Lee Love on wed 7 jul 10
On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 7:13 PM, Robert Harris wro=
=3D
te:
>
> For those of us that make primarily functional pottery there is a real
> problem that the public cannot tell the difference (or at least do not
> value it) between skilled potters and those that have been doing
> evening classes for a couple of years and use standard of the shelf
> glazes. -
Actually, hobby potters are a main source of educated customers.
This is especially true if you teach. There is a huge hobby
community of potters in Japan. Because of them, professional potters
have a much larger source of tools and materials than we do here.
Folks that make the stuff, even as a hobby, know
how hard it is to do it well. They are a valuable resource to the
professional potter.
--
Lee, a Mashiko potter in Minneapolis
http://mingeisota.blogspot.com/
=3D93Observe the wonders as they occur around you. Don't claim them. Feel
the artistry moving through and be silent.=3D94 --Rumi
paul gerhold on thu 8 jul 10
Two comments on the previous posts:
1) The assumption seems to be that potters who don't have to make their
living as potters will charge less. Seems to me that logic could dictate
the exact opposite.
2) If the public can not tell the difference between work by a "professiona=
l
potter" and a skilled amateur maybe the fault lies not with the public but
with the professional potter. Most of the functional work I see out there
is pretty mediocre in terms of the glazes and design work on the glazes. I
am not trying to say there isn't really good work out there but an awful lo=
t
of it just looks the same and not much different from 20 years ago.
Paul
:
Jennifer Boyer on thu 8 jul 10
Wow, Lili has raised some interesting points. More than once I've heard the
adage: in order to make a living as a potter, marry well.....
My reliance on pottery to make a living has changed over the years. When
starting out and for around 25 years, I pulled my weight when paying the
bills in the family. I'd say I contributed 30% of our income, pretty good
since we had 2 kids to raise and Tony worked long hours. But this was day t=
o
day living expenses, and what I didn't need to worry about was putting away
a nest egg, since I knew my parents would leave me a valuable piece of
property that would be my retirement savings account eventually. It would
have been tough to work hard enough at production pottery to put anything
into a retirement account.
One thing that took me by surprise: I can't crank out the pots the way I
used to. I'm 59 and the joints are complaining! When I started out I was
under the delusion I would do full time production into my 70's: NOT. I've
been doing web design on the side to boost my income since I can't handle
full days in the studio any more. It's great having a day job. It makes the
studio more fun since that pressure to make money has lessened.
And I can hear some people saying I should have focussed more on one off
work that brings a higher selling price, but I'm just not that creative!
I've tried over the years to come up with new intricate "art" pieces and
they just don't sell: you folks out there making that work are lucky you're
creative juices lead to sales. In Vermont, what sells is what's useful:
mugs, vases, lamps, etc. Moderately prices ones. I co-won a craft gallery
and we just jury in a well known potter in our area who does beautiful work=
,
wood and salt firing, amazing forms with a good amount of added steps beyon=
d
the basic throwing. He charges what he should for those pots and they sit o=
n
the shelf. He's one of our low sellers. In our area, bread and butter
potters are doing ok, not the high end ones..
I agree with Lili, no apologies necessary for doing pottery from a
comfortable position supported by family assets. The world needs pots. And
making a living strictly from pots is HARD. Noone should gloss over that
fact.
Jennifer, on a web design week in my schedule....
http://vtpots.com
http://jboyerdesign.com
Dolita Dohrman on thu 8 jul 10
I have read a number of these posts and all have very valid points.
I have been making pots for about 15-16 years and have never done it
full time. I do not make a living doing this but try to make enough
to cover expenses. That being said, I do understand the pricing
issue. I have a good friend who invited me to put work in her
gallery. My mugs were priced at $18, hers were $20. She asked me to
raise the price of mine to $20. The only reason mine were priced
lower is that I did not think they were worth more and they certainly
were not as well made as hers. However, I understood her reasoning.
When Louisville Clay held their first group sale 6 years ago, we
agreed to mix all of our work together. This same friend is an
excellent functional potter and does it full time. She had a
university student plop down a set of 5 badly thrown small plates in
the midst of her work and put a $12 price tag on the whole set. A
similar sized plate thrown by my friend would have been $24.
Understandably, she was upset. And guess what, those crappy plates
sold.
How many of us have walked into a booth and looked around, thinking
in our minds...are you serious, you are really selling this stuff?
Or had someone say, oh, please go to my website and tell me what you
think. Well, one does have to show restraint so as not to hurt
anyone's feelings! If they have already gone through the trouble of
making it, firing it, photographing it, then setting up a website to
display it, you already know they think it is special. I recently
walked around a local craft fair and, after visiting one too many
booths filled with ho-hum pots with bad glazes, one phrase started to
repeat itself in my head....JUST BECAUSE YOU CAN, DON'T! A couple of
classes does not make a doctor, neither does it make a potter. Most
of the artists I admire most have been at it for at least 25 years.
Think about it.
Dolita in Kentucky...who thinks about it all the time
Jim Willett on thu 8 jul 10
=3D46rom our corner, Lili, a big =3D93amen!=3D94 That is the way it is in o=
ur c=3D
orner of the=3D20
world as well. Over the past 11 years we have operated our pottery studio=
=3D
in=3D20
Edmonton.We went from running a production pottery supplying literally to=
=3D
ns of=3D20
pots to over 50 retailers, to trying and failing with a gallery with stud=
=3D
io=3D20
attached, to our basement studio. Doing production we learned to run a le=
=3D
an=3D20
and mean operation with both of us working over 60 hours a week, which=3D20=
=3D
allowed us to break even, selling wholesale at prices that allowed our re=
=3D
tailers=3D20
to sell against the hobby potters. Our bodies let us know we were nearing=
=3D
the=3D20
end of that ride so we went the gallery route with a working pottery stud=
=3D
io on=3D20
one of the main streets in Edmonton, and promoted like crazy, thinking we=
=3D
were=3D20
different enough to become a destination shop. We still had to fight the =
=3D
very=3D20
things you spoke of. Those =3D93hobby potters=3D94 who =3D93made a bowl onc=
e=3D94=3D
and who=3D20
sell at the farmer=3D92s market or twice a year at the potter=3D92s guild s=
al=3D
es and are=3D20
happy if they sell enough to pay for their materials and dues. To top it =
=3D
off we=3D20
have a Craft Council in Alberta which discourages people in craft from ac=
=3D
tually=3D20
making a living at it. If you operate as a business you are frowned upon =
=3D
as=3D20
being too commercial. Part of the problem is they operate their own galle=
=3D
ry so=3D20
they put themselves in competition with their own members.We were craft=3D2=
0=3D
council members for several years yet when we had our studio operating ju=
=3D
st a=3D20
few blocks from their headquarters and the Korean Craft delegation came t=
=3D
o=3D20
the city we were snubbed. It became clear we were fighting a losing battl=
=3D
e so=3D20
we closed our doors and cut our overhead to the bare minimum, working out=
=3D
of=3D20
our basement studio at home. We make our living with clay, but a good por=
=3D
tion=3D20
of it is through The Clay Teacher where we go out to the schools in the a=
=3D
rea=3D20
and teach hand building projects. We taught over 4700 students and proces=
=3D
sed=3D20
their projects this school year! We still make pots for sale through our =
=3D
website=3D20
and we price our wares realistically. If we sell an item we make money on=
=3D
it.=3D20
We have done several wedding registries and we have been judged good=3D20
enough to be chosen to sell our wares in the craft tent at The Edmonton F=
=3D
olk=3D20
Music Festival for the second year in a row. Last year the Folk Festival =
=3D
paid for=3D20
our August road trip to see my son in Virginia. So we do make our living =
=3D
at clay.=3D20
And we have found our niche for the moment. Cindy likes the new schedule,=
=3D
=3D20
because it gives her a couple of summer months with a bit of =3D93play=3D94=
, =3D
when she=3D20
can pursue her artistic bent. Your analogy of the dog breeders is right o=
=3D
n.=3D20
There is no easy answer, but you have, as you so often do Lili, hit the n=
=3D
ail on=3D20
the head.=3D20
Jim Willett and Cindy Clarke
http://www.outofthefirestudio.com
http://www.theclayteacher.com
Out of the Fire Studio
Dana & Chris Trabka on thu 8 jul 10
Dolita,
My vocation and avocation are far separated. 9 to 5 I work as a systems
engineer working out problems with customer expectations, limitations of
sofware, mechanical equipment and design. From 5 to 9, vacations, holidays,
when I am not interacting with the family and when I am not sleeping I work
with clay. My wife, Dana, always knows where to find me - the studio. Why d=
o
I work with clay; because I want to. As to the benifits of an "independent"
income; I make just those pots I want to make. I do no commissions. It is a=
n
wonderfully enjoyable experience. In the studio the question is "What do I
want to make?". I make some pots that are easy to acquire ($20 to $50). I
make some pots that not casual ($50 to $75). I make some pots that have a
gallery feel ($100 to $400). Do they sell; YES. Do they all sell; YES.
However the higher end does not have the volume of the lower end. A casual
piece is a $20; easy to pay for not much to think about. Between $20 and $4=
0
it takes a bit more, the glaze, the form or I liked your casual pot. At $50
to $75 it is a gift (to yourself or some one that is special). The piece is
useful, has a good shape, and has a glaze that is appealing. At the $100 to
$400 range, it is "I WANT THAT POT" and the price is not a consideration. I
truely enjoy the people who "want that pot". One time a customer was
casually strolling by my booth, with no apparent need to take a close look.
One of my floor vases caught her eye. It took her feet about 5 paces to
respond to what the mind was seeing. Truely increadable to see such body
language.
Chris
Luke Nealey on thu 8 jul 10
On 7/7/10, Lili Krakowski wrote:
>
>
> But we all are up against very unfair competition. No, not evil
> intentions, just an unrealistic approach. We have newbies proudly tel=
l
> us they fell in love with clay at some recreational class, have been
> potting just a year and already are selling at local fairs etc. We have =
had
> people who do the clay equivalent of painting-by-the-numbers and boast of
> their sales.
> We have--as a group--provided "training wheels" for dozens and dozens of
> beginners and hobbyists....and our "reward" has been undercutting of the
> professional market.
>
> I am not blaming or accusing or condemning or judging anyone. I only am
> saying that a very real aspect of "la condition potiere" is being ignored=
,
> even when we discuss it.
> We are the professional registered dog breeders who must compete
> against those who breed a purebred bitch once a year to pay for her vet
> bills....Right.
>
> Why not discuss that?
Lili,
There is an OB/GYN here in town that has become quite a successful writer o=
f
medical mysteries. I don't know that he is unfairly stealing "professional=
"
writers business simply because it is not his main source of income. The
publishers publish his books because they think people will buy them, and
they do. I don't know if he attended workshops on writing where the folks
that ran the workshops are now mad because he got books published. If he
starts making more money from books than he does in his practice should his
partners be mad because he doesn't have to OB/GYN any more and should let
them have that business? Or should his patients go elsewhere because he's =
a
writer not a physician now?
I sell or barter or gift my pots on a very ad hoc basis. I don't cover my
expenses, its not a goal or the reason I make stuff. My better stuff is as
good or better than much of what I see at craft fairs (at least to my
aesthetic and using all the things I have learned on Clayart). But that is
irrelevant. When I pull something out of my kiln that is good in my eyes I
am a potter. It doesn't matter what kind: hobbyist, ignorant, etc., just a
potter. I probably will never know what people or other potters think of m=
y
work but it really is not a big part of why I do it.
