What is the definition of an Artisan?

Really? Who cares if it's "artisan" or not. Bottom line, if you like the product and it works well for you, use it. If not, don't. All of this back and forth over the definition of a stupid word has got everybody going around in circles with no end in sight. What was the original point of this thread anyway?

Well now we can move into the term, "Organic," if you want to. That one bothers me more than artisan.

OK, so I guess that's wasn't my last post on the subject. The problem here is that some seem to be conflating several  terms that mean completely different things.

Business:  The production of goods or the providing of services for profit. For a business to be remain viable it must produce revenue in excess of expenses (profit), otherwise at some point capital is depleted and production must cease.
Profit:  Revenue in excess of total expenses.
Wealth:  Profits that are saved or invested rather than spent.
Artisan:   One who is skilled in the production of some product or a master of some craft or trade.
Hobby:  Taking part in some activity for the pleasure derived from doing so and does not depend on profits for its continuation.

None of these things are mutually exclusive, nor mutually inclusive and they are quite distinct things.   An artisan can run a business.  An artisan can produce something as a hobby.  An artisan's hobby can become a business.  An artisans business can become a hobby.  They are not the same things.

So to address some of the above:
Q: So....does making money at a craft disqualify one from being considered artisan?
A: No it does not.

Q: Why does it matter if an artisan is making money?
A: It does not make a difference.  Being an artisan does not depend on whether or not the artisan is even in business.

Q: And would you call someone who is has a registered corporation, tax burdens, and wholesale retailer deals a hobbyist?
A: Having a corporation, paying taxes, and distributing products to a wholesale retailer are certainly indictions of business activity.  Further, you said that you had not taken a dollar for yourself, but rather, "Any surplus revenue has been reinvested in the company thus far so I can have fun making new scents and doing new projects."  That "surplus revenue" is profit. Delayed gratification, sacrifice, a willingness to take economic risk, investment, pride in production, and hard work are the hallmarks of "business" in a free-market economy sense of the word.  

I hope that clears that up.

Really? Who cares if it's "artisan" or not. Bottom line, if you like the product and it works well for you, use it. If not, don't. All of this back and forth over the definition of a stupid word has got everybody going around in circles with no end in sight. What was the original point of this thread anyway?

I asked it. I believe that when one hears the word "artisan" its true meaning has been elevated in some way beyond the original meaning. I found this the other day from 1888. English Synonymes Explained in Alphabetical Order, George Crabb, p.87

"Artist is a practiser [sic] of fine arts
Artisan is a practiser of vulgar arts

Artificer, one ... who does or makes according to art ... manufacturers are artificers"

The artist ranks higher than the Artisan. The former requires intellectual refinement in the exercise of art; the later requires nothing but to know the general rules of his art"


I believe this just might be the correct technical definition. An Artist paints creating something from nothing, while the sign painter is an artisan.  Some how over the years, the definition got twisted into ... one person business made in small batches. I no longer buy into that.

If a large company employed 100 sign painters who all made signs by hand, I can believe they are ALL artisans and it has nothing to do with a home business and if the artisan builds a machine to paint the signs - good for him. He invented something new and just became an artist of sorts.

From a question to spilled milk

Really? Who cares if it's "artisan" or not. Bottom line, if you like the product and it works well for you, use it. If not, don't. All of this back and forth over the definition of a stupid word has got everybody going around in circles with no end in sight. What was the original point of this thread anyway?

I asked it. I believe that when one hears the word "artisan" its true meaning has been elevated in some way beyond the original meaning. I found this the other day from 1888. English Synonymes Explained in Alphabetical Order, George Crabb, p.87

"Artist is a practiser [sic] of fine arts
Artisan is a practiser of vulgar arts

Artificer, one ... who does or makes according to art ... manufacturers are artificers"

The artist ranks higher than the Artisan. The former requires intellectual refinement in the exercise of art; the later requires nothing but to know the general rules of his art"


I believe this just might be the correct technical definition. An Artist paints creating something from nothing, while the sign painter is an artisan.  Some how over the years, the definition got twisted into ... one person business made in small batches. I no longer buy into that.

If a large company employed 100 sign painters who all made signs by hand, I can believe they are ALL artisans and it has nothing to do with a home business and if the artisan builds a machine to paint the signs - good for him. He invented something new and just became an artist of sorts.

So by that definition, does the distinction of "artisan" imply a commercial aspect? I make signs for a living and while there is artistry involved, signs are made for purpose, whether it be commercial, advertising, directional, etc. It's rare that an artist would sit around and make signs for no reason whereas painting or other forms of art aren't necessarily done for a commercial purpose. Or is it that the artisan creates something that has a useful purpose? Nobody is going to spend a lot of time creating pottery, soap or brushes purely for enjoyment. They're creating purposeful items to sell them. Whether or not they're in it for a profit is up to them.

So by that definition, does the distinction of "artisan" imply a commercial aspect? I make signs for a living and while there is artistry involved, signs are made for purpose, whether it be commercial, advertising, directional, etc.  

OK, I'm learning here so ...

First, "vulgar" does not have the common meaning used today but an original definition

" generally used, applied, or accepted ... understood in or having the ordinary sense"

a worker who practices a trade

---

I take "artist" to mean exactly what it says - the artist uses their intellect in the creation of their art. So for real life examples ...

If Lady Forbes is a perfumer and creates a fragrance then she is an artist - in her art.
If B&M is known for fragrances and creates unique soap scents, then he is an artist in the art of soap making.
If MW does something that changes the formula for her soaps to give them superb after shave feel, then she is an artist.

