Kathy Forer on mon 16 aug 04
Mel, Good food for thought during the workday.
But it sounds a little like the oldster saying the world is going to
hell in a handbasket. Maybe what we're seeing is a realignment. Of
process and product, of art and craft, of quality and content. Not that
what you and the calligraphers are seeing might not be an unfortunate
permanent trend, but couldn't it also be an opening up of the art of
the craft?
Often training is at fault. I used to cringe when I saw expressive
drawing by people who had disdain for art skills. Not the
revolutionaries, but their followers. Weak lines, bad form. Then I saw
that they were incorporating the redirections of Matisse, Goya and
numerous other forerunners who were highly skilled and academically
trained but who intentionally broke with expected tradition.
In a sense the newer arts and craftspeople are shaking out direction.
What will survive? What will morph into creative new avenues?
Often intent is at fault. Art schools can be pretty lame and reinforce
immature phases as respectable motions.
Often, as you observe, it's both. It's not admirable, although it can
be important or useful, but hasn't it always been like this? There are
innovations that get overdone, then the synthesis retreats as the new
become incorporated into the overall.
Kathy Forer
mel jacobson on mon 16 aug 04
had a long discussion the other day with a group
of outstanding calligraphers. i mostly listened, it
was an old story for a potter. art is just catching up to them.
the story goes like this:
big show last month, many of the pieces did not have
any written words that could be found. just marks
all over the paper. color, tricks, watercolor, acrylics
but no calligraphy. just art marks.
IS IT CALLIGRAPHY?
it was a calligraphy show, suppose to be done by
calligraphers, but it was `abstract painting`. it is like if
you want to be good, recognized, don't do craft things,
don't show your skill, do art tricks.
same thing is happening in fabric shows. textile exhibits.
nothing to wear. all hangs on the wall. images, metaphor,
nothing to do with skill or craft. all art. it seems the
crafts people are embarrassed. don't wear it, put it on the
wall.
(several years ago i wrote a paper saying `some of the best
art in america is coming from female textile artists..honest,
good control of the craft...unimposing...people who love
their materials and are working hard with them. i have to amend
my paper. now many want to show art, many of them don't want
to be associated with the craft....want to be `big time artists`.
sorry, it does not work.)
the big trouble is, they are not full time artists..they are
messin in areas that they do not have expertise. it is
faking art. (look in the magazines, see what to do) it is not good
calligraphy, textiles, and it sure is not
good painting. very average.
same thing we see in clay. not good pots, not very good
3d art. caught in the middle. the training in skill is poor,
and no training in art. makes for a sorry mess. but, thank god
for typeset. they can tell us all about it on the wall. paragraph
after paragraph. the story of their lives. illustrated wall stories.
anyway. it is what i am sorting out right now. i have no perfect answers.
should make a good discussion for clayart.
i just don't want to be embarrassed because i have skill, and years
of knowledge. it seems that is what we should all strive for.
don't ever want to take away the right for anyone to do art, do three dee
expression. it just always smacks me as arrogant when untrained, unskilled
folks think they can do art and show it without paying dues.
mel
From:
Minnetonka, Minnesota, U.S.A.
web site: my.pclink.com/~melpots
or try: http://www.pclink.com/melpots
new/ http://www.rid-a-tick.com
Barbara Lewis on mon 16 aug 04
Hey Mel: Long time no see. I do know what you mean. It seems that the more
an "artistic endeavor" requires TECHNICAL knowledge, as in clay (chemistry,
firing temps, building kilns etc.) the less what you do is called "art." Just
an observation. Barbara
John Hesselberth on mon 16 aug 04
On Monday, August 16, 2004, at 12:58 PM, mel jacobson wrote:
> it just always smacks me as arrogant when untrained, unskilled
> folks think they can do art and show it without paying dues.
Hi Mel,
Exactly the same thing can be said if you replace the word 'art' with
'craft' in the above sentence. With all the prepackaged clay and
glazes, computerized kilns, etc. we have, perhaps, made it too easy to
make a pot. As a result, a lot of really poor quality or just plain
mediocre work is showing up in the marketplace dragging the whole
marketplace down to a beginner's level. It is not an easy issue to deal
with.
