JJHerb@aol.com on sat 30 nov 96
Mr. Hluch: I would have characterized the first part of my post as hyperbole
rather than hysteria. I felt that it was a sort of response to a straw man -
the burnished, unglazed pots of indigenous people in a discussion about
crazed glazes. I was surprised to find that the third world part of the post
got the response, in at least one case foaming and frothing, when my main
point was that a number of folks who post here seem unequipped to, unprepared
for, or unconcerned with the production of functional pottery meeting a
minimum technical standard of safety and hygiene.
As for the list of potters with crazed ware, I could (on the basis of pots
with crazed glazes only) be on that list and it is distinguished company.
However, do these people intend to produce pottery with cracked glaze or do
they accept it as a result of the process constraints they place upon
themselves. Phil Rogers, the British ash glaze person of whom you wrote,
gives the impression that the look of the ash glaze and its interaction with
the form are more important than its particular crackless integrity. On the
other hand, his glaze applications are not very thick and the possibility of
a system of intersecting cracks producing a shard in the Cherrios seems low.
Just to belabor the point a little more - what constitutes "acceptable"
crazing in a glaze, one crack per inch or fifty. What if the crack are
visible but not detectable with a finger nail? What if some pieces of the
glaze spontaneously separate from the pot. I have seen this happen in a
thick pool of glaze at the bottom of a vase I made. The cracks are close
enough that a piece will occasionally release.
Finally, I am gratified that your dedication to beauty is such that it allows
you to risk even your existence rather than be chained to the mundane. My
point is that it should not be necessary to do so.
I will be driving by Fredrick soon on my way back to Texas. I think western
Maryland is beautiful country and I envy your proximity to Wonder Book and
Video and the Sidling Hill Cut. I will wave as I go.
Joseph Herbert
JJHerb@aol.com
Hluch - Kevin A. on sun 1 dec 96
Joseph,
You don't seem capable of understanding what I am asking. What,
specifically is the degree of risk that one undertakes in using crazed
pottery in everyday life? I get the impression that you think that all
crazed pottery should be avoided as food utensils because of the
possiblity of acquiring some disease.....How? What diseases? What is the
frequency? Who is affected? What, simply, are the facts in regard to this
assertion on your part?
I must confess that I thought that African village pottery must certainly
be more dangerous than crazed pottery. Perhaps you can inform us of the
degree of risk posed by each group since you are so knowledgeable? I'm
only talking about crazed pottery and bacteria...not exploding teapots or
dishes that spew shrapnel during brunch.
I have been using quite heavily crazed pottery for at least fifteen
years...If you know of particular instances where people have been
sickened or have died from bacteria harbored by crazed pottery, I'm
sure that many people on this list would like to hear about it. And I
imagine so would the FDA...
Please Joseph, just the facts on this one...
I wish, in your travels, that you WOULD stop by. Perhaps we could share
a cup of coffee or tea. I have, with much consideration, selected a very
special mug with which to serve you.
Kevin A. Hluch
102 E. 8th St.
Frederick, Md.
PS. The only foaming and frothing taking place in my house lately is
occuring in my electronically controlled dishwasher.
Also, my Phil Rogers pot is VERY heavily crazed and the glaze is very thick.
On Sat, 30 Nov 1996 JJHerb@aol.com wrote:
> ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
> got the response, in at least one case foaming and frothing, when my main
> point was that a number of folks who post here seem unequipped to, unprepared
> for, or unconcerned with the production of functional pottery meeting a
> minimum technical standard of safety and hygiene.
>
> themselves. Phil Rogers, the British ash glaze person of whom you wrote,
> gives the impression that the look of the ash glaze and its interaction with
> the form are more important than its particular crackless integrity. On the
> other hand, his glaze applications are not very thick and the possibility of
> a system of intersecting cracks producing a shard in the Cherrios seems low.
>
> Just to belabor the point a little more - what constitutes "acceptable"
> crazing in a glaze, one crack per inch or fifty. What if the crack are
> visible but not detectable with a finger nail? What if some pieces of the
> glaze spontaneously separate from the pot. I have seen this happen in a
> thick pool of glaze at the bottom of a vase I made. The cracks are close
> enough that a piece will occasionally release.
>
> Finally, I am gratified that your dedication to beauty is such that it allows
> As for the list of potters with crazed ware, I could (on the basis of pots
> with crazed glazes only) be on that list and it is distinguished company.
> However, do these people intend to produce pottery with cracked glaze or do
> they accept it as a result of the process constraints they place upon
> you to risk even your existence rather than be chained to the mundane. My
> point is that it should not be necessary to do so.
>
> I will be driving by Fredrick soon on my way back to Texas. I think western
> Maryland is beautiful country and I envy your proximity to Wonder Book and
> Video and the Sidling Hill Cut. I will wave as I go.
>
> Joseph Herbert
> JJHerb@aol.com
>
| |
|