It may not be fair or right or good that some professions make a ton more
money than others. The fact is that we have a market economy and people
will buy what they like/want. End of story. If you can't get enough peopl=
e
to buy your stuff at a price at enables you to live like you want, you need
to find something different to do. I too cringe every time I read here
about somebody that is going to make their living making pots. They are fa=
r
braver than I am.
Luke Nealey
Rankin Co. MS
Robert Harris on thu 8 jul 10
Paul - while I agree that some "professional" potters are putting out
junk, I obviously didn't make my point clear enough. I have had
friends who are "middle class" collectors of pottery. That is, their
cupboards are full of mugs, bowls etc all handmade by different
potters (including me).
Some of the stuff is fantastically well made and glazed. Others are
(in my opinion of course) poorly made (off centre feet, wonky rims,
crawled glazes). The problem is that these friends of mine value all
of these pots equally. They do not really see the difference in
quality.
Perhaps these poorly made pots are made by a skilled potter who is
deliberately introducing flaws as an artistic expression (as a
"craftsman this is somewhat anathema to me). But I don't think so.
This is what my comment about faux japanese "manky" pots is about.
Because we (in the west) do not have the cultural background to inform
us about what is natural/wabi-sabi excellence, and what is just manky
pottery, it distorts the view of the public who would like to be
collectors.
Personally I do not seem to sell to hobby potters. I have noticed that
my customers are youngish (25-45) well educated, upwardly mobile, but
not necessarily "rich". Although I have had lots of older, seemingly
wealthy, folks (I live in Florida after all), pawing over my stuff in
booths, none of them actually buy anything. Even though I can see by
their bags that they have bought other stuff at the same fair.
As to your other point, I think you will find that potters who are
supported by others underprice their work because the price
differential is made up by the personal fulfillment of having sold
something. In a very crass way (which is slightly unfair) stroking
their ego is more important than money.
Robert
On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 8:59 AM, paul gerhold wro=
=3D
te:
> Two comments on the previous posts:
> 1) The assumption seems to be that potters who don't have to make their
> living as potters will charge less.=3DA0 Seems to me that logic could dic=
ta=3D
te
> the exact opposite.
>
> 2) If the public can not tell the difference between work by a "professio=
=3D
nal
> potter" and a skilled amateur maybe the fault lies not with the public bu=
=3D
t
> with the professional potter.=3DA0 Most of the functional work I see out =
th=3D
ere
> is pretty mediocre in terms of the glazes and design work on the glazes.=
=3D
=3DA0 I
> am not trying to say there isn't really good work out there but an awful =
=3D
lot
> of it just looks the same and not much different from 20 years ago.
>
> Paul
>
>
> :
>
--=3D20
----------------------------------------------------------
Dolita Dohrman on fri 9 jul 10
Hi Chris, We are probably on the same page. What I wrote was not
targeting people like you. You and I make pots for the same
reasons. I have 'art' pieces and I have functional pieces, all are
priced accordingly. After 15 years, I have finally reached a level
at which I feel I can charge anywhere from $20 for a mug to $180 for
my wall plates. Haven't made anything that goes over $200...yet! My
prices do not undercut those of people trying to make a living. I
have to tell you though, I would never want to even try to make a
living doing this, my hat is off to those who do.
You really have some useful info in this email as far as pricing
goes. I have never really put it into words before but you are right
about the price of 'gift' items.
I love your description of the body language of the woman you went
right to your floor vases...it does feel good, doesn't it!
Dolita
On Jul 8, 2010, at 11:01 PM, Dana & Chris Trabka wrote:
> Dolita,
>
> My vocation and avocation are far separated. 9 to 5 I work as a
> systems engineer working out problems with customer expectations,
> limitations of sofware, mechanical equipment and design. From 5 to
> 9, vacations, holidays, when I am not interacting with the family
> and when I am not sleeping I work with clay. My wife, Dana, always
> knows where to find me - the studio. Why do I work with clay;
> because I want to. As to the benifits of an "independent" income; I
> make just those pots I want to make. I do no commissions. It is an
> wonderfully enjoyable experience. In the studio the question is
> "What do I want to make?". I make some pots that are easy to
> acquire ($20 to $50). I make some pots that not casual ($50 to
> $75). I make some pots that have a gallery feel ($100 to $400). Do
> they sell; YES. Do they all sell; YES. However the higher end does
> not have the volume of the lower end. A casual piece is a $20; easy
> to pay for not much to think about. Between $20 and $40 it takes a
> bit more, the glaze, the form or I liked your casual pot. At $50 to
> $75 it is a gift (to yourself or some one that is special). The
> piece is useful, has a good shape, and has a glaze that is
> appealing. At the $100 to $400 range, it is "I WANT THAT POT" and
> the price is not a consideration. I truely enjoy the people who
> "want that pot". One time a customer was casually strolling by my
> booth, with no apparent need to take a close look. One of my floor
> vases caught her eye. It took her feet about 5 paces to respond to
> what the mind was seeing. Truely increadable to see such body
> language.
>
> Chris
Lee Love on fri 9 jul 10
I just wanted to add: It is hard to buy from a Sourpuss. Try to
keep a joyful attitude.
--
Lee, a Mashiko potter in Minneapolis
http://mingeisota.blogspot.com/
=3D93Observe the wonders as they occur around you. Don't claim them. Feel
the artistry moving through and be silent.=3D94 --Rumi
Lee Love on fri 9 jul 10
On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 1:18 PM, Robert Harris wro=
=3D
te:
> Paul - while I agree that some "professional" potters are putting out
> junk, I obviously didn't make my point clear enough. I have had
> friends who are "middle class" collectors of pottery. That is, their
> cupboards are full of mugs, bowls etc all handmade by different
> potters (including me).
I have "working class" people buying my work, as well as students and
other potters. I am a democrat as far as selling goes and I want all
types to be interested in using functional work to enhance their daily
lives.
--
Lee, a Mashiko potter in Minneapolis
http://mingeisota.blogspot.com/
=3D93Observe the wonders as they occur around you. Don't claim them. Feel
the artistry moving through and be silent.=3D94 --Rumi
Lee Love on fri 9 jul 10
On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 10:47 PM, Daniel Rotblatt w=
=3D
rote:
> Chris,
>
> I'm not advocating making or selling in competition with Wal-martesque
> stores.
Many young potters do exactly this in Mashiko. They wholesale mugs
for $2.50 each. It is like being a share cropper. But there are so
many young potters trying to make ends meet during hard times, so
there are many willing to do this.
--
Lee, a Mashiko potter in Minneapolis
http://mingeisota.blogspot.com/
=3D93Observe the wonders as they occur around you. Don't claim them. Feel
the artistry moving through and be silent.=3D94 --Rumi
Robert Harris on fri 9 jul 10
Wow Lee, pick up on my apparently politically incorrect word choice
and completely ignore my actual point. Do your "working class"
customers value your work more than someone significantly less skilled
and experienced? If so, why? Perhaps they are more attuned to skill
levels? If they do not then that re-emphasizes my point - how would it
make you feel to know they think that unskilled garbage is just as
good (because it's handmade) as your stuff?
My point was that these friends while enjoying hand-made pottery (and
good for them) had no concept of different levels of skill. But that
goes back to a recent post saying that true production potters who
don't add some sort of "artistic" merit to their pots, and are old
fashioned craftsmen, have no place place in the modern "Wal-mart"
society. Which is probably an accurate but sad truth. Let's face it,
I've seen some pretty nice Ohata and Tenmoku style glazes in Target on
some nice well designed porcelain plates and bowls - all for less
money than it takes me to buy the raw materials and run the kiln.
Since I pride myself on "clean" unadorned, classic tableware, I have
nothing to offer besides the "handmade" label. That's why I've given
up trying to become a "professional" potter.
On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 11:29 AM, Lee Love wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 1:18 PM, Robert Harris w=
=3D
rote:
>> Paul - while I agree that some "professional" potters are putting out
>> junk, I obviously didn't make my point clear enough. I have had
>> friends who are "middle class" collectors of pottery. That is, their
>> cupboards are full of mugs, bowls etc all handmade by different
>> potters (including me).
>
> I have "working class" people buying my work, as well as students and
> other potters. =3DA0 I am a democrat as far as selling goes and I want al=
l
> types to be interested in using functional work to enhance their daily
> lives.
> --
> =3DA0Lee, a Mashiko potter in Minneapolis
> http://mingeisota.blogspot.com/
>
> =3D93Observe the wonders as they occur around you. Don't claim them. Feel
> the artistry moving through and be silent.=3D94 --Rumi
>
--=3D20
----------------------------------------------------------
Neal on fri 9 jul 10
I'm fortunate to live in North Carolina, a state with a rich
pottery tradition, which makes it also a state full of potters.
Some of are well known enough to command high prices. But for
every Mark Hewitt and Ben Owen III, there are a couple of
dozen others toiling away making their living selling $15 mugs
and $20 bowls.
As a hobbyist, I don't mean to take away the livelihood of a
professional. When I compare my prices to some professional
potters, however, I'm not underpricing my work. They are
underpricing theirs.
For instance, I don't see how anyone can wholesale mugs that
retail for $10.50 in a gallery and make any money. I pulled
some prices from the Seagrove Pottery's website. (It's not
in Seagrove, but actually in Raleigh. If anything, the prices
are big city prices and more than some of the Seagrove potters
charge.)
http://www.seagrovepotterygallery.com/gallery.htm
Other prices from their website: $14 for a 6-inch vase, $18
for a 9.5-inch pie plate, $20 for an 11-inch dinner plate,
and $12 for a honey pot (complete with lid and dipper).
Neal O'B.
Raleigh, NC
Lee Love on fri 9 jul 10
On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 11:36 AM, Robert Harris wr=
=3D
ote:
> Wow Lee, pick up on my apparently politically incorrect word choice
> and completely ignore my actual point. Do your "working class"
> customers value your work more than someone significantly less skilled
> and experienced?
Robert, the pottery "culture" is diverse in America. We are
lucky here in Minnesota/Wisconsin. Warren MacKenzie has educated
thousands of people. Most never became potter, but are appreciators
none the less. I have no idea what the climate is like elsewhere.
--
Lee, a Mashiko potter in Minneapolis
http://mingeisota.blogspot.com/
=3D93Observe the wonders as they occur around you. Don't claim them. Feel
the artistry moving through and be silent.=3D94 --Rumi
Robert Harris on fri 9 jul 10
Hi Fabienne,
I wasn't trying to knock my friends (they are after all my friends!)
or you. Je ne sais quoi is indeed an important part of what we make.
ESPECIALLY in this time of mass production. In fact I suspect that is
precisely what all these posts about "handmade" production pottery vs
commercial pottery are all about.
If we accept that handmade should add value above and beyond the
"it's handmade" tag then Je ne sais quoi is precisely shat it is all
about. And if hobby potters and less skilled professionals can produce
the odd pot that has the quality we seek, then the professional potter
must add that to EVERY pot he makes or die on the vine.
This fact means that old fashioned craftsmanship cannot compete on a
pure basis with commercial pottery, and that "pots with character"
will be the only pots that can be sold by potters living with the
expenses of a 1st world country. Maybe this is a good thing? I don't
know.
I know that I like making pots that all strive toward a single ideal
form (which may/will of course change over time). In other words they
would all be the same but for the fact that as a human being I cannot
be as exact as a machine. I could of course make a mould/template of
that one ideal form, but I enjoy the process of throwing, and when a
pot approaches as closely as possible the ideal lodged in my mind, it
gives me the greatest satisfaction. However from my argument above I'm
not sure if this type of craftsmanship can ever be profitable. C'est
la vie.
