I really enjoy the viewpoints here, and work in much the same ways people in the artist camp describe. I agree its counter productive to have a semantic discussion about art vs craft from this point, but the one thing I’ll add because I don’t see it mentioned in the discussion is the sense of purpose and responsibility I feel to the vision of a project. It educates me, inspires me, sends me on crazy field recording sessions and provides me with a wealth of experiences I would never have in my life had the project not been brought to me. That vision IS the muse, and I feel like it’s bigger than me, my cave of perceptions and the creative opportunity space available to me prior to a project’s arrival and discovery. I find this aspect of our work exhilarating, and want to promote it over the internal forces that drive designers. When I work this way creativity is literally an afterthought.

The differences between “art” and “craft” are probably impossible to define. My working definition is that I use craft to make art. A great craft piece may be elegant, and flawless in a sense, but it may lack in the “intriguingly mysterious” department. Great art for me is intriguingly mysterious above all. It asks more questions than it answers, and they are the kinds of questions that compel you to want to know more. And, as I think I may have have said in this sound forum before, using different words, the most mysterious and compelling aspect of almost all works of art come to us artists in the form of a mistake, or an accident when we’re sweating away at the craft work on the project. We aren’t smart enough to invent art using logic, but sometimes we’re smart enough to recognize something wonderful when it falls into our laps. A great craftsperson knows how to avoid accidents. A great artist knows how to use them.

That’s why I said “can” instead of “does.” I have no doubt that you are passionate.

To simplify…I just feel that the term “craft” implies a more structured, by the numbers, approach to the work which it describes. Certainly, there are tasks where that description is perfectly accurate. However, I don’t feel the term can encompass the moments where we are asked to truly create, to add depth to the narrative, or explore the depths of our own aesthetics to serve an idea or emotion that can only be described in abstract terms. Any time you leave a piece of yourself in a film/game/etc., you’re working in the realm of art. I also feel that can be done while serving, to quote your words, “the spirit of a project and it’s true visionaries.” The overall piece certainly is not your or my artistic vision (on that we are in total agreement), but your vision IS a part of it. Art and design are about decisions. Decisions don’t necessarily get in the way unless your ego is informing them. If you can keep your ego out of it, then you can create art in service to another…in service to a larger work.

…and now I’ll stop being argumentative. ;)

I’m deeply passionate about sound design and think its the greatest thing ever. Any negative associations created by calling it craftsmanship are not intentional. Sound can be art, but the kernel of inspiration in the majority of films, games, plays etc is simply not rooted in the sound design anymore than its rooted in the costume design, lighting design, vfx or hair. If the argument is that we are all artists in a collaborative, I say take a good look at which way the prevailing tide of influence flows on a project to see if that’s true. I’ve had projects where my contributions influenced and even inspired changes in the overall work. But even in those examples to say the film or game is my artistic vision would be an overstatement. I don’t think this harms the working relationship whatsoever with a client. I think it’s healthier to put my personal artistic desires aside in order to fully serve the spirit of a project and it’s true visionaries. I am still passionate, I draw deeply from life experiences and I have a vision for the design of the sound, but the actual artistic boss is still calling the shots.

this was a really, really juicy bit of thought- I thank you for sharing it, and I don’t even feel like I have the will to comment until it bounces around my brain for a good while….

I find a flaw with this logic. I have personal friends who are painters. People who are often commissioned to create a painting on a specific subject or theme, and creating those commissioned pieces can involve a process of revisions. The client will come back and say, can you make this section brighter, or, “I’d like there to be more gold in these fish scales” (an actual quote). Is the painter then less of an artist, because she is working within a client’s vision? A person is not less of an artist (or just a craftsperson), simply because they are creating in service to another’s vision. Art can be individual and collaborative. I think that it is a narrow mindset to consider our work simply “craft,” and one that can fundamentally alter one’s approach to the creative process in a negative way.

Please write more op-eds like this Randy, your wisdom is much appreciated.