Linda Arbuckle on wed 26 nov 97
> t will be interesting to hear other views. Maybe we will
> discover that when Ron Roy or Tom Buck or Linda Arbuckle,
> Marcia Selsor or Jack Troy, Jonathan Kaplan (and a host of others)
> explain something in careful detail, they hide some significant
> bit of informtation so that the rest can't "steal" from them.
>
This one made me smile, Dannon. It's right up there with the one about
alligators living in the sewers of NYC, and the folk wisdom that if
you pick a hamster up the tail its eyes fall out.
But seriously, I appreciate the knowlege I've gotten from other people
and try to credit the source if appropriate when I pass things on.
We've all had people give us valuable information, and most people are
willing to pass it on. Any "serious" writing on tech issues would have
to be better grounded than what amounts to "hearsay" on ClayArt, altho
the resources are really good.
Ceramics has a lot of technology. It does interesting things to the
ceramic "culture". Since making a clay object by hand is a bit of an
anachonism since manufacturing (machines do it faster and cheaper),
individual makers put "added value" in the product by introducing
content and variation manufacturing doesn't , i.e. art concerns. So
the glaze that makes one person's work really zing may not work with
the kind of work you make. So, it's the singer, not the song. The
openness in an art clay environment about tech stuff has built a lot
of shop talk that's the basis for a strong community not found in
disciplines that don't need this kind of sharing, like painting.
People in other art disciplines have at times expressed admiration for
the kind of community and sharing that clay people have. THEN we have
those interesting discussions about ethics and aesthetics! And if
we're in the same location, we EAT together. Ah, the potlucks.
Linda
--
Linda Arbuckle
Associate Professor, Graduate Coordinator
University of Florida, Box 115801, Gainesville, FL 32611-5801
e-mail:arbuck@ufl.edu (Note: this is a new e-mail address)
Marcia Selsor on thu 27 nov 97
I must have missed the original post about this. I agree with Linda regarding
the technical complexity of our chosen field. I don't knowingly leave out any
little something. As Paul Soldner once noted,
he made stamps from his naval because we all have different navals.
Given the exact prescribed information, each one adds their individual
signature or personal quality to the work.
I just bought a book on "Craft Culture" by Peter Dormer at the Anthropology
Conference in DC. My papers there are appreciated because Anthropologist
worship ceramicists and their technical background of ceramic knowlegde.
Anyway, I admired Peter Dormer's insights in
"New Ceramics". He died last year of cancer. I think this book will be
interesting.
Best wishes to all fellow and sister clayarters as we begin the holiday
seasons (earlier each year)
Marci in Montana
Linda Arbuckle wrote:
>
> ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
> > t will be interesting to hear other views. Maybe we will
> > discover that when Ron Roy or Tom Buck or Linda Arbuckle,
> > Marcia Selsor or Jack Troy, Jonathan Kaplan (and a host of others)
> > explain something in careful detail, they hide some significant
> > bit of informtation so that the rest can't "steal" from them.
> >
>
> This one made me smile, Dannon. It's right up there with the one about
> alligators living in the sewers of NYC, and the folk wisdom that if
> you pick a hamster up the tail its eyes fall out.
>
> But seriously, I appreciate the knowlege I've gotten from other people
> and try to credit the source if appropriate when I pass things on.
> We've all had people give us valuable information, and most people are
> willing to pass it on. Any "serious" writing on tech issues would have
> to be better grounded than what amounts to "hearsay" on ClayArt, altho
> the resources are really good.
>
> Ceramics has a lot of technology. It does interesting things to the
> ceramic "culture". Since making a clay object by hand is a bit of an
> anachonism since manufacturing (machines do it faster and cheaper),
> individual makers put "added value" in the product by introducing
> content and variation manufacturing doesn't , i.e. art concerns. So
> the glaze that makes one person's work really zing may not work with
> the kind of work you make. So, it's the singer, not the song. The
> openness in an art clay environment about tech stuff has built a lot
> of shop talk that's the basis for a strong community not found in
> disciplines that don't need this kind of sharing, like painting.
> People in other art disciplines have at times expressed admiration for
> the kind of community and sharing that clay people have. THEN we have
> those interesting discussions about ethics and aesthetics! And if
> we're in the same location, we EAT together. Ah, the potlucks.
