Hank Murrow on sun 20 dec 09
Kathy Forer (see below) has made a significant contribution to this
thread by taking the discussion out to include other species. Back in
1958 I read a small book by J.Z.Young entitled "Doubt and certainty
in Science", which opened my eyes to intelligence outside that which
we know as humans. I recommend the book.
By simply asking us to look at the octopus' behavior, and comparing
it to ours as craftspeople..... Kathy has shed much light on the
'problem' of who we are. The difference for me (from octopuses and
other critters) seems to be the ruminating, reflecting, and emotional
stirring that the Clayart membership is engaged in with this thread.
I doubt any octopus wonders what and why it is doing
something......... let alone posting his or her concerns on the
internet! I salute my fellow craftscritters wherever they are..... in
the oceans, or here on clayart.
Cheers, Hank in Eugene
On Dec 19, 2009, at 7:06 PM, Kathy Forer wrote:
> On Dec 19, 2009, at 1:30 AM, Bill Merrill wrote:
>
>> Dry it and fire it using cow manure and wood (walk to get the
>> manure) start the fire by friction, using no matches, fire it, now
>> that may be a truely hand made pot.
>
> The pot is not just the clay, it's also the fire.
>
> The coconut shell the octopus uses for its home is a material
> transformed with the use of tools and made into a useful object. It
> is Octopus-made using a rock to split the coconut. The rock is a
> tool as well as secondary material as far as the octopus building
> its home is concerned.
>
> Why would there be an artificial line between tools and materials?
> Once a material is transformed, materials as tools have acted upon
> it. As soon as clay is put into fire its pure state is transformed
> to a more complex one.
>
> If transformation is essential to making ceramics, why limit its
> application to fusion by fire? Why would wood's only utility be as
> fuel for fire? Wood can as easily be a 2x4, twig or split log. What
> design in the sand says it can't also be used to shape clay? And
> what of the curious ores we find in the earth on the way to our
> clay pit, other raw materials also transformed by fire. Is it wrong
> to make things with metal earth as we fire our clay earth, and use
> those knives or rasps or loops as tools to help cut and form?
> Collecting, formation and transformation is the essential process
> in making ceramics, just as the octopus with its shell.
>
> Ceramics is a product of all the classical elements, earth, water,
> fire, and air. There are many recipes to how we get those all
> working together but in the end we each find a way.
>
> If wood is used to fuel the fire that cooks the clay, then its use
> as material and tool is integral to the ceramic process and unless
> restricted by the tree union, is paid wages and should be available
> as material and tool throughout the factory. This would not be the
> case if clay is formed and left to dry and dust that way in its
> impermanent earthen form.
>
> Is the cycle so limited that wood (used elsewhere in the process)
> and metal (forbidden?) cannot be employed as well to shape the raw
> material?
>
> "By hand" demands different materials and methods when applied
> formally to shaping wet clay or making ceramics. Once wood and fire
> are added to the clay/water mix, it's ridiculous to unilaterally
> assign circular limits to how they can be used. In making ceramics,
> wood can play with clay just as well as fire interact with water.
>
> Clay forming hand tools are made from trees or other found or
> forged material. Other tools come from computers, pixels and
> vectors but that's another story. Our hands are our first tools. We
> use them in context of the materials and techniques that are
> available and chosen. It always comes down to art and technology.
>
>
> Kathy
>
| |
|