Anyone who does not do something by rote but intellectually "within an art" creates something new, is an artist. That does not mean they are good or bad at it. That does not mean they make a profit at it. It only means that within the confines of their art, they create something unique to themselves.

----------

Now the Artisan.  The definitions all more or less say the same thing "a person skilled in an applied art; a craftsperson." That is the first of primary definition.

a worker who practices a trade


From 1888 - the artisan needs to know the rules of the art but does not create something new,  like an artist. They are "skilled" in the craft but that does not make that artists - it can make them a mechanic or a simple artisan. And yes, mechanic is an artisan. They are skilled at a trade.

So how to apply this to soap? The sign maker knows how to use paint and a brush. He knows how to apply the paint and how to make a sign someone else designed. He is "skilled" in this craft. The sign maker is an artisan, not an artist. Similarly, I can follow the direction of a recipe and cook dinner. I know how to measure 1 tsp and I know what 16 oz of water is. But I am not an artist. I would be an artisan, one who follows the rules of the craft. A chef who creates a brand new recipe out of nothing - he/she is an artist on the art of cooking.

The same is true for soap (IMO). If the soap maker follow a recipe - then they are an artisan, skilled in making a product. They know the rules, they follow the recipe. Whether or not one makes profit as an artisan is not relevant. I can make artisan pizza but not make profit. One can make pottery as an artisan following a rote procedure and just keep the pots in their house.

So no, profit does not matter. Neither does all this stuff about "working out of the house, small batches, not large production, etc." I find that all silly. The more I think this through, the more its becoming clearly. Over time, the words are morphing into something the marketing people want them to be rather than what they are. In the end, its simple.

Artist - create something from nothing using your intellect. For example, a soap maker who creates a new formula with a new fragrance - that is an artist in the art of soap making.

Artisan - a skilled craftsman in the art of soap making who follows the rules, follows the formula by rote. They are "skilled" in the art of soap making. That does not mean they are good at it nor make a single dollar.

grim

I think you nailed it.

I understand Bruce's point.  Profit isn't a benefit of doing business, it's a prerequisite.  If you are producing something without the expectation of profit, for the fun of it, that falls into the realm of the hobbyist.  However, the term artisan does not imply being a hobbyist, nor does being a hobbyist preclude one from being an artisan.

Addressing grim's original  point. It is true that the term "artisan" is sometimes muddled when used only as a marketing term, however in a larger sense, it conjures up the image of a small operation where the primary decisions are made by a person, or small number of persons, rather than by a board of directors.  Likewise, day to day operations are presumed to be handled by some person rather than by a dedicated team.  Artisan products are, or at least are imagined to be, carried out in a single building rather than in a plant or other large production facility and without the aid of modern mass production methods -- for at least much of the operation.  In summary, the connotation of Artisan is directly related to the idea of "small business" as opposed to  "big business" and "main street" as opposed to  "wall street" or to use another common term a "mom and pop operation."

Oh sure, my overarching point is that it's probably more important to decide whether a brand meets your own, personal standards, rather than trying to decide what kind of category you fall in.

And would you call someone who is has a registered corporation, tax burdens, and wholesale retailer deals a hobbyist? I wouldn't consider myself a hobbyist. But again, I think that speaks more to how it's nigh impossible and a bit of an exercise in futility to try to put labels on everything. I prefer to judge things on a case-by-case basis.

This point is off topic, so this will be my last statement on this. What differentiates a hobby from business is the desire to support oneself and possibly others primarily or solely through some activity, the production or creation of products or by providing services.

In order to accomplish that, profit is a requirement, not a perk. Profit is the amount of money that remains after costs and taxes are deducted from revenues. You have stated that you made profit and have invested those profits into the company. The goal is assumed to be to allow growth. Therefore, these are business practices, rather than hobbyist practices.

My point was that it's pointless and a waste of time to try to define and categorize every single aspect of the industry. This deep dive into semantics I believe reinforces my overarching point

My point was that it's pointless and a waste of time to try to define and categorize every single aspect of the industry. This deep dive into semantics I believe reinforces my overarching point

To the contrary its enlightening. In the OP I asked I am trying to figure out the difference between an Artisan and non-Artisan. The word “artisan” is overused. There are artisan breads, beer, pizza, butchers, bakers, and candlestick makers.

The word is overused and overhyped. Buying bread made by an Artisan only means they follow a recipe and are skilled at baking. It doesn't mean they are an artist in baking. That is a huge difference. Marketing hype ... This was Dominoes Artisan Pizza It's now gone. Why? I guess it didn't work out. It only meant, from the definition, they followed a recipe.

Within this industry there seems to be the image that an Artisan is better than commercial produced soaps. I don't see that. I don't know if MdC, ADP, T&H, CF, SMN, or ABC are artisan or not. But these products seem to be near or at the top in quality as perceived by many, yet maybe they are not what is perceived as artisan. I guess the bottom line falls back to Buffleheads definitions or "shartisan". Such things also exist.

I am not discussing "value" which is a different subject, just quality.

I don't let myself get bothered by the 'artisan' vs 'non-artisan' title...if a product is good and works for me, I'll buy it. if it's not for me, I'll sell it off and move on.

from the forum's perspective, when we first brought this forum back to life, we separated the businesses into two categories: vendors & artisans. personally, that distinction became harder to determine & justify, so we agreed to not waste any time with it and just merge the two together and rename them as merchants.