"Craftsmanship is the foundation of Art."

Must objects be practical, functional, or utilitarian in order to be considered "CRAFTS"?

 
Aren't all ARTS fundamentally grounded in craftsmanship?

       Lexington-based weaver and author Philis Alvic aptly describes this entire terminological area as "quicksand!"

       Mildred Constantine, long-time curator at the Museum of Modern Art, said: ''Craft is the mastery of techniques and materials; art is the investment of spirit in whatever materials are used.'' 

       The distinction between ART and CRAFT may be so vague that it's meaningless; yet the terms bear significantly different connotations.   See: Terminology & Definitions

Artists Versus Craftspeople   (from http://www.visual-arts-cork.com/crafts-history-types.htm#artists):

"Despite a general resurgence in the world of handicrafts and decorative arts - especially ceramics, glass-blowing, furniture and fashion design - the sheer diversity of craft disciplines has made it all but impossible to establish common standards of training and production. Inevitably, therefore, the craftworker functions more like an artist and less like an artisan. However, society continues to deny craftspeople parity with fine artists.

True, many craft activities (producing beautiful functional items) can be clearly distinguished from the fine arts (producing beautiful items for beauty's sake), but a large number of craftspeople who create one-off pieces would rightly consider themselves artists. For example, there seems no logical reason to classify a unique piece of pottery, or stained glass, or wood-carving, or textile (e.g., tapestry), as a "craft product", rather than a "work of art." In fact, by comparison with many modern-day conceptual artists and other exponents of contemporary art, ceramicists, wood-turners and stained glass artisans are infinitely more 'artistic'."