Barb Lund on mon 17 apr 00
Alisas story of the decorated factory made pots hit home. I have recently
been involved in a juring process involving such a situation. At issue is
whether the work" counts" as hand made pottery if the items used are
factory made and/or slip cast. It doesn't matter how good the decorating
is, it is not hand made pottery and telling the public it is, by allowing
such work in a pottery show, where all work must be made by the exhibitng
artist, is miseducating the public. It may be extrememely good painting,
but it is not on hand made pots. It does those of us who make our own pots
and then decorate them a great disservice. Most of the public can't tell a
factory pot from a "real" one.
This issue makes me squirm because we have such an artist locally who makes
very fine decoated work, but he/she does not make the pots themselves.
How do the rest of you think?
Barb from Bloomington
Barb Lund
barblund@bluemarble.net
520 West 6th St.
Bloomington, In 47404
USA
812-339-8476
http://www.craftswomen.com/BarbLund-Potter/
Kathryn L Farmer on tue 18 apr 00
I think that if the artist makes the prototype, the mold, the slip cast
piece, and does the decorating, then it is as "hand made" as a piece thrown
on the wheel. If, however, an artist relys on the work of another (bought
mold, pre-made bisque) then the work is not hand made.
As for whether or not decorated pieces constitute art is another argument
entirely in my mind. Take Warhol, for example. Most of his work is comprised
of pre-existing images. Does that mean that the finished result is not art?
If I were hosting an art show I would show and jury both totally hand made
pieces and beautifully decorated pieces, but designate them to different
categories and offer separate prizes. After all, isn't the ultimate goal to
reward pieces that are beautiful and/or meaningful or moving, or whatever
art is... ? :-)
Kathryn
Kathryn
----- Original Message -----
From: "Barb Lund"
To:
Sent: Monday, April 17, 2000 5:21 PM
Subject: jurying and pots not made by artist
> ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
> Alisas story of the decorated factory made pots hit home. I have recently
> been involved in a juring process involving such a situation. At issue is
> whether the work" counts" as hand made pottery if the items used are
> factory made and/or slip cast. It doesn't matter how good the decorating
> is, it is not hand made pottery and telling the public it is, by allowing
> such work in a pottery show, where all work must be made by the exhibitng
> artist, is miseducating the public. It may be extrememely good painting,
> but it is not on hand made pots. It does those of us who make our own
pots
> and then decorate them a great disservice. Most of the public can't tell
a
> factory pot from a "real" one.
>
> This issue makes me squirm because we have such an artist locally who
makes
> very fine decoated work, but he/she does not make the pots themselves.
>
> How do the rest of you think?
> Barb from Bloomington
> Barb Lund
> barblund@bluemarble.net
> 520 West 6th St.
> Bloomington, In 47404
> USA
> 812-339-8476
> http://www.craftswomen.com/BarbLund-Potter/
Gregory D Lamont on tue 18 apr 00
At 05:21 PM 4/17/00 -0400, you wrote:
>----------------------------Original message----------------------------
>Alisas story of the decorated factory made pots hit home. I have recently
>been involved in a juring process involving such a situation. At issue is
>whether the work" counts" as hand made pottery if the items used are
>factory made and/or slip cast. It doesn't matter how good the decorating
>is, it is not hand made pottery and telling the public it is, by allowing
>such work in a pottery show, where all work must be made by the exhibitng
>artist, is miseducating the public. It may be extrememely good painting,
>but it is not on hand made pots. It does those of us who make our own pots
>and then decorate them a great disservice. Most of the public can't tell a
>factory pot from a "real" one.
>
>This issue makes me squirm because we have such an artist locally who makes
> very fine decoated work, but he/she does not make the pots themselves.
>
>How do the rest of you think?
>Barb from Bloomington
>Barb Lund
>barblund@bluemarble.net
>520 West 6th St.
>Bloomington, In 47404
>USA
>812-339-8476
>http://www.craftswomen.com/BarbLund-Potter/
Barb,
I'm certainly not an expert at this, but here's my take on a hypothetical
situation: I purchase a slipcast, bisqued item from, say, Aftosa. I then
decorate it with underglazes, overglazes, etc. I would say this is
"hand-decorated" pottery, not "hand-made". If, on the other hand, I
design and produce a prototype piece, either produce the mold myself, or
contract the moldmaking out to a professional, and do the actual
slipcasting and decorating myself, I'd call that "hand-made".
