting the surreal...

But, when it comes to something that's to be functional, that function comes first. If it's jewelry, it has to fit, has to have a sturdy, easy to use clasp and nothing that will scratch or come loose. If it's clothing, it has to fit right, has to be well-made, and has to have a very functional but aestetic way of closing. If you're making something for a purpose, then make it for that purpose. Once you have the fundamentals down, then you can embelish to your heart'sc content. Pretty aestetics only go so far if you can't use it for what you ment it for.

Of course, a lot of this does come from my background... Several members of my family are in contstruction, and that meticulous midnset always stuck with me... I grew up hearing stories of my dad trying to fix the archetect's work, trying to turn fanciful numbers into something that added up, that physics would actually allow. The architect's numbers might claim that 2+3=4, but his intent was... rolleyes

The other part of my facinaton with making the fanciful as practical as possible, is my own frustration of growing up as a tomboy, and having toys and clothing not being able to keep up with what I thought was a reasonable level of activity.  

[Stereochrome]

I'm an industrial design student. xP

But there's enough boring, practical junk out there. All modernist and minimalist and shizz. I had lots of respect for it at first, but as I learned more, read more and thought more I realized that it was a bit of a weakness, really.

A lot of these 'functional' products are really very limited, as modernist design usually is. It looks the same no matter who owns it. It's functional, as long as you use it for the exact purpose it was meant for - be even a little bit creative, and it's functional strengths disappear. And it's just... faceless.

Anyway I guess what I'm saying is, you can't overdo functionality. Some of the most beautiful things are born out of practicality - like an amphora, for example, which has so many practical reasons for each of it's features. But it's flexible - you can store anything in it, the handles are useful for everything from shipping to carrying to pouring, and so on.

If you overdo practicality, you can loose that. Like, say, a pair of ergonomic scissors. You know, those overdesigned ones? Might be a dream to cut with, but I like to use my scissors as pliers and hammers and whatever other tool I forgot today. If the handle's too awkward and bulky to do anything other than boring old cutting, than it loses functionality rather than increasing it.

But yeah, industrial design. Probably not the same story in terms of jewelry. I do have a necklace that's a tiny compass, though. Multi-functional! ;D