Atefe Mirsane, Farhang Parsikia and Narges Marandi

Narges Marandi, Atefe Mirsane, Farhang Parsikia and Zahra Mottaghi reflect on the changing meaning of “craft” in Iran.

During the first Iran Craft Week event, held online due to the pandemic aftermath in June 2021, mutual concern and/or interest grew as we worked on the lectures and other relevant content together. Because this topic includes aspects in the fields of crafts, art, and research, we decided to brainstorm and discuss ideas and experiences to reach a framework in which we could point out the issues and pinpoint the facts.

Initially, therefore, we presented a brief review in the fifth volume of Ms Craftland Magazine which was unveiled at the Iran Craft Week event. As each volume elaborates on a specific topic regarding Iran’s contemporary craft and the collaborations with Garland magazine, we decided to present our thoughts and ideas within the Garland magazine this time to be exposed to other experts’ thoughts and ideas in the relevant fields based on their different views and experiments to learn more about the topic through various perspectives as well.

To start with, it is essential to elaborate on the term ‘handicraft”, which is known in Persian as sanaye-e dasti (صنایع دستی).  The word “sanaye-e dast” was used in the past, until gradually “craft” was applied to create a new concept. The authors in line with many scholars active in handicraft and decorative art believe there is no equivalent in Persian for the word “craft” and we have to use the word itself. However, in contemporary Iran “Sanaye-e Dasti” is more specific compared to ‘craft’.

“The word ‘Craft’ comes from the Middle English word for ‘Strength’ or ‘Skill’, derived from the Old English word cræft which comes from Old High German Kraft, for strength and means “skill in planning” (Mark, 2011). It is believed that crafts were traditional arts that were revived in decorative forms and later became invaluable, hand-made objects kept in special places or preserved by professionals. The Industrial Revolution during the seventeenth century and the Art and Craft movements in the late nineteenth century contributed to boost the local craft productions into known and/or popular artisanal efforts which were made with higher wages. Craft and handicrafts were applied to such handmade materials, some of which were later produced to simplify the application of tools to create craft.

A Note on Etymology

Translating this word to صنایع مستظرفه (Sanāye-e Mostazrafeh) “Decorative Fine Arts” or هنرهای متعالی (Honarhāy-e Moteāli) “High Arts” or هنرهای زیبا (Honarhāy-e Zibā) “Fine Arts” only indicates (conveys) its original meaning partially. The first and second phrases respectively represent the material and spiritual qualities of “Fine” while هنرهای زیبا embraces the two aspects at once; therefore, it is an appropriate translation for “Fine Arts”.

The word هنر (art), originates from the Middle Persian, hunar which itself is a transformed form of a hypothetical word, hu-nara- in old Iranian. The prefix hu–, adds “خوب” (good) to the meaning and nara means “good ability”, as “capability” or “ability”. In Avesta (the sacred writings of Zoroastrianism, compiled in the 4th century AD.), there are different combinations of words with the noun core hunara-, such as hunara-vant- which means هنرمند (artist). In the tables made in  Achaemenid period tablets the hūvnara has the same meaning which is the transformed version of the same old Iran words. Furthermore, this word as well has also entered to Armenian language from Iran languages.

The word زیبا (beautiful), possibly originating from its old Iran root zay-, means “decorating”, “preparing” and “equip”.

The Arabic word صنایع, is the plural form of the feminine noun صنعة, with the original meaning of هنر (art) and is from the root “ص ن ع” (ṣādē Nūn Ayn) and is related to “building” and “designing”.

The Persian word دست (hand), originates from dast in Middle Persian, dasta in old Persian, *jástah, in proto-Iranian, *jhástas in proto Indio-Iranian, and *ǵhé-to- in proto Indo-European which all mean “hand”. Their root in proto Indo-European is *ǵhes with the original meaning of “grabbing”.

The Arabic word مستظرفه (Mostazrafeh) is the feminine form of مستظرف which is an infinitive adjective made of استظراف (Estezrāf) which implies “delicate” and “beautiful”. استظراف is the infinitive noun, rhyming with استفعال (Estefal) which is built on the root of “ظ ر ف”  (Zād, Reh, Fā).

To conclude, the most common translation of “fine arts is “Honarhāy-e Zibā” which is not only Persian but also embraces both materialistic and spiritual (non-material) aspects.

Christy Wilson, in his book A History of Iran’s Industries, published in the 80s, presents three definitions for industry (see etymology at end of this article): one utilizes skill and taste in the manifestation of beauty and beauty through imitation and innovation; two is how humans express their opinions about perfection; and third preserves and records the comprehended beauties. During the 1980s, art activists in the United States, simultaneously with European activities, made a distinction between hand-made crafts and Decorative Fine Arts (Sanaye-e Mostazrafeh). (Wilson. J, 1938)

“…..a growing number of contemporary artists are turning to the techniques and traditions of craft. Contemporary artists using craft in their work claim the value of a handmade aesthetic and often reject the efficacy in their artistic production. […] through adopting the methods and materials of craft many contemporary artists question long-lasting divisions between domestic production and fine art.” (Poser, 2008)

Therefore, it is time to find a more thorough and fundamental understanding of creative works and how sense-making happens. Sense-making in this field can be understood by justifying the choice of words. The use of different terms and forms to address creative works of art in Iran and the etymology of the word craft, applying the term “craft” could not be thoroughly justified.

