Susan Setley on sun 30 nov 03
In a message dated 11/30/03 9:05:40 PM, kobco@NETZERO.NET writes:
<< Personally, I don't care because I don't want to submit anything, but your
definition and restriction is still not completely clear and ambiguity in
definition drives me nuts. Not you. Just the lack of clarity.
Barbara Kobler http://www.claywoman.net >>
I agree with you. I have seen people use molds to make remarkable
one-of-a-kind pieces of work that certainly should be in competition with the very high
quality of work shown on the calendars.
L. P. Skeen on sun 30 nov 03
For someone who doesn't care, you sure do go on and on. Let me state AGAIN,
at the risk of sounding like a total bitch, This is MY calendar, and what
goes in it is MY CALL. So far, there have been no complaints about the
pieces I chose, so I think maybe I do have a clue as to what constitutes
good work, or at least good slides, and I have the right to choose what I
like. (I did actually put in a couple of pieces this year that were not my
favorites, but other people who saw them said, "Ooh, that's cool!" and so I
deferred to their judgement.)
On every show application, there are guidelines as to what will and won't be
accepted. I think I stated the calendar guidelines pretty clearly. Do you
also attack Jean Lehman for restricting the SFPN to ONLY functional work?
Somehow I don't think so.
L
----- Original Message -----
From: "Barbara Kobler"
Or maybe what you really mean is simply "Only original one of a kind
items".
> Personally, I don't care because I don't want to submit anything, but your
definition and restriction is still not completely clear and ambiguity in
definition drives me nuts.
John Rodgers on mon 1 dec 03
Sheesh!
Lisa, what are you? Some kind of nearsighted narrow-minded clayart
calendar tycoon crone sitting on a mountain somewhere??? Won't allow ANY
but YOUR definition of handmade pottery in YOUR calendar??? Sheesh!!!
I jokes!........ I jokes!......... I jokes!
LET IT GO, FOLKS!
Lisa is right on target here. The calendar is a private production,
not one SPONSORED by Clayart or ACERS or any other organization. She is
within her rights and HAS defined the rules. Live with it.
I do molded work myself, but I support Lisa 100% on her rights to sail
her own ship on this.
If anyone wants to do it different , fine. Then get out there and do it,
but lighten up on her! This is her party. Conform to the dress code or
you don't get in!!!
'Nuff said!!
Regards,
John Rodgers
Chelsea, AL
L. P. Skeen wrote:
>For someone who doesn't care, you sure do go on and on. Let me state AGAIN,
>at the risk of sounding like a total bitch, This is MY calendar, and what
>goes in it is MY CALL. So far, there have been no complaints about the
>pieces I chose, so I think maybe I do have a clue as to what constitutes
>good work, or at least good slides, and I have the right to choose what I
>like. (I did actually put in a couple of pieces this year that were not my
>favorites, but other people who saw them said, "Ooh, that's cool!" and so I
>deferred to their judgement.)
>
>On every show application, there are guidelines as to what will and won't be
>accepted. I think I stated the calendar guidelines pretty clearly. Do you
>also attack Jean Lehman for restricting the SFPN to ONLY functional work?
>Somehow I don't think so.
>
>L
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Barbara Kobler"
>Or maybe what you really mean is simply "Only original one of a kind
>items".
>
>
>>Personally, I don't care because I don't want to submit anything, but your
>>
>>
>definition and restriction is still not completely clear and ambiguity in
>definition drives me nuts.
>
>______________________________________________________________________________
>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.
>
>
>
L. P. Skeen on mon 1 dec 03
John of COURSE I'm not a crone......I'm only 36 for gosh sake!
Furthermore, I live in the Piedmont of NC, "piedmont" being some other
language meaning "foot of the mountain". OTOH, my house IS on top of a big
hill........... ;)
L
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Rodgers"
> Lisa, what are you? Some kind of nearsighted narrow-minded clayart
calendar tycoon crone sitting on a mountain somewhere???
John Rodgers on mon 1 dec 03
Well........
I do hope you realized the intended humor of my post.........!