Robert
On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 1:19 PM, Fabienne McMillan wrote:
> Hi Robert,
>
> I have a cupboard full of those mugs, too :) =3DA0I have bought some subs=
ta=3D
ndard
> pots with the rim off center e.g. b/c they had a 'je ne sais quoi' or eve=
=3D
n
> 'je sais quoi' that appealed to me and I love using all of them in the
> morning. =3DA0In fact, it takes me a minute to figure out which one today=
:=3D
p
> =3DA0I'm one of those hobby potters (well, was, on hiatus for now) who bu=
ys=3D
pots
> at fairs or elsewhere. =3DA0... maybe I'm the minority, but yeah, I know =
th=3D
e
> difference.
>
> Fabienne
>
> "We never touch people so lightly that we do not leave a trace." ~ Peggy
> Tabor Millin
>
> On Jul 8, 2010, at 1:18 PM, Robert Harris wrote:
>
>> Some of the stuff is fantastically well made and glazed. Others are
>> (in my opinion of course) poorly made (off centre feet, wonky rims,
>> crawled glazes). The problem is that these friends of mine value all
>> of these pots equally. They do not really see the difference in
>> quality.
>
>
--=3D20
----------------------------------------------------------
Fabienne McMillan on fri 9 jul 10
Hi Robert,
I have a cupboard full of those mugs, too :) I have bought some
substandard pots with the rim off center e.g. b/c they had a 'je ne
sais quoi' or even 'je sais quoi' that appealed to me and I love using
all of them in the morning. In fact, it takes me a minute to figure
out which one today :p I'm one of those hobby potters (well, was, on
hiatus for now) who buys pots at fairs or elsewhere. ... maybe I'm
the minority, but yeah, I know the difference.
Fabienne
"We never touch people so lightly that we do not leave a trace." ~
Peggy Tabor Millin
On Jul 8, 2010, at 1:18 PM, Robert Harris wrote:
> Some of the stuff is fantastically well made and glazed. Others are
> (in my opinion of course) poorly made (off centre feet, wonky rims,
> crawled glazes). The problem is that these friends of mine value all
> of these pots equally. They do not really see the difference in
> quality.
Lee Love on mon 12 jul 10
On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 7:48 PM, Ron Roy wrote:
>> In each group there are both professionals and amateurs, creative and
> traditional potters - it's time to try and convince those who don't
> care enough to make truly useful work that it's in the best interest
> of us all to try and do the job properly.
It is equally important not to make ugly pots. What I have
noticed about critics that have no aesthetic sense, is that they
always fall back on technical/quantitative measure, rather than ones
based upon beauty or qualitative measure. If you don't have an eye,
you can only base judgment on that which can be physically measured.
The most obvious measurements are light/heavy, thick/thin,
tall/short, regular vs. irregular.
Almost anybody can master the quantitative aspects. They are
elementary. But especially in our day and time, where mass
production and machines can beat humans easily in the realm of
quantitaty, the aesthetic aspects are ever more important, to justify
what we do. Humans have to do what machines can't, or they become
redundant.
--
Lee, a Mashiko potter in Minneapolis
http://mingeisota.blogspot.com/
=3D93Observe the wonders as they occur around you. Don't claim them. Feel
the artistry moving through and be silent.=3D94 --Rumi
Luke Nealey on mon 12 jul 10
On 7/11/10, Snail Scott wrote:
"As craftspeople, we value, even revere, excellent
craftsmanship, but it cannot be an end in itself.
Unless that craftsmanship manifests itself in a
way that affects the end user's appreciation of
the object, then it benefits only the maker.
We respect those who make their own clay and
compose their own glaze formulas, and honor
them above those who use pre-made materials.
We give credit to a skilled kiln operator, and to
the people who has mastered some particularly
difficult skill in order to produce their work. But,
these are OUR standards. Why should the customer
care?"
"Naturally, not all potters are as described above, but
too many see their own interest in craft and process
as the essential thing about their work. It is to them,
to course, but it almost never is to a buyer. You aren't
selling process, nor craftsmanship; you are selling an
object. Craftsmanship is just one potential aspect of
its desirability.
As I've said before, feel free to make what you like, but
if you want to make a living wage at it, potters need to
look outside the clayworld itself for inspiration, and offer
something to the buyer besides your own experience
in the making. *That's your reward, not theirs*."
Snail,
I guess I should have just for you to reply on this thread, it says all the
things I was trying to.
2 Thoughts:
1. I was visiting my brother in Madison WI and we went out to see Mark
Skudlarek's noborigama at Cambridge Wood Fired Pottery. My brother, a
professor of engineering, was interested in the process and kiln but as we
left he turned to me and said "do people really buy that stuff and use it?"
There was nothing at all compelling about the process that would make him
desire one of the really cool pieces we saw. I, of course, saw lots of
stuff I would buy or want to make.
2. I think part of the problem is the fact that, as you say well, what we
are discussing are objects. People can pick them up and look at, feel etc.
They can judge whether they like it or not. Unlike a surgeon or an
electrician, where some kind of licensing/standards are there to provide at
least some assurance that they know what they are doing (as we may not be
able to judge) and things will happen as they should, the pot purchaser can
judge for themselves. And finally, for the most part, the purchase of most
of the pottery, glass, art/craft described is both discretionary and, I
would think in most cases, small in terms of amount that people would not
worry a whole lot if the purchase didn't work out. Bad for the potter's
reputation and repeat business but not a long rued decision by the
purchaser.
Luke Nealey
Rankin Co. MS
Lee Love on mon 12 jul 10
Snail, it is really tough to compete with Wallmart. They have the
corner on consumer stuff, whose fashion comes and goes.
I am guessing you are living is a pottery deprived part of the
country according to the pots you describe. I would recommend a trip
to the American Pottery Festival at NCC in the
fall.http://www.northernclaycenter.org/see/AmPotteryFest.php Where
you see a range of work. From Ayumi Horie, Mike Noman and Maren
Kloppman to Warren MacKenzie, Randy Johnston and Jeff Oestrich
(bigger, but incomplete list below.)
I never hear folks making perennial, genuine pots
complaining much. In these hard times, making consumer goods to match
the couch are probably hit hardest.
The list below does not include all the folks in the Festival who are
in the regular sales gallery:
Shannon Adams (MT), Donna Anderegg (CA), Stanley Mace Andersen (NC),
Dan Anderson (IL), Chuck Aydlett (MT), Mary Barringer (MA), Chris
Baskin (OR), Peter Beasecker (TX), Wayne Branum (WI), Andy Brayman
(MI), Bob Briscoe (MN), Bill Brouillard (OH), Mary Louise Carter (LA),
Joe Christiansen (MN), Linda Christianson (MN), Sam Chung (AZ), Naomi
Cleary (PA), Steven Colby (CO), Michael Connelly (PA), Bernadette
Curran (PA), Malcolm Davis (WV), Charity Davis-Woodard (IL), Josh
DeWeese (MT), Paul Dresang (IL), Kowkie Durst (OR), Sanam Emami (CO),
Paul Eshelman (IL), Marty Fielding (VT), Julia Galloway (MT), Steve
Godfrey (AK), Silvie Granatelli (VA), Ursula Hargens (MN), Louise
Harter (CT), Sarah Heimann (NH), Steven Hill (IL), Bryan Hopkins (NY),
Ayumi Horie (NY), Marlene Jack (VA), Sarah Jaeger, (MT), Eric Jensen
(IL), Randy Johnston (WI), Gail Kendall (NE), Maren Kloppmann (MN),
Ben Krupka (CT), Forrest Lesch-Middelton (CA), Simon Levin (WI), Suze
Lindsay (NC), Elizabeth Lurie (MI), Warren MacKenzie (MN), Missy
McCormick (OH), Jan McKeachie-Johnston (WI), Kent McLaughlin (NC),
Alleghany Meadows (CO), Ron Meyers (GA), Sequoia Miller (WA), Lisa
Naples (PA), Jeff Oestreich (MN), Lisa Orr (TX), Jess Parker (CA),
Aysha Peltz (VT), Mark Pharis (WI), David Pier (NC), Joseph Pintz
(OH), Liz Quackenbush (PA), Brenda Quinn (NY), Kari Radasch (ME),
Alison Reintjes (KY), Davie Reneau (KY), S.C. Rolf (WI), Hide Sadohara
(NY), Pete Scherzer (MN), Ellen Shankin (VA), Mark Shapiro (MA), Andy
Shaw (LA), Jane Shellenbarger (MI), Sandy Simon (CA), Chuck Solberg
(MN), Albion Stafford (NY), Will Swanson (MN), Munemitsu Taguchi (PA),
Shoko Teruyama (NC), Betsy Williams (NM), Michael Wisner (CO), Rosalie
Wynkoop (MT), Liz Zlot Summerfield (NC).
--
Lee, a Mashiko potter in Minneapolis
http://mingeisota.blogspot.com/
=3D93Observe the wonders as they occur around you. Don't claim them. Feel
the artistry moving through and be silent.=3D94 --Rumi
John Britt on tue 13 jul 10
Ron,
I know this topic means a lot to you and I understand your concern and ag=
=3D
ree=3D20
with you in principle when you say:=3D20
=3D93If we were to support the idea of good craftsmanship here on clayart -=
=3D
as a=3D20
group - so that others would understand how important it is -that would h=
=3D
elp.=3D20=3D20
I'm not talking about style - I'm talking about leaky pots and glazes tha=
=3D
t fit.=3D94
But in actuality, what you ask for is impossible.=3D20
The first reason is that Clayart is not a unified =3D93group=3D94 is it a l=
oo=3D
sely knit band=3D20
of misfits, who come and go, read and don=3D92t read, write and don=3D92t w=
ri=3D
te, etc.=3D20=3D20
And it is a small group, in spite of those who think it is so powerful th=
=3D
at it is=3D20
capable of =3D93taking over the world=3D94. So even if you could get Clayar=
t =3D
to agree=3D20
on anything, which would only be that they like to read Clayart, it would=
=3D
=3D20
change in about a week as the group changed and went on to another topic.=
=3D
The second reason is that ceramics is complicated. It is like Rodney King=
=3D
=3D20
saying =3D93Why can=3D92t we just get along=3D94? This is a very good quest=
ion =3D
and comes=3D20
at things from the simplest idea. It should be true and we should be able=
=3D
=3D20
to =3D93just get along=3D94 but it is impossible. (the reasons are human na=
tu=3D
re,=3D20
prejudice, alcohol, drugs, seven deadly sins, poverty, etc.) So in the s=
=3D
ame=3D20
way your question, =3D91why can=3D92t we just have good craftsmanship, i.e.=
p=3D
ots that=3D20
don=3D92t leak and glazes that fit=3D92, comes at things from the simplest =
id=3D
ea. But it is=3D20
impossible because we are human and because this is earth.=3D20
It is hard to control all the variables. So for instance, if I have an el=
=3D
ectric kiln=3D20
that is firing perfectly even, and all the glazes fit. Then in a month it=
=3D
is off a=3D20
cone or more because of degradation of the elements, an element that is=3D2=
0=3D
broken, a growing crack in the lid, etc. Then suddenly the glazes displa=
=3D
y=3D20
delayed crazing because the clay body is not fired to the correct cone. O=
=3D
r=3D20
perhaps, I get a new kiln and now it is way more efficient than the last =
=3D
kiln=3D20
and it may take several months for me to figure out the =3D93correct=3D94 s=
ch=3D
edule=3D20
and glaze fit. Or perhaps, the company stops selling my G-200 feldspar an=
=3D
d I=3D20
need to find a substitute. (or barnard, a talc, a ball clay, gerstley bor=
=3D
ate, etc.=3D20
Anything that changes in ceramic materials!)