Here is where it gets fuzzy for me: I design the prototype and send it out
to, say Ceramic Design Group for the moldmaking, slipcasting and bisque
firing, with the peice returned to me for decorating, glazing and
firing. If it was a one-off item, I'd be inclined to call it "hand-made",
but if the peice was to be produced in quantity, I'd be inclined to call it
"hand-decorated", but not "hand-made". I have nothing against slip
casting, RAM pressing, or any other production technique, if it is the best
way to produce the piece. I think the difference here is whether the
production technique is being dictated by the nature of the peice, or for
reasons of quantity production.
I'll be interested to see how other reply.
Greg
E-mail address:
gdlamont@isunet.net
Pottery Web Page:
http://www.ourwebpage.net/greglamont/
Mailing address and Phone:
Greg Lamont
3011 Northwood Drive
Ames, IA 50010-4750
(515) 233-3442
Jim Brooks on tue 18 apr 00
I dont think this issue will ever be settled!!!! The person that uses
commercial molds and cuts up the pieces and reassemblies them..has an
origninal..handmade.. the person who paints or carves designs in a
commerical mold piece has an orignial hand made piece.
If one paints on the commerical mold piece..is it not original.? Do you
think that Andy Warhol stretched his own canvas?.. I doubt it.. Does that
mean his work is not original.? If someone paints a bowl.. that was
purchased at a shop.. does that mean that piece is not original?.. Or, that
it is just used as a canvas ..?
I prefer hand thrown pottery.. I like the feel better.. and i like the
"idea" that someone made it from a glob of clay.. But, that is not the only
way.. In most things in life..there are multiply ways of doing things.. same
is for pottery and art. And, slip casting.... using molds... is a tried
and true method of producing pottery and art..(If you think this isn't so..
watch the auctions).....And. it is time tested.. many time older than any of
us...Yes, even older than i am......!!!
I really think this appoach to .".my way is the only way.". smacks of the
eliteist and reminds me of most painters that i know. Their's is the only
art.!!. I guess we all need something to be snobs about ..and in pottery this
seems to be the "SNOB ISSUE"!
As the kids of today say..and rightfully so.."Get over it" !..If it made
from clay and touched be human hands..you and i can learn to love it... Jim
in Dallas.
Earl Brunner on tue 18 apr 00
LOL! There are some people out there that would question
your example of
of an artist! Just because some people say that Warhol is an
artist.....
You admit to a difference between handmade and "decorated"
pieces. The
promoters of an exhibit have a right to set what ever
criteria they
choose and the bottom line is that would-be exhibitors
should be honest
and meet the conditions. It the promoters want to do it
your way, fine,
but nothing says they should, or are required to do so.
Kathryn L Farmer wrote:
>
> ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
>
> As for whether or not decorated pieces constitute art is another argument
> entirely in my mind. Take Warhol, for example. Most of his work is comprised
> of pre-existing images. Does that mean that the finished result is not art?
>
> If I were hosting an art show I would show and jury both totally hand made
> pieces and beautifully decorated pieces, but designate them to different
> categories and offer separate prizes. After all, isn't the ultimate goal to
> reward pieces that are beautiful and/or meaningful or moving, or whatever
> art is... ? :-)
>
> Kathryn
>
> Kathryn
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Barb Lund"
> To:
> Sent: Monday, April 17, 2000 5:21 PM
> Subject: jurying and pots not made by artist
>
> > ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
> > Alisas story of the decorated factory made pots hit home. I have recently
> > been involved in a juring process involving such a situation. At issue is
> > whether the work" counts" as hand made pottery if the items used are
> > factory made and/or slip cast. It doesn't matter how good the decorating
> > is, it is not hand made pottery and telling the public it is, by allowing
> > such work in a pottery show, where all work must be made by the exhibitng
> > artist, is miseducating the public. It may be extrememely good painting,
> > but it is not on hand made pots. It does those of us who make our own
> pots
> > and then decorate them a great disservice. Most of the public can't tell
> a
> > factory pot from a "real" one.
> >
> > This issue makes me squirm because we have such an artist locally who
> makes
> > very fine decoated work, but he/she does not make the pots themselves.
> >
> > How do the rest of you think?
> > Barb from Bloomington
> > Barb Lund
> > barblund@bluemarble.net
> > 520 West 6th St.
