Antoinette Badenhorst on fri 10 mar 00
To my limited knowledge there is a big difference between these two. It
would be good to know how you clayartes will deffine this. I think sculpture
is surpose to bring over a message and handbuilding not always. Is there a
fine line between the two or can a handbuild piece also have meaning? How
will jurors seperate the two?
Lets discuss this a little and see where it leads us.
Antoinette.
Earl Brunner on sat 11 mar 00
By this definition then, what would you classify the the
following pot as?
http://coyote.accessnv.com/bruec/eij2409.jpg
Or this one?
http://coyote.accessnv.com/bruec/eij2427.jpg
Antoinette Badenhorst wrote:
>
> ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
> To my limited knowledge there is a big difference between these two. It
> would be good to know how you clayartes will deffine this. I think sculpture
> is surpose to bring over a message and handbuilding not always. Is there a
> fine line between the two or can a handbuild piece also have meaning? How
> will jurors seperate the two?
> Lets discuss this a little and see where it leads us.
> Antoinette.
--
Earl Brunner
http://coyote.accessnv.com/bruec
mailto:bruec@anv.net
Janet Kaiser on sat 11 mar 00
Antoinette!
Always one to take up the gauntlet, here goes...
Unless you meaning sculpting (as a verb) I would hazard that you are
confusing method or technique with result here. Handbuilding is the method.
Sculpture is just one of the many possible results. IMHO it has little to do
with being "meaningful" or otherwise of the finished product, whatever the
method or technique involved.
In the good old days, "sculpting" in clay usually meant working with
armatures and using a lot of clay slapped on, taken off, slapped on again,
hollowed out, etc. etc.... Sculpting was therefore not synonymous with what
we regard as handbuilding today.
These days a "sculpture" can be made using slabs, coils, thrown elements,
etc. just like vessels and pots. I would suppose a "sculpture" is a
non-functional 3-D art form, whereas a handbuilt pot may still be
non-functional but remains a vessel of some sort.
What the jurors at shows would think is quite another matter...
Depends on their agenda.
Just my odd pence worth to start the ball rolling...
Janet Kaiser
The Chapel of Art, Criccieth LL52 0EA, GB-Wales
Home of The International Potters Path
TEL: (01766) 523570
WEB: http://www.the-coa.org.uk
EMAIL: postbox@the-coa.org.uk
> ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
> To my limited knowledge there is a big difference between these two. It
> would be good to know how you clayartes will deffine this. I think
sculpture
> is surpose to bring over a message and handbuilding not always. Is there a
> fine line between the two or can a handbuild piece also have meaning? How
> will jurors seperate the two?
Janice Alexander on sun 12 mar 00
It seems to me that handbuilding is a process, and not the end product, like
sculpture.
Janice in NC
Lana Reeves on sun 12 mar 00
Handbuilt sculpture? Meaningful pinch pots??? Art pottery??? Here we go
again! I'd classify them as "beautiful" and leave it at that! Lana
kilnkat@rcn.com =^..^=
-----Original Message-----
From: Earl Brunner
To: CLAYART@LSV.UKY.EDU
Date: Saturday, March 11, 2000 9:40 AM
Subject: Re: Handbuilding versus sculpture.
>----------------------------Original message----------------------------
>By this definition then, what would you classify the the
>following pot as?
>
>http://coyote.accessnv.com/bruec/eij2409.jpg
>
>Or this one?
>
>http://coyote.accessnv.com/bruec/eij2427.jpg
>
>Antoinette Badenhorst wrote:
>>
>> ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
>> To my limited knowledge there is a big difference between these two. It
>> would be good to know how you clayartes will deffine this. I think
sculpture
>> is surpose to bring over a message and handbuilding not always. Is there
a
>> fine line between the two or can a handbuild piece also have meaning? How
>> will jurors seperate the two?
>> Lets discuss this a little and see where it leads us.
>> Antoinette.
>
>--
>Earl Brunner
>http://coyote.accessnv.com/bruec
>mailto:bruec@anv.net
>
ababy sharon on sun 12 mar 00
Hello Earle!
