Lisa or Ginny on wed 11 jun 97
Is there any reason why raku salt and pepper shakers would be unusable?
Living Tree Pottery
Frank Hartlieb on thu 12 jun 97
Salt and pepper shakers -raku fired- should function without any
problems--glazing the interior to keep carbon particles from mixing in
might be a good idea.
Russel Fouts on thu 12 jun 97
=3E=3E Is there any reason why raku salt and pepper shakers would be =
I suppose if they didn't have holes or weren't hollow. =3B-)
Otherwise I can't think of any reason.
=2A Russel Fouts, CI=24: 100021,23,
=22It took more then one man to change my name to Shanghai Lil.=22
Jasper Stil on sun 15 jun 97
On Thu, 12 Jun 1997 19:17:43 EDT, you wrote:
=3E ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
=3E =3E=3E Is there any reason why raku salt and pepper shakers would be =
=3E I suppose if they didn't have holes or weren't hollow. =3B-)
.... or moisted.
But, if apart from that they are particularly beatifull, you could always =
them as 'presse-papier', if there's a need to find 'usability' at all.
Sorry, Russel: I know I have nothing to contribute here, but I couldn't =
when retrieving this message between the others on behalf of Marie-Claire.
You like your tea (very) strong, isn't it? Will remember that if and when =
visit us someday. :) :-) :-)) :-D
Joseph Herbert on mon 12 apr 04
"They have strange ideas in Texas. In Japan, the country of origin,
Raku is only FUNCTIONAL.
Next thing you'll be telling us is that ketchup is a vegetable. Oh
sorry, different President. "
I think Lee's comment indicates the difference between American raku and the
original Japanese raku. American raku tends toward barely mature, flashy,
metal laden, grossly unstable glazes that may even have a velvety surface.
These pieces cannot be safely used in contact with anything. Touching them
damages the "wonderful" surface and using them as vessels risks damaging the
user. The Japanese tradition of raku demands usability, although the prices
paid for the older revered pieces must cut down on the usability a little.
Calling these two classes of objects by the same name is unfortunate and
really only reflects some similarity in process. Using the same word to
describe them is like using the word "Throwing" for what happens on the
wheelhead and when mud hits the wall during a three-year-old's pie fight.
Sounds the same but is actually different.