> > Bloomington, In 47404
> > USA
> > 812-339-8476
> > http://www.craftswomen.com/BarbLund-Potter/
--
Earl Brunner
http://coyote.accessnv.com/bruec
mailto:bruec@anv.net
Kathryn L Farmer on wed 19 apr 00
:-) I agree on all counts. Cheaters shouldn't be allowed to win in any
competition.
Personally I'd like to be as successful as Warhol no matter what you called
me. (well, not really... I'm too private a person for fame)
Kathryn
Norman van der Sluys on wed 19 apr 00
Surely "artist decorated" pottery is in a different category from handmade
pottery, and is judged according to different criteria. Picasso's pots are a
case in point. You judge the decoration and how it works on the pot, not the
pot itself. To my mind it is a different art/craft form entirely, apples and
oranges. Which is more valuable is a matter of location and season, just as
with apples and oranges.
Barb Lund wrote:
> ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
> Alisas story of the decorated factory made pots hit home. I have recently
> been involved in a juring process involving such a situation. At issue is
> whether the work" counts" as hand made pottery if the items used are
> factory made and/or slip cast. It doesn't matter how good the decorating
> is, it is not hand made pottery and telling the public it is, by allowing
> such work in a pottery show, where all work must be made by the exhibitng
> artist, is miseducating the public. It may be extrememely good painting,
> but it is not on hand made pots. It does those of us who make our own pots
> and then decorate them a great disservice. Most of the public can't tell a
> factory pot from a "real" one.
>
> This issue makes me squirm because we have such an artist locally who makes
> very fine decoated work, but he/she does not make the pots themselves.
>
> How do the rest of you think?
> Barb from Bloomington
> Barb Lund
> barblund@bluemarble.net
> 520 West 6th St.
> Bloomington, In 47404
> USA
> 812-339-8476
> http://www.craftswomen.com/BarbLund-Potter/
--
Norman van der Sluys
-in idyllic Western Michigan, glad to be thinking pots after a long hard day at
COMDEX
Jeff Lawrence on wed 19 apr 00
Hello Clayart,
All my molds, without exception, are hand-made.
Jeff Lawrence ph. 505-753-5913
Sun Dagger Design fx. 505-753-8074
18496 US HWY 285/84 jml@sundagger.com
Espanola, NM 87532 www.sundagger.com
David Hendley on wed 19 apr 00
My definition of 'handmade' is literal: to be a 'handmade' pot,
a 'hand' had to make it, not a mold.
Get it? 'hand...made'.
It doesn't matter who designed the mold or who did the casting,
a cast pot is not a handmade pot. It can be 'artist designed',
'hand finished', or 'hand decorated', but not 'handmade'.
Read my 'Comment' in the current issue of Ceramics Monthly
for my complete argument in favor of this position.
As for an artist entering a piece handmade by someone
else and only decorated by the artist, I think this is also
less than honest unless the maker is listed as a collaborator
or is at least acknowledged. Pottery is not the same as
painting; there is a long craft tradition that must be recognized,
and it is the only media where only the hands, not tools, are
regularly used to make the work.
--
David Hendley
Maydelle, Texas
hendley@tyler.net
http://www.farmpots.com/
----- Original Message -----
From: Gregory D Lamont
To:
Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2000 2:41 PM
Subject: Re: jurying and pots not made by artist
| ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
| At 05:21 PM 4/17/00 -0400, you wrote:
| >----------------------------Original message----------------------------
| >Alisas story of the decorated factory made pots hit home. I have recently
| >been involved in a juring process involving such a situation. At issue is
| >whether the work" counts" as hand made pottery if the items used are
| >factory made and/or slip cast. It doesn't matter how good the decorating
| >is, it is not hand made pottery and telling the public it is, by allowing
| >such work in a pottery show, where all work must be made by the exhibitng
| >artist, is miseducating the public. It may be extrememely good painting,
| >but it is not on hand made pots. It does those of us who make our own
pots
| >and then decorate them a great disservice. Most of the public can't tell
a
| >factory pot from a "real" one.
| >
| >This issue makes me squirm because we have such an artist locally who
makes
| > very fine decoated work, but he/she does not make the pots themselves.
| >
| >How do the rest of you think?
| >Barb from Bloomington
| >Barb Lund
| >barblund@bluemarble.net
| >520 West 6th St.
