Luonnoksia käsityön ruumiillisuudesta. : Käsityö Maurice Merleau-Pontyn ruumiinfenomenologian valossa.

Purpose This study focused on craft from a standpoint of phenomenological philosophy and craft was interpreted through Maurice Merleau-Ponty’s phenomenology of the body. The main focus was the physical phase of the craft process, wherein a product is made from material. The aim was to interpret corporality in craft. There is no former research focusing on lived body in craft science. Physical, bodily making is inalienable in craft, but it is not articulated. Recent discussion has focused on craft as ”whole”, which emphasizes designing part in the process, and craft becomes conceptualized with the theories of art and design. The axiomatic yet silenced basis of craft, corporality, deserves to become examined as well. That is why this study answers the questions: how craft manifests in the light of phenomenology of the body and what is corporality in craft? Methods In this study I cultivated a phenomenological attitude and turned my exploring eye on craft ”in itself”. In addition I restrained myself from mere making and placed myself looking at the occurrence of craft to describe it verbally. I read up Maurice Merleau-Ponty’s phenomenology of the body on his principal work (2002) and former interpretations of it. Interpreting and understanding textual data were based on Gadamer’s hermeneutics, and the four-pronged composition of the study followed Koski’s (1995) version of the Gadamerian process of textual interpretation. Conclusions In the construction of bodily phenomenology craft was to be contemplated as a mutual relationship between the maker and the world materializing in bodily making. At the moment of making a human being becomes one with his craft, and the connection between the maker, material and the equipment appears as communication. Operational dimension was distinctive in the intentionality of craft, which operates in many ways, also in craft products. The synesthesia and synergy of craft were emphasized and craft as bodily practice came to life through them. The moment of making appeared as situation generating time and space, where throwing oneself into making may give the maker an experience of upraise beyond the dualism of mind and body. The conception of the implicit nature of craft knowledge was strengthened. In the light of interpretation it was possible to conceptualize craft as a performance and making ”in itself” as a work of art. In that case craft appeared as bodily expression, which as an experience approaches art without being it after all. The concept of aesthetic was settled into making as well. Bodily and phenomenological viewpoint on craft gave material to critically contemplate the concept of “whole craft” (kokonainen käsityö) and provided different kind of understanding of craft as making.