So now I am a =3D93Clayart hobbyist=3D94 and I have to figure out specific =
sc=3D
ientific=3D20
details that are mostly done by professionals who train for many years as=
=3D
=3D20
ceramic engineers. It is not going to happen. At the Homer Laughlin China=
=3D
=3D20
Company in Ohio where they make Fiestaware, they have a team of about 10=3D=
20=3D
people who work day and night to keep all the technical factors in check.=
=3D
=3D20
They have machines that cost thousands and thousands of dollars and requi=
=3D
re=3D20
hours and hours of work and maintenance, manuals, specific skills to work=
=3D
,=3D20
etc. The have control of the clay body, kilns, glazes, and hundreds of sk=
=3D
illed=3D20
workers who do what they say.
But an artist who wants to make some pottery is not capable of doing that=
=3D
.=3D20
They want to buy a claybody, buy some glazes that are the colors that the=
=3D
y=3D20
like, that remind them of a happier time when they were a child, make a=3D2=
0=3D
design from their mother=3D92s kitchen pattern, and fire it and sell it and=
=3D
make=3D20
someone happy for just a minute.=3D20=3D20
I could go on and on about the details of why this isn=3D92t going to happe=
=3D
n, but=3D20
there is one other thing. Ceramics exists across a broad range of accepta=
=3D
ble=3D20
standards. There is not one way. There are glazes that fit well enough an=
=3D
d=3D20
claybodies that are vitreous enough. They may not meet your exacting=3D20
standards but they aren=3D92t going to kill anyone, they may crack in 10 ye=
=3D
ars,=3D20
they may get a bit hot in the microwave but they work pretty well. ( And =
=3D
they=3D20
may even be within the legal standards of acceptability.)
So you can try to get everyone to agree to your standards, try to get=3D20
everyone to be very scientific but in reality it isn=3D92t going to happen.=
=3D
We can all=3D20
try to be better and education is the start of that, but even people who =
=3D
know=3D20
often veer off course because of time and financial constraints.=3D20
I do applaud your idealism but this is earth and we can only do so much.
Just my opinion,
John Britt
www.johnbrittpottery.com
Ellary Blair on tue 13 jul 10
Hi Ron=3D2C I agree with you all the way. It is to bad that potters don't
take more pride in what they make. I do crystalline pottery and it is
a difficult type of ceramics. I made a group of mugs and put them in
our local art's centers gift shop. I got a phone call that one had
sold and the buyer brought it back because it leaked. I checked all of
the mugs after I removed them from the gift shop. If the crystal glaze
had any crazing it leaked. I decided that I was not going to do
anymore functional pieces that could hold water. I do only decorative=3D20
pottery and use a good clear on the inside that doesn't allow leaks. I
wish people would be more conscious of the kind of work they put out
for sale. I have seen so many pots that have apparent glaze faults=3D2C
or cracks usually on the bottom. I feel if you put out work like that
you will eventually lose your costumer base. The gallery I have my
work in is in Lawrence Ks=3D2C my hometown=3D2C every year they have a side=
walk
sale where you can sell your pieces that are seconds. Mark them down
according to the flaws=3D2C you still get to sell the pot but not take the
chance of ruining your reputation. Obvious flawed work put out for
sale at the regular price as one that is perfect is the sign of a lazy
potter or one that doesn't take pride in their work. =3D20
Ellie Blair
Blair Pottery
Lawrence=3D2C Kansas 66047
Ellie Blair
Blair Pottery
Lawrence=3D2C Kansas 66047
=3D20
_________________________________________________________________
The New Busy is not the old busy. Search=3D2C chat and e-mail from your inb=
ox=3D
.
http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=3D3DPID28326::T:WLMTAGL=
:O=3D
N:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_3=3D
Snail Scott on tue 13 jul 10
On Jul 12, 2010, at 2:18 PM, Lee Love wrote:
> ...I would recommend a trip
> to the American Pottery Festival at NCC in the
> fall.http://www.northernclaycenter.org/see/AmPotteryFest.php Where
> you see a range of work...
Not sure why you thought I was denigrating my
local stuff, either in general or specifically. I
was just pulling up, a la 'Law & Order', a few
extremes based in reality.
I suspect that we are actually in agreement in this.
People who make excellent work - not just well-
constructed, but appealing and interesting - these
folks are at the top: the prima ballerinas, the pop
stars, the Formula 1 drivers of pottery. The middle-
of-the-road, average, competent-but-dull potter
will never be among them unless they change
their work to go beyond the merely adequate.
Some excellent potters may deserve equal
recognition and not gain it, but it's a good bet that
mediocrity will never be so honored. And may have
a tough time making a full-time living in pottery. (Or
not. I sometimes think that shows juried by the
cognoscenti form a dialogue which excludes a lot
of potential buyers, not unlike (ironically) the insular
world of contemporary art. Outward-looking work
may catch the eye of a lot more folks who couldn't
name one famous potter ever.)
>
> I never hear folks making perennial, genuine pots
> complaining much...
True. People who feel a sense of mission about their
work will do it regardless of widespread approval or
monetary gain, or lack thereof. Most of them probably
wouldn't mind some of one or the other, though, and
it's not wrong to seek a chosen level of comfort and
security. My point was not that everyone needs to make
mugs that hold exactly one can of Red Bull or which
coordinate with Miley Cyrus's current fashions. It was
that while market forces, pricing, consumer education,
competition from amateur hacks and more may be
hurting sales, it does the maker no harm to consider
whether the product may be a factor as well.
I'm not trashing traditional standards of craftsmanship,
merely pointing out that more may be required.
Craftsmanship is just one leg holding up the table.
(To push that analogy to the breaking point, if it's a
four-legged table, you might even be able to lose it
altogether if the others are properly positioned.)
The origin of this thread, in my recollection, was the
general question of 'how do we get people to buy
more of our stuff?'
There's a lot of competition for buyers' attention now,
and to succeed in the face of all present obstacles,
excellence, not merely competence, may be required.
It's a definition of 'excellent' that must be chosen each
time by the maker, though, and voted on by the buyer.
-Snail
Lee Love on tue 13 jul 10
On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 4:17 PM, Lis Allison wrote:
> But how is the buyer to recognize excellence?
It is a matter of what a society values. We don't see the whole
picture if we just look at the individual. I think that Clay Centers
are actually better at educating good consumers than University
programs are
> That is why I think some form of accreditation would be a great marketing
> tool.
This is not the best motivation for credentials, IMHO. In Shop
Class as SoulCraft, Crawford explains how lame mechanics trained at
the cookie cutter schools like Motorcycle Mechanics Institute are,
compared to mechanics who go through something more like an
apprenticeship program, even if it is an informal one.
They have a Prefectural pottery shokunin/craftsman school in
Mashiko where students learn all the technical aspects of ceramics.
But really, these things are only the foundation for anybody wanting
to go on to be a studio artist. Originally, this school was created
to supply skilled workers to work in the factory like potteries in
Mashiko. My teacher drew on graduates from this craftsman school
for his apprentices, but they really came out of the school having no
idea how to make their own pots. They were more like electricians
and plumbers than they were architects or designers. They knew how to
do what creative people told them to do.
Like a Mashiko gallery owner once told me, " A
shokunin/craftsman can copy anything." After a long pause, "But maybe
a deshi/apprentice can make something totally new."
--
Lee, a Mashiko potter in Minneapolis
http://mingeisota.blogspot.com/
=3D93Observe the wonders as they occur around you. Don't claim them. Feel
the artistry moving through and be silent.=3D94 --Rumi
Lee Love on tue 13 jul 10
On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 4:23 PM, Elizabeth Willoughby
wrote:
> =3DA0Then Lee, we can concentrate on Aesthetics.
They aren't exclusive. You have to be a lame assed potter not to
know the technical aspects. And you don't have to use industrial
methods to arrive at a technically sound pot. A disrespect for
traditional methods, proven over tens of thousands of years,
automatically tells me that a person is limited in their understanding
of what a sound pot is.
If you don't pay attention to aesthetics, you might as well buy
crap at Wallmart. At least industrial methods can be directed by good
design.
I always look at the pot a potter makes, before I ask for
technical information from them. Anybody can master the technical
aspects, but not everybody knows how to apply them esthetically. An
overbearing focus on technical aspects only, creates dead pots.
--
Lee, a Mashiko potter in Minneapolis
http://mingeisota.blogspot.com/
=3D93Observe the wonders as they occur around you. Don't claim them. Feel
the artistry moving through and be silent.=3D94 --Rumi
Snail Scott on tue 13 jul 10
On Jul 13, 2010, at 11:56 AM, Lee Love wrote:
> Technical aspects are easy to come to grips with. Ugly is
> another matter...
You said it! ;)
-Snail
Snail Scott on tue 13 jul 10
On Jul 13, 2010, at 11:56 AM, Lee Love wrote:
> Snail, I thought you were denigrating what you knew. Because I don't
> think it is a problem where I live. Lotsa fine work at affordable
> prices, so people don't bother with stuff "stuck in the '60s."
You do live in one of the reputed great centers
of contemporary American pottery. But is truly no
one there making mediocre stuff, selling at farmers'
markets and church bazaars?
In the small Midwestern college town near my home
we have potters whose work is in the best museums,
others I am embarrassed to see at a street fair, and
a few in between, making competent but not
extraordinary work and getting by. The blue-chip
potters seem to sell mainly to 'destination' buyers
who seek their work out specifically, while the mid-
and lower-level potters seem to mainly sell to impulse
buyers who take a liking to it. Even the really bad
stuff seems to get a few buyers, often (ironically)
because the candy-colored monochrome commercial
glazes of the less skilled makers suit the buyer's kitchen
better than the mottled brown glaze combos carefully
developed by the better makers, whose work would
often fit right into a 1970's craft magazine. Too much
education at the feet of those who had their heyday
in the 70's? Perhaps the barely-trained competitors
at the next booth have the wisdom of innocence after
all.
An awful lot of potters seem to make work in response
to other pots, not in response to the intersection of
materials and life.
This has been the case, more or less, everywhere I
have lived.
I can't think who it was who wrote that you cannot
trust the judgement of any architect about normal
human responses to a building, because all the
normal human responses have been trained out of
them through years of education and practice. (It's
been a while since architecture school; I'll have to
look it up.)
But I digress... (Who, me? never!)
If your area is truly free of people making derivative
renditions of the 'moldy oldies', soporific forms with
generic glazes, or scrawny handles, feeble rims,
and s-cracks, then I am pleased. But even in
Renaissance Florence there were lousy painters.
-Snail
Lee Love on tue 13 jul 10
Snail, I thought you were denigrating what you knew. Because I don't
think it is a problem where I live. Lotsa fine work at affordable
prices, so people don't bother with stuff "stuck in the '60s."
On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 12:04 AM, Snail Scott w=
=3D
rote:
>
> Unfortunate? Maybe that is the true recipe for success:
> slap-dash craftsmanship and a really fast van!
> (and mist...) =3DA0 =3DA0;)
Potters learn it from post-post-modern artists. It
is related to relativistic values. Are their universal standards for
Beauty? Yes. Beauty is not the same as taste.
Technical aspects are easy to come to grips with. Ugly is another mat=
=3D
ter.