| >Bloomington, In 47404
| >USA
| >812-339-8476
| >http://www.craftswomen.com/BarbLund-Potter/
|
| Barb,
|
| I'm certainly not an expert at this, but here's my take on a hypothetical
| situation: I purchase a slipcast, bisqued item from, say, Aftosa. I
then
| decorate it with underglazes, overglazes, etc. I would say this is
| "hand-decorated" pottery, not "hand-made". If, on the other hand, I
| design and produce a prototype piece, either produce the mold myself, or
| contract the moldmaking out to a professional, and do the actual
| slipcasting and decorating myself, I'd call that "hand-made".
|
| Here is where it gets fuzzy for me: I design the prototype and send it
out
| to, say Ceramic Design Group for the moldmaking, slipcasting and bisque
| firing, with the peice returned to me for decorating, glazing and
| firing. If it was a one-off item, I'd be inclined to call it "hand-made",
| but if the peice was to be produced in quantity, I'd be inclined to call
it
| "hand-decorated", but not "hand-made". I have nothing against slip
| casting, RAM pressing, or any other production technique, if it is the
best
| way to produce the piece. I think the difference here is whether the
| production technique is being dictated by the nature of the peice, or for
| reasons of quantity production.
|
| I'll be interested to see how other reply.
|
| Greg
| E-mail address:
| gdlamont@isunet.net
|
| Pottery Web Page:
| http://www.ourwebpage.net/greglamont/
|
| Mailing address and Phone:
| Greg Lamont
| 3011 Northwood Drive
| Ames, IA 50010-4750
| (515) 233-3442
|
Jim Brooks on wed 19 apr 00
Kathy.. I agree with you.. If the promoters of a show wish to set
requirements..let them..It is their show. And, of course if you are going
to be in that show.you should meet those requirements.. Andy Warhol was the
example used in a previous message..not necessarily mine... But i still
think my points were valid.. You , of course may disagree. Jim
Kathryn L Farmer on thu 20 apr 00
I didn't mean to imply that I advocate dishonesty. However the piece is
made, I think that its creator should be open and honest about the process.
I do think however, that hands are used in carving a prototype, mixing
plaster, pouring, casting, cleaning greenware, decorating the final result,
etc. as much as using a wheel. That is not to say that I prefer cast pieces
over thrown work aesthetically. I just think that hands are as directly
involved in cast pieces IF the creator does the entire process him/herself.
If you don't like the notion that a piece is not a one-of-a-kind, then I can
see how the casting process would not feel fair to qualify as being as
desirable or as valuable as a thrown or handbuilt piece. Although the finish
work might tip the scales there too in many cases.
In any case I do agree that there is a difference and works should be judged
accordingly rather than be placed in the same category. Some people prefer
cakes, some prefer pies. Both are sweet. :-)
Kathryn
in rainy Michigan
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Hendley"
To:
Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2000 2:53 PM
Subject: Re: jurying and pots not made by artist
> ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
> My definition of 'handmade' is literal: to be a 'handmade' pot,
> a 'hand' had to make it, not a mold.
> Get it? 'hand...made'.
>
> It doesn't matter who designed the mold or who did the casting,
> a cast pot is not a handmade pot. It can be 'artist designed',
> 'hand finished', or 'hand decorated', but not 'handmade'.
> Read my 'Comment' in the current issue of Ceramics Monthly
> for my complete argument in favor of this position.
>
> As for an artist entering a piece handmade by someone
> else and only decorated by the artist, I think this is also
> less than honest unless the maker is listed as a collaborator
> or is at least acknowledged. Pottery is not the same as
> painting; there is a long craft tradition that must be recognized,
> and it is the only media where only the hands, not tools, are
> regularly used to make the work.
> --
> David Hendley
> Maydelle, Texas
> hendley@tyler.net
> http://www.farmpots.com/
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Gregory D Lamont
> To:
> Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2000 2:41 PM
> Subject: Re: jurying and pots not made by artist
>
>
> | ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
> | At 05:21 PM 4/17/00 -0400, you wrote:
> | >----------------------------Original
message----------------------------
> | >Alisas story of the decorated factory made pots hit home. I have
recently
> | >been involved in a juring process involving such a situation. At issue
is
> | >whether the work" counts" as hand made pottery if the items used are
> | >factory made and/or slip cast. It doesn't matter how good the
decorating
> | >is, it is not hand made pottery and telling the public it is, by
allowing
> | >such work in a pottery show, where all work must be made by the
exhibitng
> | >artist, is miseducating the public. It may be extrememely good
painting,
> | >but it is not on hand made pots. It does those of us who make our own
> pots
> | >and then decorate them a great disservice. Most of the public can't
tell
> a
> | >factory pot from a "real" one.
