I have been trying to get to a working definition of art. It is hard to transition from having just an intuitive feel of what it is, to being able to define it at any length. I have been reading various essays from people such as R.G Collingwood and other to get a better feel. there are hundreds of pages on the subject, and the material does not lend itself to being easily understood, but that same depth has given me a better framework to build my own understanding of the subject.

This idea has been thought about for countless centuries, and achieving a perfect answer may be impossible, but I think i can get a idea of the definition of art that is good enough for me. I want to see how much , if any , the use of automation and industry inherently alters the quality of arts.

Industrialization replaced many craftsmen during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. One of the influential craftsmen of the time, William Morris, stated that machinery was “altogether an evil”. he saw what seemed to be a race to the bottom as factories comprised on their work to slash costs and time. but, He also stated that machines could “reduce the hours of labor” needed to crate a product of a given quality.

This leads to to idea that i am trying to express: That the creation of art and craft requires the exchange of time for quality though labor. machines can let the artist perform the exchange at a more favorable rate. An artist must know the nature of their work to know what parts can be streamlined. What if a piece could have more expression, more unique identity, for the given amount of time that a creator invests in it?

I am also getting the notes that I have been reaching together so that I can go though them more easily, now that I have a large amount of notes, it is time to get them organized in a more useful manner. My second batch of bowls for bowls of hunger shroud be fired in Opelika. I will get pictures of those up soon.