Joyce Lee on sat 20 sep 03
Malcolm said:
"How is it that potters have come to believe that there is something
inherently superior about making one's own glazes?"
-------------------------------
If we're speaking of claybuds, Malcolm, I
haven't found Inherent Superiority to be an
apt description of our feelings and desires to
make our own glazes. If anything, many of us
who haven't yet achieved any kind of significant
understanding, after several years of pursuit,
are humbled daily by this ragtag journey
and wonder ourselves why we fight the fight
.......=20
For me, working with the chemistry of glazes as
well as the physics of firing is a=20
compulsion/an obsession, as is
much of anything I try to achieve with clay. This
obsession pre-dated my recent, just as intense,
desire to explore decoration of functional pots, which
is also driving me nuts as well as giving me
much satisfaction.... well, so far ... Some
Satisfaction. This latest urge came about with the
advent of Craig's article in CM ..... having been
fed earlier by David's wonderful use of color
in high fire. (Nope, the "urge" had nada to
do with "superiority," ol' claybud .... simply
a new, and to me, challenging way to go.....)
Everything in clay takes
sooo LONG to see the result!! (I'm assuming that
this is Big News to all clayarters.....)
It's all exciting .... clamps onto the mind and
will not let go ... glazes/firing/decoration=20
consume far too much of my time.
I do find trying to Just Begin to feel comfortable
with glazing and firing leads to 85,000 questions
daily ... even when I can't get into the studio.
I'm a cook...... love cooking....... love the science
of cooking .... taking cooking to the basics.....
but this lifelong pleasure doesn't begin to
compare with my journey into the basics of
making pots....... which for me includes glazes
and firing.
I am grateful every single day that Robin
Hopper's two-week long, day&night long,
class on glazes and colour development was
my first ever formal experience with clay and that
#1 Support Person accompanied me so that
he has some exposure to the insanity
that comes with the love of clay ..... later
came the wheel ... even later any attempt to hand-
build (which is also recent with me and
just as compelling). BUT my gratitude=20
doesn't stretch to cover "feelings of
superiority" ... that attitude would never
have occurred to me from reading Clayart .....
even after 7 years ..... if I were looking
for opportunities to "feel superior" I'd have
beat feet long ago into another arena .. nor
would I choose to provoke new, aging,
tired brain cells daily with the wonderful
assistance of the glaze gurus on this list ...
they
challenge me constantly.
Frankly, I figured I'd be spending my Youth
of Old Age
in my unused, cushioned wicker rocking chair=20
watchin' the dogs traipse by on our dirt road
on their way to and from the dump.... listening
to the burro bray ... the roadrunner cluck.....
the roosters at either end of our road announcing
the dawn all day&night long..... a cup of tea,
a glass of wine...... something genteel...... that's
what Mama Luce reared me to be (not by
example, however) ........ I did not anticipate
EVER ...... not even when I started exploring
this Nice Little Hobby for retirement.... that I'd
be sweatin'&swearin' late into the night ....
trying to emulate (right! like
that'll happen) all my Wondrous Clay Friends .....
and spending ALL
our hard-earned money on clay stuff.
Some of us, Malcolm, are enchanted
by delving into glazes (and firing!) .... some
not ..... we're ALL potters .... our enthusiasm
gets away from us now&then .... praise be!......
but our Love of Process feeds our passion.
For some..... so they tell me..... the finished
product is what counts. Good on 'em. I'm
just not one of those and I feel lucky, blessed.......
not "superior." Of course, it's also true that
my "finished product" may not be nearly as
fine as yours (chances are) and you have a
right to feel superior in comparison. =20
Joyce
In the Mojave thinking about Arti ..... and seeing
once again that we love Arti..... in spite of his
admittedly less than attractive self expressions
..... because of his
Passion ..... honest, genuine passion..... nothing
false there.. for many of us on this list passion
for clay in its myriad forms is a shared compulsion....
we accept that others don't necessarily understand...
we read and then we move back into the flow=20
of words, of
thoughts, of challenges which come to us via
Clayart from those who CARE. I'm so grateful
that I am one. =20
Richard Aerni on sat 20 sep 03
>Malcolm said:
>
>"How is it that potters have come to believe that there is something
>inherently superior about making one's own glazes?"
