Cheri Glaser on wed 19 nov 97
Dear Clayarters
I recently had a discussion with a friend that got me thinking. I want to
throw it to the group for discussion because I'd like to hear some
other viewpoints.
Last year at my Xmas show, this friend found a vase that had a
serious crack in the bottom. I had missed it, otherwise I'd have
pitched it. I told him I couldn't sell it to him because it was seriously
flawed. He asked if he could have it. I said, sure, if you want it.
A few months later, he returns with this vase and it looks perfect.
He had repaired it with a mix of epoxy and tile grout that matched
the glaze perfectly. He suggested that I repair all my cracks that way.
I said, I couldn't. It wouldn't be right. He said why not? Woodworkers use
wood putty fillers, photographers color their prints to their liking - what's
the difference?
I still feel the integrity of the pot is compromised. I'd be passing off
an inferior pot as a perfect pot. Of course it wouldn't be appropriate
for ovenware. But would it ever be appropriate? I have an occassional
handle that pulls away from the body, or a crack where a slab meets a wall.
I've never thought to patch them. Does anyone do that? Is it OK in
some applications? I was very impressed by that epoxy/grout solution
but.........
With reservations,
Cheri Glaser
Brookville, Indiana
Judith Enright on thu 20 nov 97
Cheri - there was a similar thread a while back. Here's my opinion:
Ask yourself "what am I willing to live with?" I think your answer is
right there in your post. If your intuition is to reject such
repairs, then stick by it. Pottery-making is not derived in the same
fashion as woodwork (ie, wood putty etc. is an accepted form of the
woodworking process and is not always incorporated as repairing -- it
can also be considered part of the finish work. Strictly speaking, I
don't know that the same can be said of applying patchwork to what is
supposed to be a one-piece ceramic work).
And finally, when I queried my mentor on the same subject some time
ago, he asked me to look at whether I'd be willing to attach my name
to such repaired work. It's a good question and one that I ask myself
everytime I'm confronted with the issue.
-- Judith Enright @ Black Leopard Pottery
jenright@wsgr.com
BTW: HAPPY THANKSGIVING to all of us at Clayart!
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Ethics
Author: Cheri Glaser at Internet
Date: 11/19/97 5:45 PM
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
Dear Clayarters
I recently had a discussion with a friend that got me thinking. I want to
throw it to the group for discussion because I'd like to hear some
other viewpoints.
Last year at my Xmas show, this friend found a vase that had a
serious crack in the bottom. I had missed it, otherwise I'd have
pitched it. I told him I couldn't sell it to him because it was seriously
flawed. He asked if he could have it. I said, sure, if you want it.
A few months later, he returns with this vase and it looks perfect.
He had repaired it with a mix of epoxy and tile grout that matched
the glaze perfectly. He suggested that I repair all my cracks that way.
I said, I couldn't. It wouldn't be right. He said why not? Woodworkers use
wood putty fillers, photographers color their prints to their liking - what's
the difference?
I still feel the integrity of the pot is compromised. I'd be passing off
an inferior pot as a perfect pot. Of course it wouldn't be appropriate
for ovenware. But would it ever be appropriate? I have an occassional
handle that pulls away from the body, or a crack where a slab meets a wall.
I've never thought to patch them. Does anyone do that? Is it OK in
some applications? I was very impressed by that epoxy/grout solution
but.........
With reservations,
Cheri Glaser
Brookville, Indiana
douglas gray on thu 20 nov 97
To patch or not to patch, Is that the question?
Actually I understand your point and have found ocassions when I repair with
good heart and other times when the pot meets it's maker, so to speak.
I would quess that it depends on the intended use of the object. If you are
making a utilitarian object and the use is compromised, I would probably trash
it. (Well, maybe I would take a slide of it, first if it was a good looking
pot)
If the piece was meant to function in a visual manner, I would probably repair
it and feel no remorse. (Unless, of course, I thought that the piece might fall
apart some time in the near future. How do you explain that one to a customer?)
The real trick is to keep an open mind. Don't assume that every crack is a bad
thing. We have all chosen to wqork in a medium which is unpredictable and
difficult to control, at best. Maybe it is even impossible to control. Why then
should we get so dissapointed when something doesn't go as planned? Much of
what we do is unpredictable, so why fight it?