>From Rlchard Zakin's book:Hand-Formed Ceramics, I learnt that there are
utilitarian and unutilitarian vessels. For me it was a great discovery and a
way to create vessels that you can put flowers in, but you better live these
vessels as they are. Definitely not sculptures(Unless you put them upside
down)
Ababi
sharon@shoval.org.il
http://www.israelceramics.org/main.asp?what=gallery
http://clay.justnet.com/cgallery/asharon.htm
----- Original Message -----
From: Earl Brunner
To:
Sent: Saturday, March 11, 2000 04:39
Subject: Re: Handbuilding versus sculpture.
> ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
> By this definition then, what would you classify the the
> following pot as?
>
> http://coyote.accessnv.com/bruec/eij2409.jpg
>
> Or this one?
>
> http://coyote.accessnv.com/bruec/eij2427.jpg
>
> Antoinette Badenhorst wrote:
> >
> > ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
> > To my limited knowledge there is a big difference between these two. It
> > would be good to know how you clayartes will deffine this. I think
sculpture
> > is surpose to bring over a message and handbuilding not always. Is there
a
> > fine line between the two or can a handbuild piece also have meaning?
How
> > will jurors seperate the two?
> > Lets discuss this a little and see where it leads us.
> > Antoinette.
>
> --
> Earl Brunner
> http://coyote.accessnv.com/bruec
> mailto:bruec@anv.net
>
Antoinette Badenhorst on mon 13 mar 00
Janet,you`re right. Let me say it like this: when will a handbuild piece be a
sculpture and when will it be a vessel. Say a competition for sculpture
comes up (or for handwork),will there be a point where one can say this is a
good piece of handwork,but not a sculpture or the other way round? Will all
entries be seen as sculptures.
This is already difficult to explain what I mean,so we will have to think
about it.In my mind I see a well made vessel with some bumps and indentions
that slightly indicates a human figure. It is painted to be a human figure.
Will this be a vessel or a sculpture.Ot can it be concidered a sculptural
vessel? Thanks for responding. I think it is good to concider this in ones
work. It might help with direction.
Antoinette.
iandol on mon 13 mar 00
------------------
Now, when I attended art school, what Janet K. describes as sculpting was =
called
modelling. To sculpt you wielded a dummy mallet and a set of chisels and =
hacked
away at wood or stone. But today I think of my teapots as sculptures. Wheel
thrown, altered, assembled with clay additions. And who would deny the =
meaning
of a teapot with it=92s implications of meeting, friendship, discourse, =
sharing,
invigoration and comfort.
Ivor Lewis.
Wondering how anyone could start the day without a cup of tea. And trying to
recall a remark of the Mad Hatter about the meaning of words.
Teres Whitney on mon 13 mar 00
I agree with Janice. Hand building is a process just as throwing is. The
final result is sculpture. Regardless of process the piece ends up as a
functional or non-functional work. Hand built (coil, slab, pinch pot)
functional or non-functional will usually classify the end product. The
same is true in any medium.
Teres-Dallas, 25 years pottery, functional sculpture and non-functional
sculpture.
-----Original Message-----
From: Janice Alexander
To: CLAYART@LSV.UKY.EDU
Date: Sunday, March 12, 2000 7:24 PM
Subject: Re: Handbuilding versus sculpture.
>----------------------------Original message----------------------------
>It seems to me that handbuilding is a process, and not the end product,
like
>sculpture.
>
>Janice in NC
>
Norman van der Sluys on tue 14 mar 00
Terminology in the visual arts is somewhat problematical. In my college days I
was comfortable with the term "painting" to include two dimensional works that
featured areas of color (not just colored lines.) Thus a pastel was a painting,
and a collage belonged in that category too. The term had lost its connection to
the material and techniques implied by "paint." I am still comfortable with
that definition. 2-D stuff was painting, or drawing, or print, and which they
were was determined largely by characteristics rather than materials or
techniques.
Sculpture meant 3-D back then, but I have grown less comfortable with the term
as I have aged (and grown to work in 3 dimensions.) My favorite sculptors back
then were people like Seymour Lipton, who braised monel metal, Tony Carro (do
we call his stuff "weldings?) and George Segal, who shopped at Goodwill and the
wrecking company. Sculpture seemed to me inadequate then and moreso now. But
nothing catchy has ever occurred to me to replace it, and I distrust terms that
categorize by materials and specific media. Winslow Homer was a painter: some of
his greatiest works were done in watercolor. My Grandma was a watercolor
painter, and she made her own stationery with her paints and brushes. Then there
are those who indulge in china painting, a technique that seldom rises above the
decorative. This leads by extension to "ceramic artists", and I admit to a
prejudice here that is likely to get me in trouble here on Clayart.