> | >
> | >This issue makes me squirm because we have such an artist locally who
> makes
> | > very fine decoated work, but he/she does not make the pots
themselves.
> | >
> | >How do the rest of you think?
> | >Barb from Bloomington
> | >Barb Lund
> | >barblund@bluemarble.net
> | >520 West 6th St.
> | >Bloomington, In 47404
> | >USA
> | >812-339-8476
> | >http://www.craftswomen.com/BarbLund-Potter/
> |
> | Barb,
> |
> | I'm certainly not an expert at this, but here's my take on a
hypothetical
> | situation: I purchase a slipcast, bisqued item from, say, Aftosa. I
> then
> | decorate it with underglazes, overglazes, etc. I would say this is
> | "hand-decorated" pottery, not "hand-made". If, on the other hand, I
> | design and produce a prototype piece, either produce the mold myself, or
> | contract the moldmaking out to a professional, and do the actual
> | slipcasting and decorating myself, I'd call that "hand-made".
> |
> | Here is where it gets fuzzy for me: I design the prototype and send it
> out
> | to, say Ceramic Design Group for the moldmaking, slipcasting and bisque
> | firing, with the peice returned to me for decorating, glazing and
> | firing. If it was a one-off item, I'd be inclined to call it
"hand-made",
> | but if the peice was to be produced in quantity, I'd be inclined to call
> it
> | "hand-decorated", but not "hand-made". I have nothing against slip
> | casting, RAM pressing, or any other production technique, if it is the
> best
> | way to produce the piece. I think the difference here is whether the
> | production technique is being dictated by the nature of the peice, or
for
> | reasons of quantity production.
> |
> | I'll be interested to see how other reply.
> |
> | Greg
> | E-mail address:
> | gdlamont@isunet.net
> |
> | Pottery Web Page:
> | http://www.ourwebpage.net/greglamont/
> |
> | Mailing address and Phone:
> | Greg Lamont
> | 3011 Northwood Drive
> | Ames, IA 50010-4750
> | (515) 233-3442
> |
vince pitelka on thu 20 apr 00
> ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
> Surely "artist decorated" pottery is in a different category from handmade
> pottery, and is judged according to different criteria. Picasso's pots are
a
> case in point. You judge the decoration and how it works on the pot, not
the pot itself. To my mind it is a different art/craft form entirely,
apples and
> oranges. Which is more valuable is a matter of location and season, just
as with apples and oranges.
Several people have mentioned Picasso during this thread, and that is not an
appropriate example for comparison. It is true that Picasso's pots were
made by others, but they were made to his instructions, and he often cut and
re-assembled the forms. Artists do that sort of thing all the time, in
order to try their imagery in lots of different media. Picasso was just
unusually prolific, always searching in a number of different directions at
once.
- 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/
Veena Raghavan on thu 20 apr 00
I have been following this thread, now and again, and do not really
understand what the problem is. If you enter a juried or any other show and
are asked to send slides of the pieces you wish to enter, surely you should
have those pieces available to send, if your work is selected. In some
cases, the terms state that you should send slides representing your work,
not of the actual pieces. In such a case, it would be acceptable to send
pieces other than the ones in the slides. Perhaps I am confused or did not
read the posts carefully, but I cannot understand any objection to the
organizers wanting the pieces that were juried into the show.
If someone were to come to your studio/gallery, purchase a piece, and ask
you to ship it to them or for them, would you feel justified in sending a
piece other than the one they purchased? If the answer to that question is
"yes", then I am dumbstruck and have nothing more to say, but if your
answer is "no", then surely this more or less the same situation.
Have I got something wrong somewhere? If so, I apoligize for interjecting
with my two cents worth. It is just that this has been going on for a bit
now, and I really cannot understand any justification for sending slides
that are not of the pieces you are entering in the show, and then feeling
ill-treated because your piece was not accepted or did not win an award.
