Attention to detail and stifled creativity?

[Ron1]

6 hours ago, Violadamore said:

I have pointed out more than once on this forum that violin-family luthiery (the wood-carving part involving the external appearance) is performed within an artistic canon which was closed centuries ago.  It is a game with rules, like the creation of any copy of an historical original of anything, making an item to a detailed contractual specification, the composition and playing of classical music itself, Olympic sports, chess, or poker.  If you have agreed to play the game, defiance of the rules is not creativity.  Defiance of the rules is cheating, and demonstrates a lack of respect for yourself and for the other participants. 

 

I strongly disagree.  Artistic expression, individuality, and creativity are alive and well in the world of violinmaking- always have been and always will be.  There are parameters, but not rules.  The "game" that has closed rules is not the making of a violin, but rather, the making of a Stradivari or a Guarneri, etc.

   

[ctanzio]

I think of this as a form versus function issue.

To get something to function as desired, only enough attention to detail is needed to get it to perform as expected, and safely. I was a licensed PE for many years, and most projects did not require me to push the envelope on performance. The occasional high performance project that came through required slavish attention to detail with a comparable cost in both time and money.

Form is a whole other issue, since so much of its value lies in the eye of the beholder. But for me, there is a direct correlation between mastery of detail and high art.

To use a knitting example, I am reminded of my  grandmothers.

My maternal grandmother who could knit woolen vests like a machine. They were warm and durable and awful dull gray looking things. But functioned perfectly for seven of her own children and two orphans she took in off the streets, and all the grandchildren that followed. A vest from Grandmom Stunder was common but treasured, since we were all members of families of modest means and the winters in the northeast can be rough when you cannot afford to keep the house at a comfortable temperature. 

My paternal grandmother was an accomplished seamstress. She could knit lace table cloths that were astonishing in their complexity and the fineness and consistency of the stiches. A table or sideboard cloth from Grandmom Tanzio was rare and treasured as they were time consuming to make and time was something in short supply for a young widow with four children of her own.

You can be remembered for creating lots of useful things, or a few beautiful things. I do not see the utility is valuing one more than the other. 

[Don Noon]

7 hours ago, Violadamore said:

If you have agreed to play the game, defiance of the rules is not creativity.  Defiance of the rules is cheating, and demonstrates a lack of respect for yourself and for the other participants. 

I think it depends on what game you're playing.  "Making a violin" has no real rules.  "Making a traditional violin" has a lot more boundaries.

By way of illustration... several years ago at VSA one maker asked for my opinion about his entry.  I suggested that the gold paint he put on the ends of his pegs was likely to lose points with the judges, whereupon he became rather insulted about my critique of his "artistic expression".  He was not playing the same game, and therefore not bound by the same rules as most of the others, and therefore not likely to win.

So, yes... creativity is limited in scope if you want to play the game of making instruments that appeal to classical musicians and/or judges at those types of competitions.

However, the OP posed the question about attention to detail and its limiting of creativity.  I'd say it is more limiting of productivity.

[Violadamore]

2 hours ago, Ron1 said:

I strongly disagree.  Artistic expression, individuality, and creativity are alive and well in the world of violinmaking- always have been and always will be.  There are parameters, but not rules.  The "game" that has closed rules is not the making of a violin, but rather, the making of a Stradivari or a Guarneri, etc.

   

I feel that what is alive and well is the sense of personal accomplishment one gets from conquering a supremely difficult task, the very Everest of woodworking, supremely well.  The rest of it, if I cared to pursue it, would most probably descend into a controversial discussion of semantics, social status, and art history, just like it always does.  Let it suffice that someone invented the idea of the violin around 400 years ago, a few genuine geniuses refined the design up to about 300 years ago, and all anyone has done since is mess with the aesthetics a bit.

1 hour ago, Don Noon said:

I think it depends on what game you're playing.  "Making a violin" has no real rules.  "Making a traditional violin" has a lot more boundaries.

