Anna Millington

Mass production within the Creative

Arts: the Arts and Crafts movement
versus 20th century artists
‘So long as the system of competition in the production and exchange of the
means of life goes on, the degradation of the arts will go on; and if that system is
to last forever, then art is doomed, and will surely die; that is to say, civilization
will die.’ (William Morris) Morbid and filled with the mongerings of the death of
civilization; could William Morris have had a point? We live in an age where we can
simply go online, parooze and browse to our hearts content until we stumble into
some cushion with a cute design we like, but to only find that there more or less
100 of the same done by different people but yet. Over-saturation would be a
fitting term for the state of designs and art currently. We are spoiled for choice in
the number of beautiful designed products we have access too. One can churn out
a design and pay some printing company to ink up a shirt, jumper or bag with said
design. But is this inherently a bad thing?

I personally believe that one's income should not limit the beauty and appeal of
the product one buys, however when it comes to the debate of whether quantity
of a product is a detriment to the quality over products, I am undecided on where
I stand. Does making a beautiful designed product available to the general public
mean sacrificing the overall quality and craftsmanship of the product? To answer
this question I have taken a look at William Morris and his ‘arts and crafts
movement’ which sought to preserve craftsmanship and quality of artisan goods. I
chose William Morris and his involvement and influence on the Arts and crafts
movement because he provides a good argument and example of someone who
was against the mass production of the creative arts. I personally appreciate his
work and enjoy the atashetic that the arts and movement produced but in
researching the movement, it highlighted many problems in trying to outright
reject mass production. For a counter argument I have chosen to look at the
british textile designer Lucienne Day; her work marked a change in tastes and
demand from the general public, sharing Morris’s view on Art for the people but
not his blatant hate and mistrust of mass production. She offers a different
perspective to the argument and her ethics are important to consider integrating
into my own.(Pevsner 1991; Morris and Briggs, 1977; Visual-arts-cork.com, n.d.;
MacCarthy, 1995; MacCarthy, 2014, Vallance, 1995, Day, Day and Jackson, 2011;
Robinandluciennedayfoundation.org, 2018 )
In the late 1800s, William Morris helped found the Arts and Crafts movement
along with the philosopher John Ruskin. This movement could be considered one
of the most influential of modern Art movements and some believe was a
response and criticism of the industrial revolution and its negative social and
aesthetic effects. Morris believed in the value of craftsmanship and traditionally
crafted art but felt a lot of guilt due to him growing up in wealthy middle class
family and having access to beautiful sights and objects and later when his
designs became popular among the middle and upper class. (Pevsner 1991;
Morris and Briggs, 1977; Visual-arts-cork.com, n.d.; MacCarthy, 1995; MacCarthy,
2014 ) It was Morris and John Ruskin shared disliked the industrialisation and
shared labour of art and design; this ideology was mostly instilled within members
of this movement, though there would be some that didn’t fully embrace the no-
use-of machinery mentality. Even Morris despite his views on mass production had
been willing to commission work from various manufacturers who could meet his
standards.(Pevsner, 1991; Morris and Briggs, 1977; Pye, 1968)

However many view this endeavour to persevere craftsmanship and statement

against industrialism to have failed but why might this be? (Worsley, 2005;
Richards, 2013; Pevsner 1991) I believe it is because the two ideals of the
movement weren’t compatible at the time and just in general; I strongly agree
that everyone should be able to own nice items, designs ect, but pairing that idea
along with the preservation of crafts and guilds is what I feel doomed the
movement. For an example let’s take a look some of William morris’s designs;
both are beautiful, elaborate and portray natureal and floral forms which was
typical of arts and crafts movement. It is immediately clear that these designs
that a lot of time went into the creation of them but would one expect to see this
in the everyday home? Would a family with a limited income and time find this
appealing or even necessary?

These designs, though beautiful didn’t and now still don’t appeal to the mass and
are something you’d expect to see in the middle or upper class’s rooms. The
designs themselves didn’t have mass appeal. Now considering the amount of time
required to produce these designs, the ink and materials that go into creating
them; how on earth could you expect those low income foke of industrial Britain to
afford these? (Victoria and Albert Museum, 2018; Pevsner 1991) These designs
wouldn’t have been produced in mass due to the beliefs held by Morris and what
was produced would have been more expensive due to the time and labour spent
on it. Trying to make artisan goods that take considerably more time and effort
than the factory, mass produced alternatives and were more expensive and this
isolated the very people that Morris and the movement were trying to reach.