That is not to say that we should completely give in to the forces of fire and
heat. That brings me to a point that has as much application to a way of life
as it does to a way of making ceramic objects. There are people who like to
control the various aspect of their lives (or their work). They spend so much
of their time trying to predict results, trying to take care of others, trying
to make the world make sense, that they forget how to live.
On the other hand there are people who are lack the ability to take charge of
their lives in any significant way. They eat white bread because that is what
they were given, they don't speak up, they don't make waves, and they too don't
really get a chance to live.
I know these are extremes here, but the fact it that if you try too hard to
control things which you can't control, or never try to control the things you
are capable of controlling, you never give yourself a chance to live life to the
fullest (or make pots to the fullest, as the case may be).
So look at that crack , how much will it really compromise your work? Can you
accept it as a happy accident or is it just really bad? When in doubt, I put
things away, out of sight long enough for my expectations to fade, and then come
back with a new eye (or two). When you think of the wooden bowls that are
turned gree, just so they will crack; just so they can be mended, Or when you
think about the artist that makes a raku pot by breaking it apart and gluing it
back together, you start to see a completely new realm of thinking and a
multitude of possibilities.
doug
In message Cheri Glaser writes:
> ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
> Dear Clayarters
>
> I recently had a discussion with a friend that got me thinking. I want to
> throw it to the group for discussion because I'd like to hear some
> other viewpoints.
>
> Last year at my Xmas show, this friend found a vase that had a
> serious crack in the bottom. I had missed it, otherwise I'd have
> pitched it. I told him I couldn't sell it to him because it was seriously
> flawed. He asked if he could have it. I said, sure, if you want it.
>
> A few months later, he returns with this vase and it looks perfect.
> He had repaired it with a mix of epoxy and tile grout that matched
> the glaze perfectly. He suggested that I repair all my cracks that way.
> I said, I couldn't. It wouldn't be right. He said why not? Woodworkers use
> wood putty fillers, photographers color their prints to their liking - what's
> the difference?
>
> I still feel the integrity of the pot is compromised. I'd be passing off
> an inferior pot as a perfect pot. Of course it wouldn't be appropriate
> for ovenware. But would it ever be appropriate? I have an occassional
> handle that pulls away from the body, or a crack where a slab meets a wall.
> I've never thought to patch them. Does anyone do that? Is it OK in
> some applications? I was very impressed by that epoxy/grout solution
> but.........
>
> With reservations,
>
> Cheri Glaser
============================================================================ =)
Douglas E. Gray
Assistant Professor of Art, Ceramics
Francis Marion Univeristy
Florence, South Carolina 29501
dgray@fmarion.edu
Vince Pitelka on thu 20 nov 97
>I still feel the integrity of the pot is compromised. I'd be passing off
>an inferior pot as a perfect pot. Of course it wouldn't be appropriate
>for ovenware. But would it ever be appropriate? I have an occassional
>handle that pulls away from the body, or a crack where a slab meets a wall.
>I've never thought to patch them. Does anyone do that? Is it OK in
>some applications? I was very impressed by that epoxy/grout solution
>With reservations,
>Cheri Glaser
Cheri -
I will be interested to hear what others have to say on this, but here's my
slant. I do not think it is ever wise or ethical to use a post-firing
material to fix a flaw on a pot. Sculptural forms are another issue, and I
do not see anything wrong with doing post-firing alterations or repairs.
But on a utilitarian pot, even if it is a vase or planter, there are too
many millenia of precedence dictating that what you get is what has survived
the test of the fire (there are exceptions, of course, but they are
culture-specific).
Post-firing decorative effects in contemporary ceramics, such as you find in
the work of Bennet Bean, are an entirely different issue. In that case the
means and media of decoration are clearly stated, and the customer knows
just what they are getting. I guess that what this comes down to is
absolute honesty to the customer. If you pass ceramic work off as something
other than what it really is, the clay gods will act accordingly.
