priddy on wed 3 may 00
------------------
Vince Pitelka =3Cvpitelka=40DeKalb.net=3E wrote:
A traditional
=3E painter's canvas is SUPPOSED to be a completely inert, unimposing =
substrate
=3E for painting. A pot which presents itself as a work of art should never=
be
=3E that. A fine pot has a pesonality and a presence, and in this case it
=3E becomes an inseparble component of the final expression of the piece.
which is what we did. She had painted in those =22paint your own=22
places, just cause she missed doing it. When she saw my pots,
she saw forms that begged for painting. I wanted to learn to paint
in that style and voila=21, a collaboraztion is born. Then came the hard
part: where and how to show them and ascribe the money as they sold.
The solution we came to was to show in co-op galleries and shows where we
were both members. And we divided the money by the work in. I wanted
to show the work in juried shows, but didn't do it because of the
questions raised here. I signed the bottoms with my studio emblem stamp
and she signed the painting in chinese calligraphy.
But seeing those images emerge on my work was nothing less than
inspirational=21 I tried triply hard to learn to paint
after seeing the possibilities. I had always thrown classical forms
because that is what I liked, but they never saw their full expression
until they had these paintings. There was a synergy that I may never
know again. And that is ok.
And the emergent work from my own hand is the chinese brush painted
tilework, which is some of the most satisfying work I have ever made
-a collaboration of form and painting that is wholly original to me.
But I will work with other people, although I will probably not be
able to show it in national level shows. Maybe there ought to be a
national level show just for Collaborative work. It would be
fascinating and a real work/social experiment to boot...
imagine: a show where you would be thrown out if you actually did ALL
of the work yourself. Imagine the back-peddling of some of those less
than ethical types who now want to acknowledge their apprentices and
co-workers...the possibilities are hysterical.
respectfully submitted,
elizabeth priddy
priddy-clay=40usa.net
http:www.angelfire.com/nc/clayworkshop
=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F==
5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5=
F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F
Get free email and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=3D1
Dannon Rhudy on wed 3 may 00
>..... I wanted
>to show the work in juried shows, but didn't do it.
....>But I will work with other people, although I will probably not be
>able to show it in national level shows. Maybe there ought to be a
>national level show just for Collaborative work. ...
Juried shows do not generally prohibit collaborative work.
Indeed, I've seen several such works that are jointly signed -
Ruggles & Rankin spring to mind - so if you are minded to
submit work that's collaborative, have at it.
Dannon Rhudy
potter@koyote.com
| |
|
