Re: Programming is not a craft

I still think there's something valuable lurking in the debate in general.
Several of my cohorts at Improving had a debate in podcast form back in Sept
(
http://improvingpodcasts.com/2010/09/ep-30-computer-science-software-engineering-and-software-craftsmanship/)
which I really wish I had time to digest and react to, because I found
myself wanting to jump into it - agreeing with the point of some, but not
the arguments, disagreeing with other points.

When brainstorming notes on Dan's article I wrote this down: "But there's an
obvious difference between a work of utility and a work of beauty, between
something to be used, and something to enjoy, be inspired by, etc." And this
seems an obvious argument with so many extremes to compare (the TXDoT bridge
vs. the gargoyle) ... and my gut just doesn't seem to buy it. It's too easy
to say that, but it doesn't resonate in my soul. That one _cannot_ divorce
any work of art/craft from its utility (in sometimes a very broad sense),
and that any successful utilitarian work _cannot_ be void of beauty (though
the beauty may be dulled).

And this is when I wish my friend Dave Sims were here to write from out of
his deep philosophical brain.



-- 
Chris
http://improvingenterprises.com
http://clabs.org