- Vince
Vince Pitelka - vpitelka@DeKalb.net
Home 615/597-5376, work 615/597-6801, fax 615/597-6803
Appalachian Center for Crafts
Tennessee Technological University
1560 Craft Center Drive, Smithville TN 37166
Mark Bolton on thu 20 nov 97
Im throw many of my shapes (porcelain) off the hump and even though I throw as
dry as I can using slip instead of water and work compression to the gill's
(spelling?) I once in a while I get cracks (some call "s" cracks). These if
they protrude to the interior of the bowl/vessel of course get sent to pottery
heaven (the shard pile) but if the do not I sell them as firsts. This is based
in the fact of "functional pottery" and that if the crack is of reasonable size
and does not impede the function of a pot it does nothing more to impede the
function than that of a signature on the bottom of a pot that destines the pot
for the shelf to be visually functional rather than broken in the sink where it
belongs simply because the buyer feels that it is too precious or "artistic"
(cant believe I even typed that word) to USE. I feel that if the crack does not
impede the function of the pot the user should enjoy its years of function
being reminded of the MAKER as opposed to the years of function that a $100,000
a year chemist-ultra thin glazed-ultra thin bodied-sterile feeling-made off the
backs of the workers pot from WalMart/Xmas Tree Shop,.. etc provides. As for
the epoxy repair obviously I feel it should have been left as is.
I realize that this is a philosophical answer to the original
question but i feel it is the answer.
P.S.
I realize that this is off the subject and has probably been
said many times b4 but I hope any of you looking for you viability in pots
don't set a foot in WalMart ,.. Xmas Tree shops ..mega chains,... etc because
that is the most hypocritical and self defeating action you can take towards
this craft in this country,... (awaiting the bombarding I anticipate I will
receive) .... signing off,... grolleg ... see you
P/P/S
In making for our xmas season out of approximately 700lb(wet)
of clay we had less than 6 "s" cracks and they are all for sale.
Joseph Bennion on thu 20 nov 97
Cheri,
With the exception of ovenware, what is the problem? Who wrote the
rules? In Japan you can find very pricey pottery that has cracks
filled with some sort of material covered with gold leaf. I used
bond-o after watching sculptors use it topatch cracked figures. The
brand I use sets the same color as my salt fired body. I once got a
tea bowl from Jack Troy. While using it later I saw where he had
trimmed through the bottom and then patched it with a little bit of
trimming. I now do the same instead of chucking the perforated pot.
These repaired pots speak about the importance of process. To toss
"less than perfect" pot is to deny the process as it is manifest in
the product.
Think about it....Joe the Potter
===
Joseph Bennion "stay together
PO Box 186 learn the flowers
Spring City, Utah 84662 go light"
801-462-2708
joe.the.potter@rocketmail.com Gary Snyder
---Cheri Glaser wrote:
>
> ----------------------------Original
message----------------------------
> Dear Clayarters
>
> I recently had a discussion with a friend that got me thinking. I
want to
> throw it to the group for discussion because I'd like to hear some
> other viewpoints.
>
> Last year at my Xmas show, this friend found a vase that had a
> serious crack in the bottom. I had missed it, otherwise I'd have
> pitched it. I told him I couldn't sell it to him because it was
seriously
> flawed. He asked if he could have it. I said, sure, if you want it.
>
> A few months later, he returns with this vase and it looks perfect.
> He had repaired it with a mix of epoxy and tile grout that matched
> the glaze perfectly. He suggested that I repair all my cracks that
way.
> I said, I couldn't. It wouldn't be right. He said why not?
Woodworkers use
> wood putty fillers, photographers color their prints to their liking
- what's
> the difference?
>
> I still feel the integrity of the pot is compromised. I'd be passing
off
> an inferior pot as a perfect pot. Of course it wouldn't be appropriate
> for ovenware. But would it ever be appropriate? I have an occassional
> handle that pulls away from the body, or a crack where a slab meets
a wall.
> I've never thought to patch them. Does anyone do that? Is it OK in
> some applications? I was very impressed by that epoxy/grout solution
> but.........
>
> With reservations,
>
> Cheri Glaser
> Brookville, Indiana
>
__________________________________________________________________
Sent by Yahoo! Mail. Get your free e-mail at http://mail.yahoo.com
Mark Issenberg on thu 20 nov 97
Cheri: I would consider a pot that gets fixed with strange materials at
least a second if not a garbage can pot. As Dennis Miller says, "Just
one man's opinion."