>-------------------------------
Hmmm...I'll begin a brief attempt at an answer by asking another
question...perhaps it will put your question in perspective.
Why is it that potters have come to believe there is something inherently
superior about making one's own pots, instead of buying commercial
bisqueware and then glazing it?
I have always felt that learning to make pots, on or off the wheel, is only
half of the job. The other half of it is comprised of decorating and
glazing the piece. In order to do that, one is required to become familiar
with slips and glazes. Many people who work in clay, and who seek new
frontiers for themselves, eventually come to feel that developing their own
glazes and glaze techniques is as much a part of developing their own style
as making their own forms and using their own carefully worked out forming
techniques.
I'm not sure that I would use the word "superior" to describe everyone's
attitudes towards homegrown vs. storebought glazes. After all, you will
find a great deal of excellent work around which is decorated with
storebought glazes, or to take it one step further, with glaze recipes
taken from other sources. Some people are content to expend their time and
energy dealing with other areas of ceramic work than glaze research.
Others feel more drawn to glaze work, and put the greater part of their
creative energy into that area, and less into others. Some potters
are "well balanced" and do both innovative glaze work as well as
innovative form work. We all do what we are drawn towards, and to a lesser
extent, what we are best at.
Hope this helps clarify the issue for you.
Best,
Richard Aerni
Bloomfield, NY
Vince Pitelka on sat 20 sep 03
Malcolm wrote:
"How is it that potters have come to believe that there is something
inherently superior about making one's own glazes?"
Malcolm -
I can only address the high-fire range, so I hope someone else will address
cone six. But I will say that the cone 6 pottes I know who are using Ron
and John's book and are fully exploring the possibilities of cone 6 are
producing glazes FAR more interesting than any commercial cone 6 glazes I
have seen.
It isn't a question of "come to believe." It is that in high-fire glazes
there really is no comparison between commercially-available ones and those
that you make yourself. The commercial ones are pretty limited and bland in
comparison to well-formulated glazes mixed in the studio. Any potter who
really tries both will almost always gravitate towards mixing their own
glazes, because that is part of expressing who you are as a potter. When
you collect, formulate, or adapt glazes, and learn how to make them safe and
stable, you are creating something unique that adds to the other unique
qualities of your wares. In consideration of that, it is hard for me to
understand why anyone would want to use commercial glazes, unless they
simply don't have any other option in their particular circumstance. If
that is the case, there is certainly nothing at all wrong with using
commercial glazes. But given the option, mixing your own always offers far
more possibilities.
Best wishes -
- Vince
Vince Pitelka
Appalachian Center for Craft
Tennessee Technological University
1560 Craft Center Drive, Smithville TN 37166
Home - vpitelka@dtccom.net
615/597-5376
Office - wpitelka@tntech.edu
615/597-6801 x111, FAX 615/597-6803
http://iweb.tntech.edu/wpitelka/
Malcolm Schosha on sun 21 sep 03
Vince,
I will take your word on that. But commercial base glases can be
greatly improved with a little effort.
My attitude toward glazes is very different than most potters. I am
not saying that my approach is better, just different. The pottery
from the past that I love the most is that of Attic Greece, which had
no glazes. If a thrown pot does not look good before the glaze is put
on, it will not look good afterwards either. If the shape looks
really good without the glaze, the glaze covering will (nine times
out of ten) deminish the refinement of the shape.
Glazes do, in many instances, serve an important practical function
by making the surface impervious to liquids. And I admit that much
Sung Chinese ware looks good, even though it is glazed.
I seems to me that most of the pottery I see around does not have the
shape very well refined. On the other hand, those who are into Tea
Ceremony stuff think I am a complete yahoo.
For the most part, I have avoided glazes when I could; and when I
have used glazes it was a thin clear glaze over the form, with
underglaze painting.
