Craft, Migration and the Weight of Memory Design, Crafts, Meritocracy, Experiential design, Archival materiality, memory In the narrow lanes of old markets, among the fading signboards and the old shutters half-covered with layers of political posters, stories are embedded in objects. They are woven into textiles, etched on the stones, and molded into fluffy breads.
 |
| Pratishtha Mishra |
Crafts are not just artifacts but archives of movement, adaptation, and survival. What we call crafts today have historically been utilitarian products for local consumption. Migration, whether forced, voluntary, or cyclical, has shaped how materials are chosen or stories are carried forward. Yet, in a world that increasingly values speed and scalability, these traditions often go unnoticed, their practitioners left to navigate an economy that does not account for memory.
Movements have participated in defining crafts. The migration of Persian artisans to India brought the intricate techniques of Bidriware, which evolved uniquely in the Deccan, while the Mughal patronage of stone marble inlay work saw artisans reinterpreting Persian aesthetics within Indian architectural traditions. These journeys, whether due to royal commissions, trade, or displacement, shaped the material artisans chose, the patterns they imprinted, and the hybrid techniques that emerged. Archival materiality makes it evident here that crafts are not just products but living documents, preserving histories that might otherwise be erased.
Craft, in many ways, is an act of rebellion against loss and against forgetting. Objects made with human hands hold an emotional and cultural residue that factory-produced goods cannot replicate. But whose work is considered worthy of preservation? Meritocracy in the crafts sector becomes evident here. Recognition is often dictated by access to who gets institutional validation, whose work is archived, and whose skills remain on the margins of artistic recognition. Street-side sign painters, vernacular typography artists, and roadside pot makers rarely enter curated museum spaces, even though their work tells stories of deep-rooted cultural shifts.
Today, artisans must navigate shifting landscapes with material scarcity and urban gentrification. Formal economies prioritise visibility over authenticity, while the informal economy thrives on resourcefulness and frugality, often overlooked in conventional artistic merit. For those working within the informal economy, JUGAAD, bricolage, and frugal innovation are not just creative strategies but essential tools for survival. Though they lack formal education, artisans create solutions that are deeply rooted in the context of their culture and environment, yet these solutions remain invisible in contemporary creative
dialogues. At the same time, some crafts are adapting and being reinterpreted into digital media and modern aesthetics to meet the needs of the market. But adaptation comes at a cost: what is lost when a craft is forced to conform to commercial viability?
Crafts remain a testament to identity and survival but are also fragile, like other tacit knowledge-based practices. If value is dictated by institutional recognition and an expectation to fit in neatly in the categorised art world narratives, where does it leave these invisible practitioners?
As artists, researchers, and curators, the challenge is not just preservation but rethinking merit, visibility, and access. Perhaps the answer lies in expanding archives beyond institutions, in creating new storytelling methods that allow these crafts to breathe and shift
on their terms. The question remains: who gets remembered, and who gets left behind?
6th March / Mishra P.
Website
https://sites.google.com/view/iamlassly?usp=sharing
Follow
https://www.instagram.com/iamlassly/
Artblogazine Team @ 2025