Mark in Miami
Ken Russell on fri 21 nov 97
Cheri, I'm like you when it comes to cracks. They're seconds, period. I do
have two =22Pots By The Pound=22 sales from the studio each year for all my
functional seconds (glaze crawls, tiny bottom cracks, etc.). Other than =
that
I'd never try the epoxy/clay mix trick but I wouldn't hold it against a =
potter
who does. That's their choice and I'd respect it, but it's not for me
personally. I have some potter friends who absolutely throw away (break =
them
into chards) ANY pot that's not up to their snuff. I admire them. I'm too
greedy and still think my seconds are good buys for local farmers and they =
feel
the same way. When I sell my seconds, it's up front=3B meaning I show a =
customer
why and what the flaw is before they buy it. One thing I will NEVER do is =
send
a second to a wholesale customer. I equate that to the thought of slipping
Grandma the tongue when she gives me a kiss. OOUUGHH=21=21
I've tried the crack mender from Archie Bray. It has to be mixed with slip
perfectly or else there's a glaring puttied in crack thing on the bottom. =
That
would make it a functional second. I suppose it would blend in well only =
with
porcelain or white stoneware. My clay body has iron on it so the mender
screams, =22CRACKS HERE=21=21 GOT YOUR FRESH PUTTIED CRACKS RIGHT =
HERE=21=21=21=22 whenever
I've tried to use it. It's only worked well once but I still couldn't send =
that
pot to a wholesale customer and sold it out of the shop because that
Grandma/French kiss feeling was too strong.
Ken Russell
The Arlington Pottery
gone2pot=40iw.net
dan Wilson on fri 21 nov 97
Recently, I became fascinated with the crack and did quite a few bowls
with cracks in the lips. There is one particular crack that happens
sometimes early in the process that only shows itself after the firing. It
seems the stresses pull apart the wall of the pot leaving a fine organic
tear I found appealing and was intent on reproducing. Well, these were fine
bowls in my estimation but they didn't sell; even after explaining that the
cracks were cultivated. Potential customers went on to more functional
things which is alright. I guess my point is that the crack has its place
in the context of the piece in which it appears and the venue in which it
is presented. I've always thought (I guess believed) that each piece is the
result of a concious activity in which each aspect of its character is the
result of willful choices and thoughtfull manipulation of the materials and
language at my command. If the results fall outside of the parameters of
this "vision" so to speak, I most often feel the piece is unsuccessfull and
invariably place a lower value on it. This "standard" is self-imposed and
may not coincide with "standards" others may have set for themselves.
Dan Wilson
Richard Jeffery on fri 21 nov 97
-----Original Message-----
From: Judith Enright [SMTP:jenright@wsgr.com]
Sent: 20 November 1997 14:29
To: Multiple recipients of list CLAYART
Subject: Re: Ethics
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
Cheri - there was a similar thread a while back. Here's my opinion:
Ask yourself "what am I willing to live with?" I think your answer is
right there in your post. If your intuition is to reject such
repairs, then stick by it. Pottery-making is not derived in the same
fashion as woodwork (ie, wood putty etc. is an accepted form of the
woodworking process and is not always incorporated as repairing -- it
can also be considered part of the finish work. Strictly speaking, I
don't know that the same can be said of applying patchwork to what is
supposed to be a one-piece ceramic work).
[Richard]
Judith
I can't let that one go. Wood putty has no place in cabinet making or
finishing.
It's an attempt to hide a mistake or an accident....
I accept that there are markets where that doesn't matter to the end user
(customer?), and in industry it may be more acceptable, but it should
matter to the maker.
Surely it's the same with clay? You are right about the "what am I willing
to live with" bit, but let's try to compare like with like when talking
about other crafts.
