The changing nature of things
On a recent drive to a show in Kansas City, I listened to a terrific book, “The Lost Painting: The Quest for a Caravaggio Masterpiece” by Jonathan Harr. The story provides some fascinating insight into the work of Art Historians, but it also provided me with a partial answer to a question that I’ve been pondering.It’s nearly impossible to have a conversation about craft without also talking about art. What I’ve been wondering recently is when our current notions about art and artists emerged. According to Harr, and information available on the net, Western painters didn’t begin signing their work until the early Renaissance in the 15th century (much earlier in the East, where a Chinese painting by Cui Bai has both his signature and the date 1061.). Before then they were considered skilled artisans in the same vein as potters or metal workers.
It seems reasonable to assume that the emergence of a signature would parallel a cultural change that elevates painters and sculptors to a higher level in society. Such certainly seems to have been the case. It’s also interesting to note that early Greek pottery was often signed by both the potter and the vase painter, although both were apparently regarded as master craftsmen.
It’s now common and expected that people that make things sign their work. Many customers believe that the signature adds value and insist on one. I’m kind of ambivalent about it myself; my feeling is that the work itself should reveal the maker.