Hart, G. W. (2012). What can we say about “math/art”? Journal of Mathematics and the Arts, 6(2–3), 87–91. https://doi.org/10.1080/17513472.2012.679887
STOP 1: “To reconcile these issues, perhaps what we call an ‘Art Exhibition’ should be rebranded as something like ‘Exhibition of Mathematical Art, Craft, Design, Models, and Visualization.’ This conveniently covers the entire collection without having to be definitionally specific about individual items.”
Hart discusses how the definition of art and artistic works may block creators and audiences from engaging with the projects. He argues the differences among art, craft, design, and model. For example, crafts/models can be reproduced by competent workers following step-by-step instructions and used for educational purposes, which are not proper art. I never thought from this perspective before. In our entire course, we have been talking about math and art, where the word “art” is interchangeable with “craft and design”, in my opinion. I guess what Hart tries to argue here is that sometimes the fine art is defined as a profession and a high standard of work by the authorities and institutions. Some works are created as aesthetic objects, but others are intended as mathematical demonstrations. Thus, mathematicians and educators don’t have to fit their work into the artistic standards, and trying to prove that math is art can limit the creations.
STOP 2: “Mathematics appeals because of the delights to be found in rigorous reasoning and understanding with clarity. I believe mathematical art succeeds in our community because it alludes in various ways to these same pleasures…The art that is mathematical art must bring to mind a landscape of mathematical pleasure.”
Indeed, some artwork may be hard for the general public to understand. I think what Hart tries to approach here is to suggest an accessible and explicit way to deliver mathematical messages from artworks. If the audience is confused and has a hard time understanding the work, it is probably not a good educational math-art work. Linking back to his idea about how he wants to distinguish professional and educational artwork, I appreciate the suggestion of designing artwork for different settings. In our classrooms, we always need to think about whether the art project is accessible to students. For example, what works in elementary classes may not work the best for high schools. Thus, adaptations are always needed for different circumstances.
Questions:
1. What is art in your own definition? What can be included as part of art? What is not considered art?
2. Do you agree with Hart’s idea to separate art into different categories (i.e. design, model, craft, etc.)? What is the benefit of doing this? What is the downside of this idea?
VIDEO
Stop 1: I first stopped at around 9:00 – 10: 00 when Nick Sayers said, “Being an artist is more than drawing a picture”. I really resonate with this idea since each time we talk about art, most people immediately think about drawing and have a conclusion that I CAN or I CANNOT draw. However, this is not true since we learn that art is so much more than drawing a picture, and there are various aspects of art. Only viewing art as drawing can restrict many ideas and creativity. To change the assumptions about art, I guess we need to explore more fields in art to show our students how diverse art can be.
Stop 2: 28:00 I was fascinated by the Christmas tree design with 2000 plastic water bottles. When I first saw the picture in the video, I thought that was a super cool Christmas tree, but I could never imagine that it was made of plastic bottles. I think this is a good example of how recyclable materials can be used in art. This is a wonderful sustainability project to try with the class. I can also see the pattern of the Christmas tree, where the hexagon shape is repeated to construct the tree. We can probably also engage the math part, for example, ask students to calculate and estimate how many bottles they need to construct the tree.
Stop 3: 33:00 I loved to play with spirographs when I was a kid, but I’ve never thought about the math and art behind it. Nick Sayers mentioned that he liked cycling, so he combined the idea of spirograph drawing with cycling by tracking the wheels. He created a drawing machine with bicycle parts. This is something I could never think of, so I really like this creative and original design. I can tell he tried to engage in his hobbies in art and got the ideas from everyday life. Probably, this should be something we can engage students to do. Our students all have different hobbies and come from different backgrounds, so they may also have some creative ideas to combine their interests with math or art.
What does this artist's work offer you in terms of understanding math-art connections, and what does it offer you as a math or science teacher?
The thing that inspired me most in the interview was definitely the materials Nick Sayers used in his projects. Many of them are accessible, unexpected, and fun! As I have mentioned above, sometimes I restrict myself too much to “art is drawing,” so I may not have the chance to explore more creative ideas. Nick Sayers started with the little things around him and developed the idea by engaging various aspects in different fields. As a math/science teacher, I guess I can try to observe small things around me in my daily life and take time to think more deeply about the design behind them to see if they can be connected to something else.
I really appreciated your reflections, especially around Hart’s distinction between art, craft, and models. I actually find myself agreeing with him. I’m an excellent copier, if you saw art I did in school, it probably looked good. But I was copying. I could follow steps and reproduce something carefully, but coming up with something completely original? That’s a different skill. I enjoy sewing and crafting where the pattern is laid out for me, and I really respect people who can forge their own path and create something entirely new. So I don’t see Hart’s separation as dismissive, I see it as clarifying purpose. In education especially, models and reproducible work have huge value.
ReplyDeleteI also liked what you said about accessibility. If mathematical art is so abstract that students are just confused, then the connection can get lost. There’s a balance. What works in elementary won’t always work the same way in high school, and adaptation matters. The recycled bottle tree and the bike spirograph show that art can be building, designing, problem-solving, and using everyday materials. Your point about hobbies really resonated with me too. I’m fascinated by my husband’s fly tying — he calls it a hobby, but my daughters and I call it a craft (which he doesn’t fully appreciate!). It’s detailed, creative, technical, and takes real skill - and maybe that’s exactly the kind of space where math-art connections can grow.
Sunny, I liked how you explored Hart’s distinctions between art, craft, design, and models. Your reflection on how labeling can either open or restrict creativity is what I grappled with as well. In my own post, I found myself questioning whether replication, especially through coding or fabrication tools, diminishes originality. Like you, I’m beginning to think the issue isn’t whether something fits a category, but what values and intentions sit behind the work.
ReplyDeleteYour point about accessibility in educational contexts also connects to my thinking about sweetgrass and algorithmic processes. Braiding follows structured repetition, much like coding or spirograph systems, yet we don’t question its authenticity. That makes me wonder whether mathematical art becomes less about classification and more about relationship — between structure, context, and meaning. Your post helped me see how careful we need to be about definitions shaping creativity rather than supporting it.
The definition of art is such a sticky one and difficult to nail down. I agree with Hart that there is a difference between creating something new and copying or following a pattern. But within the world of creativity there are different types of art and different tools used to create the art. A painter uses paint and color and also structure and proportion while a mathematical artist may use computer code or regular shapes as their medium.
ReplyDeleteThe article I read this week was about basket weaving, which also relates to Tracy's comments about braiding sweetgrass. With traditional basket making there are likely many who follow the traditional patterns, but I also imagine there are some who add a flourish, or have a way with colors, or maybe develop a new style.
While it might be helpful to separate art into different styles, it also my prevent some people from engaging with a style they are unfamiliar with. This would limit exposure and engagement with ideas if people tend not to interact with other types of art. It also can result in an imposed hierarchy where certain types of art are valued over others.