Lois Ruben Aronow on thu 1 apr 04
I just got my issue of CM, and was excited to see what all the hubbub was
about.
While I didn't find the pot on the cover inspiring (I rarely do, by the way)
I didn't vomit when I saw it either.
My question is to Karen, I suppose: You are quite passionate in your post
about disliking the work, but you don't say why - you only say it's ugly. I
am so curious to know your opinion of why you dislike it so passionately.
What moves you to that disdain? Saying it's ugly and it angers you isn't
enough for me.
I'm not trying to start a fight - I'm trying to start a discussion. I
really am really curious. Did the article not give you enough information
to get inside the artists head? What was it that pushed those buttons? In
your post, you said you are well educated about this sort of art. If you
could educate me as to why you think it's so horrible, please do. I admit
to not understanding it, but I didn't get the same reaction you did. I'd
love to learn more.
On a related note, I recently attended a slide presentation and talk by Jeff
Shapiro. I admire the craftsmanship of his work, but anagama work is not
really my cup of tea. I don't get it. No big deal. One of the slides he
showed looked to me like a rock. Turns out he slip cast a real rock, one he
admired, press molded it, and fired it in his anagama. I thought "Great.
Aren't there enough rocks in the world". As he explained his motivations
(for casting rocks) and his firing techniques (some of which involved
residual salt dripping down and simulating lichens) - I got it! It was a
lightbulb moment for me. He was able to make me see what he saw, what he
was trying to achieve, and why he felt like he achieved it.
On a roundabout note I guess I'm trying to say that maybe the writing of the
article wasn't up to snuff for you - didn't bring you to where you needed to
be to feel comfortable with the work.
Lastly, maybe I'm one of the few who has been really enjoying the new look
and feel of CM. Like the little graphic treatments, etc. Like the work
they show of artists I'm not familiar with. While I respect and love all of
you, the world is so big, and there is so much work outside of Clayart to be
seen and learned about.
FWIW.
Gene and Dolita Dohrman on thu 1 apr 04
Just want to clarify something. While I may not always
like/appreciate/understand all that passes for great works in clay
(remember, I am the one who has a problem with lumpy, pitted teabowls), I
look forward to receiving CM every month. It is such a treat when I find it
in my mailbox. There is always plenty in there to make me happy-I even pour
over all the ads.
Dolita
dohrman@insightbb.com
Louisville, KY
Richard Aerni on thu 1 apr 04
Well, it's about time CM had a good controversy on their hands!
I've kind of gotten to missing those "please don't ever show any more of
that terrible (fill in the blank)kind of work anymore!" letters...we used
to give the letters section dramatic readings in one of my old studios.
Made for an entertaining lunch break.
...and here I thought while reading this header that perhaps the
controversy was that the editors knew where Saddam had been hiding his
barium carbonate, and didn't tell the WMD inspectors...
richard aerni
rochester, ny
Lois Ruben Aronow on fri 2 apr 04
> ...and here I thought while reading this header that perhaps
> the controversy was that the editors knew where Saddam had
> been hiding his barium carbonate, and didn't tell the WMD
> inspectors...
>
Close - they know where he's hiding the Albany slip and the Gerstely Borate.
| |
|
