dividing line between rich and poor

frillyrattie replied to your text post: Craft vs. Art                                              

I always thought the difference between art and craft was craft was sonething you could use…like that scarf you knitted can be used to keep someone warm or the bowl you made can be eaten out of. Art is displayed…that scarf or bowl is being looked at and admired and not being used.       

This is certainly one line that people have used to differentiate art from craft. But as @des-zimbits noted

Joanna Russ’s “How to Suppress Women’s Writing” spends a lot of time pointing out that divides like art vs craft have always existed to raise up the work of the privileged (rich, white, men) and deny the ability of the marginalized (poor, people of colour, women) to create meaningful art. It’s an artificial divide WITH PREJUDICE.

So when we use a defining line like that, we also have to look at whose things are being displayed. This also gets into things like cooks vs. chefs, seamstresses/tailors vs. fashion designers, etc.

My larger point, though, was that creative endeavors are creative endeavors, regardless of the artificial lines of legitimacy that may be drawn between them.

Heroes and Villains and Everything in Between


He hated to remember how this city once was. A grand, reputable place – the kind others envied. The kind others aspired for.

He hated to think about what it had become. A loony bin, with a fine line that divided the people between the rich and the poor. The millionaires, and everyone else. Those who make it to the big leagues do it on the backs of innocents. Those who don’t take up petty crime until petty crime leads to murder and murder leads to a jail cell, or worse.

The most profitable business is the illegal kind. Gang membership is on the rise, and the police are outnumbered 1:5. The city needs a hero. Desmond is that hero.

But only begrudgingly.


Alright, so there’s been some backlash in this region of Tumblr about Lilly Pulitzer’s collaboration with Target. Now, obviously Lilly for Target isn’t the same as the shift you bought for Easter from your favorite Lilly store. It’s a different line, similar to the differing lines that Ralph Lauren has. I hate the argument people are putting out there though, that it shouldn’t be done because they don’t want some “basic girl wearing my favorite high class brand.” Fashion is for everybody. Nice brands aren’t supposed to be an exclusive club for the one percent. They’re just well-made clothes that go for a higher price because that’s what it’s worth. What the Lilly for Target line is worth will be less than the rest of the brand’s garments because it will probably not be as well made. Are you also going to fault the same “basic” girl for saving up her money and buying a real Lilly shift because she loves Lilly but can’t afford it all the time like you can? Are you going to fault her for not having access to the wealth and resources you were born into by random chance? Please, grow up and don’t act so spoiled. You are actually asking for a divide between the rich and poor. That is ridiculous. Making fashion accessible to everybody is something worth doing. Zac Posen did a line for Target a few years back. He’s an extremely accomplished designer. Rodarte also did a line for Target. Lilly Pulitzer is in good, stylish company. Besides, the world would be better off if everyone was better dressed.

With love,