It seems to me that if a work calls attention to the way it was made, as opposed
to the statement it makes, it is destined to be judged by standards of
craftsmanship rather than art. In art, all techniques are fair game, but the
point of the piece must not be to make one bigger, or smaller, or lighter, than
the other fellow can make.
Of course, I don't call myself an artist - I am a potter, and I make things
people can use everyday. I try to make a statement with my pots and my
lifestyle, but I am content to be judged in terms of craftsmanship, even though
I am a relative newcomer to pottery and my work is far from perfection. (yes I
do break stuff, and yes I do give stuff away.) I don't think an exhibition of
handbuilding sounds like a transcendent experience, but a show of works by a
sculptor who works in clay and uses handbuilding techniques - that sounds like
art to me.
Norman van der Sluys
Janice Alexander wrote:
> ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
> It seems to me that handbuilding is a process, and not the end product, like
> sculpture.
>
> Janice in NC
vince pitelka on wed 15 mar 00
> In my mind I see a well made vessel with some bumps and indentions
> that slightly indicates a human figure. It is painted to be a human
figure.
> Will this be a vessel or a sculpture.Ot can it be concidered a sculptural
> vessel? Thanks for responding. I think it is good to concider this in ones
> work. It might help with direction.
Antoinette -
I would say that such an object is a vessel and a sculpture, and therefore a
sculptural vessel. But every three-dimensional object can be discussed in
terms of its sculptural attributes, whether or not it was created as
sculpture. With our without specific narrative content, any object can be
discussed in terms of line and plane, balance and gravity, visual radiation
and gesture, perception of movement, pattern and texture, color and value,
positive and negative space, etc.
When an artist sets out to create sculpture, reference to the vessel is
certainly an option, and the finished product may even have utilitarian
attributes, if that is part of the artist's narrative intent. However, in
art competitions specifically calling for sculpture in all media, I think
there is a bias against vessels. Personally, I feel that some of the most
exciting work being done in ceramics today is in sculptural vessels which
have no real utilitarian function. And in defining sculptural vessels, it
is irelevant whether the work is handbuilt or wheel-thrown or a combination
of the two.
Best wishes -
- Vince
Vince Pitelka
Home - vpitelka@dekalb.net
615/597-5376
Work - wpitelka@tntech.edu
615/597-6801 ext. 111, fax 615/597-6803
Appalachian Center for Crafts
Tennessee Technological University
1560 Craft Center Drive, Smithville TN 37166
http://www.craftcenter.tntech.edu/
Janet Kaiser on wed 15 mar 00
Just shows you are older than me Ivor! Or more pedantic. Modelling is what
they do on a cat walk in a fashion house as far as I am concerned. Sculpting
is more than hammer and chisel stuff, or do you not make moulds and casts
down-under? I have never seen a cast made of either wood or stone, but
surely you would not call a bronze a model? Surely that is a sculpture?
On the other hand I have serious doubts that a functional or even
non-functional teapot could be called a sculpture. It may have sculptural
elements and be hand-built using various techniques, but the fact it is a
teapot removes it from the pure, fine art category.
Fill it with elephant dung or used condoms and write a long explanatory
statement and you may be on to something though. However, it would be easier
and more PC to work this angle on a piss-pot though. The post-feminists
would be happier. Something rather male-macho about teapots don#t you agree?
Strictly tongue-in-cheek Janet Kaiser
The Chapel of Art, Criccieth LL52 0EA, GB-Wales
Home of The International Potters Path
TEL: (01766) 523570
WEB: http://www.the-coa.org.uk
EMAIL: postbox@the-coa.org.uk
----- Original Message -----
From: iandol
To:
Sent: 13 March 2000 20:02
Subject: Re: Handbuilding versus sculpture.
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
------------------
Now, when I attended art school, what Janet K. describes as sculpting was
called
modelling. To sculpt you wielded a dummy mallet and a set of chisels and
hacked
away at wood or stone. But today I think of my teapots as sculptures. Wheel
thrown, altered, assembled with clay additions. And who would deny the
meaning
of a teapot with it's implications of meeting, friendship, discourse,
sharing,
invigoration and comfort.
Ivor Lewis.
Wondering how anyone could start the day without a cup of tea. And trying to
recall a remark of the Mad Hatter about the meaning of words.
| |
|
