Karen Sullivan on wed 11 apr 01
on 4/11/01 8:19 AM, Roger Bourland at citrus@BOURLAND.COM wrote:
> 2. Then, just to start a fight on a new thread... I've wondered for a long
> time why some fine potters use stoneware exclusively while others use
> porcelain. I think it must be more than just personal preference. Seems to
> be almost personal conviction.
Roger...
I think the choice of clay is significant...
Porcelain has a dense structure...but has the potential
to move with the quality of detail that looks like the folds
of skin... details of surface that are unique to porcelain.
certainly the fired quality is different...
white..glazes that look brighter...more translucent and
glass like...a distinct vocabulary.
I think with porcelain in detailed movements...
a specific potential in the way the material moves.
with the expectation that glazes will break and cause
white/bright edges.
STONEWARE is a greater range...gutsy...rugged...more
plastic, finer structure in the body...A different vocabulary
that can reflect burnished to ripped...quite a diverse
range...glazes that reflect the warmth of colors from the
iron....
You can make clay look like any material...think of
Marilyn Levine, Richard Shaw, versus Voulkous...what
an amazing range.
I think temperature has a huge effect....Perhaps as
important a consideration as clay choices.
bamboo karen
| |
|