Crafts had some specific characteristics, coming from creativity; perhaps crafts were considered artworks. Whether today the same expression is extended along with art and/or fine art is a matter of debate. “To begin, it should be said that this object called craft is internally diverse, or rather underpinned by several categories. So, the word is to describe the activities of various makers: […] but craft is also, as Glenn Adamson has made clear in his Thinking Through Craft (2007), a dimension that underpins almost any work of art—be it that of Constantin Brancusi, Jeff Koons or Robert Smithson.” (Smith, 2016) Further, craft pertains to those everyday items, mostly mass-produced, which are nevertheless manu-factured (manually created).

Helen Holmes (2015) considers craft an elusive term, mentioning that craft, as a concept, is ambiguous, and its opposition to ‘art’ has long been a topic of academic discussion. Buszek (2012) in a lecture, proposed a question “Do you consider yourself as painters or artists?” he asked painting students. As a scholar of contemporary art, she believes that “craft mediums and processes have become inescapable in contemporary art.”

As the craftspeople willingly made efforts to promote in addition to upgrading their (manual) tools and machines, technology was engaged which continuously and greatly contributed to the realm of craft, art, and design. As of now, there are artisans, who are better to be called “thinker-makers”, because they are working in different areas; from practical arts to visual arts who do not particularly belong to a specific period or era. Contemporary artists/artisans have always attempted to express their ideas. Many works reflect social changes and evolutions such as the worldwide experience of the COVID-19 pandemic. But debates on what to call art or handcraft are still a challenge.

Handmade crafts have long been a part of our ancient cultural heritage. Although the new generation seems to be trying hard to preserve and revive some of the old techniques, unfortunately, many have disappeared. Efforts to preserve these techniques will not result in any progress unless there are knowledgeable customers. Finding international customers for such products from Iran can be challenging since online restrictions on platforms like Etsy, and Amazon affect Iranian craftspeople negatively. However, other platforms such as Facebook and Instagram have served as digital shops.

This has been a new encounter with crafts which led to new behaviours; craft stores largely grew after the Covid-19 pandemic regarding the numbers before the pandemic, demonstrating such modes which directly indicate the audience’s awareness and their developing tastes.

As for craft and technology, what we comprehend from craft in this era remains a question. The tools assist the making processes which aim at boosting and promoting the craft, and present a new form of technology in the industry.

As of today, therefore, we have no craft-person or no source to present such branches in contemporary craft. Today, retrieving crafts has become a great concern: attempting to be involved in applying crafts, preserving them as invaluable objects, and channelling the financial stream back to the labourers and supporting producers rather than feeding the dealers in between.

Still, the craft is exposed to direct threats and vulnerabilities that in turn challenge the old concepts. The compatibility between hand-made and machine-made elements, though, is still a topic. The question is whether the values are still considered.

Crafts in Iran have always reflected innovation and development in concepts. The challenge in the contemporary era is, regarding technology and craft, if traditional values are preserved. In recent decades though, we have had an outstanding climax in our lives which has led to more hand-made products available domestically and in workplaces and are considered much more valuable than before.

Narges Marandi: M.A of Art research; Art researcher and Translator

Atefe Mirsane: M.A of Arts and Folk Trades- CEO and Editor-in-chief of CRAFTLAND Magazine

Farhang Parsikia: M.A of Iranian Studies, M.A of Ancient Iranian Language, Research Staff in Sharif University of Technology

Zahra Mottaghi: Ph.D. Candidate, Applied Linguistics, Language and Art Specialist

References

1. برهان، محمد حسین بن خلف، 1391، برهان قاطع، به اهتمام محمد معین، تهران:

موسسه انتشارات امیرکبیر.

2. حسندوست، محمد،1393، فرهنگ ریشه شناختی زبان فارسی، تهران: فرهنگستان

زبان و ادب فارسی.

3. قیّم، عبدالنبی،1390، فرهنگ معاصر عربی- فارسی، تهران: فرهنگ معاصر.
4. معین، محمد، 1383، فرهنگ فارسی، تهران: موسسه انتشارات امیرکبیر.
5. منصوری، یدالله، 1384، بررسی ریشه شناختی فعلهای زبان پهلوی (فارسی میانۀ

زردشتی)، تهران: فرهنگستان زبان و ادب فارسی.

6. هرن، پاول–هاینریش، هوبشمان، 1394، فرهنگ ریشه شناسی فارسی، ترجمۀ جلال

خالقی مطلق، اصفهان: مهرافروز.

