Abstract
Gauntlett’s Making is Connecting comes at an important time when interest in skills and the use of creativity is being discussed in many areas, from Sennett’s (2008) The Craftsman to the Victoria and Albert Museum’s ‘The Power of Making’. Gauntlett’s discussion flags some of these debates, making important connections in innovative and interesting ways, showing how acts of creation can be seen as fostering links within society and stressing the political importance of this.
There are three main ways in which the title thesis, that making is a process of fostering connections, is argued: first, that making is literally connecting things together to create something new (these can be both materials and ideas); second, that creativity contains a social dimension to it; and, finally, creation allows us to share things with the world and make our relations and environments just that little bit more pleasant. These are positives that Gauntlett sets out in us moving from a culture which he sees as ‘sit back and be told’ to one focused on ‘making and doing’ (p. 11). These arguments are well set out, being explored through linking historical theory to current practice by amateurs. With this focus, the argument is clearly made that it is all forms of creativity which are worthy of investigation and interest. Although Gauntlett’s discussion of creativity is an interesting one due to his definition including the idea of joy, claiming that ‘with no magical, smile inducing spark behind it, the constructed thing is just a constructed thing’ (p. 77), these discussions provide an interesting basis for his argument; yet more discussion of this inclusion within the definition would have been thought provoking.
These main themes are developed by showing the relevance of theory from the industrial revolution to different current contexts of creativity. As such, the classics when concerning craft – Ruskin (2009) and Morris (2004) – are turned to, both of whom argued that creative freedom is needed for artistic endeavour and then for an equal society. They are used here to show the importance of art in connecting people together but also how creativity contains the potential for joy and fulfilment within it that is necessary for our connections. Although the use of Morris for this purpose is certainly valuable in giving a first, unintimidating introduction, it does not give full explanation for Morris and Ruskin’s work. Gauntlett seems unprepared to discuss the relations with economic systems which lay at the heart of Morris’ work and the ways in which these can be influenced by creativity but also help to constrain this. Similar criticisms can be seen in his use of Rozika Parker to demonstrate how important craft can be as a political tool enabling the shaping the new identities. Yet this is not the main thesis Parker (2010) argues, which instead rests on the ways in which gendered notions of craft can be constraining and are difficult to negotiate, as is often discussed in relation to skill. Parker shows how aspects of femininity developed and were enforced through acts of creation before being able to be opened to only some aspects of negotiation. In doing so Parker gives demonstrations of how her example of embroidery encouraged meek and insular forms of femininity, hardly what Gauntlett is claiming is fostering connections between people. Yet these tensions within acts of creativity and norms which surround them are not discussed within Gauntlett’s work. Gauntlett does however provide stimulating overview of Illich (1973, 2002) to support his argument which appears to be a thought-provoking synthesis of these main theoretical influences.
Throughout the text Gauntlett does a fascinating and enlightening job of drawing the comparisons between physical acts of everyday creativity with the more virtual acts of this through the use of Web 2.0 and creative outlets such as YouTube. The argument is made that these are just as creative pursuits, allowing forms of expression and connection in ways which we have not witnessed before. The technical aspects of this expertise are clearly explained yet some of the on-going arguments over ownership, advertising and government interference are analysed all too briefly with faith that these complications will become ironed out in time. Yet it can be argued that these are debates we need to be having rather than leaving the decisions up to the companies which control them.
As a whole this text is an unintimidating introduction to many of the ideas which frame creativity. I would recommend many of its ideas surrounding the potential of making, yet it should be read alongside more critical texts in order for a wider picture to be garnered. As such, the book provides a valuable contribution drawing together debates and moving them into a world of computer-aided creativity.