The more expensive and exclusive nature was even apparent when I tired to
produce my own William Morris inspired designs. I ended up with two designs on
paper, one of which I made into an etching plate and prints. To start with William
Morris designs are very ornate and contain a high amount of detail: so the designs
on paper took a long time to produce and then the etching took even longer to
make. The results of the prints and designs were quite successful but they
required a considerably longer time to produce and despite today advancements
in technology would still be more costly and more effort to mass produce. Not to
mention the william morris aesthetic though beautiful is not something you see
many people wanting to or even trying to attestation, however there is still a
market for those who want more traditional and classic designs rather than
minimal modern designs. People might not be as keen on Morris’s designs know
because of the very detailed and busy look of his designs: there is a lack of open
space in his work and the colours can be very saturated and imposing. People
want their homes to look fresh and open and sadly his designs don’t help with
that look. However I think it will be important to not disregard Morris style and
attention to detail and incorporating some elements from his work might help my
own work.

These were two juxtaposing ideas that didn’t have a chance to work together due
to the beliefs of the movement and the limits of the time. However Morris wasn’t
the only individual who would get the idea of good for the masses; in a post world
war two Britain another textile designer by the name Lucienne day and her
husband Robin Day made waves at the festival of Britain with their works.
Lucienne made Calyx, a fabric for the interoir of a room display her husband Robin
had made for the show (Day, Day and Jackson, 2011;
Robinandluciennedayfoundation.org, 2018 )
As the picture shows, the overall aesthetic of the room is very modern and
geometric and reflects the change in taste that occured after world war two;
people wanted something morden. Robin created the rather spidery and steel
framed furniture and in the left corner we can see Calyx in it’s abstract glory. As
can be seen in Fig.4 the design is rather botanical and are highly abstract
mushrooms and both compliment and contrast with the steel framed furniture.
Lucienne was said to be strongly inspired by European abstract painters like
Wassily kandinsky (Victoria and Albert Museum, 2018; MacCarthy, 2010;
Robinandluciennedayfoundation.org, 2018) Clayx became very popular, large
quantities being produced and several varieties varying in colour being available;
it is even still available to this day. Lucienne was able to cross a bridge that the
Arts and crafts movement had been unable to do; her work was in households all
around Britain. Printed onto cheaper fabrics like rylon so people with limited
budgets could afford quality designs and printed for longer periods of time to
allow more people to have access to her work. Lucienne Days philosophy about
quality design for the masses matches with the Company Ikea’s idea of
‘democratic design’ which in turn goes well with my research and brief. Days
methods of making her designs more widly abavlive will be important to consider
for my own work. (MacCarthy, 2010; Day, Day and Jackson, 2011; Victoria and
Albert Museum, 2018)

I did a little experimentation and create some works inspired by Lucienne Days
works to try and understand the process behind her work and why her work
translates easily to mass produced works. I produced one design which was
heavily inspired by her piece Calyx and then a sewn fabric piece which inspired by
her overall style. When producing both works I found that making each one look a
little bit different was challenged and avoiding repetition might be a challenge if
multiple designs were produced. However because of the more simplistic and less
ornate nature of the designs allows for much easier reproducibility and much
broader appeal which will be something I should keep in mind when producing my
final piece. Not to mention that they took a lot less time to produce than the
William Morris designs. A simpler design can be printed and copied over and over
with considerably less resources and materials used and due to a lot of her work
being just simplified shapes and forms, there is a certain timelessness to them.
Similarly to William Morris, both Lucienne and Robin believed that art should be
for the people, and in the post-war year of social optimism this seemed an
achievable aim. Her furnishing fabrics, wallpapers and table linens were to
decorate ordinary homes. After her breakthrough in 1951 and despite her growing
success, Lucienne remained committed to the idea that art should be affordable
for ordinary people. In an interview at a retrospective exhibition of the Days’ work,
‘her husband said, "If you have any social conscience at all you can't remain an
elitist and work just for the few. Good design should - and I still believe this -
enhance people's quality of life. I suppose that's a fairly vain thing to say. But
that's what we thought." Lucienne added,’ (Higgins, 2001)