I don't, in any way, want to hold back the progress of these aids nor
discourage beginners, but I do regret that there are no standards one
has to meet to be able to call oneself a potter and be able to use that
term as a professional tag. The only way I can think of to deal with it
is to go back to a Guild system where one has to be juried in or serve
an apprenticeship with a Guild member before they can call themselves a
Guild Potter. Then one still has to convince the public that the Guild
Potter designation has some meaning.
We have a system like that, although it is only moderately rigorous, in
the Pennsylvania Guild of Craftsmen and, oh my, you should hear the
complaining from those who don't meet the standards and are told they
need to improve before they gain juried status. To me this is a real
issue that the Potters' Council should wrestle with.
John
John Hesselberth
http://www.frogpondpottery.com
http://www.masteringglazes.com
Scott Paulding on mon 16 aug 04
Hi All,
Full time, I work in computers (gotta get my silica fix somehow). This being
said, inferring that clay is just a hobby to me severely undermines my
realtionship with it. I've been making pots for just over 11 years now. Been
through all of the bumps and bruises that all potters go through. Spent the
time learning about glaze chemistry. I've never built a kiln though.
Barb, you are absolutely right. The more technical something it, the less it's
considered art. This is going to sound geeky, but I've read computer code that
was downright poetic. It's amazing when, the right person, with the right
inspiration/creativity/understanding sits down to write something and it is
absolutely perfect in every way. Even if it is just commands for a computer to
interpret.
I'm also amazed, utterly amazed at how mutually reinforcing clay is to my life.
Learning pottery taught me how to learn process. To see process, and how to
live process, and understand process. Learning this way has helped me to
utterly simplify complex systems (like throwing/wheel dynamics, interpersonal
dynamics, OR computer systems), and make something that was once very bulky
have new life. Once I understand the process, and understand all of the rules,
I am free to -- no, it is my job to -- break said rules. Shake things up from
time to time, and see what settles out.
In a way, to me, that is the definition of art. Breaking the rules and see what
settles out. But it's also highly personal. A constant growth and development.
Gettig rid of what doesn't works, and reinforcing what does. And once it's
fortified, if it stops working, get rid of it too! Or hell, get rid of it all
together and try somehting new for the fun of it.
The truly great artisits can, in the right time and place, do this on a
societal/global level.
just my $.02
-scott
--- Barbara Lewis wrote:
> Hey Mel: Long time no see. I do know what you mean. It seems that the more
> an "artistic endeavor" requires TECHNICAL knowledge, as in clay (chemistry,
> firing temps, building kilns etc.) the less what you do is called "art."
> Just
> an observation. Barbara
>
>
______________________________________________________________________________
> 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.
>
=====
"I should have been a plumber."
-Albert Einstein
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
Joseph Bennion on mon 16 aug 04
Wow Mel,
This is sure to kick off an avalanche of comment. Does the art-craft
debate never die?
Personally I have no interest in the title "Artist". Too much evil has
been unleashed in the name of art and by people calling themselves
artists. The quest to be noticed by the art establishment and to be
marketable has done inestimable harm to our craft. It would suit me
near total to be remembered as a potter. A good pot is just that. It
doesn't care about being called art. It just is.
Joe the Potter
--- mel jacobson wrote:
> had a long discussion the other day with a group
> of outstanding calligraphers. i mostly listened, it
> was an old story for a potter. art is just catching up to them.
>
> the story goes like this:
>
> big show last month, many of the pieces did not have
> any written words that could be found. just marks
> all over the paper. color, tricks, watercolor, acrylics
> but no calligraphy. just art marks.
> IS IT CALLIGRAPHY?
> it was a calligraphy show, suppose to be done by
> calligraphers, but it was `abstract painting`. it is like if
> you want to be good, recognized, don't do craft things,
> don't show your skill, do art tricks.
>
> same thing is happening in fabric shows. textile exhibits.
> nothing to wear. all hangs on the wall. images, metaphor,
> nothing to do with skill or craft. all art. it seems the
> crafts people are embarrassed. don't wear it, put it on the
> wall.
> (several years ago i wrote a paper saying `some of the best
> art in america is coming from female textile artists..honest,
> good control of the craft...unimposing...people who love
> their materials and are working hard with them. i have to amend
> my paper. now many want to show art, many of them don't want
> to be associated with the craft....want to be `big time artists`.
> sorry, it does not work.)