Malcolm
..........................................
--- In clayart@yahoogroups.com, Vince Pitelka wrote:
> Malcolm wrote:
> "How is it that potters have come to believe that there is something
> inherently superior about making one's own glazes?"
>
> Malcolm -
> I can only address the high-fire range, so I hope someone else will
address
> cone six. But I will say that the cone 6 pottes I know who are
using Ron
> and John's book and are fully exploring the possibilities of cone 6
are
> producing glazes FAR more interesting than any commercial cone 6
glazes I
> have seen.
>
> It isn't a question of "come to believe." It is that in high-fire
glazes
> there really is no comparison between commercially-available ones
and those
> that you make yourself. The commercial ones are pretty limited and
bland in
> comparison to well-formulated glazes mixed in the studio. Any
potter who
> really tries both will almost always gravitate towards mixing their
own
> glazes, because that is part of expressing who you are as a
potter. When
> you collect, formulate, or adapt glazes, and learn how to make them
safe and
> stable, you are creating something unique that adds to the other
unique
> qualities of your wares. In consideration of that, it is hard for
me to
> understand why anyone would want to use commercial glazes, unless
they
> simply don't have any other option in their particular
circumstance. If
> that is the case, there is certainly nothing at all wrong with using
> commercial glazes. But given the option, mixing your own always
offers far
> more possibilities.
> Best wishes -
> - Vince
>
> Vince Pitelka
> Appalachian Center for Craft
> Tennessee Technological University
> 1560 Craft Center Drive, Smithville TN 37166
> Home - vpitelka@d...
> 615/597-5376
> Office - wpitelka@t...
> 615/597-6801 x111, FAX 615/597-6803
> http://iweb.tntech.edu/wpitelka/
>
>
______________________________________________________________________
________
> Send postings to clayart@l...
>
> 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@p...
Vince Pitelka on sun 21 sep 03
> The pottery
> from the past that I love the most is that of Attic Greece, which had
> no glazes. If a thrown pot does not look good before the glaze is put
> on, it will not look good afterwards either. If the shape looks
> really good without the glaze, the glaze covering will (nine times
> out of ten) deminish the refinement of the shape.
Malcolm -
I appreciate your point of view regarding unglazed clay, but Attic Greek
pots are perhaps not the best examples, because although they are not
glazed, they do rely heavily on complex figurative painting and polished
terra sig. There are lots of examples of classical Greek pots where divine
imagery is painted on funky shapes, or the other way around. As you know,
the painter was rarely the potter, and often there was too little
collaboration between the two towards a mutually successful product.
And regarding your final statement above, I cannot agree, A plain unglazed
clay form never looks like more than a plain unglazed clay form. That is
perfectly adequate with sculpture, large architectural vessels, tribal pots,
and perhaps some other forms, but most pots look naked without glaze or slip
(including terra sig). A beautiful vessel form generally does not loose any
of its beauty due to tasteful application of glaze, and often becomes far
more beautiful.
That said, I have certainly seen lots of vessel forms that are
over-decorated or poorly glazed, and that of course distracts the eye from
the beauty of the form.
You said:
> Glazes do, in many instances, serve an important practical function
> by making the surface impervious to liquids. And I admit that much
> Sung Chinese ware looks good, even though it is glazed.
Wow, Malcolm. You're treading on mighty thin ground there. Are you
serious? Those Song wares would have looked pretty ordinary in raw unglazed
clay. They would not have been the masterpieces that they are. The same is
true of most of the great abundance of spectacular glazed wares made around
the world through history.
Best wishes -
- Vince
Vince Pitelka
Appalachian Center for Craft
Tennessee Technological University
1560 Craft Center Drive, Smithville TN 37166
Home - vpitelka@dtccom.net
615/597-5376
Office - wpitelka@tntech.edu
615/597-6801 x111, FAX 615/597-6803
http://iweb.tntech.edu/wpitelka/
pdp1@EARTHLINK.NET on mon 22 sep 03
Hi Malcom...and all...
