pdp1@EARTHLINK.NET on fri 5 sep 08
Hi Pat,
I find this to be a very good question.
As much as I like Picasso, and his Art...I lost some respect for both, with
his fake and stupid if not gratuitous foray into painting on other's more or
less 'generic' forms as a gimmick, especially where the Potter(s) got no
billing, and, I feel, he should have had more class than to do that, and,
should not have sought implied 'credit' for being a 'Ceramic Artists' by
reputation then, merely for painting ON someone else's things.
If good forms, or even generic forms, or lousy forms, and equal billing,
then I'd say, "Sure...why not..."
As it is, the Potter may as well have smeared, dabbed or added however so,
some Clay onto a 'Picasso' Painting, and claimed it is his Work, as far as
absurdity goes...
I would have, at that point...
Picasso really blew it, in that escapade, in my book...
I am reminded of a true story of a small Town in Michigan -
The State of Michigan, in printing the State Maps, accidentally left this
little Town off.
So, the Town printed their own Maps of the Town, leaving off the State of
Michigan.
Good for them...
Lol...
Love,
Phil
l v
----- Original Message -----
From: "Pat Southwood"
> Dear Lee,
>
> You said, - As Picasso said, "I can make anything the
>> art tells me to make." >
>
> If that is the case then why did Picasso have to get "just a potter" to
> make his ceramics for him?
> .
> Regards,
> Pat Southwood
>
Hank Murrow on sat 6 sep 08
Dear Lee;
This is a real story about Picasso from one of his dealers.
"I went to the Master's atelier to have a drawing authenticated. I
found him working on a small painting and asked him to authenticate
the drawing. He said, 'Yes, it is mine'.
Some months later, I returned to have a small painting authenticated.
Picasso said, "No, that's a fake"........ I replied, "But Master, I
saw you working on that one when I came to have the drawing
authenticated!"
He said simply, "I often paint fakes"
Sometimes that is exactly what we do. he had the courage to admit it.
Cheers, Hank in Eugene
www.murrow.biz/hank
On Sep 6, 2008, at 5:21 PM, Lee Love wrote:
>
> I saw a wonderful show of Picasso's ceramic work at the Ibaraki
> Prefectural Museum of Ceramics. In addition to the painting on
> dishes and platters, he made sculpture, taking functional work,
> cutting them apart and reassembling them. I am guessing he was one
> of the first persons to do this kind of thing.
>
> Here is Picasso telling one him self. I have always thought, once a
> person gains some success, that the biggest hazard is copying ones
> self. Stepping out of your usual medium is one way to keep fresh:
>
>
> "From the moment that art ceases to be food that feeds the best minds,
> the artist can use his talents to perform all the tricks of the
> intellectual charlatan. Most people can today no longer expect to
> receive consolation and exaltation from art. "The 'refined,' the rich,
> the professional 'do-nothings', the distillers of quintessence desire
> only the peculiar, the sensational, the eccentric, the scandalous in
> today's art. I myself, since the advent of Cubism, have fed these
> fellows what they wanted and satisfied these critics with all the
> ridiculous ideas that have passed through my mind. "The less they
> understood them, the more they admired me. Through amusing myself with
> all these absurd farces, I became celebrated, and very rapidly. For a
> painter, celebrity means sales and consequent affluence. Today, as you
> know, I am celebrated, I am rich. "But when I am alone, I do not have
> the effrontery to consider myself an artist at all, not in the grand
> old meaning of the word: Giotto, Titian, Rembrandt, Goya were great
> painters. I am only a public clown--a mountebank. "I have understood
> my time and have exploited the imbecility, the vanity, the greed of my
> contemporaries. It is a bitter confession, this confession of mine,
> more painful than it may seem. But at least and at last it does have
> the merit of being honest."
>
> - Pablo Picasso 1952
>
> Self honesty is a rare ability. One I admire greatly.
>
> --
> Lee Love in Minneapolis
> http://heartclay.blogspot.com/
> http://mashikopots.blogspot.com/
> http://claycraft.blogspot.com/
>
> "Let the beauty we love be what we do.
> There are hundreds of ways to kneel and kiss the ground." --Rumi
Pat Southwood on sat 6 sep 08
Hi Phil,
Whoo Hoo, We agree on something .
I have always had some difficulty appreciating parts of Picassos talent.
Most of it seemed to me to be a collection of one-liners.
However, I put this down to my lack of knowledge, personal preferences, etc.