By way of illustration... several years ago at VSA one maker asked for my opinion about his entry.  I suggested that the gold paint he put on the ends of his pegs was likely to lose points with the judges, whereupon he became rather insulted about my critique of his "artistic expression".  He was not playing the same game, and therefore not bound by the same rules as most of the others, and therefore not likely to win.

So, yes... creativity is limited in scope if you want to play the game of making instruments that appeal to classical musicians and/or judges at those types of competitions.

However, the OP posed the question about attention to detail and its limiting of creativity.  I'd say it is more limiting of productivity.

I was talking about "Making a traditional violin", but one should also consider the rules imposed by customer expectations in the marketplace.  Make one of those geometric thingies that well-meaning engineering types keep coming up with (and which can sound surprisingly good, BTW), and see how many commissions in the price range which can support a maker you get.

[Violadamore]

8 hours ago, Marty Kasprzyk said:

As a builder I'm hoping to please a few who appreciate something different from the usual.

You say you're hoping to attract some real squirrels?

That photo is awesomely adorable, BTW.

Marty, I feel that what you do is brilliant, but you are so far outside the box you're on hyperdrive, headed somewhere else.  Maybe it's finally time for a new Amati.

[Muswell]

3 hours ago, Don Noon said:

However, the OP posed the question about attention to detail and its limiting of creativity.  I'd say it is more limiting of productivity.

Exactly. To go off topic......how about the idea that you learn more by getting things wrong and then asking why?

[jezzupe]

Details relate to ascetics, ascetics relate to form and materials , form relates to function, there are many functional violin like objects that do not conform to the form of a traditional Stradavari instrument, this we all know, and as pointed out, that these violin like objects lack legitimacy and economic value in the general pool of classical and traditional player market, this is in general true, all though it really doesn't pertain to the OP, but as the brainwashed debt slaves that we are, we generally always put things on scales and measures as it relates to money, monetary value it seems equals value in most peoples eyes.

That being said, I feel there are much larger and more fundamental issues at hand that have have potentially massive ramifications for the world of bowed instruments,as it relates to their popularity, the popularity of classical/bowed instrument music which in turn could be correlated to monetary value somewhat indirectly.

My response very much has to do with the OP but much more in the sense of how it relates to our individuality as both makers and players. The therum I put forward that is at this point speculation relates to individual creativity as it pertains to aesthetics, details and "looks" and how an instruments visuals will effect young people who are in the beginning stages of developing the desire to engage music.

First I would say that it's great when kids start instruments early, I feel prodigy should be fostered and at least investigated to see if it's there, you wont know if a child is mozart unless you give them a chance, that being said I feel most kids who start playing generally start around 11 to 13, at this age peer influence and their own personal identity of just who they are starts to form, and in that critical stage, personal individuality in their dress, their clique, the music they listen too, all that puberty stuff is very wrapped up in "creative details" that allow them to both identify with other kids and to express their own individuality.

THIS is where I feel the world of bowed music has inadvertently shot itself in the foot. Through somewhat of an echo chamber a revolving circle of group think based on monetary value and expectations we come to the following; besides advanced players and violin makers/judges very few people will notice the "details" that may be an individual makers, for the most part, to the average person, pretty much all violins look the same, some may be reddish, some may be brownish, some may be yellowish, but well, they all look the same to the average person, particularly the average 13 year old kid.
 

I would state that its the "average" kid who we need to target, because the average kid is the majority and often times greatness comes from the average if its given a chance or a spark is lit.

Long story short, I feel that because all violins basically look the same to the average kid, that it lacks the individual flair that allows them to feel important so it does not get considered as an instrument choice, they'll choose an electric guitar because there are millions of different looks to choose from and I can find one that feels like "me". And I think it's this simple shallow "thing" that is completely over looked and has been massively detrimental to the world of bowed instruments and turned lots of potential young players away from choosing violin.

So, I'm trying to work with my friend at Bristol, the head of the music dept. to set up some scientific control studies related to the psychological effects of "one of these things is not like the other"  as it relates to violins.