>Malcolm said:
>
>"How is it that potters have come to believe that there is
something
>inherently superior about making one's own glazes?"
How is it that Potters have come to believe there is
something inherently superior about making one's own Pots?
Phil
Las Vegas
Malcolm Schosha on mon 22 sep 03
Vince,
In regard to Greek pottery, of course not every pot is great. This
applies to pottery from all traditions. Of the Greek ceramics, the
earlier stuff is more likable than the later. Greek methods, and
quality, changed over the years. And certainly I did not say that, in
Greek pottery, the decoration fit the shape in every case; but there
is nothing uniquely Greek about second rate pieces. What interests me
are the ones that work.
Also I did not say that unglazed ware is better than glazed. If the
piece was designed to be glazed, like the Sung celadons, it will look
better with a glaze. What I said was that I prefer to design and make
pottery without glazes. I never intended a general rule for all
potters.
I mentioned the Sung Chinese pottery for a particular reason, which
you have completly misunderstood. The misunderstanding is probabily a
result of my rather poor writing skills. I mentioned this example
because I do not want anyone to think I am incapable of appreciating
glazed pottery, or that I am trying to lay down a rule for others to
follow. I have spent hours looking at the Sung celadons at the
Metropolitan Museum in NYC, starting from when I was quite young and
had (at that time) no idea of making pottery. There are actually only
few such pieces there, but I love them.
I hope this clarifies things a little. There will, it seems, be more
discusion of glazes to follow.
Malcolm
......................................................................
--- In clayart@yahoogroups.com, Vince Pitelka wrote:
> > The pottery
> > from the past that I love the most is that of Attic Greece, which
had
> > no glazes. If a thrown pot does not look good before the glaze is
put
> > on, it will not look good afterwards either. If the shape looks
> > really good without the glaze, the glaze covering will (nine times
> > out of ten) deminish the refinement of the shape.
>
> Malcolm -
> I appreciate your point of view regarding unglazed clay, but Attic
Greek
> pots are perhaps not the best examples, because although they are
not
> glazed, they do rely heavily on complex figurative painting and
polished
> terra sig. There are lots of examples of classical Greek pots
where divine
> imagery is painted on funky shapes, or the other way around. As
you know,
> the painter was rarely the potter, and often there was too little
> collaboration between the two towards a mutually successful product.
>
> And regarding your final statement above, I cannot agree, A plain
unglazed
> clay form never looks like more than a plain unglazed clay form.
That is
> perfectly adequate with sculpture, large architectural vessels,
tribal pots,
> and perhaps some other forms, but most pots look naked without
glaze or slip
> (including terra sig). A beautiful vessel form generally does not
loose any
> of its beauty due to tasteful application of glaze, and often
becomes far
> more beautiful.
>
> That said, I have certainly seen lots of vessel forms that are
> over-decorated or poorly glazed, and that of course distracts the
eye from
> the beauty of the form.
>
> You said:
> > Glazes do, in many instances, serve an important practical
function
> > by making the surface impervious to liquids. And I admit that much
> > Sung Chinese ware looks good, even though it is glazed.
>
> Wow, Malcolm. You're treading on mighty thin ground there. Are you
> serious? Those Song wares would have looked pretty ordinary in raw
unglazed
> clay. They would not have been the masterpieces that they are.
The same is
> true of most of the great abundance of spectacular glazed wares
made around
> the world through history.
> Best wishes -
> - Vince
>
> Vince Pitelka
> Appalachian Center for Craft
> Tennessee Technological University
> 1560 Craft Center Drive, Smithville TN 37166
> Home - vpitelka@d...
> 615/597-5376
> Office - wpitelka@t...
> 615/597-6801 x111, FAX 615/597-6803
> http://iweb.tntech.edu/wpitelka/
>
>
______________________________________________________________________
________
> Send postings to clayart@l...
>
> 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@p...