Richard
Ray Carlton on fri 21 nov 97
yeah i patch up pots for the market and who cares // potters have been doin
this for thousands of years..in fact in ancient times in the orient the
potters never even bothered they told the purchasers that the faults added
to the individuallty of the piece and in fact were an aesthetic
embellishment. They should be pleased to be able to buy a piece with such
venerable markings upon its otherwise perfect surface. Isn't it time we got
past all this nit picky stuff about marks on the pots. gallery owners and
buyers at large need to be educated that we are creating hand made art
something that is becoming more and more rare on this planet. in years to
come as we become more and more swamped by sanitised industial products,
pots that show the fallible hand of the maker and divulge the secrets of
the process will become more and more highly prized. as time marches on the
people who will be able to afford expend the amount of energy we do in
creating our work will become less and less//
so make what you will and sell what you can as these days of many potters
are finite
At 12:36 20/11/97 EST, you wrote:
>----------------------------Original message----------------------------
>
>Cheri,
> With the exception of ovenware, what is the problem? Who wrote the
>rules? In Japan you can find very pricey pottery that has cracks
>filled with some sort of material covered with gold leaf. I used
>bond-o after watching sculptors use it topatch cracked figures. The
>brand I use sets the same color as my salt fired body. I once got a
>tea bowl from Jack Troy. While using it later I saw where he had
>trimmed through the bottom and then patched it with a little bit of
>trimming. I now do the same instead of chucking the perforated pot.
>These repaired pots speak about the importance of process. To toss
>"less than perfect" pot is to deny the process as it is manifest in
>the product.
> Think about it....Joe the Potter
>
>
>===
>
>Joseph Bennion "stay together
>PO Box 186 learn the flowers
>Spring City, Utah 84662 go light"
>801-462-2708
>joe.the.potter@rocketmail.com Gary Snyder
>
>
>
>
>---Cheri Glaser wrote:
>>
>> ----------------------------Original
>message----------------------------
>> Dear Clayarters
>>
>> I recently had a discussion with a friend that got me thinking. I
>want to
>> throw it to the group for discussion because I'd like to hear some
>> other viewpoints.
>>
>> Last year at my Xmas show, this friend found a vase that had a
>> serious crack in the bottom. I had missed it, otherwise I'd have
>> pitched it. I told him I couldn't sell it to him because it was
>seriously
>> flawed. He asked if he could have it. I said, sure, if you want it.
>>
>> A few months later, he returns with this vase and it looks perfect.
>> He had repaired it with a mix of epoxy and tile grout that matched
>> the glaze perfectly. He suggested that I repair all my cracks that
>way.
>> I said, I couldn't. It wouldn't be right. He said why not?
>Woodworkers use
>> wood putty fillers, photographers color their prints to their liking
>- what's
>> the difference?
>>
>> I still feel the integrity of the pot is compromised. I'd be passing
>off
>> an inferior pot as a perfect pot. Of course it wouldn't be appropriate
>> for ovenware. But would it ever be appropriate? I have an occassional
>> handle that pulls away from the body, or a crack where a slab meets
>a wall.
>> I've never thought to patch them. Does anyone do that? Is it OK in
>> some applications? I was very impressed by that epoxy/grout solution
>> but.........
>>
>> With reservations,
>>
>> Cheri Glaser
>> Brookville, Indiana
>>
>
>__________________________________________________________________
>Sent by Yahoo! Mail. Get your free e-mail at http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>
raycarlt@valylink.net.au
Ray Carlton
McMahons Creek Victoria Australia 3799
Jane Woodside on fri 21 nov 97
Ok, my two cents: if a pot is repairable and will be desirable as repaired, I
will mark it down, put a little "not perfect" sticker on it, and , where
possible put it next to its perfect sibling. People who like the appearance
of the pot will ask me what's not perfect about it--sometimes it bothers them
enough to buy the more expensive sibling, sometimes they're glad to get a
bargain because of something I (foolishly) find fault with. Sometimes they
were just curious. If a fault doesn't affect function, its still a fault and
should be disclosed in my view. There is another issue of course whether you
want anything other than perfection out there with your name on it. I'm not
that fastidious--yet.
Jane Woodside on a nearly perfect day in San Francisco.
Lyn Packer on fri 21 nov 97
Hi Cheri, Just putting me two cents worth in. Put yourself in the place of
a buyer. Would you be happy to buy a pot that you didn't know was repaired?
I know I wouldn't, especially a piece made to be used.
I think you really have answered your query yourself in your letter. All
the best.
Lyn
lyn.packer@clear.net.nz
Vince Pitelka on fri 21 nov 97
> With the exception of ovenware, what is the problem? Who wrote the
>rules? In Japan you can find very pricey pottery that has cracks
>filled with some sort of material covered with gold leaf. I used
>bond-o after watching sculptors use it topatch cracked figures. The
>brand I use sets the same color as my salt fired body. I once got a
>tea bowl from Jack Troy. While using it later I saw where he had
>trimmed through the bottom and then patched it with a little bit of
>trimming. I now do the same instead of chucking the perforated pot.