Quite simply I'm one of the few makers who has a body of work that has an established outside of the norm look that is diverse, so my instruments are prime candidate for the test.

It's as simple as "Here Jonny, look at these 6 violins, we heard you were thinking about starting to try to play an instrument, if you could choose any one of these 6 violins, which one would you choose?  there will be 5 regular violins, and then one of mine

based on my own personal experience with younger people and their reactions to my violins, particularly the 13 to 20 somethings ,I'll go out on a limb and say that the majority of kids, who have no indoctrinated preconceived notions about violins as they have no "sophistication" will choose mine.

Again I aim to prove this in repetitive test's with many participants over a prolonged period of time. IF in fact I am right, this would expose a MAJOR FLAW , imo, in the way we have been "doing it" so to speak.

Really the entire reason behind this is my own personal experience as a kid, "hey, why do all violins look the same" "um some mumbo jumbo that clearly means you don;t know why" ok, well why would I want to do that? why would I want to join a bunch of "conformist" who lack any individuality? hey look at these electric guitars, look at that one, or that one, oh wow that ones really cool. I mean I kinda like classical music from the stuff I've heard, but it just seems so boring and conformist, lacks individuality, not cool, gimme the BC Rich. 

 Now through that BC RIch I did eventually find my way back to classical and bowed music, but it kinda stinks to think that my road was detoured or had to go through the guitar first simply by my notions as a young person as to what I thought was cool. But I wanted to be me and I know every kid I knew wanted the same thing, it's when we first started finding who we are and the way something looked was uber important to me, and I know others.

So, in closing, I'm going to keep making my weird azz violins and now guitars, which are also weird to guitar people, and in time I will prove that you've been doing it all wrong and hopefully at the same time draw in millions of new enthusiastic young players which will mean more debt, er, money for everyone  

 

[Violadamore]

20 minutes ago, jezzupe said:

Details............................... the average 13 year old kid..................... they'll choose an electric guitar.......... it's this simple shallow "thing".........................money for everyone  

C'mon, 'fess up.  At 13 you were just looking for a "chick magnet". 

[Muswell]

I started playing guitar to attract chicks and ended up talking to middle-aged men about fingernails.

[jezzupe]

2 minutes ago, Violadamore said:

C'mon, 'fess up.  At 13 you were just looking for a "chick magnet". 

Probably had somethin' to do with it. To me tradition will always be here, so when you grow up, you can buy a Noon or a Burgess, you know, after the world has crushed your soul and made you conform to the harsh reality of money and the "man"   I'm built for before that time, you know, when you were young and still had hope for the world 

[jezzupe]

7 minutes ago, Muswell said:

I started playing guitar to attract chicks and ended up talking to middle-aged men about fingernails.

amen to that one brother , "meh my shoulder hurts, what about a bevel edge?" " I don't care about the rain forest I'm old and I want Rosewood" "how can I make my guitar louder than the banjo" 

[Muswell]

The banjo always wins.

[MANFIO]

5 minutes ago, Muswell said:

The banjo always wins.

Never seen a Trombonist asking if his sound is projecting well.

[David Burgess]

5 hours ago, jezzupe said:

 To me tradition will always be here, so when you grow up, you can buy a Noon or a Burgess, you know, after the world has crushed your soul ....

[Guest]

2 hours ago, jezzupe said:

 To me tradition will always be here, so when you grow up, you can buy a Noon or a Burgess, you know, after the world has crushed your soul and made you conform to the harsh reality of money and the "man"  

Depends on were you hang you choose to hang your hat, I guess...I was gonna say "Jezzupe for President, then remembered how I botched the last joke,,,...doh.

Drive on soldier...

[John_London]

Surely attention to detail is the vehicle for creativity?