Regards,
John Rodgers
Chelsea, AL ... where my shop has been completed and released back to me
and I am going nuts because I suddenly realized that I am committed to
two very different jobs simultaneously!!!!!!
Hmmmm! Now where did I put that bottle of cloning tonic............!?
L. P. Skeen wrote:
> John of COURSE I'm not a crone......I'm only 36 for gosh sake!
>Furthermore, I live in the Piedmont of NC, "piedmont" being some other
>language meaning "foot of the mountain". OTOH, my house IS on top of a big
>hill........... ;)
>
>L
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "John Rodgers"
>
>
>> Lisa, what are you? Some kind of nearsighted narrow-minded clayart
>>
>>
>calendar tycoon crone sitting on a mountain somewhere???
>
>______________________________________________________________________________
>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.
>
>
>
Barbara Kobler on mon 1 dec 03
O.K., LP Skeen, I just read your clarification. I still don't quite get it. You say
"I prefer original, handbuilt or wheel-thrown work. Molded and mass produced items are not what...." These two statements still do not make it clear what you mean.
Something can be original, handbuilt and not be mass produced, yet have parts or all of it molded. Do mean no plaster molds. No production ware and no jiggered ware. Or maybe you do mean no commercial molds that are not altered. If so, why not just say that. Or maybe what you really mean is simply "Only original one of a kind items".
Personally, I don't care because I don't want to submit anything, but your definition and restriction is still not completely clear and ambiguity in definition drives me nuts. Not you. Just the lack of clarity.
Barbara Kobler http://www.claywoman.net
L. P. Skeen on tue 2 dec 03
> I do hope you realized the intended humor of my post.........!
Yes absolutely; I was definitely laughing! :) And thanks for your kind
comments as well. <:o)
L
Bobbruch1@AOL.COM on tue 2 dec 03
Lisa, I am more than a little curious here about your thinking. I do some
work with press molds (that I make) in combination with "handbuilding," and
other pieces with coils and slabs alone, and have tried some extruding. I am
being told by someone who I respect (and who I think you would also) that I need
to switch over to extruding 100% of my work because I could make it a lot
faster than I do at present - and by extension, be able to price it more
competitively.
My take on what I do is that exclusive use of the extruder would eliminate a
large portion of the hand work that I presently do, even on pieces that are
started in a mold. I am not saying that extruders would eliminate handwork, just
that they would minimize or at least lessen it. I somewhat enjoy the hand
work, it is why I was attracted to the clay process in the first place. That
and my resistance to change along the cost of the equipment that I want keep me
in limbo between various types of construction methods.
So I am of the conclusion that an extruder (or a slab roller) will put my
work on more of a "production basis" than any press molded piece I have ever
done. Yet you seem to feel that there is some derogatory tone to work that has a
very high concentration of handbuilding verses other work that has a much lower
element of that which you seem to value.
Maybe because I work in a number of different methods, I fail to see the
aesthetic difference between any of the pieces based solely on the use of those
methods. Lisa, I am not trying to be combative and I fully respect your right to
make the rules. You are doing the work, and you get to make the call. But
after that is said, I am still curious why you are saying it. You are not the
only one who has expressed that opinion on this list. There have been other
such discussions on this subject and I have never understood it, except perhaps
in the area of production work. It would really be helpful, maybe to both
"sides" of the discussion to layout the thought process. Maybe someone else who
shares that view could chime in and explain the logic.
As an aside, I recently had a photo put in a local calendar. The production
company saw the photo on a promo card for a show and accepted it based on that.
Their only question was "what is the title"? Even though it will be the only
ceramic piece in the calendar, that process still stands out in juxtaposition
to the clayart calendar.
Bob Bruch
L. P. Skeen on tue 2 dec 03
Bob said :
you seem to feel that there is some derogatory tone to work that has a very
high concentration of handbuilding verses other work that has a much lower
element of that which you seem to value.
Actually, Bob, I NEVER said anything derogatory about handbuilt work. A
great deal of my own work is handbuilt now, and I admire well-done handbuilt
work a great deal. Having done so much of it myself in the last year, I'll
have to say that handbuilding is at least as difficult as throwing, but in
different ways. ;o)
L
| |
|