Malcolm Schosha on mon 22 sep 03
--- In clayart@yahoogroups.com, Lee Love wrote:
>
> These tend not to be my favorite pots, because I prefer more
> gestrual forms. And also, they tend to be about containment,
rather than
> offering, and the intellect, rather than feeling. In the East,
bowls are
> much more important. I've mentioned here in the past, that I
think part
> of the reason why these Western pots may seem to emphasis
containment, is
> because in the West, the dominant right hand is on the outside of
the pot.
> In the East, the dominant hand is in the inside. Even with closed
forms,
> instead of the feeling of containment, you get the impression that
the pot
> was "grown" from the inside out.
......................................................................
...
Lee I agree with a fair amount of what you said in this message. My
problem is with your first paragraph, above.
I tend to avoid attacking pottery of various traditions, prefering
instead to explain what I like and why. On the other hand those who
who prefer Japanese pottery above all else, seem to feel no need for
such restraint. The tone was set by Leach in his book. If you would
like, I will point out for you the weakness of the Japenese
tradition, which are many.
Lee, Is this sort of backhanding of a currently out of style
tradition really necessary? The Attic Greek tradition is the basis of
a classical tradition in pottery that still lives in the northern
Mediteranean countlies, as well as in my heart. It is not a product
of the left brain only, and it does not lack gestural qualities, and
your statement about dominant hand does not apply because any good
thrower (and particularly the Italians and Greeks) will tell you that
in throwing the hand inside is the most important.
As I said, I have avoided any criticism of ceramic traditions,
because this leads nowhere. The results can be similar to insulting a
person's strongly held religious beliefs, and the reaction is
predictable.
Malcolm
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
--- In clayart@yahoogroups.com, Lee Love wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Vince Pitelka"
>
> Malcolm wrote:
>
> > > The pottery
> > > from the past that I love the most is that of Attic Greece,
which had
> > > no glazes.
>
> These tend not to be my favorite pots, because I prefer more
> gestrual forms. And also, they tend to be about containment,
rather than
> offering, and the intellect, rather than feeling. In the East,
bowls are
> much more important. I've mentioned here in the past, that I
think part
> of the reason why these Western pots may seem to emphasis
containment, is
> because in the West, the dominant right hand is on the outside of
the pot.
> In the East, the dominant hand is in the inside. Even with closed
forms,
> instead of the feeling of containment, you get the impression that
the pot
> was "grown" from the inside out.
>
> >>If a thrown pot does not look good before the glaze is put
> > > on, it will not look good afterwards either. If the shape looks
> > > really good without the glaze, the glaze covering will (nine
times
> > > out of ten) deminish the refinement of the shape.
>
> I tend to feel the same way, because my primary interest is
in form.
> A blind man can be the judge of the kinds of pots I like.
>
> Vince wrote:
>
> > (including terra sig). A beautiful vessel form generally does
not loose
> any
> > of its beauty due to tasteful application of glaze, and often
becomes far
> > more beautiful.
>
> It always depends. With my teacher's work, I always
liked his
> unglazed Yohen work the best. I liked it better than the
Haicabari
> (firemouth) work, because the deposited fly ash tends to obscure the
> variations of color on the bare clay and inlay. If you like clay
texture,
> unglazed wood fire or soda is a really good way to bring it out,
without
> covering it up with glaze. The thing about the Yohen work, is
that the
> surfaces are smooth and nice to touch, unlike heavily deposited ash
type
> wood kiln work.
>
> Vince again:
>
> > That said, I have certainly seen lots of vessel forms that are
> > over-decorated or poorly glazed, and that of course distracts the
eye from
> > the beauty of the form.
>
> The main thing glaze should not do is distract from the
form.
>
> Malcolm again:
>
> > You said:
> > > Glazes do, in many instances, serve an important practical
function
> > > by making the surface impervious to liquids. And I admit that
much
> > > Sung Chinese ware looks good, even though it is glazed.
>
> In high fire ware, glaze is not necessary because the clay
body
> itself is impervious to liquids.
>
> Vince again:
>
> > Wow, Malcolm. You're treading on mighty thin ground there. Are
you
> > serious? Those Song wares would have looked pretty ordinary in
raw
> unglazed
> > clay. They would not have been the masterpieces that they are.
