bgioia10 on sun 21 may 00
I can't disagree with the any of the basic points of view.
The most one can offer is a snap shot opinion
of their own limited experience and understanding.
What we need is a motion picture of our collective comprehension
A living response to an unanswerable question...
So as to provoke greater insight into our own actions and motivations.
Personally my own "opinion" in this regard
is very unstable and subject to much inspection.
Initially moulding work was for me a means of reducing the price tag.
I saved my "original" for the perceived intrinsic handbuilt value,
though this effort was found to be pointless and quickly dropped.
Presently unmotivated by financial concerns,
moulds have become intrinsic to my creative process.
Though I have and do suspect the integrity of slip casting and have chosen
press moulding for the individual attention required to complete a work,
I would use slip casting without question if it provided a solution
that I needed to deal effectively with a problem.
I think anytime a technique is used which is ineffective
or unsuitable for a circumstance then the integrity of
such a choice is reflected in a work and individual.
This is interesting.
Let me quote....
Himmat is obsessed with the sensuous qualities of clay,
its fine texture, the way it can mimic surfaces
and the shapes it can take.
He prefers not to model directly in clay,
he uses the method of slip casting.
He prepares the clay lovingly as all potters do,
letting it mature (and rot) in large vesels for years
so that it becomes silky and viscous,
so that as slip it has the consistancy of cream and honey.
He casts in plaster little and big objects found in nature,
found in the market place, or made by him;
the prepared slip is poured through an opening
in the thick mould and as the plaster absorbs
the water he gauges the quantity and pours out the excess,
leaving just enough to make a fragile inner-wall of clay
that simply recieves the impress at second remove-
the cast of a cast of a found object.
He can also brush the slip over the inner surface
of the mould or do a (clay) slab casting.
The clay can be mixed with brick or marble dust
or sometimes gunny sack to strengthen
the substance and give it texture.
When you open the plaster piece mould,
the clay object is extracted like a chrysalis from the cacoon.
Himmat prefers to mould the object because
he does not care to struggle with form,
because the surface he will obtain from the
spinning and pumping and pinching the clay with his hands is not,
as he puts it himself, not sophisticated enough,
because he prefers the plastic values he obtains from this
delicate balance of technique, craft and chance where
all the three aspects must vanish too and make for a
phenomenological encounter with a sign.
He produces, linguistically speaking, an indexical sign,
a sign not so much about skill and meaning
but about an interface of forms, establishing a contiguity
between natural form and human artefact.
Some food for thought.
Bruce
kinoko@OKJUNC2.JUNCTION.NET on sun 21 may 00
At 02:00 5/21/00 +0530, you wrote:
> I can't disagree with the any of the basic points of view.
>The most one can offer is a snap shot opinion
>of their own limited experience and understanding.
>What we need is a motion picture of our collective comprehension
>A living response to an unanswerable question...
>So as to provoke greater insight into our own actions and motivations.
>Personally my own "opinion" in this regard
>is very unstable and subject to much inspection.
>
>Initially moulding work was for me a means of reducing the price tag.
>I saved my "original" for the perceived intrinsic handbuilt value,
>though this effort was found to be pointless and quickly dropped.
>Presently unmotivated by financial concerns,
>moulds have become intrinsic to my creative process.
>Though I have and do suspect the integrity of slip casting and have chosen
>press moulding for the individual attention required to complete a work,
>I would use slip casting without question if it provided a solution
>that I needed to deal effectively with a problem.
>
>I think anytime a technique is used which is ineffective
>or unsuitable for a circumstance then the integrity of
>such a choice is reflected in a work and individual.
>
>This is interesting.
>Let me quote....
>
> Himmat is obsessed with the sensuous qualities of clay,
>its fine texture, the way it can mimic surfaces
>and the shapes it can take.
>He prefers not to model directly in clay,
>he uses the method of slip casting.
>He prepares the clay lovingly as all potters do,
>letting it mature (and rot) in large vesels for years
>so that it becomes silky and viscous,
>so that as slip it has the consistancy of cream and honey.
>He casts in plaster little and big objects found in nature,
>found in the market place, or made by him;
>the prepared slip is poured through an opening
>in the thick mould and as the plaster absorbs
>the water he gauges the quantity and pours out the excess,
>leaving just enough to make a fragile inner-wall of clay
>that simply recieves the impress at second remove-
>the cast of a cast of a found object.
>He can also brush the slip over the inner surface
>of the mould or do a (clay) slab casting.
>The clay can be mixed with brick or marble dust
>or sometimes gunny sack to strengthen
>the substance and give it texture.
> When you open the plaster piece mould,
>the clay object is extracted like a chrysalis from the cacoon.
>Himmat prefers to mould the object because
>he does not care to struggle with form,
>because the surface he will obtain from the
>spinning and pumping and pinching the clay with his hands is not,
>as he puts it himself, not sophisticated enough,
>because he prefers the plastic values he obtains from this
>delicate balance of technique, craft and chance where
>all the three aspects must vanish too and make for a
>phenomenological encounter with a sign.
>He produces, linguistically speaking, an indexical sign,
>a sign not so much about skill and meaning
>but about an interface of forms, establishing a contiguity
>between natural form and human artefact.
>
>Some food for thought.
>Bruce
>
>___________________________________________________________________________
___
>Send postings to clayart@lsv.ceramics.org
>
>You may look at the archives for the list or change your subscription
>settings from http://www.ceramics.org/clayart/
>
>Moderator of the list is Mel Jacobson who may be reached at
melpots@pclink.com.
>
Very good,indeed....Himnat/Bruce
ISao & Don
Don & Isao Sanami Morrill
e-Mail:
| |
|