Will get off my soapbox now, and again, I apologise if I misunderstood the
point being made and am wasting precious Clayart space and everyone's time.
All the best.
Veena
Veena Raghavan
75124.2520@compuserve.com
vince pitelka on fri 21 apr 00
> I do think however, that hands are used in carving a prototype, mixing
> plaster, pouring, casting, cleaning greenware, decorating the final
result,
> etc. as much as using a wheel. That is not to say that I prefer cast
pieces
> over thrown work aesthetically. I just think that hands are as directly
> involved in cast pieces IF the creator does the entire process
him/herself.
I don't know how you can say this. A wheel-thrown pot is completely made by
hand, individually, and every one is different. Every movement, every stage
in its construction, every detail of form and finish, represents a complex
series of decisions made by the artist during the creation and completion of
each piece. Can you really compare that with a slip-cast piece, even when
the creator designed the original and made the mold?
I certainly do not begrudge potters who choose to go into
semi-mass-production with assisted technologies like slip-casting,
ram-pressing, and jiggering, but the work is not handmade, by any stretch of
the imagination. David Hendley says it so well in his comment in the back
of the latest CM.
Whether the creator does all the work him/herself is irrelevant in
attempting to establish whether the work is handmade. The reality is that
once the orginal has been made, the creator could just as well hire someone
to make the molds, pour the molds, and finish the castings and at that point
the work would be exactly the same as if the creator had completed the whole
process.
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/
Kathryn L Farmer on sat 22 apr 00
That's why I added this part:
"If you don't like the notion that a piece is not a one-of-a-kind, then I
can
see how the casting process would not feel fair to qualify as being as
desirable or as valuable as a thrown or handbuilt piece. Although the finish
work might tip the scales there too in many cases."
& clarified with this statement:
"hands are as directly
involved in cast pieces IF the creator does the entire process him/herself"
(emphasis on the "IF")
I agree that thrown pots are each unique in form and for that reason are
often more desirable in the sense of being art. I do not agree that cast
pieces are not always "handmade" That depends upon how many peices are cast,
whether or not the artist is involved in the ENTIRE process, and what
transformations or embellishments are made after a piece is removed from the
mold. In the making of a single piece, an electric wheel is as much an
assistance as a mold. Try making a thrown, turned piece without one.
If you are trying to define pottery as strictly thrown or handbuilt pieces,
and cast work should not be passed as one and the same, then I agree. If you
are trying to say that cast pieces cannot be considered "handmade" or art,
then I disagree. I would say that each individual piece, however made, would
have it's own merit dependent upon a myriad of variables. To be fair, an
artist should be straightforward to shows/jurors about his/her process, be
placed in an appropriate category for comparison/competition, and ultimately
let the public decide what it finds to be beautiful.
All of my opinions on the subject are that of a layman, but I'm entitled to
them all the same. Of course, I also believe that nature gave us prolific
daffodils to beautify a lawn rather than give us something to be weeded...
so, as you can see, I'm accustomed to being in the minority on issues.
Quote me anytime, but please do not take it out of context.
Kathryn
----- Original Message -----
From: "vince pitelka"
To:
Sent: Friday, April 21, 2000 3:23 PM
Subject: Re: jurying and pots not made by artist
> ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
> > I do think however, that hands are used in carving a prototype, mixing
> > plaster, pouring, casting, cleaning greenware, decorating the final
> result,
> > etc. as much as using a wheel. That is not to say that I prefer cast
> pieces
> > over thrown work aesthetically. I just think that hands are as directly
> > involved in cast pieces IF the creator does the entire process
> him/herself.
>
> I don't know how you can say this. A wheel-thrown pot is completely made
by
> hand, individually, and every one is different. Every movement, every
stage
> in its construction, every detail of form and finish, represents a complex
> series of decisions made by the artist during the creation and completion
of
> each piece. Can you really compare that with a slip-cast piece, even
when
> the creator designed the original and made the mold?
>
> I certainly do not begrudge potters who choose to go into
> semi-mass-production with assisted technologies like slip-casting,
> ram-pressing, and jiggering, but the work is not handmade, by any stretch
of
> the imagination. David Hendley says it so well in his comment in the back
> of the latest CM.
>
> Whether the creator does all the work him/herself is irrelevant in
> attempting to establish whether the work is handmade. The reality is that
> once the orginal has been made, the creator could just as well hire
someone
> to make the molds, pour the molds, and finish the castings and at that
point
> the work would be exactly the same as if the creator had completed the
whole
> process.