A master-made instrument or an instrument aspiring to be that clearly involves far more attention to detail than the Stentors (I mention them having seen the youtube video of how they are made, which is good in its way). In my trade, websites, your average user taking a look would not know the difference between a product which took 20 hours and one which took 200 hours. The difference is huge and it matters enough for function that some customers will add a nought or or two to their spend to get quality. What do you get for the extra hours? In a large part, you get attention to detail which often at subtle levels means the product both does a better job and has more creativity coming through it. Is making violins different, in this respect?

Some people have the genius to do rough work where the creativity shines through in spite of lack of skill or polish. Probably true of making violins, of writing novels, of painting, and in all sorts of fields. It does not follow that lack of attention to detail frees up creativity.

[James M. Jones]

1 hour ago, John_London said:

Surely attention to detail is the vehicle for creativity?

Not sure ....might be the cart before the horse.....does creativity lead ?     In my life .....met a lot of artists who have very little detail but loads of creativity, lots of others who care about details but couldn’t create anything new for love or money.. similar to the art v craft arguments, I see them as related but not the same. On the art, creative side there is an onus to produce the new idea, the Picasso, the. Dr Susse,  on the craft ,detail side the emphasis primarily rests a kind of strength or integrity, the type setters and barrel makers..... perhaps both can and should learn from the other, however there is still a distinction between the two. Personaly I think that ,at it,s best ,the internet has done a lot for both.

[Rue]

17 hours ago, lpr5184 said:

Is the thread that was mentioned a MN thread on violin making  or from a knitting forum?

Is violinmaking comparable to knitting?

 

1. No knitting forums have been contacted.

2. Yes.

[Rue]

Excellent replies!  I have read through them all, and am enjoying the enhanced thinking process (on my part) that they are stimulating.

I also am enjoying pictures of squirrels in squirrel houses...

[David Beard]

On 3/1/2018 at 7:30 AM, Rue said:

This came up in another thread, and I thought it might deserve a little attention of its own.

I've noticed on this forum (and others) what I consider almost obsessive attention to minute details, and have been wondering when does it matter, and when does it not matter.  Where is that 'line'?

I think, if you want to produce a great product, you need to be aware of all these details, but if it ultimately doesn't matter, how much of your time are you going to devote to it?

So...since I don't make violins...but I make other stuff...I am using a knitting example of my own.  I'm surprised at how well knitting compares to violin making...

So there are actually two questions mashed together:

1.  How much time should you devote to details?

2.  Has the internet (as a discussion/teaching tool) stifled creativity - since it leads to a consensus that there is only 'one' right way to do something?

I guess I just don't see the meat in this particular debate.      

"1.  How much time should you devote to details?"    How about as much or as little as you please? What does 'should' have to do with it?   In an art, you must satisfy the core of your own sensibilities if you are to give anything of value.   If you want to paint freely on a blank canvas, then do so.   If you want to make in an historically motivated way, then do so.   If we gain a new and clearer understanding of exactly how classical violin making was accomplished, that doesn't mean we all must now do things in that way.  But for those who would like to, it opens a door that has long been shut.

" 2.  Has the internet (as a discussion/teaching tool) stifled creativity - since it leads to a consensus that there is only 'one' right way to do something? "  Is that true at all?  The internet gives an unlimited platform to express any opinion or unique viewpoint you desire.  To my eye it fuels diversity and openness, in fact breaking apart the prior tyranny of majority or established taste and viewpoint. Only a generation ago, the channels for global or national public expression were few and limited to things popular enough to draw large audience.   Now the bandwidth is unlimited.   I see a riotous explosion of diverse and inspired creativity in the world.   I guess it's a matter of viewpoint. 

 

 

[Rue]

I appreciate your response , but I  find yours (and that of some others) also rather humorous...since what sparked my question (this time around) was the lengthy debate regarding what ultimately amounts to differences of micromillmetres at violin corners...

Where is the meat there?  Yet the debate goes on (and on)...