--
Lee, a Mashiko potter in Minneapolis
http://mingeisota.blogspot.com/
=3D93Observe the wonders as they occur around you. Don't claim them. Feel
the artistry moving through and be silent.=3D94 --Rumi
Elizabeth Willoughby on tue 13 jul 10
Hi Ellary,
Needless to say, I also agree with Ron. In my way of thinking it is our
responsibility as makers of functional work to put work out there that does
not leak, does not leach, mugs that are comfortable to hold, teapots that d=
o
not drip, smooth bottoms and rims, etc. . . . work that does the job it is
supposed to do. If we are serious about what we do, we can do it well, (go=
d
knows there are enough books and teachers around to help us out there), and
it will only bring more buyers to our booths, and give potters a good
reputation they can be proud of.
John B, the point is, it is not idealistic to think that we can make a
difference if we encourage one another to pay attention to craftsmanship.
It is basic.
And Tony C, I would say that I know of one potter that is pretty darn good
at glaze technology . . . and you do too. He has been the most generous
person on this list, caring and helping potters fix their glaze problems. I=
n
fact I seem to remember that he helped you once.
Craftmanship, is the key to good work. Then Lee, we can concentrate on
Aesthetics.
Liz Willoughby
Brighton,
Ontario, Canada
On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 11:41 AM, Ellary Blair wrote:
> Hi Ron, I agree with you all the way. It is to bad that potters don't
> take more pride in what they make. I do crystalline pottery and it is
> a difficult type of ceramics. I made a group of mugs and put them in
> our local art's centers gift shop. I got a phone call that one had
> sold and the buyer brought it back because it leaked. I checked all of
> the mugs after I removed them from the gift shop. If the crystal glaze
> had any crazing it leaked. I decided that I was not going to do
> anymore functional pieces that could hold water. I do only decorative
> pottery and use a good clear on the inside that doesn't allow leaks. I
> wish people would be more conscious of the kind of work they put out
> for sale. I have seen so many pots that have apparent glaze faults,
> or cracks usually on the bottom. I feel if you put out work like that
> you will eventually lose your costumer base. The gallery I have my
> work in is in Lawrence Ks, my hometown, every year they have a sidewalk
> sale where you can sell your pieces that are seconds. Mark them down
> according to the flaws, you still get to sell the pot but not take the
> chance of ruining your reputation. Obvious flawed work put out for
> sale at the regular price as one that is perfect is the sign of a lazy
> potter or one that doesn't take pride in their work.
>
> Ellie Blair
> Blair Pottery
> Lawrence, Kansas 66047
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Ellie Blair
> Blair Pottery
> Lawrence, Kansas 66047
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> The New Busy is not the old busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your inbox=
.
>
> http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=3DPID28326::T:WLMTAGL=
:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_3
--
Liz Willoughby
Brighton/Grafton,
Ontario, Canada
Lis Allison on tue 13 jul 10
>
> There's a lot of competition for buyers' attention now,
> and to succeed in the face of all present obstacles,
> excellence, not merely competence, may be required.
> It's a definition of 'excellent' that must be chosen each
> time by the maker, though, and voted on by the buyer.
>
But how is the buyer to recognize excellence?
That is why I think some form of accreditation would be a great marketing
tool.
Lis
--
Elisabeth Allison
Pine Ridge Studio
website: www.pine-ridge.ca
Pottery blog: www.studio-on-the-ridge.blogspot.com
Garden blog: www.garden-on-the-ridge.blogspot.com
Arnold Howard on wed 14 jul 10
From: "Lis Allison"
> But how is the buyer to recognize excellence?
> That is why I think some form of accreditation would be a
> great marketing
> tool.
--------------
Custom knifemakers have an organization called the American
Bladesmith Society. Members work toward certification as
journeyman and master bladesmiths. In that field, those are
very prestigious titles. I don't know if this idea would be
feasible for potters.
Sincerely,
Arnold Howard
Paragon Industries, L.P., Mesquite, Texas USA
ahoward@paragonweb.com / www.paragonweb.com
Paul Haigh on wed 14 jul 10
If a pot is functional- make the damn thing work well, IMO.
The wife stopped at a pottery on the way home from her rents. She is starti=
ng to develop an eye. She bought a slabbed bowl with a slight glaze imperfe=
ction (to be supportive, low priced all around)- nothing to complain about,=
but noticed cracks in many if not most of the pots there. 3 years ago she =
might not have noticed the flaws that she saw on this trip.
Leaking: If I bought a functional pot that leaked, and the potter didn't ge=
t my frustration- I would freak out. Really- there's no question.
Function: Some pots function better out of good vs. poor design, or because=
design considerations were made to support some aesthetic or sculptural as=
pect. I guess that some of the public may not recognize that funky aspect c=
utting into the pouring or the handle (with uncomfortable ridges on the bac=
k) or whatever- they may be turned off to buying from some dude in a booth =
next time, and that's unfortunate for the potters that spend a lot of time =
pestering friends about what they like in a handle.
Seconds: I just opened my wood kiln last night. I had maybe 7-8 glaze tests=
in there- 3 were derived from a red clay that I picked up in SC on a busin=
ess trip. These were all done on tumblers that I made for my wife- a nice m=
ismatched set. One clay glaze was great (1:1 with wood stove ash), others c=
razed way too much and I'll do more tests. I try not to use the wood fire a=
s an excuse for crazing- if the glaze fit is bad, then even sheltered pots =
have crazing inside and it doesn't work. A lot of other pots ended up in th=
e shard pile. I expect that and account for it in my yield: I like being pi=
cky, and the wood kiln likes being a beast.
If you were to eat at my house you might never buy my pots, as we keep some=
seconds and replace them as we trade/buy others work or produce more inter=
esting seconds. The nuka (silica/feldspar/ash) came out SPECTACULAR- but we=
're keeping that too.
I do, rarely, sell seconds- but I am very proud of what I consider a fault =
or not, and have been criticized for not selling pieces with what some see =
as "mulligans". This isn't my day job though- I don't feel so much pressure=
about it.
It's hard to command a good price in some places, and hard to keep up with =
production to support a low price for others if they make their living on p=
ots. Someone starting out and trying to increase their quality, who maybe d=
oesn't realize how far they have to go can be given some guidance and some =
slack. The people that have bad glaze fits, underfired dull pots that leak,=
that have been doing it for years and are happy because pots sell... well =
they hurt us all I think.
Paul Haigh
Wiley Hill Mudworks
Web: http://wileyhill.com
Facebook: http://tinyurl.com/28ggv3w
etsy: http://www.etsy.com/shop/WileyHillMudworks
Marcia Selsor on wed 14 jul 10
I , too,liked Randall's post and definitions. However, in 2000 or 1999 I =
=3D
attended the "New Majolica " conference in Toronto. During the 2 days of =
=3D
lectures, the curator from the Asmolean in Oxford, mentioned a time in =3D
the Victorian era when an Italian Majolica plate sold for more than a =3D
Tintoretto painting. Another example I can remember was a rabbit =3D
hare/oil spot sold setting an auction record of something like $15,000 =3D
in 1915.
So pottery has been considered art in the past. It is not a new concept. =
=3D
Just one that needs reawakening.
Marcia
http://www.Americanpotters.com
On Jul 14, 2010, at 1:25 PM, gayle bair wrote:
> Hey Randall,
>=3D20
> Ae far as I'm concerned you hit the nail on the head with your =3D
response.
> I have been battling the artist vs craftsman approach since the =3D
beginning of my career in clay (1996).
> After 40 yrs in the "Arts" after I had just realized clay was the =3D
perfect medium I had been seeking I was suddenly labeled a crafter.
> At that point I took the challenge of making functional ware that are =3D
(perhaps only in my mind) works of art but
> my buyers appear to agree. It's been tough going but I've never backed =
=3D
down from that goal. It was a new form of discrimination and it really =3D
ticked me off. =3D20
> Thanks for stating it so simply and honestly.
> Best regards,
> Gayle Bair
> Bainbridge Island WA
> Tucson AZ
> gayle@claybair.com
> www.claybair.com
>=3D20
>=3D20
> On Jul 14, 2010, at 8:31 AM, Randall Moody wrote:
>=3D20
>> On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 9:28 AM, Arnold Howard =3D
wrote:
>>=3D20
>>> From: "Lis Allison"
>>>=3D20
>>>> But how is the buyer to recognize excellence?
>>>>=3D20
>>>> That is why I think some form of accreditation would be a
>>>> great marketing
>>>> tool.
>>>>=3D20
>>> --------------
>>> Custom knifemakers have an organization called the American
>>> Bladesmith Society. Members work toward certification as
>>> journeyman and master bladesmiths. In that field, those are
>>> very prestigious titles. I don't know if this idea would be
>>> feasible for potters.
>>>=3D20
>>> Sincerely,
>>>=3D20
>>> Arnold Howard
>>> Paragon Industries, L.P., Mesquite, Texas USA
>>> ahoward@paragonweb.com / www.paragonweb.com
>>>=3D20
>>=3D20
>> I think that there are two, maybe three, groups at work here. Those =3D
who
>> approach clay as a craft/craftsman medium, those that approach it as =3D
a
>> Art/artist medium and those that attempt to approach it as both. =3D
Personally
>> if some group of people attempt to tell me that I must conform to =3D
their
>> standards of what is and is not art I will tell them to pound sand. I =
=3D
will
>> not be boxed in to a compound or "guild". I honor craftsmanship but =3D
I am
>> not a tradesman and will reject any attempts to shove my chosen =3D
medium back
>> into an anachronistic structure that has little to no bearing on art.
>> Personally I think that the only way that craft (for want of a better
>> descriptor) will be looked at with the same esteem as Art is for us =3D
to stop
>> looking back to the past and outdated concepts such as guilds, =3D
apprentices,
>> journeymen and masters. We, if we want to keep any modicum of =3D
validity must
>> stop treating ourselves as anachronisms and "others" who are outside =3D
the Art
>> world looking in.
>>=3D20
>> --
>> Randall in Atlanta
>> http://wrandallmoody.com/home.html
>=3D20
Marcia Selsor
http://www.marciaselsor.com
Randall Moody on wed 14 jul 10
On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 9:28 AM, Arnold Howard wrot=
e:
> From: "Lis Allison"
>
>> But how is the buyer to recognize excellence?
>>
>> That is why I think some form of accreditation would be a
>> great marketing
>> tool.
>>
> --------------
> Custom knifemakers have an organization called the American
> Bladesmith Society. Members work toward certification as
> journeyman and master bladesmiths. In that field, those are
> very prestigious titles. I don't know if this idea would be
> feasible for potters.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Arnold Howard
> Paragon Industries, L.P., Mesquite, Texas USA
> ahoward@paragonweb.com / www.paragonweb.com
>
I think that there are two, maybe three, groups at work here. Those who
approach clay as a craft/craftsman medium, those that approach it as a
Art/artist medium and those that attempt to approach it as both. Personally
if some group of people attempt to tell me that I must conform to their
standards of what is and is not art I will tell them to pound sand. I will
not be boxed in to a compound or "guild". I honor craftsmanship but I am
not a tradesman and will reject any attempts to shove my chosen medium back
into an anachronistic structure that has little to no bearing on art.
Personally I think that the only way that craft (for want of a better
descriptor) will be looked at with the same esteem as Art is for us to stop
looking back to the past and outdated concepts such as guilds, apprentices,
journeymen and masters. We, if we want to keep any modicum of validity must
stop treating ourselves as anachronisms and "others" who are outside the Ar=
t
world looking in.