When I saw/read that Picasso had "done" some ceramics, I thought, O.K. fair
do's. - he is obviously interested in process and skill.
Upon discovering at Manriques' museum in Lanzarote that Picasso simply
decorated the forms provided by others, left me feeling that I was right
the first time, disappointed and a bit cheated.
Even if he instructed the potter as to the form, the arrogance is
astounding.
This isn't collaboration, it's just a rip off.
It is a lack of respect for craft skills and an arrogance that so called
fine art skills are so superior that they need no explanation or
embarrassment.
A fairly famous local art college won't use clay as it is deemed "too
process orientated"
As you say on your side of the Atlantic, go figure.
With Best Wishes,
Pat Southwood
---- Original Message -----
From:
To:
Sent: Saturday, September 06, 2008 4:44 AM
Subject: Re: The voice of the Clay Or "Just a tool" - Pat's observation...
> Hi Pat,
>
>
>
> I find this to be a very good question.
>
>
> As much as I like Picasso, and his Art...I lost some respect for both,
> with
> his fake and stupid if not gratuitous foray into painting on other's more
> or
> less 'generic' forms as a gimmick, especially where the Potter(s) got no
> billing, and, I feel, he should have had more class than to do that, and,
> should not have sought implied 'credit' for being a 'Ceramic Artists' by
> reputation then, merely for painting ON someone else's things.
>
>
> If good forms, or even generic forms, or lousy forms, and equal billing,
> then I'd say, "Sure...why not..."
>
>
> As it is, the Potter may as well have smeared, dabbed or added however so,
> some Clay onto a 'Picasso' Painting, and claimed it is his Work, as far as
> absurdity goes...
>
> I would have, at that point...
>
>
>
> Picasso really blew it, in that escapade, in my book...
>
>
> I am reminded of a true story of a small Town in Michigan -
>
>
> The State of Michigan, in printing the State Maps, accidentally left this
> little Town off.
>
>
> So, the Town printed their own Maps of the Town, leaving off the State of
> Michigan.
>
>
> Good for them...
>
>
> Lol...
>
>
>
> Love,
>
> Phil
> l v
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Pat Southwood"
>
>> Dear Lee,
>>
>> You said, - As Picasso said, "I can make anything the
>>> art tells me to make." >
>>
>> If that is the case then why did Picasso have to get "just a potter" to
>> make his ceramics for him?
>> .
>> Regards,
>> Pat Southwood
>>
>
>
Lee Love on sat 6 sep 08
On Sat, Sep 6, 2008 at 5:00 PM, Pat Southwood
wrote:
> Upon discovering at Manriques' museum in Lanzarote that Picasso simply
> decorated the forms provided by others, left me feeling that I was right
> the first time, disappointed and a bit cheated.
Pat,
I am sorry you saw a lousy show. I am guessing he had an
influence on people like Voulkos and Woodman.
I saw a wonderful show of Picasso's ceramic work at the Ibaraki
Prefectural Museum of Ceramics. In addition to the painting on
dishes and platters, he made sculpture, taking functional work,
cutting them apart and reassembling them. I am guessing he was one
of the first persons to do this kind of thing.
Here is Picasso telling one him self. I have always thought, once a
person gains some success, that the biggest hazard is copying ones
self. Stepping out of your usual medium is one way to keep fresh:
"From the moment that art ceases to be food that feeds the best minds,
the artist can use his talents to perform all the tricks of the
intellectual charlatan. Most people can today no longer expect to
receive consolation and exaltation from art. "The 'refined,' the rich,
the professional 'do-nothings', the distillers of quintessence desire
only the peculiar, the sensational, the eccentric, the scandalous in
today's art. I myself, since the advent of Cubism, have fed these
fellows what they wanted and satisfied these critics with all the
ridiculous ideas that have passed through my mind. "The less they
understood them, the more they admired me. Through amusing myself with
all these absurd farces, I became celebrated, and very rapidly. For a
painter, celebrity means sales and consequent affluence. Today, as you
know, I am celebrated, I am rich. "But when I am alone, I do not have
the effrontery to consider myself an artist at all, not in the grand
old meaning of the word: Giotto, Titian, Rembrandt, Goya were great
painters. I am only a public clown--a mountebank. "I have understood
my time and have exploited the imbecility, the vanity, the greed of my
contemporaries. It is a bitter confession, this confession of mine,
more painful than it may seem. But at least and at last it does have
the merit of being honest."
