""Ornament" and the Sources of Design in the Decorative Arts" Response

The article “Ornament and the Sources of Design in the Decorative Arts” by William M Ivins was quite difficult to understand with one reading. However, after reading it a couple of times I’m still not sure if I entirely comprehended the author’s message. It is clear that the author wanted to drive us through the distinction between craftsmanship and design from the beginning. I really liked the way that he used music as an example and metaphor to explain the argument of replication and its relation from the craftsman to the performer. The author also mentions a numerous of recognized print makers, silversmiths, engravers, and designers whose works are today considered as masterpieces. While mentioning his works, the author emphasized on the difference between the person that creates and the person that reproduces.

In the last page the author mentions that the craftsman in the country is disappointing. I feel that Ivins had a strong appreciation towards decorative arts, and the importance of studying it for inspiration, and understanding where and how things were obtained. I think that ornament goes more towards the aesthetics, the beauty, and design goes more for the idea, the message. The tone of the last paragraphs had a kind of melancholy since nowadays is rare to find such detailed works made by hand. I think that this article might be received with divergent interpretations since has such a tangled construction.