--
Randall in Atlanta
http://wrandallmoody.com/home.html
Lee Love on wed 14 jul 10
On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 7:36 PM, Snail Scott wr=
=3D
ote:
>
> You do live in one of the reputed great centers
> of contemporary American pottery. But is truly no
> one there making mediocre stuff, selling at farmers'
> markets and church bazaars?
Snail, I don't even think of those items in the same category as the
work of a studio artist.
> An awful lot of potters seem to make work in response
> to other pots, not in response to the intersection of
> materials and life
Outside influences are important. My article is all about this.
The big pitfall IMHO, is when a potter copies themselves. When they
copy their own success and stop growing. We agree, it is good if we
are not making the same pots we did long ago.
A dialog between the work of creative persons is a really
great thing to see.
>
> If your area is truly free of people making derivative
> renditions of the 'moldy oldies', soporific forms with
> generic glazes, or scrawny handles, feeble rims,
> and s-cracks, then I am pleased. But even in
> Renaissance Florence there were lousy painters.
They are irrelevant to studio artists and are no different than the
oil, acrylic or watercolors you see at the same venues.
--
Lee, a Mashiko potter in Minneapolis
http://mingeisota.blogspot.com/
=3D93Observe the wonders as they occur around you. Don't claim them. Feel
the artistry moving through and be silent.=3D94 --Rumi
gayle bair on wed 14 jul 10
Hey Randall,
Ae far as I'm concerned you hit the nail on the head with your response.
I have been battling the artist vs craftsman approach since the =3D
beginning of my career in clay (1996).
After 40 yrs in the "Arts" after I had just realized clay was the =3D
perfect medium I had been seeking I was suddenly labeled a crafter.
At that point I took the challenge of making functional ware that are =3D
(perhaps only in my mind) works of art but
my buyers appear to agree. It's been tough going but I've never backed =3D
down from that goal. It was a new form of discrimination and it really =3D
ticked me off. =3D20
Thanks for stating it so simply and honestly.
Best regards,
Gayle Bair
Bainbridge Island WA
Tucson AZ
gayle@claybair.com
www.claybair.com
On Jul 14, 2010, at 8:31 AM, Randall Moody wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 9:28 AM, Arnold Howard =3D
wrote:
>=3D20
>> From: "Lis Allison"
>>=3D20
>>> But how is the buyer to recognize excellence?
>>>=3D20
>>> That is why I think some form of accreditation would be a
>>> great marketing
>>> tool.
>>>=3D20
>> --------------
>> Custom knifemakers have an organization called the American
>> Bladesmith Society. Members work toward certification as
>> journeyman and master bladesmiths. In that field, those are
>> very prestigious titles. I don't know if this idea would be
>> feasible for potters.
>>=3D20
>> Sincerely,
>>=3D20
>> Arnold Howard
>> Paragon Industries, L.P., Mesquite, Texas USA
>> ahoward@paragonweb.com / www.paragonweb.com
>>=3D20
>=3D20
> I think that there are two, maybe three, groups at work here. Those =3D
who
> approach clay as a craft/craftsman medium, those that approach it as a
> Art/artist medium and those that attempt to approach it as both. =3D
Personally
> if some group of people attempt to tell me that I must conform to =3D
their
> standards of what is and is not art I will tell them to pound sand. I =3D
will
> not be boxed in to a compound or "guild". I honor craftsmanship but I =
=3D
am
> not a tradesman and will reject any attempts to shove my chosen medium =
=3D
back
> into an anachronistic structure that has little to no bearing on art.
> Personally I think that the only way that craft (for want of a better
> descriptor) will be looked at with the same esteem as Art is for us to =
=3D
stop
> looking back to the past and outdated concepts such as guilds, =3D
apprentices,
> journeymen and masters. We, if we want to keep any modicum of validity =
=3D
must
> stop treating ourselves as anachronisms and "others" who are outside =3D
the Art
> world looking in.
>=3D20
> --
> Randall in Atlanta
> http://wrandallmoody.com/home.html
Snail Scott on thu 15 jul 10
On Jul 15, 2010, at 2:49 PM, Lee Love wrote:
> ... Jeff Koons is
> another way to approach clay art. His "Michael and Bubbles" in
> porcelain is a scream:
> http://s3.artknowledgenews.com/files2008/JeffKoonsMichaelJacksonAndB.jpg
When I finally got to see one in person, I was
stunned to realize how big it is. It is a cast
porcelain figurine in the traditional style of
such things, but life-size - about four feet high
and 6' long overall.
By the way, the signature on the back isn't
Jeff Koons's, it's that of the Italian ceramist
who did the fabrication. Koons has never
claimed to be a craftsman and makes no
bones abourtt he faqctthat his work is made
by hired staff, but unlike a lot of other artists
who see themselves mainly as designers,
he makes a p[articular point of it.
-Snail
Lee Love on thu 15 jul 10
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 9:14 PM, Randall Moody wr=
=3D
ote:
> I wasn't being provincial. If anything the near constant "in Japan" would=
=3D
be
> considered provincial. (: a person of local or restricted interests or
> outlook).
You are fully mistaken about Japan. My article The Studio Potter,
"Found In Translation" explains the importance of outside influences
in Japanese ceramics. First, the Chinese and Koreans, and at the
turn of the 19th century, Europe and American. The World Expositions
were important in disseminating cultural information in both
directions.
When we close ourselves off from some of the greatest
traditions in our craft, we really hobble ourselves. We make work
that has already been done, but we haven't a clue about it.
Here is a teaser from my article:
"Functional potters understand how machined, synthetic surfaces
reduce our exposure to a natural tactile vocabulary. The gesture and
the natural non-uniformity of handmade work are two of the things that
draw many of us to handmade pottery. But our tactile vocabulary can
also be limited in the opposite direction, when we become used to
exaggerated gesture and expression, and lose the ability to perceive
more subtle and nuanced expression. I realized that intentional
throwing marks were not honest, and distorting a pot to look as
though it was accidental or a ''kiln accident'' was not genuine.
The Japanese examples at the Kutani and Mino exhibitions
helped me realize that copying oneself in order to repeat success is
actually more problematic that copying outside inspirations, because
it closes you off from exploration. Whether looking outside or
inward, a potter needs to reinterpret, rather than to render. "
--
Lee, a Mashiko potter in Minneapolis
http://mingeisota.blogspot.com/
=3D93Observe the wonders as they occur around you. Don't claim them. Feel
the artistry moving through and be silent.=3D94 --Rumi
Dale Neese on thu 15 jul 10
In the video with glass bead maker Art Seymor, he make the comment of how h=
e
sometimes prices his beads if they are really great examples of his work an=
d
effort......the price is "what I am willing to part with it for". Sorta the
way I price my some of my vessels above all other factors when they really
make my heart race. Of course there is only so much that the general public
will pay for a functional mug or a bowl so I try to keep those prices in
line with most other makers I have observed.
Dale Tex
"across the alley from the Alamo"
Helotes, Texas USA
www.daleneese.com
__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature=
database 5281 (20100715) __________
The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
http://www.eset.com
Lee Love on thu 15 jul 10
On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 9:04 PM, Marcia Selsor wrote:
> So pottery has been considered art in the past. It is not a new concept. =
=3D
Just one >that needs reawakening.
It doesn't need "reawakening" in Japan. Pottery has always been fine art t=
=3D
here.
Here, we have glaze masters that think earthenware like majolica
are not "functional." Do we want "Masters" like that UL certifying
our pots? Or folks that believe all functional pots should be
subservient to the dishwasher and microwave?
It would be a great disservice to our Studio Pottery system and put
us back in the industrial dark ages.
--
Lee, a Mashiko potter in Minneapolis
http://mingeisota.blogspot.com/
=3D93Observe the wonders as they occur around you. Don't claim them. Feel
the artistry moving through and be silent.=3D94 --Rumi
Lee Love on thu 15 jul 10
Randall,
I just wanted to add that I like your work in your portfolio at
your webpage. The do feel classic and whether it is conscious or
not, related to classic Chinese Sung Era porcelain forms.
--
Lee, a Mashiko potter in Minneapolis
http://mingeisota.blogspot.com/
=3D93Observe the wonders as they occur around you. Don't claim them. Feel
the artistry moving through and be silent.=3D94 --Rumi
Lee Love on thu 15 jul 10
On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 10:31 AM, Randall Moody w=
=3D
rote:
>I think that there are two, maybe three, groups at work here. Those who
>approach clay as a craft/craftsman medium, those that approach it as a
>Art/artist medium and those that attempt to approach it as both
You leave out the area most successful and respected modern
potters find themselves in, that of Studio Potter. It is somewhat
inspired by the studio arts, but without the pretentious baggage.
> descriptor) will be looked at with the same esteem as Art is for us to st=
=3D
op
> looking back to the past and outdated concepts such as guilds, apprentice=
=3D
s,
> journeymen and masters. We, if we want to keep any modicum of validity mu=
=3D
st
> stop treating ourselves as anachronisms and "others" who are outside the =
=3D
Art
> world looking in.
In our culture, if you want to be seen as "the artists", we have
several examples about how to do this. You can be trained as a fine
artist as Isamu Noguchi was, but use clay as one of your mediums.
Voulkos is another example. He use to sell pots in the sales shop,
so he could buy oil paints, his "serious" work. Jeff Koons is
another way to approach clay art. His "Michael and Bubbles" in
porcelain is a scream:
http://s3.artknowledgenews.com/files2008/JeffKoonsMichaelJacksonAndB.jpg
Almost forgot Grayson Perry! (I know Randall, his is British,
sorry!) This Transvestite potter could be a good one for an artist to
emulated: http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200312/s1005290.htm
There are more I am sure, but I can't think of them right
now. Personally, there is too much drama being an artist. I am
happy to be a studio potter. ;^)
--
Lee, a Mashiko potter in Minneapolis
http://mingeisota.blogspot.com/
=3D93Observe the wonders as they occur around you. Don't claim them. Feel
the artistry moving through and be silent.=3D94 --Rumi
Lee Love on thu 15 jul 10
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 1:23 PM, Randall Moody wr=
=3D
ote:
> My post wasn't meant to imply that certain pieces of ceramics were not
> considered Art in the past. Also, the last time I checked I was not in Ja=
=3D
pan
> and most of the rest of the members of clayart are not either. It would a=
=3D
lso
> be a great disservice to drag our Studio
There is no excuse for a provincial attitudes today. We have access
to the culture of all times and all places, allowed to do this by
modern technology. Also, many of us are not limited to selling work
to our neighbors, but sell to many countries across the globe. T
If we want to be successful about our craft being taken
seriously as art, we might as well look at examples where what we want
to do is sucessful
I was not talking about feudal Japan. There is no place on the
planet with as vibrant and living ceramic culture as you find in Japan
today.
So welcome to modern times! Be freed from the provincial/feudal
attitude about culture.
.--
Lee, a Mashiko potter in Minneapolis
http://mingeisota.blogspot.com/
=3D93Observe the wonders as they occur around you. Don't claim them. Feel
the artistry moving through and be silent.=3D94 --Rumi
Randall Moody on thu 15 jul 10
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 12:49 PM, Lee Love wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 9:04 PM, Marcia Selsor wrote:
>
> > So pottery has been considered art in the past. It is not a new concept=
=3D
.
> Just one >that needs reawakening.
>
> It doesn't need "reawakening" in Japan. Pottery has always been fine art
> there.
