From: gorman@acsu.buffalo.edu (Anne-Marie K. Gorman)
Newsgroups: alt.sewing
Subject: Re: I'm a Bo-oo-zo and I'm okay..
Date: 12 Nov 92 21:26:47 GMT
Organization: UB


It seems to me that there's a great deal of confusion behind this bozo
business.  John asks:

>>Is some one a Bozo simply because they have a project that they would like
>>to finish within a short period of time and with professional results.

Mary Rita says:      
>That's a key statement:  an amatuer who wants quick *professional*
>results.  Not quick "amatuer" results; results that are equivalent to
>those of a professional.  Eliminating the need for professionals.
>Denying the value of professionals.  Making it so that in the yellow

and later in the same post:

>That is what you are asking for;  for the power to wield the creativity
>and talents of others as if they were your own, and to eliminate the
>need for others.  To be able to create in a self-absorbed vacuum, things
>of the same quality produced by designers and crafters who have dedicated
>significant effort into learning their art.
>
>I was right to trigger a Bozo alarm for Michael's request.  Michael was
>able to get a really nice 300 dpi printout of a logo design from his
>computer and felt that since he had already short-cut the design process,
>now there just had to be a way to short-cut the fabrication process,
>in so doing, eliminating all craftspeople and designers.  Just Michael
>and his machines.  Complete digital perfection, never touched by human
>hands, and of course, quick and cheap.  All he had to do was type in
>the team name, and, *zap!* instant "art".  Not.

Number one:  Michael created a logo for his team.  He used his computer
as a tool for his creativity.  That's not wielding others' talents as his 
own. 

Number two:  I agree that replacing artists with mass production
hurts the artists.  But the key word is "replacing."  In many cases,
mass production extends to a whole new set of people the opportunity
to enjoy something that was previously out of their reach--it doesn't
replace artists.  Team shirts are a good example:  if the only way to get
a logo onto a shirt was to have it hand-embroidered, most teams wouldn't
have team jerseys.  They'd have to settle for just matching coloured
shirts or something like that.  Computerized sewing of names &c. hasn't
replaced a band of hand-team-shirt-makers.  I'd be willing to bet that
John was not "bypassing the art department" (to quote Mary Rita again)
when he made his logo; if he hadn't had his computer he wouldn't have hired
a professional designer, he would have just bought iron-on letters or
something like that.
>Think "Bozo" when you hear someone put down "home-made" as inferior.  Think
>"Bozo" when someone thinks you give handmade gifts because you're cheap.
>Think "Bozo" when you see mass manufactured "quilts" in the department
>store.  And think about how these things reflect on the perpetuation
>of these arts and crafts as a part of our creative heritage.
I don't think that people who buy mass manufactured quilts (deliberate
absence of quotation marks) necessarily think that home made equals
inferior.  I imagine that most of them admire hand made quilts, but 
can't afford to buy one and don't have the time/energy/capacity to make
one themselves.  Is a hand made quilt artistically better than a mass
produced one?  Sure.  Are all mass produced ones therefore deserving
of bozo-dom?  No.


Number three:  I think the whole insistence on art and creativity is
misplaced.  Maybe John (and others) aren't after art.  Maybe they simply
want something functional and reasonably attractive.  Not everything
has to be artistic.  Team jersey logos are for identification, not for
admiration.  People don't even see them closely enough to be able to
notice whether they are handsewn or not, so considerations such as 
satin stitch versus others are irrelevant.


Finally:
>The point was never that using a machine is wrong; the point (which so many
>of the flamers have missed) is the use of machines to eliminate human
>participation.  

Well, frankly, Mary Rita, you can't blame people for misunderstanding you.
Almost every machine eliminates *some* human participation.  I think you
have to make it more clear which kinds of human participation you see as
necessary to preserve in order to avoid bozo-ness.  E.g.  is everyone who
sends printed wedding invitations instead of hand-calligraphed ones a 
bozo?  What about mass-produced clothes instead of individually designed
and hand tailored?  

If using machines in a way that eliminates human participation is the
only criterion for bozodom, then everyone in the Western world, and most
of those in the rest of the world, is a bozo.

Anne-Marie


-- 
===============================================================================
Anne-Marie K. Gorman          Sophie and Teresa (9 1/2 months old) are walking!
Human factors/ergonomics      Time flies twice as fast when you're having
University at Buffalo         twice as much fun.