7. Adamson, Glenn (2007), Thinking Through Craft, Oxford, UK: Berg Publishers.
8. Bailey, H. W. (1979). Dictionary of Khotan Saka. New York: Cambridge University Press.
9. Bartholomae, Christian (1961). Altiranisches Wörterbuch. Strassburg: Trübner.
10. Boyce, Mary (1977). A Word-List of Manichaean Middle Persian and Parthian. Leiden: Brill.
11. Buck, Carl Darling (1949). A Dictionary of Selected Synonyms in the Principal Indo-European Languages. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
12. Buszek, M., E., (2012), Labor is my Medium: Some perspective(s) on contemporary craft, The University of Chicago Press Journals, Archives of American Journals.
13. Carl Meissner; Henry William Auden (1894) Latin Phrase-Book, London: Macmillan and Co
14. Charlton T. Lewis (1891) An Elementary Latin Dictionary, New York: Harper & Brothersmm
15. Charlton T. Lewis and Charles Short (1879) A Latin Dictionary, Oxford: Clarendon Press
16. Cheung, Johnny (2007). Etymological Dictionary of the Iranian Verb. Leiden: Brill.
17. De Vaan, Michiel (2008) Etymological Dictionary of Latin and the other Italic Languages (Leiden Indo-European Etymological Dictionary Series; 7), Leiden, Boston: Brill
18. Durkin-Meisterernst, Desmond (2004). Dictionary of Manichaean Middle Persian and Parthian. Turnhout: Brepols.
19. Gaffiot, Félix (1934) Dictionnaire Illustré Latin-Français, Hachettemm
20. Gignoux, Philippe (1972). Glossaire des Inscriptions Pehlevies et Parthes. London: Lund Humphries.
21. Gignoux, Philippe (1991). Les quatres inscriptions du mage kirdīr. Paris: Peeters.
22. Harry Thurston Peck, editor (1898) Harper 's Dictionary of Classical Antiquities, New York: Harper & Brothers
23. Horn, Paul (1893). Grundriss der neupersischen Etymologie. Strassburg: Georg Olms Verlag.
24. Holmes, Helen (2015), Transient craft: reclaiming the contemporary craft worker, Sage Journals, Volume 29, Issue 3.
25. Hübschmann, Heinrich (1895). Persische Studien. Strassburg: K.J. Trübner.
26. Kent, Roland G. (1953). Old Persian. New Haven: American Oriental Society.
27. Klein, Ernest (1966). A Comprehensive Etymological Dictionary of the English Language. Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing Company.
28. Mayrhofer, Manfred (2000). Etymologisches Wörterbuch des Altindoarischen. Heidelberg: C. Winter.
29. Mark, Joshua. j., (2011), Crafts, Word History Encyclopedia.
30. Monier-Williams, Monier (1960). A Sanskrit-English Dictionary. London: Clarendon Press.
31. Morgenstierne, Georg (1927). An Etymological Vocabulary of Pashto. Oslo: J. Dybwad.
32. Morgenstierne, Georg (1974). Etymological vocabulary of the Shughni group. Göttingen: Reichert.
33. Nyberg, Henrik Samuel (1964). A Manual of Pahlavi: Texts. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
34. Nyberg, Henrik Samuel (1974). A Manual of Pahlavi: Grammar. Göttingen: Otto Harrassowitz.
35. Pokorny, Julius (1959). Indogermanisches etymologisches Wörterbuch. Bern: Francke Verlag.
36. Poser, j., (2015), Contemporary Craft: The Look of Labor: Art Education (2008), Volume 61, Issue 2.
37. Ramminger, Johann (accessed 16 July 2016) Neulateinische Wortliste: Ein Wörterbuch des Lateinischen von Petrarca bis 1700, pre-publication website, 2005-2016
38. Ringe, Don (2006) From Proto-Indo-European to Proto-Germanic, Oxford University Press
39. Sprengling, Martin (1953). Third Century Iran: Sapor and Kartir. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
40. Tarkom Oksala et al., (2022), Craft, Technology and Design, Hame University of Applied Sciences, Julkaisija, E publication.
41. Smith, Tai (2016), The Problem with Craft, Art Journal, College Art Association, Vol 75, No. 1
42. Whitney, William Dwight (1885). The Roots, Verb-Forms and Primary Derivatives of the Sanskrit Language. Leipzig: Motilal Banarsidass.
43. William Smith et al., editor (1890) A Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities, London: William Wayte. G. E. Marindin
44. Wilson, J. Christy, (1983), History of Iranian Art, Unknown Publisher

Atefe Mirsane ✿ A Persian pioneer

  ✿ Atefe Mirsane is a talented jeweller specialising in wood. Besides her own craft, she is dedicated to building bridges for her fellow Iranians. Atefe is currently a scholarship student at St Petersburg University of Technology and Design, where she is working on her dissertation entitled: In the field of wooden jewelry: Development of jewelry design in the traditions of Russian culture using Iranian technologies. In 2021, she founded Craftland magazine, which aims to introduce the world to Iranian handicrafts, culture and tourism. It is a digital magazine in both English and Italian. It features stories of Iranian artisans. […]

Tags

Atefe Mirsane | Iran | Persian Prospect | theory | thinker-maker