>
> Linda
>
> --
> Linda Arbuckle
> Associate Professor, Graduate Coordinator
> University of Florida, Box 115801, Gainesville, FL 32611-5801
> e-mail:arbuck@ufl.edu (Note: this is a new e-mail address)
Dannon Rhudy on fri 28 nov 97
Hmmmmmm. I must be losing my touch. I THOUGHT that it would
be obvious that my "leave something out" comment was tongue-in-
cheek, but there have been so many responses saying that nothing
IS left out...so: I was being facetious. None that I know leave
ANYTHING out of responses to questions...and those listed were
merely the ones who popped into my head as I was thinking of all
the remarkable information made available to this list, from a
large group of knowledgeable and helpful people.
So - a pleasant holiday to all.
Dannon Rhudy
potter@koyote.com
----------------------------Original
message----------------------------
I must have missed the original post about this. I agree with
Linda regarding
the technical complexity of our chosen field. I don't knowingly
leave out any
little something. As Paul Soldner once noted,
he made stamps from his naval because we all have different
navals.
Given the exact prescribed information, each one adds their
individual
signature or personal quality to the work.
I just bought a book on "Craft Culture" by Peter Dormer at the
Anthropology
Conference in DC. My papers there are appreciated because
Anthropologist
worship ceramicists and their technical background of ceramic
knowlegde.
Anyway, I admired Peter Dormer's insights in
"New Ceramics". He died last year of cancer. I think this book
will be
interesting.
Best wishes to all fellow and sister clayarters as we begin the
holiday
seasons (earlier each year)
Marci in Montana
Linda Arbuckle wrote:
>
> ----------------------------Original
message----------------------------
> > t will be interesting to hear other views. Maybe we will
> > discover that when Ron Roy or Tom Buck or Linda Arbuckle,
> > Marcia Selsor or Jack Troy, Jonathan Kaplan (and a host of
others)
> > explain something in careful detail, they hide some
significant
> > bit of informtation so that the rest can't "steal" from them.
> >
>
> This one made me smile, Dannon. It's right up there with the one
about
> alligators living in the sewers of NYC, and the folk wisdom that
if
> you pick a hamster up the tail its eyes fall out.
>
> But seriously, I appreciate the knowlege I've gotten from other
people
> and try to credit the source if appropriate when I pass things
on.
> We've all had people give us valuable information, and most
people are
> willing to pass it on. Any "serious" writing on tech issues
would have
> to be better grounded than what amounts to "hearsay" on ClayArt,
altho
> the resources are really good.
>
> Ceramics has a lot of technology. It does interesting things to
the
> ceramic "culture". Since making a clay object by hand is a bit
of an
> anachonism since manufacturing (machines do it faster and
cheaper),
> individual makers put "added value" in the product by
introducing
> content and variation manufacturing doesn't , i.e. art concerns.
So
> the glaze that makes one person's work really zing may not work
with
> the kind of work you make. So, it's the singer, not the song.
The
> openness in an art clay environment about tech stuff has built a
lot
> of shop talk that's the basis for a strong community not found
in
> disciplines that don't need this kind of sharing, like painting.
> People in other art disciplines have at times expressed
admiration for
> the kind of community and sharing that clay people have. THEN we
have
> those interesting discussions about ethics and aesthetics! And
if
> we're in the same location, we EAT together. Ah, the potlucks.
>
> Linda
>
> --
> Linda Arbuckle
> Associate Professor, Graduate Coordinator
> University of Florida, Box 115801, Gainesville, FL 32611-5801
> e-mail:arbuck@ufl.edu (Note: this is a new e-mail address)
Kathryn Whipple on fri 28 nov 97
I was fortunate enough to be a student of Linda's a few years ago, and came
out of school with more knowlege than i knew what to do with...which leads
me to my point. Maybe these gurus of ours are dispensing such a volume and
glory of info that us disciples just don't have the skills to
apply...claywork, after all has many similarities to cooking, and no two
cooks can step in the same recipe twice...(huh?)
Rather than wondering what they aren't telling, I think it might be more
instructive to think about what we're not hearing. Or about how our own
bodies and minds interact with the info we're given to create new things
rather than imitations. And anyway, hamsters don't have tails, not enough
to pick them up by, anyhow.
Happy Thanksgiving all! Thing that i'm thankful for number 27: clayart.
Kathy
Brooker, FL
james klueg on thu 4 dec 97
I'd like to second Marci's recommendation of Peter Dormer's "The Culture
Of Craft". It's a swell book of edited articles with something of
philosophic interest for any contempo craftsperson. In addition to "New
Ceramics", many of you may know that he wrote books on design as well.
As a teacher, I'm finding many interesting points of convergence between
craftspeople and designers (graphic designers, in our department). I
think both groups have some common ground on ideas of utility, innovation
within established genres and a refreshing lack of respect for typical
fine arts preciousness. Interesting times we live in.
Jim K. in Duluth
| |
|
