Lily Krakowski on tue 9 sep 03
Neither is set in stone. We put handles on cups, Asians don't. We use
utensils and eat off flat things--a.k.a. plates, and other cultures use
theirf fingers and eat out of individual or shared bowls. So from the
get-go a lot of "function" and "form" depend on who and what and how, and
when.
I often put flowers in a pitcher. I like the way the lip allows one flower
to jut out away from the pack. I like the total look. I like giving the
pitcher a multiple purpose. And I like using my soup bowls for deserts, and
my little desert bowls for condiments or relishes, and so on.
Maybe what bothers you, as has been suggested, is that you think the flower
person uses your pots irreverantly. You HAVE made vases. Why does he not
use them....but his viewpoint may well be that he feels homier with a
pitcher, because when he was a child his family did not HAVE vases, but only
had jugs and ewers. He may think that VASES qua VASES are pompous, too stiff
and formal, but that pitchers and jugs and mugs are friendlier. I think-- no
reference books here on that--that a number of Dutch painters show flowers
in ewers, or beer steins....
A quote from an interview with Frans Wildenhain ("Masters of Contemporary
American Crafts" Brooklyn Museum, 1961)"Wildenhain considers ceramic objects
as abstract sculpture and he interprets each shape as a form in itself,
avoiding repetitions, and not determining shapes by tradition alone."
Lili Krakowski
Constableville, N.Y.
Be of good courage....
Tony Olsen on wed 10 sep 03
Lily,
You said:
----------8<---------------
I often put flowers in a pitcher. I like the way the lip allows one =
flower
to jut out away from the pack. I like the total look. I like giving =
the
pitcher a multiple purpose. And I like using my soup bowls for deserts, =
and
my little desert bowls for condiments or relishes, and so on.
----------8<---------------
This struck me as a bit coincidental, I just finished a pitcher that, =
from the start, I intended to be used as a vase. It is about 16 inches =
tall and has a triangular shaped base. I was real satisfied with the =
shape and size but screwed up the glaze a bit. (Gotta make a good one =
now.) As far as the multiple purpose, I don't think my 'vase' would =
serve very well as a pitcher as it is a bit unwieldy due to it's size. =
I did design and build this 'vase' to be less formal, and also to be the =
center focus of a table setting. It is in a pitcher form but has a vase =
function. =20
Another piece I recently made for a relative is a very small mug, about =
the size of a child's tea set cup. In shape and color, it matches a =
larger one I made for her. This was requested for holding medication =
pills after they were counted and just before consumption. I think it =
could also be used for ear rings when removed for the night. =20
I guess there are no real 'rules' for this. I just do what I like or =
what someone else wants. I really don't care what the buyer does with =
it in the privacy of their own home. ;-)
Going to go look at a new kiln (new to me) today at noon.. It's larger =
than the two I have now. No one told me I would be running out of room =
so fast.
Stay muddy!
Tony Olsen, Galveston Texas USA
neslot@houston.rr.com
http://tonyolsen.com/up/
bill edwards on wed 29 mar 06
Many years ago I would be working around other potters
and watched a couple of them throw these gigantic
forms. I think I was intimidated by them a little at
the time, then I started throwing these big forms
myself and found them to be nothing more exciting than
the forms I was already throwing. A mind-set was
examined. It became much more exciting to throw in
sets over the larger things because sets that matched
well were much harder to achieve in my opinion.
Through the many years of travel as a potter I have
learned that form and function is important but in
this case size isn't everything. I made it a point to
do some figuring in regards to several of my own
firings where I placed several large vessels in a few
firings and then caclulated the net take home from the
smaller pieces, I made much more in the end with my
multiple smaller pieces than I did with the larger
pieces. I still took it on myself to throw a large
form on occasion and do one of a kinds to exhaust my
desires for creative reasoning.
Glazes over the years also changed. I wrote in on the
PV clay because it was one of the worst experiences of
my life many years back when I was a potter in a group
studio. The base glaze was a pv clay base and a very
poor one at that. I could walk by the glaze with
vinegar and watch the color change. I argued the
virtues then about calculating the glaze over and
eventually I think that group made some changes but
who knows how many thousands of pieces of work left
the building that was poorly devised because things
back then was based all to often on eye candy, not
chemistry and reasonable understanding on the
functional side of things.
Its about 3:30 AM and I should be sleeping, pottery
was running through my head and I needed a shot of my
people here to relax me a little, so here I am with
lots to say but fear I will stir up a bee-hive, so I
will cut it off short. I suppose there's only so much
anyone needs to say at any one setting anyways.
Yes, I will remove the signature line after I send
this so no one will have to read that I have anything
left to sell. It is all gone with the exception of
some keep-sakes. Ron and Johns book was kept because
an old friend sent it to me as well as a couple other
books I recieved from great potters over the years.
Plus I can argue virtues if I have those books in
front of me can't I? Right,
I will repeat the Edwards Glossy Clear 1234 on the
next write up.
Bill Edwards
http://apottersmark.blogspot.com/
'Studio Pottery Set-up for Sell, offers considered!'
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
| |
|