So much of what makes art is special is the fact that Art is an expression of
oneself and many, including Morris I think, feel that mass production can lessen
the value of both the item and the artist. One can appreciate the sentiments that
were held by Morris and the arts and crafts movement; one could even argue we
are going through a bit of an industrial revolution right now. With the
advancement of our technology at an alarming speed and the ever looming
possibility of mass redundancy by replacing humans with robots. And what does
this mean for Art, as AI becomes more advanced and mimicking the human brain,
would the role of artists and designers also be made redundant. I would argue
that it wouldn’t and I feel that Lucienne Day and her work are an example of
embracing advancement and progress in technology yet not losing one’s artistic
integrity and views. I don’t think sacrificing the quality of the materials
necessarily takes away from the quality of the design; it gives people who might
not normally have access to good design and chance to enjoy them, even if it isn’t
for as long. This might mean me having to opt for using slightly cheaper materials
and looking for cheaper alternatives to create a product or peice which is both
wonderful to look about but has the possibility of being reproduced.

When designing for my brief and final piece I will need to take into consideration
what works and doesn’t work when it comes to producing work for the masses:
beautiful as William Morris works are he didn’t consider his target market when
creating his designs and the actual reproducibility of his work. Keeping some of
the details I had used in my experimentation and translating it over to Lucienne
Day’s more simplified and minimalistic style hopefully will produce the desired
results.

Both in their own rights are highly talented artists, William Morris, in my opinion
being incredibly important and influential for 19th century design. Lucienne day
though maybe not as well-known as William Morris I think is also a very important
figure in morden design. She might not be known as a revolutionary however her
beliefs on Art and design are far more suited to a modern capitalist society and a
necessary adaptation of the ideologies of the Arts and Crafts movement.
Bibliography

Websites

Visual-arts-cork.com. (n.d.). Arts and Crafts Movement: Origins, History,

Aesthetics. [online] Available at: http://www.visual-arts-cork.com/history-of-
art/arts-and-crafts.htm [Accessed 6 Oct. 2018].

MacCarthy, F. (2014). William Morris – beauty and anarchy in the UK. [online] the
Guardian. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/oct/03/how-
william-morris-beauty-and-anarchy-uk [Accessed 6 Oct. 2018].

Victoria and Albert Museum. (2018). V&A · William Morris and wallpaper design.
[online] Available at: https://www.vam.ac.uk/articles/william-morris-and-wallpaper-
design [Accessed 6 Oct. 2018].

Robinandluciennedayfoundation.org. (2018). Robin and Lucienne Day Foundation

- Lives and Designs. [online] Available at:
http://www.robinandluciennedayfoundation.org/lives-and-designs/festival-of-
britain/calyx-in-milan-triennale-room-setting [Accessed 6 Oct. 2018].

Victoria and Albert Museum. (2018). V&A · Lucienne Day – an introduction.

[online] Available at: https://www.vam.ac.uk/articles/lucienne-day-an-introduction
[Accessed 6 Oct. 2018].
Victoria and Albert Museum. (2018). V&A · Lucienne Day's silk mosaics. [online]
Available at: https://www.vam.ac.uk/articles/lucienne-days-silk-mosaics [Accessed
6 Oct. 2018].

Books

Morris, W. and Briggs, A. (1977). Selected writings and designs [of] William Morris.
Harmondsworth: Penguin.

Pevsner, N. (1991). Pioneers of Modern Design. London, England: Penguin Books.

MacCarthy, F. (1995). William Morris. New York: A.A. Knopf.

Pye, D. (1968). The nature and art of workmanship. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.

Day, L., Day, R. and Jackson, L. (2011). Robin & Lucienne Day. London: Mitchell
Beazley.

Articles/other

Winter, R. (1975). The Arts and Crafts as a Social Movement.

Richards, G. (2013). The Death of Art and Crafts. Canvas, [online] (4). Available at:
http://canvas.union.shef.ac.uk/wordpress/?p=1673 [Accessed 6 Oct. 2018].

Worsley, G. (2005). The uncomfortable truth about the Arts and Crafts dream. The
Telegraph. [online] Available at:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/art/3638825/The-uncomfortable-truth-about-
the-Arts-and-Crafts-dream.html [Accessed 6 Oct. 2018].
MacCarthy, F. (2010). Lucienne Day obituary. The Guardian. [online] Available at:
https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2010/feb/03/lucienne-day-obituary
[Accessed 6 Oct. 2018].

Higgins, C. (2001). Adventures in polypropylene. The Guardian. [online] Available

at: https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2001/feb/07/artsfeatures1 [Accessed 6
Oct. 2018].