>These repaired pots speak about the importance of process. To toss
>"less than perfect" pot is to deny the process as it is manifest in
>the product.
> Think about it....Joe the Potter
Sorry Joe, can't buy it. The comparison with Jack's cup is not applicable,
since that was still a repair done before the firing, which is perfectly
acceptable, although often more trouble than it is worth. But the idea of
using bondo that matches the claybody to repair fired utilitarian wares
REALLY grates the wrong way. There is no other way to say it. It seems
dishonest. Whether or not the piece is ovenware is irrelevant.
- Vince
Vince Pitelka - vpitelka@DeKalb.net
Home 615/597-5376, work 615/597-6801, fax 615/597-6803
Appalachian Center for Crafts
Tennessee Technological University
1560 Craft Center Drive, Smithville TN 37166
Craig Martell on fri 21 nov 97
At 12:36 PM 11/20/97 EST, Joe Bennion wrote:
>----------------------------Original message----------------------------
>
>Cheri,
> With the exception of ovenware, what is the problem? Who wrote the
>rules? In Japan you can find very pricey pottery that has cracks
>filled with some sort of material covered with gold leaf. I used
>bond-o after watching sculptors use it topatch cracked figures. The
>brand I use sets the same color as my salt fired body. I once got a
>tea bowl from Jack Troy. While using it later I saw where he had
>trimmed through the bottom and then patched it with a little bit of
>trimming. I now do the same instead of chucking the perforated pot.
>These repaired pots speak about the importance of process. To toss
>"less than perfect" pot is to deny the process as it is manifest in
>the product.
> Think about it....Joe the Potter
Hey Joe:
I have thought about this stuff a lot! What follows are my feelings
regarding my work and the work of others to some extent. You're correct
about "rules". There really aren't any. I guess we all make up our own
minds about this stuff and act according to our own sensibilities.
I think a person should make a distinction between a pot that is "less than
perfect", and one that is compromised, or cracked, or even a total reject.
I have never made a perfect pot. I try, but they are never perfect. When I
make one that cracks, I sell it as a second and tell the person buying it
why it's a second, and I mark the price way down, or just give it to them.
If the crack, or any other problem destroys the function of the piece, it
gets the hammer and that's it. I don't hide the cracks with bondo, or
another type of filler. I only sell seconds at the studio, they never go to
shows or galleries, shops, whatever. The stuff about denying process, to
me, is a convienient way to ignore the real issue, which is: "how do I solve
this cracking problem so I don't have to deal with issues of process
anymore". Some potters have used the "part of the process" argument for
years, and personally, I just can't get behind it. If a crack is part of
the process, filling it with bondo is more of a denial than just leaving it
there for all to see. I think potters should be concerned with making pots,
not repairing them. Fixing cracks, to me, places individual objects above
the integrity of the craft as a whole. I'm always disappointed when I go to
a gallery to see pots and there are cracks in attached handles and teapot
spouts, and it happens more than I ever thought it would. I think the
potter should be more selective, as well as the gallery staff. Cracked pots
shouldn't be in exhibitions, or sold at fairs and shops.
regards, Craig Martell-Oregon
Craig Fent on fri 21 nov 97
Cheri:
Just my 2 cents. I have sold several pots with small cracks that do not
effect the function or form of the pot in question. I am not sure if I have
ever made a perfect pot, I can usually find something wrong if I look hard
enough. Should I break a pot that the glaze didn't come out just the way I
expected? I just finished grinding off some glaze on a large bowl that ran
off the foot and pooled on the shelf. Should I have thrown it away instead?
I didn't, its in a gallery shop right now, and I won't feel bad at all if
someone pays the $260 price tag on it.
Don't get me wrong, I have thrown away lots of pots for lots of reasons, but
I don't think you can make any hard rules about it. In other words, I think
you have to take it on a pot by pot basis.
Craig
Chris Campbell on sat 22 nov 97
Hi - Interesting question. Here is where I'm coming from. I don't sell
seconds ever - repaired or otherwise. It is a respect for my clients and also
self preservation. You never know where your pottery will go and who will be
seeing it.