- Pablo Picasso 1952
Self honesty is a rare ability. One I admire greatly.
--
Lee Love in Minneapolis
http://heartclay.blogspot.com/
http://mashikopots.blogspot.com/
http://claycraft.blogspot.com/
"Let the beauty we love be what we do.
There are hundreds of ways to kneel and kiss the ground." --Rumi
James F on sun 7 sep 08
Lee...
This is a fascinating quotation=2C if genuine. Can you provide a proper at=
tribution or proof source? It seems 'too good to be true'. Thanks.
...James=20
>=20
> 'From the moment that art ceases to be food that feeds the best minds=2C
> the artist can use his talents to perform all the tricks of the
> intellectual charlatan. Most people can today no longer expect to
> receive consolation and exaltation from art. 'The 'refined=2C' the rich=
=2C
> the professional 'do-nothings'=2C the distillers of quintessence desire
> only the peculiar=2C the sensational=2C the eccentric=2C the scandalous i=
n
> today's art. I myself=2C since the advent of Cubism=2C have fed these
> fellows what they wanted and satisfied these critics with all the
> ridiculous ideas that have passed through my mind. 'The less they
> understood them=2C the more they admired me. Through amusing myself with
> all these absurd farces=2C I became celebrated=2C and very rapidly. For a
> painter=2C celebrity means sales and consequent affluence. Today=2C as yo=
u
> know=2C I am celebrated=2C I am rich. 'But when I am alone=2C I do not ha=
ve
> the effrontery to consider myself an artist at all=2C not in the grand
> old meaning of the word: Giotto=2C Titian=2C Rembrandt=2C Goya were great
> painters. I am only a public clown--a mountebank. 'I have understood
> my time and have exploited the imbecility=2C the vanity=2C the greed of m=
y
> contemporaries. It is a bitter confession=2C this confession of mine=2C
> more painful than it may seem. But at least and at last it does have
> the merit of being honest.'
>=20
> - Pablo Picasso 1952
>=20
_________________________________________________________________
See how Windows Mobile brings your life together=97at home=2C work=2C or on=
the go.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/msnnkwxp1020093182mrt/direct/01/=
pdp1@EARTHLINK.NET on sun 7 sep 08
I am saying that the foray confused ( and continues to confuse ) the public
into thinking Picasso was also
a practical 'Potter' or maker of Ceramics...or, it confused things, in
various ways.
Collaborative Work is usually understood without needing explainations,
especially in contexts where no one gets any billing anyway...or when both
parties for being well known, both receive billing.
Possibly everyone would approve if someone not 'famous' ordered a bunch of
some Potter's Wares, and painted some additional glaze on them, or ordered
Bisqued wares, Painted on them, had someone else fire them, then sold them
as their own????
Or do we only approve when a 'famous' person does it?
Factories rely on a succession of procedures, done by a succession of
individuals, and, generally, no one is confused about 'who' made the item,
it is simpy accepted 'as' an item from 'that' Factory, and goes under that
Factory's name, with no individual being given credit.
Studios which went by the name of a titular person, or by a Studio name,
also, were and are
still, understood to have however many people, working under the name-sake,
and, these individuals of course do not get any billing or have their names
associated, usually, with the product.
Picasso was in a different situation, where, the result, was a lot of people
thought Picasso was 'also' a Potter, and that this was just more proof of
his amazing versatility.
Possibly, I was too harsh or precipitous in criticising Picasso, when I
ought instead have
merely lamented how abiguity, misunderstandings, lac of understanding, and
misconstruences, or a
lack of ( or indifference about ) forsight regarding confusions which can
result from abiguity, can rob actual
situations of their meanings, good, bad, or otherwise.
I have no problem with 'Picasso' having done cut and re-arrange with other's
Green wares, nor with painting on other's Pots.
I have felt a sort of disappointment or disapproval, regarding how his doing
so was taken to
indicate he was a 'Potter' as well as a Painter.
Personally, what I lament most, is a Society so poor in it's own ability to
create and entertain itself, that a Picasso or anyone else would end up
being so overly important.
But, oh well...
Whatever...
Phil
l v
----- Original Message -----
From: "marci Boskie's Mama =^..^=" <
> Phil wrote:
>>As much as I like Picasso, and his Art...I lost some respect for both,
>>with
>>his fake and stupid if not gratuitous foray into painting on other's more
>>or
>>less 'generic' forms as a gimmick, especially where the Potter(s) got no
>>billing, and, I feel, he should have had more class than to do that, and,
>>should not have sought implied 'credit' for being a 'Ceramic Artists' by
>>reputation then, merely for painting ON someone else's things.