> 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/
Kathryn L Farmer on sun 23 apr 00
I would also add that what an artist could do and what an artist does do are
two entirely different things. Many artists rely on molds for single pieces
just to control some aspect of their work.
An artist "could" hire someone to throw pots and then add his/her own glazes
too.
"Every movement, every
stage
> in its construction, every detail of form and finish, represents a complex
> series of decisions made by the artist during the creation and completion
of
> each piece."
Every movement, every detail of form and finish of a sculpted prototype also
represents a complex series of decisions made by the artist during the
creation and completion of a piece.
..."Can you really compare that with a slip-cast piece, even
when the creator designed the original and made the mold?"...
Yes and no, I agree that it would be like comparing apples and oranges. Both
are fruit, but not the same fruit.
Kathryn
stop making bad food analogies>
"The reality is that
> > once the orginal has been made, the creator could just as well hire
> someone
> > to make the molds, pour the molds, and finish the castings and at that
> point
> > the work would be exactly the same as if the creator had completed the
> whole
> > process.
> > 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/
>
>
vince pitelka on mon 24 apr 00
> ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
> I would also add that what an artist could do and what an artist does do
are
> two entirely different things. Many artists rely on molds for single
pieces
> just to control some aspect of their work.
Kathryn -
That is certainly true. Slip casting is a very valuable tool in many
circumstances, and many artists use the process to create components for
works of art or fine craft, or to create the basic form which is then
individually altered and finished. I have always agreed with that.
> An artist "could" hire someone to throw pots and then add his/her own
glazes too.
Yes, and that is in no way similar to the artist who hires someone to
slip-cast his or her wares. There is a world of difference.
> Every movement, every detail of form and finish of a sculpted prototype
also
> represents a complex series of decisions made by the artist during the
> creation and completion of a piece.
Of course this is true up to that point, but then when a zillion
reproductions are made from a mold, the product is no longer handmade by any
stretch of the imagination.
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/
Ray Aldridge on tue 25 apr 00
At 08:15 PM 4/23/00 EDT, you wrote:
>----------------------------Original message----------------------------
>"Every movement, every
>stage
>> in its construction, every detail of form and finish, represents a complex
>> series of decisions made by the artist during the creation and completion
>of
>> each piece."
>
>Every movement, every detail of form and finish of a sculpted prototype also
>represents a complex series of decisions made by the artist during the
>creation and completion of a piece.
>
Well, not exactly, because at some point the piece goes through a stage in
which this degree of involvement is no longer necessary for the object to
be completed. At some point, for example, a car can be built by someone
other than the persons who designed the prototype.
I've thought about this question often, and while I tend to judge the value
of a piece on how I respond personally to it, and not to the process that
made it, it seems to me that it's wrong to call a slipcast and unaltered
piece "handmade."
It has nothing to do with the technology used, in my opinion. After all, I
use a kickwheel exclusively, but that doesn't make my pots "more handmade"
than those formed on an electric wheel.
I think the crucial aspect of the definition is this: can the object, at
any significant stage of making, be made using fairly unskilled labor?
It's the _skills_ of handmaking that differentiate objects from their
mass-produced counterparts. To put it another way, even if you have
designed the form, made the mold, and cast and finished the piece by
yourself, it isn't "handmade" if one of those stages of construction could
be accomplished by an untrained person after a few days of instruction. To
me, such an object is a result of mass-production, even if the designer of
the prototype and the worker in the factory are the same person.
There is an unfortunate aspect to this definition, however, and that's the
fact that most potters don't have "businesses" in the conventional sense.
What we have is only a "job." We can't someday sell our business to some
other entrepreneur, because it's only our personal skills that make our
product salable.
Ray
Aldridge Porcelain and Stoneware
http://www.goodpots.com
Morris, Marlene F. on fri 28 apr 00
>>If one paints on the commerical mold piece..is it not original.?
It's an original painting or decoration, but it's not an original pot or
piece. It's an individuation of a mass-produced unit.
>>Do you think that Andy Warhol stretched his own canvas?.. I doubt it..
>>Does that mean his work is not original.?