I want everyone to see my best. Imagine a potter you greatly respect picking
your piece up and looking closely at it. Consider a gallery owner seeing it
at a friends house and maybe wanting to carry it in their shop.
You will never get a reputation for quality and skill if you put garbage into
the marketplace. Use your hammer - it's only dirt .
Chris - madly getting ready for 8 days of shows and wondering how much stuff
is enough
Richard Jeffery on sun 23 nov 97
-----Original Message-----
From: dan Wilson [SMTP:dwilson@mail.nas.com]
Sent: 21 November 1997 17:47
To: Multiple recipients of list CLAYART
Subject: Re Ethics
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
Recently, I became fascinated with the crack and did quite a few bowls
with cracks in the lips. There is one particular crack that happens
sometimes early in the process that only shows itself after the firing. It
seems the stresses pull apart the wall of the pot leaving a fine organic
tear I found appealing and was intent on reproducing. Well, these were fine
bowls in my estimation but they didn't sell; even after explaining that the
cracks were cultivated. Potential customers went on to more functional
things which is alright. I guess my point is that the crack has its place
in the context of the piece in which it appears and the venue in which it
is presented. I've always thought (I guess believed) that each piece is the
result of a concious activity in which each aspect of its character is the
result of willful choices and thoughtfull manipulation of the materials and
language at my command. If the results fall outside of the parameters of
this "vision" so to speak, I most often feel the piece is unsuccessfull and
invariably place a lower value on it. This "standard" is self-imposed and
may not coincide with "standards" others may have set for themselves.
Dan Wilson
Dan
I applaud your courage to follow your design beliefs.....
I sometimes use existing or "encouraged" splits on the edges of wooden
bowls. Some buyers needed an explanation, but I think I found sales easier
than you have, and I'm not the only one to do this. It seemed more
"natural" - more expected(?) - in wood.
I did find it helped to actually detail or enhance the split - to make it
look deliberate rather than accidental. Maybe that was a reaction to my
fear that people wouldn't buy. I do believe it's possible to find buyers
who understand what seems right to you at the point when you produce your
work, but wouldn't want to rely on them to keep yourself fed. I also
understand the pressures to lower the price because you don't feel
confident about what you've produced, or sometimes just of the welcome it
will get.
There's no answer, other than judging the piece by your own criteria
Richard
(in Bournemouth UK, where the gloomy, wet English winter has finally
arrived. Snow - give me snow!)
the Gallagher's on sun 23 nov 97
I agree with you Craig,
Coming from theatre, where things are literally held together with gaff tape,
I strive to make perfect pottery pieces. It's deffinately a process thing,
and mastery is a challenge to meet. I am still working on it, and don't
expect that every piece I make will be "perfect" according to my standards,
which BTW, are quite high.
Pieces placed on display in galleries and shops should reflect the highest
quality the individual potter can attain.
I think seconds have their place, though, as long as they are not problems
that affect function. These pieces can certainly be sold as such to those who
wish to own good pottery, but for some reason can't or won't consider the
price of the best.
Michelle
In Oregon, where the gray keeps things green.
Marie Gibbons on sun 23 nov 97
I agree with the thought process that "flaws and imperfections" are a BENEFIT
to a hand made piece. I can remember hearing of a well known quilting artist
(can't remember her name right now) that would purposely put a flaw in the
quilt pattern. Done to enhance the presence of a Human Being = who is
capable of mistake, and often a better person because of it. Many times I
have had a piece crack or break and the repair of that crack or break caused
me to go in a new direction with the piece, often creating an even better end
product than I had originally intended.
I don't think we should be afraid of imperfection, but cherish it as it is an
element of individuality
Marie Gibbons
Arvada, CO
Eleanora Eden on wed 26 nov 97
Hi Craig and all,
At an ACC show long ago I overheard a well-known potter explaining to a
customer that the enormous s cracks on the bottoms of every one of her
porcelain plates were just part of the product, unavoidable, happens to
everybody....I felt sick.
It's one thing to sell stuff with cracks, it's quite another to demean the
whole clay community in the process.....for myself, if I can get rid of a
defect before the thing goes up for sale it's a first, if not it's a
second, and they never go to fairs or galleries.....well the one pot with
the little crack will be in this lady's hand and she'll be holding it up to
the light in the middle of the booth and rubbing her fingernail over it and
she'll put it down with a frown and walk away thinking all the stuff you do
is secondrate...who needs it....
practicing not overeating for tomorrow....Eleanora
.............................................................................
