OWLPOTTER@AOL.COM on mon 1 sep 03
In a message dated 8/31/2003 10:33:11 PM, snail@MINDSPRING.COM writes:
<< I'm a sculptor. Defined by my work, not my material.
Clay is my medium, but not my identity-Snail >>
This is a problem throughout the visual arts and crafts; that is, some are
recognized by the finished work (sculptor) and some are recognized by the medium
(potter.)
Even "painter" is defined by the finished work. A "painting" not the medium,
which could be anything used to make a painting; such as, oils, water colors,
acrylics, etc.
This has made categorizing almost impossible by guilds, shows and fairs.
Where we have "jewerlers" working in a wide variety of mediums, we also have
potters who make jewlery as well as other finished work made of clay.
So, when is a jeweler a jeweler and when are they potters making clay
jewelery?
Also, when is a sculptor a sculptor and when are they potters making
sculpture?
This confusion goes on and on. I wish someone somewhere would institute a
categorical list that made sense.
-Carolynn Palmer
Somerset Center, Michigan
John Rodgers on mon 1 sep 03
This thread stikes a chord with me, as I have really been rubbed the
wrong way at times by "The-Art-Powers-That-Be".
For many years my work was all slip cast, and much of it still is. My
finished medium was/is porcelain finished with china paints, or perhaps
not, depending on the subject. And for many years, so-called experts,
i.e. artists with large reputations, sitting as judges and jurors for
shows, would denigrate the work because it was "made from molds and slip
cast". Frankly, they didn't know their ass from a hole in the ground
...pardon my French........!
Once I sold a locally famous mug through a magazine dedicated to a
certain geographical region. The mug had ceramic moose dropping
facsimilies in the bottom. I sold just over 10,000 of them as a result
of the magazine add. So why not sell it through more magazines, I said
to myself. So I contacted a series of outdoor magazines - Outdoor Life,
Field and Stream, etc, their West Coast advertising editors, sent
samples of the mug. They all loved it, thought it would do great. But at
the last minute, every single one of them backed up saying, we have to
check with our New York Office on Madison Avenue first.........and to a
man and magazine.....every single one of the east coast offices where
the real power was, rejected the ad as not having compatible editorial
content for the magazine.
Hogwash!!! I had already proven the viability of the product in the
market place. One of the west coast persons, a really crusty lady that I
appreciated for her candor, said the real problem with New York was that
the Editors there all believe that milk comes from cartoons in the
store, and that their lap-yaps (prissy little lap dogs) don't poop, all
because they can't see the cows being milked or their dog squatting in
the neighbors yard!!!!
Well, putting down mold made things, and slip cast stuff is reflective
of wearing the same blinders as the New York Editors. I tried as best
Icould, to convince of the viability of slipcast work but they were "The
High and The Mighty" and "They" had spoken!!!
Well, it really ticked me off. It clearly demonstrated to me their
narrow mindedness, and I didn't need them. I simply won't go through all
the hassle to get told the same old story based on blind ignorance!!! I
stopped attempting to do any serious art shows, studied the market, then
sold the heck out of my stuff. Never have had a problem moving it. It
just irritates the heck out of me that the art form doesn't get the
recognition it disserves.
While I do wheel thrown pottery, and handbuild stuff, there are things
that cannot be done except by first sculpting , then molding and
casting. Consider the bronzes that are so widely accepted as "Art". I
don't know a single artist that sculpts in bronze. I know a bunch of
artists that sculpt in wax and clay, then have their work molded and
then cast by others in bronze. Heck, their finished work is not even
theirs, just by the nature of it. What you see in the galleries and
museums should be credited to the artisans and workers at the foundry
that did the bronze castings, not to the artist that sculpted the
original design. The original sculptor was, after all, ONLY the
designer. He DID NOT make the wonderful piece of work in the museum or
gallery. The foundry people made it, and should get the credit for the
accuracy of detail, the fine finishing or the work, etc. If they had not
been very good at it, the final piece would have been garbage,
regardless of how wonderful the sculptor might have been. So it is with
slip cast clay work. Go to my web site --
http://webpages.charter.net/j_rodgers and look up "Natasha" ! Tell me
if she is "Alive!" She is a true case in point!!
When an artist masters the entire process, then carries out the entire
process, then the work is truly his, and he should be recognized for it.
The time and effort to go through the entire thing should be supremely
appreciated by all, because it is not easy, and requires a great deal of
skill and talent, but the final work, when carried to completion by the
original artist, will stand above all others, because the finished work
truly carries his soul in it.
So, a little recognition for those who sculpt, make their own molds, do
their own casting, do their own finishing, and present their work in a
specific medium. The final work is what makes the statement, and if the
artists hand is on it all the way, then it is truly a piece of his/her
work and should be recognized as such.
OK. Rant over!! Soap box ignition off, ladder extended to the floor,
departure imminent!
Regards to all,
John Rodgers,
Birmingham, AL
OWLPOTTER@AOL.COM wrote:
>In a message dated 8/31/2003 10:33:11 PM, snail@MINDSPRING.COM writes:
>
><< I'm a sculptor. Defined by my work, not my material.
>Clay is my medium, but not my identity-Snail >>
>
>This is a problem throughout the visual arts and crafts; that is, some are
>recognized by the finished work (sculptor) and some are recognized by the medium
> (potter.)
>
>Even "painter" is defined by the finished work. A "painting" not the medium,
>which could be anything used to make a painting; such as, oils, water colors,
>acrylics, etc.
>
>This has made categorizing almost impossible by guilds, shows and fairs.
>Where we have "jewerlers" working in a wide variety of mediums, we also have
>potters who make jewlery as well as other finished work made of clay.
>
>So, when is a jeweler a jeweler and when are they potters making clay
>jewelery?
>
>Also, when is a sculptor a sculptor and when are they potters making
>sculpture?
>
>This confusion goes on and on. I wish someone somewhere would institute a
>categorical list that made sense.
>-Carolynn Palmer
>Somerset Center, Michigan
>
>______________________________________________________________________________
>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.
>
>
>
| |
|