A canvas is not the same as a pot, though a pot can certainly be used as a
canvas; depending on where the maker prefers to spend his/her energy. A
canvas is usually accepted as a neutral surface -- unless the painter has
taken the opportunity to alter its shape or break the frame by continuing
the painting on a surface running off the canvas proper. To me, a pot is
much more about form plus surface -- the whole shebang -- not just surface.
How many paintings invite the viewer to hold them? None that I've seen.
How many pots invite the viewer to hold them? Most of them. Almost all of
the functional ones. That's a lot more intimate than a painting, and
knowing that the piece was handMADE, not just hand-painted, takes that
intimacy a step further. Knowing that the piece was made industrially
doesn't make the piece any less good as a functional thing, just less
intimate.
>>A wheel-thrown pot is completely made by hand, individually, and every one
is different. Every movement, every stage in its construction, every detail
of form and finish, represents a complex series of decisions made by the
artist during the creation and completion of each piece.<<
Dingdingding! Yes.
>>while I tend to judge the value of a piece on how I respond personally to
it, and not to the process that made it, it seems to me that it's wrong to
call a slipcast and unaltered piece "handmade."<<
Oh my, yes.
>>One is not more hand made than the other -- they are just different
technologies.<<
Whoa, I gotta disagree. There is plenty of room for different emphases by
different makers. But handmade and hand decorated are very different to me.
It's the whole versus the part.
>>I would think that the only truly hand made vessels are those where the
person digs his own clay and pinches it with his hands and fires it in a
fire that he built. Any other argument about just creates useless noise.<<
Marlene Morris
elizabeth priddy on sat 29 apr 00
Can you call it "hand formed by the artist"?
---
Elizabeth Priddy
email: epriddy@usa.net
http://www.angelfire.com/nc/clayworkshop
Clay: 12,000 yrs and still fresh!
On Tue, 25 Apr 2000 14:47:21 Ray Aldridge wrote:
>----------------------------Original message----------------------------
>At 08:15 PM 4/23/00 EDT, you wrote:
>>----------------------------Original message----------------------------
>>"Every movement, every
>>stage
>>> in its construction, every detail of form and finish, represents a complex
>>> series of decisions made by the artist during the creation and completion
>>of
>>> each piece."
>>
>>Every movement, every detail of form and finish of a sculpted prototype also
>>represents a complex series of decisions made by the artist during the
>>creation and completion of a piece.
>>
>
>Well, not exactly, because at some point the piece goes through a stage in
>which this degree of involvement is no longer necessary for the object to
>be completed. At some point, for example, a car can be built by someone
>other than the persons who designed the prototype.
>
>I've thought about this question often, and while I tend to judge the value
>of a piece on how I respond personally to it, and not to the process that
>made it, it seems to me that it's wrong to call a slipcast and unaltered
>piece "handmade."
>
>It has nothing to do with the technology used, in my opinion. After all, I
>use a kickwheel exclusively, but that doesn't make my pots "more handmade"
>than those formed on an electric wheel.
>
>I think the crucial aspect of the definition is this: can the object, at
>any significant stage of making, be made using fairly unskilled labor?
>It's the _skills_ of handmaking that differentiate objects from their
>mass-produced counterparts. To put it another way, even if you have
>designed the form, made the mold, and cast and finished the piece by
>yourself, it isn't "handmade" if one of those stages of construction could
>be accomplished by an untrained person after a few days of instruction. To
>me, such an object is a result of mass-production, even if the designer of
>the prototype and the worker in the factory are the same person.
>
>There is an unfortunate aspect to this definition, however, and that's the
>fact that most potters don't have "businesses" in the conventional sense.
>What we have is only a "job." We can't someday sell our business to some
>other entrepreneur, because it's only our personal skills that make our
>product salable.
>
>Ray
>
>
>
>
>Aldridge Porcelain and Stoneware
>http://www.goodpots.com
>
--== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
Before you buy.
Jim Brooks on sat 29 apr 00
Just curious.. after all this badinage.. has anything anyone else has said..
affected anyones opinions.? As it was stated in the beginning.., the
question of thrown vs. slip cast will probably never be settled.. As for
submitting a pot for jurying and then providing a different pot for the
show... it is... dishonest.. a lie..... Jim
vince pitelka on sun 30 apr 00
> ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
> Can you call it "hand formed by the artist"?
How about "Slip-cast from original prototypes and hand-finished by the
artist" That's a lot of words, but I don't know how else to say it.
- 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/
| |
|
