Revisiting the relationship between art and industry in nineteenth-century Britain from the manufacturer’s perspective

IF 0.3 3区 艺术学 0 ART Sculpture Journal Pub Date : 2021-01-01 DOI:10.3828/SJ.2021.30.1.3
A. Compton
{"title":"Revisiting the relationship between art and industry in nineteenth-century Britain from the manufacturer’s perspective","authors":"A. Compton","doi":"10.3828/SJ.2021.30.1.3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The mid-nineteenth century critical discourse compartmentalized art and industry by crediting each with specific powers. Manufacturing was identified with the development of technologically advanced processes, materials and products, while fine artists were given authority over the aesthetic aspects of industrial design. The idea that the two sectors had separate areas of responsibility has proved extremely enduring, and continues to influence our perceptions of Victorian manufacturing. This article contributes to the wider task of re-evaluating the relationship between art and industry in nineteenth-century Britain by examining the role of design in potteries and art metalworking firms from the manufacturer’s perspective. It shows that contrary to the picture painted by Victorian critics, design was central to the ambitions and commercial operations of manufacturing businesses. Crucially, decisions about the recruitment of design staff were shaped by the close connection between the creation of new products at the drawing board, and their fabrication in the workshop. Since each branch of manufacturing had its distinctive characteristics, there were significant practical, aesthetic and commercial advantages for manufacturers in employing experienced designers who knew the trade, and were fully conversant with production practices. Unless a professional sculptor joined a firm, they were unlikely to have this inside knowledge, which made commissioning one-off designs from artists a riskier proposition. Manufacturers found that one of the best ways to get around this was to make reductions of sculptures, and initial demand for statuettes in Parian suggested they would be profitable for all concerned. In the end, the market did not live up to its early promise, but the publicity given to Parian statuettes compensated manufacturers and sculptors. Overall, it was this increased public exposure for art manufactures that was the prime benefit of the mid-nineteenth century critical discourse for the industrial sector.","PeriodicalId":21666,"journal":{"name":"Sculpture Journal","volume":"30 1","pages":"31-52"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sculpture Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3828/SJ.2021.30.1.3","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ART","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The mid-nineteenth century critical discourse compartmentalized art and industry by crediting each with specific powers. Manufacturing was identified with the development of technologically advanced processes, materials and products, while fine artists were given authority over the aesthetic aspects of industrial design. The idea that the two sectors had separate areas of responsibility has proved extremely enduring, and continues to influence our perceptions of Victorian manufacturing. This article contributes to the wider task of re-evaluating the relationship between art and industry in nineteenth-century Britain by examining the role of design in potteries and art metalworking firms from the manufacturer’s perspective. It shows that contrary to the picture painted by Victorian critics, design was central to the ambitions and commercial operations of manufacturing businesses. Crucially, decisions about the recruitment of design staff were shaped by the close connection between the creation of new products at the drawing board, and their fabrication in the workshop. Since each branch of manufacturing had its distinctive characteristics, there were significant practical, aesthetic and commercial advantages for manufacturers in employing experienced designers who knew the trade, and were fully conversant with production practices. Unless a professional sculptor joined a firm, they were unlikely to have this inside knowledge, which made commissioning one-off designs from artists a riskier proposition. Manufacturers found that one of the best ways to get around this was to make reductions of sculptures, and initial demand for statuettes in Parian suggested they would be profitable for all concerned. In the end, the market did not live up to its early promise, but the publicity given to Parian statuettes compensated manufacturers and sculptors. Overall, it was this increased public exposure for art manufactures that was the prime benefit of the mid-nineteenth century critical discourse for the industrial sector.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
从制造商的角度重新审视19世纪英国艺术与工业的关系
19世纪中期的批评话语将艺术和工业区分开来,赋予两者特定的权力。制造业被认为是技术先进的工艺、材料和产品的发展,而优秀的艺术家被赋予了工业设计美学方面的权威。事实证明,这两个部门有各自的责任领域,这一观点非常持久,并继续影响着我们对维多利亚时代制造业的看法。本文通过从制造商的角度审视设计在陶器和艺术金属加工公司中的作用,有助于重新评估19世纪英国艺术与工业之间关系的更广泛任务。这表明,与维多利亚时代评论家所描绘的相反,设计是制造业的雄心和商业运作的核心。至关重要的是,新产品在绘图板上的创造和在车间的制造之间的密切联系决定了设计人员的招聘。由于制造业的每个分支都有其独特的特点,因此对于制造商来说,雇用熟悉行业并完全熟悉生产实践的经验丰富的设计师具有重大的实用、美学和商业优势。除非有专业的雕塑家加入公司,否则他们不太可能有这种内部知识,这使得委托艺术家进行一次性设计变得更加冒险。制造商们发现,解决这个问题的最好办法之一就是减少雕塑的数量,而巴黎对小雕像的最初需求表明,它们对所有相关方都是有利可图的。最终,市场并没有兑现其最初的承诺,但巴黎雕像的宣传补偿了制造商和雕塑家。总的来说,正是这种增加的公众对艺术制造商的曝光,是19世纪中期工业部门批评话语的主要好处。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
32
期刊最新文献
Review Valuing sculpture in the long eighteenth century: materials and technology The Young Naturalist by Henry Weekes: intermediality, industry and international exhibitions Fabricating enchantment: Antoine Benoist’s wax courtiers in Louis XIV’s Paris Valuing ornament: Jean-Baptiste Plantar (1790–1879) between art, craft and industry
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1