.......
Eleanora Eden 802 869-2003
Paradise Hill
Bellows Falls, VT 05101 eden@sover.net
dan Wilson on thu 27 nov 97
We all appear to know whats "good" yet we find many reasons for settling
for less. So what does the cracked pot represent? Lack of attention to the
process or happy accident? A gift, born on the wings of chance in the
finest Zen tradition? Should we justify our lack of attention as "aesthetic
sensitivity" and play the "confidence game"? Boldy "adding value" by
extoling the virtues of the " Imperfect hand made object"?
Foisting "seconds" (second rate products) on the uneducated in the
name of the "Hand Made" is to misinform them of our goals. To offer the
uneducated and less fortunate "seconds" at reduced prices is to deprive
them of the truth. We ridicule "Fine Artists" for offering up ill concieved
and poorly crafted objects on the one hand and justify our own as the
natural consequence of our imperfections? In general I would say that too
many of us settle for less than our very best in the name of "recovering
costs". A "Confidence Game" indeed!
Dan Wilson
dan Wilson on thu 27 nov 97
#52
Is perplexing. "It is the equal of other bowls". "It looks so old" They
said. Its shape is pleasing and its foot is well integrated and
porportioned. In every way it is the equal of all other bowls. It is
facinating in its complexity. The glaze is "etherial" They said. It has
transformed itself into an evening sky. Just after the sun has begun to
fade. That moment when the light and the dark are in perfect ballance and
whisps of cloud thread their way accross the surface. "A quiet interplay of
transparency and opacity that engages our attention." They said. A fine
network of crazing lends a quiet texture to its overall appearance. "It
looks so old." and "The lip of this bowl is cracked - It somehow seemes
appropriate. This bowl is not beautiful. It is perplexing - and it looks so
old."... They said. "I did that on purpose." I said.
Happy Thanksgiving,
Dan Wilson
LINDA BLOSSOM on fri 28 nov 97
It seems that everyone has to answer this question for so many have
addressed the ethics issue very well. This answers the question of whether
or not to deceive a customer. Repairs that make something useful and are
not hidden don't seem deceitful, rather it seems frugal. It also seems
that trashing something that could be used with a little help keeps the
cost of those items that we deem firsts higher. Deciding if something is
truly defective can be difficult, especially given expectations and ideas
of perfection. I think that it requires knowing when something is truly
defective, functionally or esthetically. We hope for smooth glazes but are
some pinholes or small bubbles bad enough to make something a second or
trash heap fodder?
The second issue is ego. When someone says, "Would you want that to
represent you?", it has the ring of ego. There are many pieces that I
consider good enough for me. Other people like them and would be happy to
have them. But should I trash them, throw them in the pond rather than let
someone else use them because I am afraid they would make me look bad?
There are people who would like to own ceramic work and cannot easily do
so. As poor as our pay may be, our work is often too expensive for many
people. In the name of ego - how we look - do we take perfectly useful
items and trash them? It seems a waste of resources and very pompous. I
have great difficulty putting my pride - ego - above some much larger
issues. I enclose the lines below from Dan Taylor's post. Just two ways
of looking at the same thing, I think.
Foisting "seconds" (second rate products) on the uneducated in the
name of the "Hand Made" is to misinform them of our goals. To offer the
uneducated and less fortunate "seconds" at reduced prices is to deprive
them of the truth. We ridicule "Fine Artists" for offering up ill concieved
and poorly crafted objects on the one hand and justify our own as the
natural consequence of our imperfections? In general I would say that too
many of us settle for less than our very best in the name of "recovering
costs". A "Confidence Game" indeed!
Linda Blossom
2366 Slaterville Rd.
Ithaca, NY 14850
607-539-7912
blossom@lightlink.com
http://www.artscape.com
artimater on sat 18 aug 01
I like to sign my pots mel....and if mel saw one of mine he would tell =
people, "You bet I made that"HEHEHEHE
Rush
"I only indulge when I've seen a snake, so I keep a supply of =
indulgences and snakes handy"
http://www.geocities.com/artimator/index.html
artimator@earthlink.net
| |
|