>
> Here, we have glaze masters that think earthenware like majolica
> are not "functional." Do we want "Masters" like that UL certifying
> our pots? Or folks that believe all functional pots should be
> subservient to the dishwasher and microwave?
>
> It would be a great disservice to our Studio Pottery system and put
> us back in the industrial dark ages.
>
> --
> Lee, a Mashiko potter in Minneapolis
> http://mingeisota.blogspot.com/
>
> =3D93Observe the wonders as they occur around you. Don't claim them. Feel
> the artistry moving through and be silent.=3D94 --Rumi
>
My post wasn't meant to imply that certain pieces of ceramics were not
considered Art in the past. Also, the last time I checked I was not in Japa=
=3D
n
and most of the rest of the members of clayart are not either. It would als=
=3D
o
be a great disservice to drag our Studio Pottery system back to the
pre-industrial dark ages or feudal Japan.
--=3D20
Randall in Atlanta
http://wrandallmoody.com/home.html
Randall Moody on thu 15 jul 10
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 3:14 PM, Lee Love wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 1:23 PM, Randall Moody
> wrote:
>
> > My post wasn't meant to imply that certain pieces of ceramics were not
> > considered Art in the past. Also, the last time I checked I was not in
> Japan
> > and most of the rest of the members of clayart are not either. It would
> also
> > be a great disservice to drag our Studio
>
> There is no excuse for a provincial attitudes today. We have access
> to the culture of all times and all places, allowed to do this by
> modern technology. Also, many of us are not limited to selling work
> to our neighbors, but sell to many countries across the globe. T
> If we want to be successful about our craft being taken
> seriously as art, we might as well look at examples where what we want
> to do is sucessful
>
> I was not talking about feudal Japan. There is no place on the
> planet with as vibrant and living ceramic culture as you find in Japan
> today.
>
> So welcome to modern times! Be freed from the provincial/feudal
> attitude about culture.
>
> .--
> Lee, a Mashiko potter in Minneapolis
> http://mingeisota.blogspot.com/
>
> =3D93Observe the wonders as they occur around you. Don't claim them. Feel
> the artistry moving through and be silent.=3D94 --Rumi
>
I wasn't being provincial. If anything the near constant "in Japan" would b=
=3D
e
considered provincial. (*:* a person of local or restricted interests or
outlook). If we want to be successful about our craft being taken
seriously as art we need to stop treating it and speaking of it as craft. I=
=3D
f
anything we need less of the "guild" mentality and more of the intellectual
rigor you see in Art. This means speaking less of how it is made and more o=
=3D
f
why it is made and what is it saying.
--=3D20
Randall in Atlanta
http://wrandallmoody.com/home.html
Randall Moody on thu 15 jul 10
Lee, I didn't leave the Studio Potter out at all. You will find him or her
in all three groups. What you see as "pretentious baggage" can also be seen
as intellectual rigor. Noguchi presented himself as an artist and Voulkos
let others figure him out. From my readings of Mr. Voulkos I would hazard t=
o
say that he would look askance at the idea of a "guild" saying who is and
who isn't a ceramic artist. As to Perry, I think that in his case the
"pretension" of being a cross dresser lends more to his mystic than his
product does. Of course that is my opinion.
--
Randall in Atlanta
http://wrandallmoody.com/home.html
Lis Allison on fri 16 jul 10
On July 15, 2010, Randall wrote:
> If we want to be successful about our craft
> being taken seriously as art we need to stop treating it and speaking
> of it as craft. If anything we need less of the "guild" mentality and
> more of the intellectual rigor you see in Art. This means speaking
> less of how it is made and more of why it is made and what is it
> saying.
That's kind of interesting. It points up the fact that what promotes Art
directly conflicts with what promotes Craft. If we do what you suggest, it
will be good for those who are making Art using clay, but will be bad for
those making tableware.
That is why I tend to think of Clay Art and Pottery as two separate
pursuits. Different motivations, different goals, different markets,
different career paths. Different markets and different marketing tactics
follow.
Lis
--
Elisabeth Allison
Pine Ridge Studio
website: www.pine-ridge.ca
Pottery blog: www.studio-on-the-ridge.blogspot.com
Garden blog: www.garden-on-the-ridge.blogspot.com
Lis Allison on fri 16 jul 10
On July 15, 2010, Lee Love wrote:
>
> Here, we have glaze masters that think earthenware like majolica
> are not "functional." Do we want "Masters" like that UL certifying
> our pots? Or folks that believe all functional pots should be
> subservient to the dishwasher and microwave?
>
> It would be a great disservice to our Studio Pottery system and put
> us back in the industrial dark ages.
I'm just going to add one comment:
One of the biggest difficulties for people trying to sell functional
pottery (usually or mostly tableware) is the perception by members of the
general population that pottery is neither practical nor safe. In Canada
we have periodic TV specials on lead in pottery.... every time, sales drop
because the public is convinced all pottery will poison their children.
The number one question I get from possible buyers, that is, those people
who don't just walk right by my booth because they 'know' pottery is bad,
is 'can I use this for food?' The number 2 question is 'can this go in the
microwave?'. Keep in mind that many mugs are bought to use at work, and
will be used to heat tea/coffee in the nuker.
I don't agree that some form of voluntary certification for functional
potters will put us back into the dark ages. Sorry, but that is nonsense.
Yes, any certifying system will be open to abuse. So is a system without
some form of certification! And no, schools are not the place for what I
am thinking of. I would like something that potters who had been working
for a year or two could apply for. In my (limited of course) experience,
those coming out of schools have their heads full of art stuff, and have
no desire to make functional stuff. For one thing, they see the prices for
mugs and bowls versus wall pieces and they shy off quick.
Lots of good discussion about the idea on Clayart, both pro and con. I
find myself agreeing with much on both sides, but surely a middle course
is possible. Even a Potters Manifesto, voluntary of course, might help.
Above all, let's not get hot under the collar! Nobody is going to force
anybody to do/not do, anything! These are just ideas!
Ok, that was more than one comment. Sorry.
Lis
--
Elisabeth Allison
Pine Ridge Studio
website: www.pine-ridge.ca
Pottery blog: www.studio-on-the-ridge.blogspot.com
Garden blog: www.garden-on-the-ridge.blogspot.com
Lee Love on fri 16 jul 10
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 7:55 PM, Robert Harris wr=
=3D
ote:
> You do seem to be slamming those of who don't want to be artists though..=
=3D
....
Yeah, Artists are martyred for their sins, so us studio potters
don't have to. ;^)
--
Lee, a Mashiko potter in Minneapolis
http://mingeisota.blogspot.com/
=3D93Observe the wonders as they occur around you. Don't claim them. Feel
the artistry moving through and be silent.=3D94 --Rumi
Randall Moody on fri 16 jul 10
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 8:55 PM, Robert Harris wro=
te:
> You do seem to be slamming those of who don't want to be artists
> though......
>
>
>
But that is not my intent and I have stated as much. If you do not wish to
be an artist that is fine. But by the same token you can't in this day and
age and at this stage of the game attempt to force a set group of standards
or certification process on what many consider art. To do so is to attempt
to put the toothpaste back in the tube. Also if you do treat your chosen
profession the equivalent of a plumber or steamfitter you can't really
complain about it being left out of the larger Art world or that it isn't
treated with the same esteem and monetary compensation.
--
Randall in Atlanta
http://wrandallmoody.com/home.html
Robert Harris on fri 16 jul 10
I would totally second Lis' comments here.
Since I was born and raised in the UK, when I think of "Studio
Pottery" I think of the likes of Lucy Rie, Hans Coper and Emmanuel
Cooper. I still think that the first two are probably the greatest mid
20thC studio potters whose pieces speak the most to me. The majestic
simplicity of Coper's pieces still leave me in awe, and he is the
probably the potter whose work I admire the most. But I would never
want to emulate him. I want to make tableware, not studio pottery. And
there are plenty of people in the UK that were trained in that era,
but wouldn't call themselves Studio Potters. For those of us that
concentrate purely on the craft of functional ware, I believe that
there is a place for accreditation of some sort.
I would also like to point out that despite writing "Towards a
Standard", Bernard Leach was still a crotchety old snob. If you read
his early correspondence with Lucy Rie, when she was first setting up
her studio in England, he was condescending and rude, and basically
told her she "wasn't doing it right", from what I recall because he
thought her work too controlled. I think that imitating other cultures
purely because of prevailing art school mores is no better than being
too insular, let us instead be true to ourselves.
Robert
Johanna San Inocencio on fri 16 jul 10
--=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3DAVGMAIL-151161B3=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3DISO-8859-1; format=3Dflowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I like that idea, "A Potter's Manifesto", kind of like a creed. What
would you (meaning the greater Clayart community, not just Lis) include
in it?"
Johanna
"A man is as free as he chooses to make himself,
never an atom freer."
The Raven, Lillith by George MacDonald
On 7/16/2010 8:33 AM, Lis Allison wrote:
> On July 15, 2010, Lee Love wrote:
>
>> Here, we have glaze masters that think earthenware like majolica
>> are not "functional." Do we want "Masters" like that UL certifying
>> our pots? Or folks that believe all functional pots should be
>> subservient to the dishwasher and microwave?
>>
>> It would be a great disservice to our Studio Pottery system and put
>> us back in the industrial dark ages.
>>
> I'm just going to add one comment:
>
> One of the biggest difficulties for people trying to sell functional
> pottery (usually or mostly tableware) is the perception by members of the
> general population that pottery is neither practical nor safe. In Canada
> we have periodic TV specials on lead in pottery.... every time, sales dro=
p
> because the public is convinced all pottery will poison their children.
> The number one question I get from possible buyers, that is, those people
> who don't just walk right by my booth because they 'know' pottery is bad,
> is 'can I use this for food?' The number 2 question is 'can this go in th=
e
> microwave?'. Keep in mind that many mugs are bought to use at work, and
> will be used to heat tea/coffee in the nuker.
>
> I don't agree that some form of voluntary certification for functional
> potters will put us back into the dark ages. Sorry, but that is nonsense.
> Yes, any certifying system will be open to abuse. So is a system without
> some form of certification! And no, schools are not the place for what I
> am thinking of. I would like something that potters who had been working
> for a year or two could apply for. In my (limited of course) experience,
> those coming out of schools have their heads full of art stuff, and have
> no desire to make functional stuff. For one thing, they see the prices fo=
r
> mugs and bowls versus wall pieces and they shy off quick.
>
> Lots of good discussion about the idea on Clayart, both pro and con. I
> find myself agreeing with much on both sides, but surely a middle course
> is possible. Even a Potters Manifesto, voluntary of course, might help.
>
> Above all, let's not get hot under the collar! Nobody is going to force
> anybody to do/not do, anything! These are just ideas!
>
> Ok, that was more than one comment. Sorry.
>
> Lis
> --
> Elisabeth Allison
> Pine Ridge Studio
> website: www.pine-ridge.ca
> Pottery blog: www.studio-on-the-ridge.blogspot.com
> Garden blog: www.garden-on-the-ridge.blogspot.com
>
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 9.0.839 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3009 - Release Date: 07/16/10 =
01:35:00
>
>
--=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3DAVGMAIL-151161B3=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
Content-Type: text/plain; x-avg=3Dcert; charset=3Dus-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Description: "Certification"
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.839 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3009 - Release Date: 07/16/10 01=
:=3D
35:00
--=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3DAVGMAIL-151161B3=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D--
Lis Allison on fri 16 jul 10
On July 16, 2010, Randall wrote:
>
> Personally I long for a time where people who work in clay abandon the
> anti-intellectualism that appears to be so prevalent and step up to the
> big table with fully formed ideas and are willing to show them. how
> much of the ceramics magazines are devoted to aesthetics and
> criticism? Most from what I have seen are technique, how-to's and what
> it is like to be a potter. If you go to a show be willing to write an
> honest critique of it in the same vein as Art Papers or Prospect etc.
