Michael McDowell on sun 2 apr 00
All this either/or talk about clay objects has me wondering on Wendy Rosen's
remarks on function, roughly, that all objects with value derive it from their
expected function, to somehow please or satisfy the owner. I have to agree
with her. All clay objects of any value have a "Functional" aspect. This
aspect exists in relation (not necessarily opposition) to the "Sculptural"
aspect that all clay objects must also necessarily have. I think that it is
important to recognize that all clay objects also share a "Pictorial" or 2
dimensional aspect as well. Paul Lewing might appreciate this point.
My overall point is that none of these "Aspects" is an either/or, more of one
means less of the others type of quality. Each of the aspects is itself a
multidimensional spectrum of possibility and somewhere in the (infinity cubed)
intersection of all three Aspects (and I'm sure there are others) each object
we create is inevitably located.
So what do we mean by "a non-functional teapot"?
Or a Functional Potter?
Michael McDowell
Whatcom County, WA USA
mmpots@memes.com
http://www2.memes.com/mmpots
| |
|
