In this paper I argue that the bodies of artists and makers are actually performing authenticity. The bodies in the making of craft and the visual representation of this making of craft , are key figures in showing how and where craft is being made, literary and metaphorically speaking. Throughout the history that is being on display in for example design- and crafts magazines, visual representations of making are linking objects to a certain time and place.   My understanding of performing or rather performativity, is informed by the theorists such as Judith Butler and Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick for whom the relationship between saying and doing has become the centre of attention (Sedgwick 1993; Butler 1997; 1999). Although not focusing on the actual making of craft, Butler's theories on gender concerned with ‘doing’ rather than ‘being’ are useful in looking at craft from a critical perspective on what is being done. In introducing her concept of gender performativity, Butler proposes that gender is to be understood neither as an entity nor as a set of free floating attributes, but instead, as continuously being done. In her seminal text Gender Trouble from 1990 she writes ‘gender is itself a kind of becoming or activity to be conceived /…/ as an incessant and repeated action of some sort’ (Butler 1999: 112).  The attributes ascribed to gender are performative, Butler says. So if repeated action makes up the patterns, that are thought of as feminine or masculine, and in turn are making gender, maybe repetition is key in performing authenticity in the making of Craft Made in Dalarna or Småland?   

Since gender mainstreaming was launched by the end of the 20th century to promote gender equality in policy making as well as universities and has since found its way into program plans as well as evaluations documents. Gender mainstreaming introduced a gender equality perspective and was introduced as a successor to implementation of affirmative or positive action in political decision-making. But has it challenged the gender distribution in a profound way? Has it changed the way Art History is being taught or has it rather been used as an alibi for neutralizing positive action?

Guided tours for adults in Art Museums are often conducted in an anecdotal and rather disinterested fashion. This has been duly critized by researchers in the art eductional field. A series of initiatives on art educational activities for participants with neurodegenerative disorders have contributed to breaking this tradition. Since 2007, the Museum of Modern Art (MoMA) in New York has offered the Alzheimer's Project: Making Art Accessible to People with Dementia. The project has aimed at increasing the well-being of participants rather than improving their art-historical education. This has in turn led to greater focus on dialogue between the art, the guide and the participants, where the participants' own observations are given special attention. Several art institutions in the Nordic countries have been inspired by this method, for example in the form of meetings with memories (see fx http://www.alzheimerfonden.se/motenmedminnen ). To call a visitor by his or her name is one aspect of the method used. This paper focuses some of the discussions about the art pedagogical position taken in feminist and queer theory through examples from the educational practice. The aim is to explore how these art educational situations are staged in relation to the target group, people with dementia and how this can broaden the public engagement in dialogue with art.

To write the history of craft and heritage engages with constructing a canon of known practices parallel to deconstructing the differences incorporated in institutions dealing with craft. Craft objects have long since been considered as heritage, but craft is also recognized as ’intangible heritage’. This can be seen in UNESCO’s (2008) designation of ’traditional craftmanship’ as a part of global intangible heritage. However, craft’s gendered character is not equally recognized. In this article we will discuss craft, heritage and gender from a performativity perspective on making. The main question is how gender patterns are reflected in the understanding of craft, and in heritage making. The aim is to make visible the gender demarcations in the making of craft. We argue that the making of craft and its heritage status has been highly charged with gender differences. Recognizing this is of importance to be able to understand and to challenge heritage making processes and canons when it comes to craft. After a short theoretical background focusing on performativity and the canon of gender differences, three empirical examples are outlined. The first is about organizational aspects of handicraft, the second concerning the technique of crocheting, and the third considering visual representations of crafting, using empirical archival and published materials from the Home Craft Movement in Sweden.

Detta är en artikel om postproduktion i ett postindustriellt landskap och och att vara en vara i allmänhet och Åsa Jungnelius’ verk, installationen Titta en vara som kan tala! i synnerhet. Verket, installationen, visades på utställningen Massa i rörelse på Kalmar konstmuseum 5 december 2015 - 28 februari 2016 och väckte många tankar om centrum och periferi, om objekten och objektifieringen av hantverket och hantverkaren.

In January 2013, a three-year project, ‘Meetings with Memories’ (in Swedish: Möten med minnen), was launched in Swedish museums with guided tours for dementia-afflicted audiences. The project involved altogether 88 Swedish museums and was headed by the Alzheimer Foundation (Alzheimerfonden). Many Swedish art museums were part of the project, with the purpose that the art educational situations would create participation and dialogue with a group of people usually absent from the museums. Art in particular is regarded as a possible therapeutic rehabilitation for people with neurodegenerative diseases, where dialogue and making of art enhance cognitive abilities and quality of life. The therapeutic promise within art pedagogy is part of the larger context of the art educational situations we have studied. In this chapter, the aim is to explore how these situations are done and how participation can be made and interpreted in relation to the target group, people with dementia. We focus on the participation in terms of the meaning making, dialogical processes of the art educational practice of the project ‘Meeting with Memories'.

Utifrån föreställningen om Butlers genus som en "stiliserad upprepning av handlingar" som kommer till uttryck i gester, rörelser och stilar och Iris Marion Youngs studie av vad det innebär att "kasta tjejkast", undersöks performativa aspekter av att göra design. Utifrån tre bilder ur FORM diskuteras hur föreställningar om kön får effekter i designpraktiken så som den porträtteras i tidskriften.

 The making of artefacts is a core activity in society, the result of which contributes to the building up of our physical surroundings and material culture. Throughout history, craft skills have been highly appreciated and have often been seen as crucial component of a capable human. Despite this, the knowledge base that constitutes the actual making is often overlooked in research. What can we learn about things by learning about their making? How do different craft skills offer an understanding of its historical use? How can theoretical and methodological approaches be developed concerning the actual making? How can we study and understand craft as cultural heritage?This book contains a selecion of papers from the session Crafting Cultural Heritage at the Assosiation of Critical Heritage studies inaugural conference Re/theorising Heritage 2012 in Gothenburg. The contributors are Anneli Palmsköld, Thomas Laurien, Eleonora Lupo and Elena Giunta, Gunnar Almevik, and Nicola Donovan. Their common interest are theories and methods of crafting that could benefit heritage studies approach to making.