Des & Jan Howard on fri 27 nov 09
Tony
Gotta disagree with you on this one.
I have seen more cat turd pulled handles than ugly
extruded handles. Prolly because dudes/dudettes
who use extruded handles know what they're up to.
Des
tony clennell wrote:
> I've often said it takes longer to learn to make a good handle than
> throw a pot. People go to great lengths not to learn. the extruded
> handle being the first scapegoat.
--
Des & Jan Howard
Lue Pottery
Lue NSW
Australia
2850
02 6373 6419
www.luepottery.hwy.com.au
-32.656072 149.840624
Vince Pitelka on fri 27 nov 09
Tony Clennell wrote:
"I've often said it takes longer to learn to make a good handle than thro=
=3D
w
a pot. People go to great lengths not to learn. the extruded handle being
the first scapegoat."
And Des Howard responded:
"Gotta disagree with you on this one. I have seen more cat turd pulled
handles than ugly extruded handles. Prolly because dudes/dudettes who use
extruded handles know what they're up to."
Des -
I don't know what sort of precedent there is for extruded handles down in
Oz, but Tony is right about extruded handles in North America. There is n=
=3D
o
surer way to make an otherwise nice handmade mug look like a 99-cent
Walmart special than to equip it with an unaltered extruded handle. It
just makes it look machine-made. I would much rather see someone make th=
=3D
e
attempt at a pulled handle and end up with the "cat turds" you so
charmingly refer to than see them settle for something that looks
mechanical and uninteresting. The extruder is fine for making handle
stock that is then pulled or altered in some way, and of course it is
great for a zillion other studio processes, but people need to be wary of
handles that do not modulate in thickness or width along their length,
because they almost always look lame. I tell my students that a handle
generally looks best if it transitions in thickness and width from the to=
=3D
p
to the bottom, from the bottom to the top, or from both ends to the
center. Any one of those can work very well, depending on the design of
the rest of the mug or cup.
- Vince
Vince Pitelka
Appalachian Center for Craft
Tennessee Tech University
vpitelka@dtccom.net; wpitelka@tntech.edu
http://iweb.tntech.edu/wpitelka
Carolyn Boeri on fri 27 nov 09
thank you Vince. I do like pulled handles, I like lining them up along the
side of the shop table and picking and chosing "the one". A handle can
change a personality of a cup, give it dignity, or pizzazz, attitude, or
humility, bold, satisfied.
Carolyn, in Vermont, where handles sometimes fall on the floor.-----
Original Message -----
From: "Vince Pitelka"
To:
Sent: Friday, November 27, 2009 4:20 PM
Subject: Re: Minnesota handle
Tony Clennell wrote:
"I've often said it takes longer to learn to make a good handle than throw
a pot. People go to great lengths not to learn. the extruded handle being
the first scapegoat."
And Des Howard responded:
"Gotta disagree with you on this one. I have seen more cat turd pulled
handles than ugly extruded handles. Prolly because dudes/dudettes who use
extruded handles know what they're up to."
Des -
I don't know what sort of precedent there is for extruded handles down in
Oz, but Tony is right about extruded handles in North America. There is no
surer way to make an otherwise nice handmade mug look like a 99-cent
Walmart special than to equip it with an unaltered extruded handle. It
just makes it look machine-made. I would much rather see someone make the
attempt at a pulled handle and end up with the "cat turds" you so
charmingly refer to than see them settle for something that looks
mechanical and uninteresting. The extruder is fine for making handle
stock that is then pulled or altered in some way, and of course it is
great for a zillion other studio processes, but people need to be wary of
handles that do not modulate in thickness or width along their length,
because they almost always look lame. I tell my students that a handle
generally looks best if it transitions in thickness and width from the top
to the bottom, from the bottom to the top, or from both ends to the
center. Any one of those can work very well, depending on the design of
the rest of the mug or cup.
- Vince
Vince Pitelka
Appalachian Center for Craft
Tennessee Tech University
vpitelka@dtccom.net; wpitelka@tntech.edu
http://iweb.tntech.edu/wpitelka
Des & Jan Howard on sat 28 nov 09
Vince & Tony
Actually, I don't have a great problem with either of
your comments. I just needed to give a snippy reply to
Tony's blanket statement. To me, any handle, whether
pulled, extruded, cast or pressed unthinkingly &/or
insensitively conceived & applied is ugly.