>
> So, then , are you saying that overglaze artists ....china
> painters... are not allowed to be considered as
> ceramists ? That we are not fit to hold the title ?
> There are a whole bunch of us out there who use commercially
> made glazed ceramics as a canvas..
> and I hope youre not trying to say that because the tile
> or vase I painted on ( with overglaze paints, lusters , gold)
> and then kiln fired is not qualified to be
> recognized as ceramics because the tile or vase was made
> by some unnamed
> factory worker in China?
> Geez...Just when I thought we were making a little progress here....
>
>
> Marci Blattenberger Boskie's Mama =^..^=
> http://www.marciblattenberger.com
> marci@ppio.com
> Porcelain Painters International Online http://www.ppio.com
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG.
> Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 270.6.17/1657 - Release Date: 9/6/2008
> 8:07 PM
>
Lee Love on sun 7 sep 08
On 9/6/08, Hank Murrow wrote:
>
> He said simply, "I often paint fakes"
>
> Sometimes that is exactly what we do. he had the courage to admit it.
>
Tea cerimony bowls are like that. You have to make a 100 fakes
to find one genuine bowl.
--
Lee Love in Minneapolis
http://heartclay.blogspot.com/
http://mashikopots.blogspot.com/
http://claycraft.blogspot.com/
"Let the beauty we love be what we do.
There are hundreds of ways to kneel and kiss the ground." --Rumi
Steve Slatin on sun 7 sep 08
Hank -- I've always suspected that in
that exchange, Picasso was simply dealing
with a "man from Porlock." He had
better things to do with his time than
be bothered by some fool trying to
make a buck off of him and likely
after that exchange the dealer didn't
go back to trouble him again.
Steve Slatin --
--- On Sat, 9/6/08, Hank Murrow wrote:
> From: Hank Murrow
> Subject: Re: The voice of the Clay Or "Just a tool" - Pat's observation...
> To: CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG
> Date: Saturday, September 6, 2008, 8:03 PM
> Dear Lee;
>
> This is a real story about Picasso from one of his dealers.
>
> "I went to the Master's atelier to have a drawing
> authenticated. I
> found him working on a small painting and asked him to
> authenticate
> the drawing. He said, 'Yes, it is mine'.
>
> Some months later, I returned to have a small painting
> authenticated.
> Picasso said, "No, that's a fake"........ I
> replied, "But Master, I
> saw you working on that one when I came to have the drawing
> authenticated!"
>
> He said simply, "I often paint fakes"
>
> Sometimes that is exactly what we do. he had the courage to
> admit it.
>
> Cheers, Hank in Eugene
>
> www.murrow.biz/hank
>
>
> On Sep 6, 2008, at 5:21 PM, Lee Love wrote:
> >
> > I saw a wonderful show of Picasso's ceramic
> work at the Ibaraki
> > Prefectural Museum of Ceramics. In addition to the
> painting on
> > dishes and platters, he made sculpture, taking
> functional work,
> > cutting them apart and reassembling them. I am
> guessing he was one
> > of the first persons to do this kind of thing.
> >
> > Here is Picasso telling one him self. I have always
> thought, once a
> > person gains some success, that the biggest hazard is
> copying ones
> > self. Stepping out of your usual medium is one way
> to keep fresh:
> >
> >
> > "From the moment that art ceases to be food that
> feeds the best minds,
> > the artist can use his talents to perform all the
> tricks of the
> > intellectual charlatan. Most people can today no
> longer expect to
> > receive consolation and exaltation from art. "The
> 'refined,' the rich,
> > the professional 'do-nothings', the distillers
> of quintessence desire
> > only the peculiar, the sensational, the eccentric, the
> scandalous in
> > today's art. I myself, since the advent of Cubism,
> have fed these
> > fellows what they wanted and satisfied these critics
> with all the
> > ridiculous ideas that have passed through my mind.
> "The less they
> > understood them, the more they admired me. Through
> amusing myself with
> > all these absurd farces, I became celebrated, and very
> rapidly. For a
> > painter, celebrity means sales and consequent
> affluence. Today, as you
> > know, I am celebrated, I am rich. "But when I am
> alone, I do not have
> > the effrontery to consider myself an artist at all,
> not in the grand
> > old meaning of the word: Giotto, Titian, Rembrandt,
> Goya were great
> > painters. I am only a public clown--a mountebank.