The same
> is
> > true of most of the great abundance of spectacular glazed wares
made
> around
> > the world through history.
>
> I think that Malcolm's point is that the forms are the
primary
> strength of Sung work. As Rawson says, the archetypal forms
were
> perfected in Sung China. Where in the Greek and Roman pots, the
form was
> often seen as a canvas for the decoration, in the Sung pots, the
form as an
> end in itself.
>
> In conclusion, to glaze or not glaze, is one esthetic
choice we
> have.
>
> --
> Lee In Mashiko, Japan Lee@M...
>
> To Subscribe to my Email Lists send blank email to:
> Wood Firing: WoodKiln-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
> Akita Dog Photos: akita-g-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
> FolkCraft: mingei-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
> Zen Practice: E-zendo-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
______________________________________________________________________
________
> Send postings to clayart@l...
>
> 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@p...
Lee Love on mon 22 sep 03
----- Original Message -----
From: "Vince Pitelka"
Malcolm wrote:
> > The pottery
> > from the past that I love the most is that of Attic Greece, which had
> > no glazes.
These tend not to be my favorite pots, because I prefer more
gestrual forms. And also, they tend to be about containment, rather than
offering, and the intellect, rather than feeling. In the East, bowls are
much more important. I've mentioned here in the past, that I think part
of the reason why these Western pots may seem to emphasis containment, is
because in the West, the dominant right hand is on the outside of the pot.
In the East, the dominant hand is in the inside. Even with closed forms,
instead of the feeling of containment, you get the impression that the pot
was "grown" from the inside out.
>>If a thrown pot does not look good before the glaze is put
> > on, it will not look good afterwards either. If the shape looks
> > really good without the glaze, the glaze covering will (nine times
> > out of ten) deminish the refinement of the shape.
I tend to feel the same way, because my primary interest is in form.
A blind man can be the judge of the kinds of pots I like.
Vince wrote:
> (including terra sig). A beautiful vessel form generally does not loose
any
> of its beauty due to tasteful application of glaze, and often becomes far
> more beautiful.
It always depends. With my teacher's work, I always liked his
unglazed Yohen work the best. I liked it better than the Haicabari
(firemouth) work, because the deposited fly ash tends to obscure the
variations of color on the bare clay and inlay. If you like clay texture,
unglazed wood fire or soda is a really good way to bring it out, without
covering it up with glaze. The thing about the Yohen work, is that the
surfaces are smooth and nice to touch, unlike heavily deposited ash type
wood kiln work.
Vince again:
> That said, I have certainly seen lots of vessel forms that are
> over-decorated or poorly glazed, and that of course distracts the eye from
> the beauty of the form.
The main thing glaze should not do is distract from the form.
Malcolm again:
> You said:
> > Glazes do, in many instances, serve an important practical function
> > by making the surface impervious to liquids. And I admit that much
> > Sung Chinese ware looks good, even though it is glazed.
In high fire ware, glaze is not necessary because the clay body
itself is impervious to liquids.
Vince again:
> Wow, Malcolm. You're treading on mighty thin ground there. Are you
> serious? Those Song wares would have looked pretty ordinary in raw
unglazed
> clay. They would not have been the masterpieces that they are. The same
is
> true of most of the great abundance of spectacular glazed wares made
around
> the world through history.
I think that Malcolm's point is that the forms are the primary
strength of Sung work. As Rawson says, the archetypal forms were
perfected in Sung China. Where in the Greek and Roman pots, the form was
often seen as a canvas for the decoration, in the Sung pots, the form as an
end in itself.
In conclusion, to glaze or not glaze, is one esthetic choice we
have.
--
Lee In Mashiko, Japan Lee@Mashiko.org
To Subscribe to my Email Lists send blank email to:
Wood Firing: WoodKiln-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Akita Dog Photos: akita-g-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
FolkCraft: mingei-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Zen Practice: E-zendo-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
| |
|