> Even, and most especially, if it is a good friend of yours or one of
> the "big names" in pottery.
>
You do realize, there can be no criticism without a standard. To criticize
means to measure against a standard. I keep reading articles in the
magazines purporting to be criticism, and frankly, they leave me confused,
bemused and amused. Part of the problem is that there is no accepted
standard. The critic can trace the historical roots of the work he is
reviewing, point out it's connection to whatever 'movement' is au courant,
and comment on it's emotional impact on the viewer, but after that he's
lost in the ether. Most writers don't even do that, they just blither on
with words which mean what they mean them to mean.
And I think there are plenty of people doing Clay which are indeed trying
to express intellectual ideas, and doing it wonderfully well. These people
I call artists, artists who use clay as their medium.
What do you mean by 'aesthetics'? Most of the Clay Art shown in the mags
scorns any attempt at 'beauty' or 'aesthetics'. It's the studio potters
who try for that.
I think of Art as a form of communication. The artist tries to express
something. Words can be used, paint can be used, clay can be used.... but
the important thing is to say something, and to have it recieved by the
reader, viewer etc. Much clay work does this. But not the humble mug or
bowl. About the only thing one mug can express is the maker's personality.
Not all of us want to make Art. Some of us, like me, just want to make
cool tableware.
Lis
ps. Randall, you and I don't disagree, I think. We are just talking about
two different things.
--
Elisabeth Allison
Pine Ridge Studio
website: www.pine-ridge.ca
Pottery blog: www.studio-on-the-ridge.blogspot.com
Garden blog: www.garden-on-the-ridge.blogspot.com
Lee Love on fri 16 jul 10
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 8:33 AM, Lis Allison wrote:
> On July 15, 2010, Lee Love wrote:
>>
>> =3DA0 =3DA0 Here, we have glaze masters that think earthenware like majo=
lica
>> are not "functional." =3DA0 Do we want "Masters" like that UL certifying
>> our pots? =3DA0Or folks that believe all functional pots should be
>> subservient to the dishwasher and microwave?
>>
>> =3DA0 =3DA0It would be a great disservice to our Studio Pottery system a=
nd p=3D
ut
>> us back in the industrial dark ages.
>
> I'm just going to add one comment:
>
> One of the biggest difficulties for people trying to sell functional
> pottery (usually or mostly tableware) is the perception by members of the
> general population that pottery is neither practical nor safe. In Canada
> we have periodic TV specials on lead in pottery.... every time, sales dro=
=3D
p
> because the public is convinced all pottery will poison their children.
P We are incrediably lucky here in the Upper MidWest, but I
think what we have here is an excellent example. ublic education is
the key.
I remember Tony Clennel talking about a customer in
Canada being worried about Shino glazes being "food safe." Tony
seemed to think at the time, it was related recently published books.
We got folks to stop using "food safe" here a long time ago,
so it transformed into "microwave safe" and "dishwasher safe."
Folks that know better about modern handmade work aren't
tripped up by these things.
--
Lee, a Mashiko potter in Minneapolis
http://mingeisota.blogspot.com/
=3D93Observe the wonders as they occur around you. Don't claim them. Feel
the artistry moving through and be silent.=3D94 --Rumi
Randall Moody on fri 16 jul 10
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 9:54 AM, Lis Allison wrote:
> On July 15, 2010, Randall wrote:
> > If we want to be successful about our craft
> > being taken seriously as art we need to stop treating it and speaking
> > of it as craft. If anything we need less of the "guild" mentality and
> > more of the intellectual rigor you see in Art. This means speaking
> > less of how it is made and more of why it is made and what is it
> > saying.
>
> That's kind of interesting. It points up the fact that what promotes Art
> directly conflicts with what promotes Craft. If we do what you suggest, i=
t
> will be good for those who are making Art using clay, but will be bad for
> those making tableware.
>
> That is why I tend to think of Clay Art and Pottery as two separate
> pursuits. Different motivations, different goals, different markets,
> different career paths. Different markets and different marketing tactics
> follow.
>
> Lis
> --
> Elisabeth Allison
> Pine Ridge Studio
> website: www.pine-ridge.ca
> Pottery blog: www.studio-on-the-ridge.blogspot.com
> Garden blog: www.garden-on-the-ridge.blogspot.com
>
No. It points out that art not only involves good workmanship but also must
involve good intellectual rigor. Craft on the other hand, as it stands with
those of the "certification" mentality only need involve itself with the
workmanship of the piece.
Personally I long for a time where people who work in clay abandon the
anti-intellectualism that appears to be so prevalent and step up to the big
table with fully formed ideas and are willing to show them. how much of the
ceramics magazines are devoted to aesthetics and criticism? Most from what =
I
have seen are technique, how-to's and what it is like to be a potter. If yo=
u
go to a show be willing to write an honest critique of it in the same vein
as Art Papers or Prospect etc. Even, and most especially, if it is a good
friend of yours or one of the "big names" in pottery.
(crud, now I have to start writing...)
--
Randall in Atlanta
http://wrandallmoody.com/home.html
Randall Moody on fri 16 jul 10
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 9:33 AM, Lis Allison wrote:
>
>
> I don't agree that some form of voluntary certification for functional
> potters will put us back into the dark ages. Sorry, but that is nonsense.
> Yes, any certifying system will be open to abuse. So is a system without
> some form of certification! And no, schools are not the place for what I
> am thinking of. I would like something that potters who had been working
> for a year or two could apply for. In my (limited of course) experience,
> those coming out of schools have their heads full of art stuff, and have
> no desire to make functional stuff. For one thing, they see the prices fo=
r
> mugs and bowls versus wall pieces and they shy off quick.
>
It will not put us back in the dark ages per se but it is an idea right of
of that time. It will also lead to the compound mentality where everyone
in the compound is ok and everyone outside the compound is wrong, can't be
trusted and is a fraud that must be crushed or dismissed. Read "From Bauhau=
s
to Our House" by Tom Wolfe for a great critique of what that compound
mentality has done to architecture. If you consider yourself an artist then
the entire concept of "certification" is completely wrong headed in my
opinion. If you are simply a craftsman in the same sense as a plumber,
electrician, r steamfitter then you will never receive the same status or
compensation as an Artist and there isn't much I can say to change your
mind. Those arguing for the concept of some sort of certification put
themselves firmly in the realm of craft and remove themselves from the real=
m
of Art.
//Don't read into my post any slam or disparagement to plumbers or
electricians.
--
Randall in Atlanta
http://wrandallmoody.com/home.html
Robert Harris on fri 16 jul 10
You do seem to be slamming those of who don't want to be artists though....=
=3D
..
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 2:42 PM, Randall Moody wr=
=3D
ote:
> On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 9:33 AM, Lis Allison wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> I don't agree that some form of voluntary certification for functional
>> potters will put us back into the dark ages. Sorry, but that is nonsense=
=3D
.
>> Yes, any certifying system will be open to abuse. So is a system without
>> some form of certification! And no, schools are not the place for what I
>> am thinking of. I would like something that potters who had been working
>> for a year or two could apply for. In my (limited of course) experience,
>> those coming out of schools have their heads full of art stuff, and have
>> no desire to make functional stuff. For one thing, they see the prices f=
=3D
or
>> mugs and bowls versus wall pieces and they shy off quick.
>>
>
> It will not put us back in the dark ages per se but it is an idea right o=
=3D
f
> of that time. =3DA0 It will also lead to the compound mentality where eve=
ry=3D
one
> in the compound is ok and everyone outside the compound is wrong, can't b=
=3D
e
> trusted and is a fraud that must be crushed or dismissed. Read "From Bauh=
=3D
aus
> to Our House" by Tom Wolfe for a great critique of what that compound
> mentality has done to architecture. If you consider yourself an artist th=
=3D
en
> the entire concept of "certification" is completely wrong headed in my
> opinion. If you are simply a craftsman in the same sense as a plumber,
> electrician, r steamfitter then you will never receive the same status or
> compensation as an Artist and there isn't much I can say to change your
> mind. Those arguing for the concept of some sort of certification put
> themselves firmly in the realm of craft and remove themselves from the re=
=3D
alm
> of Art.
>
> //Don't read into my post any slam or disparagement to plumbers or
> electricians.
> --
> Randall in Atlanta
> http://wrandallmoody.com/home.html
>
--=3D20
----------------------------------------------------------
phil on sun 18 jul 10
Hi Lee,
Culture IS predicated on 'provincialism' or isolation to some degree...self
preferment to a great degree...it evolves in deference to psychological
context and conditions of actual climate, terrain, flora and fauna, etc.
Your perpetual elevating of the Japanese is your insinuation of yourself
into someone'else's to-you, better version of what you did not have
otherwise...and is an exploitation of the results of someone else's
"provincial' attitudes, as they had once been or remain somewhat, grounded
in psycholoogical and logistical self preferment and isolation.
Without their isolation, without their self preferment, Japan would never
have amounted to anything nor existed at all.
You seem to think everyone would run better if they had their Legs cut off,
since you hate the idea of their Feet reaching the ground, as if you believ=
e
they ought to somehow 'float' like Dandylion 'puffs' on some liberating
multicultural Breeze.
Oye...
Look around pardner...that Boat don't float...it 'sinks'...or it floats
merely very low at best, and goes a whole lot of nowhere doing so.
Probably it is wrong for any Organism to posess 'skin', or an Immue System
or to be or have a self at all.
Who are they do deny anyone and everything else entry and succour and sway
into their Body?
Lol...
The infection is pandemic.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toxoplasma_gondii
...et al...
Phil
Lv
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lee Love"
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 1:23 PM, Randall Moody
wrote:
> My post wasn't meant to imply that certain pieces of ceramics were not
> considered Art in the past. Also, the last time I checked I was not in
> Japan
> and most of the rest of the members of clayart are not either. It would
> also
> be a great disservice to drag our Studio
There is no excuse for a provincial attitudes today. We have access
to the culture of all times and all places, allowed to do this by
modern technology. Also, many of us are not limited to selling work
to our neighbors, but sell to many countries across the globe. T
If we want to be successful about our craft being taken
seriously as art, we might as well look at examples where what we want
to do is sucessful
I was not talking about feudal Japan. There is no place on the
planet with as vibrant and living ceramic culture as you find in Japan
today.
So welcome to modern times! Be freed from the provincial/feudal
attitude about culture.
.--
Lee, a Mashiko potter in Minneapolis
http://mingeisota.blogspot.com/
"Observe the wonders as they occur around you. Don't claim them. Feel
the artistry moving through and be silent." --Rumi
---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-----
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.830 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3007 - Release Date: 07/15/10
04:09:00
John Hesselberth on mon 19 jul 10
On Jul 13, 2010, at 9:05 PM, Lee Love wrote:
> Anybody can master the technical
> aspects, but not everybody knows how to apply them esthetically. An
> overbearing focus on technical aspects only, creates dead pots
And an overbearing focus on aesthetics creates defective pots. While I =3D
agree anyone CAN master the technical aspects I think fewer than 1/3 do =3D
so based on my observations over the years. Both technical excellence =3D
and good aesthetics are necessary to end up with a quality pot.
Regards,
John
| |
|
