Don Jones on thu 18 apr 96
Dear fellow clayart people,
Being relatively new to the A.C.E. circuit, and having never
experienced the booming 80's, St. Paul was still a disappointment.
Traffic was good because Winter was still hanging on and the people of
Minnesota are wonderful and appreciative. It was my first time there and
my favorite phrase was *you should do well* meaning they won't buy your
work but someone else will. I think I made expenses and some new freinds.
The standard of work was more than superb, I found my jaw hanging at almost
every booth.
Meetings were interesting. The most serious subject is the ongoing
question of large and small businesses and mass production versus one of a
kind, single person production. This subject is important because it
concerns the soul of the craft movement. The forces of promotion,
marketing, presentation have invaded even the sacristy of the most devoted
hand worker. What to do about it is a major question; bringing the issues
of law, self regulation, and enforcement down to a personal level. No one
knew what to do. Mass producers of any description (pick one) are diluting
and confusing the market. Small craftsmen are pissed and have no
philosophical or legal recourse to stand on for argument against them.
There always seems to be a counter-argument and all they can do is sit and
glare while others undersell them. It's beyond me and it seems those in
charge too. One thing that was considered was to require a sign explaining
the complete process, and how many people are involved, in every booth.
This would both educate the people willing to read it and bring some
honesty to the scene. Those in other media were interested in the concept
of the Small Studio Alliance now gaining ground in the clay world.
I really hate to bring this thread up again but the issue won't go away.
Depressed in Albuquerque,
Don Jones
claysky@indirect.com
Dave Eitel on fri 19 apr 96
Small craftsmen are pissed and have no
>philosophical or legal recourse to stand on for argument against them.
>There always seems to be a counter-argument and all they can do is sit and
>glare while others undersell them.
As a potter and a retailer who shops the ACE and Buyers Market shows, I'd
like to throw out a few random thoughts which reflect ONLY my own
observations. First, I have not found the mass produced wholesale prices
to be significantly lower than similar handmade pieces. A Bill Campbell
mug sells for from $6.25 to 8.50, for example. His 2-quart casserole sells
for $35. His work sells very well in my shop alongside my own work, which
is somewhat cheaper at retail than his is. But everyone doesn't like his
work, just as everyone doesn't like mine. I have a variety of pottery
styles in my shops because I want to have something to sell as many
customers as possible.
I have thought for a long time that the wholesale prices for one of a kind
work were way overpriced for the Midwest and are driven by market prices on
both coasts, where apparently customers are willing to spend more for
crafts. I guess my advice to potters who are not selling as much work as
they'd like is to look at their prices. When I look at (not to belabor his
work, but to continue a single example) a Bill Campbell casserole for $35 I
have to ask whether my customers will spend $72 for it. They will not, so
I don't carry his casseroles. If his price were $5 less I'd be much more
disposed to buy it, because I think it might sell at $62. The result is
that now I buy no casseroles from him. If they were $5 cheaper I might buy
15-20 a year. (My pricing is standard retail keystone--a 100% markup plus a
factor for shipping.) Even though this example is of mass produced work,
it applies to handmade work as well. A small reduction in wholesale prices
might result in increased sales.
Another really irksome thing I encounter at wholesale shows is unreasonably
high and inflexible minimum initial orders. I hear lots of arguments in
favor of them, but I often want to buy a small quantity of a potters work
to see whether it interests my customers before committing a large number
of dollars and a lot of display space to it. Or, I may be interested just
in (for example) mugs from a particular potter and don't want to fill my
shop with $500 worth of them. In the case of folks who won't reduce their
minimums for me, I just don't order from them.
Well, back to the glazing room where I'm glazing my handmade, one-of-a-kind
pots that I sell inexpensively.
Later...Dave
Dave Eitel
Cedar Creek Pottery
Cedarburg, WI
daveitel@execpc.com
Ron Roy on fri 19 apr 96
Don wrote,
" The most serious subject is the ongoing
>question of large and small businesses and mass production versus one of a
>kind, single person production. This subject is important because it
>concerns the soul of the craft movement. The forces of promotion,
>marketing, presentation have invaded even the sacristy of the most devoted
>hand worker. What to do about it is a major question; bringing the issues
>of law, self regulation, and enforcement down to a personal level. No one
>knew what to do. Mass producers of any description (pick one) are diluting
>and confusing the market. Small craftsmen are pissed and have no
>philosophical or legal recourse to stand on for argument against them."
I wonder if this is why "Guilds" were formed - to maintain standards and educate
the public? Sounds like we are again at a point in history when we must do
something to preserve what we beleive in.
Ron Roy, Toronto, Canada
peter pinnell on mon 22 apr 96
I have complete sympathy for the lone craftsperson since that is how I
earned my living for twelve years. Now that I'm an ivory tower academic,
however, I feel its my duty to take the devils advocate position.
When I was a student, I had the romantic idea that pottery was made by
mom and pop operations. As I have read more about the history of
ceramics I have learned that it has been very rare for pottery to have been
produced on this scale. Pottery was the worlds first heavy industry, and
has been produced this way for the last couple of millenia and more. In
China, ceramics began to be industrialized by the late neolithic stage,
and was completely so by the end of the Tang Dynasty (960 AD). By the
sixteenth century, China was exporting a million and a half pieces of
porcelain per year to England alone.
The first European missionaries to China sent back detailed accounts of
the porcelain industry there. They decribed in detail the complete
specialization. Each worker did one thing, and was expected to do it to
perfection. A thrower would never fire a kiln. In fact, seperate people
loaded and fired. It was so specialized that the painters each did one
thing: one person did trees, another buildings, yet another people. It
was extimated that as many as 70 people may have had a hand in some of
those Ching Dynasty masterpieces.
While the Chinese did this to an extreme, it has been common for some
specializatin to occur, and for pottery to be made in group workshops.
After all, while should a good thrower also have to be a good book
keeper? (Yes, pottery making has always been a business, and has always
needed book keepers). Attic period red and black ware was made in group
workshops, with forming, painting, and firing done by different people.
The same degree of specialization is true of Roman Terra Sigillata ware,
Turkish Isnik ware, and Westerfield salt-glazed ware, to name just a few
highlights in ceramic history.
If six people working together can make a better product, why should they
be penalized for being cooperative? If supporting the single craftsperson
is the aim, then how pure do we get? Can a person use pre made clay?
Commercial glazes? Pay someone to wedge clay? Fire kilns?
I guess my point is that maybe quality should be the deciding factor. In
the end, isn't all the rest irrelevant?
Pete Pinnell,
who really should be dealing with a pile of work on his desk
rather than dinking around with clayart.
| |
|