> "I have understood
> > my time and have exploited the imbecility, the vanity,
> the greed of my
> > contemporaries. It is a bitter confession, this
> confession of mine,
> > more painful than it may seem. But at least and at
> last it does have
> > the merit of being honest."
> >
> > - Pablo Picasso 1952
> >
> > Self honesty is a rare ability. One I admire greatly.
> >
> > --
> > Lee Love in Minneapolis
> > http://heartclay.blogspot.com/
> > http://mashikopots.blogspot.com/
> > http://claycraft.blogspot.com/
> >
> > "Let the beauty we love be what we do.
> > There are hundreds of ways to kneel and kiss the
> ground." --Rumi
Vince Pitelka on sun 7 sep 08
I Googled the Picasso quote, and found a number of references. It is among
a group of art quotes at the Freer Gallery (Smithsonian Institution) website
at:
http://www.spaceandmotion.com/Art-Gallery-Pictures.htm#Gallery.Art.Pictures.
Quotes
I am assuming that they verified its authenticity. This is the first time I
have heard it, and I immediately added it to my collection of art quotes.
- Vince
Vince Pitelka
Appalachian Center for Craft
Tennessee Tech University
vpitelka@dtccom.net; wpitelka@tntech.edu
http://iweb.tntech.edu/wpitelka
marci Boskie's Mama =^..^= on sun 7 sep 08
Phil wrote:
>As much as I like Picasso, and his Art...I lost some respect for both, with
>his fake and stupid if not gratuitous foray into painting on other's more or
>less 'generic' forms as a gimmick, especially where the Potter(s) got no
>billing, and, I feel, he should have had more class than to do that, and,
>should not have sought implied 'credit' for being a 'Ceramic Artists' by
>reputation then, merely for painting ON someone else's things.
So, then , are you saying that overglaze artists ....china
painters... are not allowed to be considered as
ceramists ? That we are not fit to hold the title ?
There are a whole bunch of us out there who use commercially
made glazed ceramics as a canvas..
and I hope youre not trying to say that because the tile
or vase I painted on ( with overglaze paints, lusters , gold)
and then kiln fired is not qualified to be
recognized as ceramics because the tile or vase was made
by some unnamed
factory worker in China?
Geez...Just when I thought we were making a little progress here....
Marci Blattenberger Boskie's Mama =^..^=
http://www.marciblattenberger.com
marci@ppio.com
Porcelain Painters International Online http://www.ppio.com
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 270.6.17/1657 - Release Date: 9/6/2008 8:07 PM
Lee Love on sun 7 sep 08
Thanks for the link Vince.
On Sun, Sep 7, 2008 at 3:37 PM, marci Boskie's Mama =^..^=
wrote:
> So, then , are you saying that overglaze artists ....china
> painters... are not allowed to be considered as
> ceramists ? That we are not fit to hold the title ?
> There are a whole bunch of us out there who use commercially
> made glazed ceramics as a canvas..
Marci,
I'm with you. Picasso never claimed to be a potter. Frankly,
it wouldn't have been the best use of time.
All these examples are valid creative expressions. I
personally believe, everybody is creative. You simply have to find
your medium. You could be a gifted enamel decorator but not be able
to make a decent pot if your life depended upon it.
--
Lee Love in Minneapolis
http://heartclay.blogspot.com/
http://mashikopots.blogspot.com/
http://claycraft.blogspot.com/
"Let the beauty we love be what we do.
There are hundreds of ways to kneel and kiss the ground." --Rumi
Lee Love on sun 7 sep 08
Here is an Einstein quote from Vince's Smithsonian Link (yeah, yeah, I
know, Einstein didn't build his own cyclotrons. What a fake!
Hahahaha! ;^))
It explains that the tool, the user and the process are not
separate, and that this idea is science, not "mysticism."
"When forced to summarize the general theory of relativity in one
sentence: Time and space and gravitation have no separate existence
from matter. ... Physical objects are not in space, but these objects
are spatially extended. In this way the concept 'empty space' loses
its meaning. ... The particle can only appear as a limited region in
space in which the field strength or the energy density are
particularly high. ...
The free, unhampered exchange of ideas and scientific conclusions is
necessary for the sound development of science, as it is in all
spheres of cultural life. ... We must not conceal from ourselves that
no improvement in the present depressing situation is possible without
a severe struggle; for the handful of those who are really determined
to do something is minute in comparison with the mass of the lukewarm
and the misguided. ...