The lovely (very well educated) older lady I was talking with, was suggesting (if I didn't misunderstand her) that original art forms evolved in isolated communities - and were very different from each other as a result.  Now, that isolation has been eroded and there appears to be one 'right' and a bunch of 'wrong' ways to go about doing things.  So, if we eliminate the 'wrong' ways, what effect will that have on the end result?

We were talking primarily about what young people were learning off the internet and YouTube 'how tos'. We didn't go on to discuss all the mavericks out there who look for the 'wrong' way to do some thing and build their oeuvre on that. (I suppose we might have, but she had to go home and feed the cows...)...

jezzupe would be one such maverick...and he's doing well.

I apologize for my lack of on-the-mark discourse on the subject.  I don't have quite the right background to better express what I'm trying to get at.  Need more art/sociology and less science...

[The Violin Beautiful]

15 hours ago, Marty Kasprzyk said:

At what distance should these little different details be recognizable?

Are we talking about using a magnifying glass, using reading glasses at a foot away, arm's length, on a table, across the room, the back of a music hall or across the parking lot like mine?

I think that great Violins by great makers are full of little details that we don’t necessarily see at first inspection, but they manifest themselves to us the more we study them. I’m reminded of the article in the Scroll magazine about f-hole layout; it didn’t attempt to prove that Strad used that method to mark his ffs, but it showed that one could study that facet of his construction and learn something valuable. I felt the same way about the presentation Kevin Kelly made about scroll layout.

Like great paintings or great musical compositions, great Violins give us endless room for analysis and education. 

[Rue]

7 hours ago, jezzupe said:

Details relate to ascetics, ascetics relate to form and materials , form relates to function, there are many functional violin like objects that do not conform to the form of a traditional Stradavari instrument, this we all know, and as pointed out, that these violin like objects lack legitimacy and economic value in the general pool of classical and traditional player market, this is in general true, all though it really doesn't pertain to the OP, but as the brainwashed debt slaves that we are, we generally always put things on scales and measures as it relates to money, monetary value it seems equals value in most peoples eyes.

That being said, I feel there are much larger and more fundamental issues at hand that have have potentially massive ramifications for the world of bowed instruments,as it relates to their popularity, the popularity of classical/bowed instrument music which in turn could be correlated to monetary value somewhat indirectly.

My response very much has to do with the OP but much more in the sense of how it relates to our individuality as both makers and players. The therum I put forward that is at this point speculation relates to individual creativity as it pertains to aesthetics, details and "looks" and how an instruments visuals will effect young people who are in the beginning stages of developing the desire to engage music.

...

 

BTW...this is very interesting, and deserves it's own thread. 

There is both a need to explore individuality and a need to conform.  I think these two needs must be balanced,  yet there are often conflicting messages that upset things and the balance is therefore not achieved.

[David Burgess]

1 hour ago, James M. Jones said:

Not sure ....might be the cart before the horse.....does creativity lead ?     In my life .....met a lot of artists who have very little detail but loads of creativity, lots of others who care about details but couldn’t create anything new for love or money.. similar to the art v craft arguments, I see them as related but not the same. On the art, creative side there is an onus to produce the new idea, the Picasso, the. Dr Susse,  on the craft ,detail side the emphasis primarily rests a kind of strength or integrity, the type setters and barrel makers..... perhaps both can and should learn from the other, however there is still a distinction between the two. Personaly I think that ,at it,s best ,the internet has done a lot for both.

If I were trying to learn blacksmithing from Jones, I'd certainly be trying to pay great attention to detail. But that wouldn't mean much, until I got to the knowledge and experience level to comprehend which details are highly important, and which are less so. Wouldn't that apply just as much to violinmaking?

[David Burgess]

22 minutes ago, Rue said:

BTW...this is very interesting, and deserves it's own thread. 

There is both a need to explore individuality and a need to conform.  I think these two needs must be balanced,  yet there are often conflicting messages that upset things and the balance is therefore not achieved.

At one time, Maestronet was more "black and white", and much more focused on "right and wrong" ways of doing things. I think there's been an improvement since then.