Des
Vince Pitelka wrote:
> I don't know what sort of precedent there is for extruded handles down in
> Oz, but Tony is right about extruded handles in North America. There is n=
o
> surer way to make an otherwise nice handmade mug look like a 99-cent
> Walmart special than to equip it with an unaltered extruded handle. It
> just makes it look machine-made. I would much rather see someone make th=
e
> attempt at a pulled handle and end up with the "cat turds" you so
> charmingly refer to than see them settle for something that looks
> mechanical and uninteresting.
--
Des & Jan Howard
Lue Pottery
Lue NSW
Australia
2850
02 6373 6419
www.luepottery.hwy.com.au
-32.656072 149.840624
Vince Pitelka on sat 28 nov 09
Des Howard wrote:
"Actually, I don't have a great problem with either of
your comments. I just needed to give a snippy reply to
Tony's blanket statement. To me, any handle, whether
pulled, extruded, cast or pressed unthinkingly &/or
insensitively conceived & applied is ugly."
Des -
That is certainly true. I do not understand why so few potters learn to
make good handles. I have always felt that there is little mystery to it,
but apparently there is a great deal of mystery to it. I have been working
on a handout on handles, and as soon as it is done I am going to put it on
my website. I certainly do not claim to have all the answers, but I have
been observing, using, evaluating, and teaching handles for quite a few
decades now and I think I have a pretty good handle on this subject. Sorry
about that.
Here is a twelve-step program to better handles exerted from the Vince
Pitelka manifesto on utilitarian handles:
1) A handle on a mug or pitcher should be no longer than it needs to be. I=
n
other words, a handle should never move the hand further from the center of
gravity than is necessary.
2) Handles generally look best when they taper both in thickness and width
from the top to the bottom, from the bottom to the top, or from both ends t=
o
the center. You can easily pull or handbuild handles in any of these
configurations
3) Un-modified extruded handles demean your mugs/cups because they look
machine-made.
4) Handles with a round cross-section give you little to hold on to. When
you raise the mug upwards towards your lips, it wants to swing sideways
because your hand has no purchase on the handle. Handles with a round
cross-section are found on 99-cent Walmart mugs. They do not belong on goo=
d
handmade mugs.
5) The most comfortable utilitarian handle has a flattened oval
cross-section. Such a handle can be pulled in the space between the thumb
and the side of the hand, or can be handbuilt from a flattened carrot-shape=
d
coil of clay.
6) A handle should never have sharp ridges on the inside or outside. Both
are important. One or two fingers contact the inside surface, and the oute=
r
surface of the third finger generally rests against the outside of the
handle. Both must be comfortable in contact with our fingers.
7) The attachment points on a handle should reassure the user of its utilit=
y
and sturdiness.
8) Consider the negative space formed by the handle. That's a big part of
the aesthetics of the mug or pitcher.
9) The handle creates a line, and that line does not stop where the handle
ends. Where does the implied line go? What does it point towards? How doe=
s
that line work with the overall profile of the pot?
10) Thumb stops (those cancerous warts that sometimes appear on top of
handles just below the attachment point) are an insult to your pots and to
the user unless they contribute to comfort and utility.
11) The handle should not make a frilly sculptural statement unless you
decide that the sculptural statement is important than function and utility=
.
Curlicue attachments went out twenty-five years ago.
12) Remember above all that aesthetics are informed by millennia of utility=
.
In other words, if all or part of a utilitarian pot looks like it will not
function well, then it probably will look awkward and unresolved. We can't
always explain this, but most people can see it.
I'd like to see every potter make great handles. So many of the handles I
see in galleries and craft shows make me cringe, and I wonder "Who taught
this person?"
- Vince
Vince Pitelka
Appalachian Center for Craft
Tennessee Tech University
vpitelka@dtccom.net; wpitelka@tntech.edu
http://iweb.tntech.edu/wpitelka
| |
|