Humanity is going to need a substantially new way of thinking if it is
to survive!" (Albert Einstein)
The same is even more true for art.
--
Lee Love in Minneapolis
http://heartclay.blogspot.com/
http://mashikopots.blogspot.com/
http://claycraft.blogspot.com/
"Let the beauty we love be what we do.
There are hundreds of ways to kneel and kiss the ground." --Rumi
Eva Gallagher on sun 7 sep 08
Hi - as my mother's favorite painter I've always been interested in Picasso
and was going to copy the quote for her, but then I saw the footnotes - the
right hand column - it is a hoax - too bad!
Eva Gallagher
Deep River, Ontario
http://stephenhilljourneyworkshopjuly2008.blogspot.com/
----- Original Message -----
From: "Vince Pitelka"
To:
Sent: Sunday, September 07, 2008 2:52 PM
Subject: Re: The voice of the Clay Or "Just a tool" - Pat's observation...
>I Googled the Picasso quote, and found a number of references. It is among
> a group of art quotes at the Freer Gallery (Smithsonian Institution)
> website
> at:
> http://www.spaceandmotion.com/Art-Gallery-Pictures.htm#Gallery.Art.Pictures.
> Quotes
> I am assuming that they verified its authenticity. This is the first time
> I
> have heard it, and I immediately added it to my collection of art quotes.
> - Vince
>
> Vince Pitelka
> Appalachian Center for Craft
> Tennessee Tech University
> vpitelka@dtccom.net; wpitelka@tntech.edu
> http://iweb.tntech.edu/wpitelka
>
>
James F on mon 8 sep 08
>=20
> So=2C then =2C are you saying that overglaze artists ....china
> painters... are not allowed to be considered as
> ceramists ? That we are not fit to hold the title ?
> There are a whole bunch of us out there who use commercially
> made glazed ceramics as a canvas..
This is a subject I have thought about often. If one paints on a panel=2C =
one does not consider oneself a woodworker. If one paints on canvas=2C one=
does not consider oneself a fiber artist. Heck=2C if one paints a fresco=
=2C one does not consider oneself a plasterer. In all cases=2C one consider=
s oneself a painter regardless of the substrate. Why then does one who pai=
nts on ceramic consider oneself to be a ceramist rather than a painter? Do=
es cooking the paint in a kiln really alter the paradigm? If one made the =
pot upon which one also painted=2C then one would obviously be both a ceram=
ist and a painter. I don't think it has anything to do with "fitness to ho=
ld a title"=2C but rather with what craft is actually being employed by the=
artist. It seems to be only a question of accurate nomenclature. Ultimat=
ely I suppose it matters not a whit=2C but it is interesting nonetheless.
Be well.
...James
_________________________________________________________________
Get more out of the Web. Learn 10 hidden secrets of Windows Live.
http://windowslive.com/connect/post/jamiethomson.spaces.live.com-Blog-cns!5=
50F681DAD532637!5295.entry?ocid=3DTXT_TAGLM_WL_domore_092008=
Vince Pitelka on mon 8 sep 08
James Freeman wrote:
"This is a subject I have thought about often. If one paints on a panel,
one does not consider oneself a woodworker. If one paints on canvas, one
does not consider oneself a fiber artist. Heck, if one paints a fresco, one
does not consider oneself a plasterer. In all cases, one considers oneself a
painter regardless of the substrate. Why then does one who paints on
ceramic consider oneself to be a ceramist rather than a painter? Does
cooking the paint in a kiln really alter the paradigm? If one made the pot
upon which one also painted, then one would obviously be both a ceramist and
a painter. I don't think it has anything to do with "fitness to hold a
title", but rather with what craft is actually being employed by the artist.
It seems to be only a question of accurate nomenclature. Ultimately I
suppose it matters not a whit, but it is interesting nonetheless."
James -
It is apparent that it means a lot to the China painters. Of course they
are painting, but the comparison to someone painting on canvas is an awkward
one. China painters are painting with ceramic materials on a ceramic
surface, and their product needs to be fired in a kiln. A China painter who
decorates commercially-made bisqueware or glazed ware certainly could not
call her/himself a potter, but such a person certainly is a ceramist.
- Vince
Vince Pitelka
Appalachian Center for Craft
Tennessee Tech University
vpitelka@dtccom.net; wpitelka@tntech.edu
http://iweb.tntech.edu/wpitelka
| |
|