>
> the big trouble is, they are not full time artists..they are
> messin in areas that they do not have expertise. it is
> faking art. (look in the magazines, see what to do) it is not good
> calligraphy, textiles, and it sure is not
> good painting. very average.
>
> same thing we see in clay. not good pots, not very good
> 3d art. caught in the middle. the training in skill is poor,
> and no training in art. makes for a sorry mess. but, thank god
> for typeset. they can tell us all about it on the wall. paragraph
> after paragraph. the story of their lives. illustrated wall
> stories.
>
> anyway. it is what i am sorting out right now. i have no perfect
> answers.
> should make a good discussion for clayart.
> i just don't want to be embarrassed because i have skill, and years
> of knowledge. it seems that is what we should all strive for.
>
> don't ever want to take away the right for anyone to do art, do three
> dee
> expression. it just always smacks me as arrogant when untrained,
> unskilled
> folks think they can do art and show it without paying dues.
> mel
>
> From:
> Minnetonka, Minnesota, U.S.A.
> web site: my.pclink.com/~melpots
> or try: http://www.pclink.com/melpots
> new/ http://www.rid-a-tick.com
>
>
______________________________________________________________________________
> 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.
>
=====
Joseph Bennion PO Box 186 Spring City, Utah 84662 435-462-2708 www.horseshoemountainpottery.com
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
Anne Webb on mon 16 aug 04
Ignorance is bliss.
Its kinda like those stupid reality shows on tv.. the first one may have
been good, but when the networks saw how much money it brought in, everyone
jumped on the bandwagon with reality this reality that.. shows are getting
worse and worse... its not good but they still pawn this crap out, not
because they think its good, but because they think they can get away
selling it to the public.
There is a self-proclaimed "artist community" just down the road from
here..what a joke. Everyone wants to be an artist. You take one art class
and pick up a paintbrush.. and voila! you're a painter.
While there are definitely some good artists down here, they are vastly
outnumbered by these "artiste" types, largely untalented individuals who
dont take the time to master the fundamentals, but they can sure crank out
"art". Funny I never viewed art as something to be "cranked out".
Unfortunately the public down here where we are, are relatively uneducated
when it comes to art or pottery, and dont know good art from bad. And
thanks to these "art"-cranking "artists", most of the legitimate artists
cant get a decent price here for their work so they have go elsewhere. What
a loss for everyone.
I dont see this as being about the legitimacy of part time vs full time
artists. Its about our motivation for doing art.
Anne
>From: mel jacobson
>
>had a long discussion the other day with a group
>of outstanding calligraphers. i mostly listened, it
>was an old story for a potter. art is just catching up to them.
>
>the story goes like this:
>
>big show last month, many of the pieces did not have
>any written words that could be found. just marks
>all over the paper. color, tricks, watercolor, acrylics
>but no calligraphy. just art marks.
>IS IT CALLIGRAPHY?
> it was a calligraphy show, suppose to be done by
>calligraphers, but it was `abstract painting`. it is like if
>you want to be good, recognized, don't do craft things,
>don't show your skill, do art tricks.
>
>same thing is happening in fabric shows. textile exhibits.
>nothing to wear. all hangs on the wall. images, metaphor,
>nothing to do with skill or craft. all art. it seems the
>crafts people are embarrassed. don't wear it, put it on the
>wall.
>(several years ago i wrote a paper saying `some of the best
>art in america is coming from female textile artists..honest,
>good control of the craft...unimposing...people who love
>their materials and are working hard with them. i have to amend
>my paper. now many want to show art, many of them don't want
>to be associated with the craft....want to be `big time artists`.
>sorry, it does not work.)
>
>the big trouble is, they are not full time artists..they are
>messin in areas that they do not have expertise. it is
>faking art. (look in the magazines, see what to do) it is not good
>calligraphy, textiles, and it sure is not
>good painting. very average.
>
>same thing we see in clay. not good pots, not very good
>3d art. caught in the middle. the training in skill is poor,
>and no training in art. makes for a sorry mess. but, thank god
>for typeset. they can tell us all about it on the wall. paragraph
>after paragraph. the story of their lives. illustrated wall stories.
>
>anyway. it is what i am sorting out right now. i have no perfect answers.
>should make a good discussion for clayart.
>i just don't want to be embarrassed because i have skill, and years
>of knowledge. it seems that is what we should all strive for.
>
>don't ever want to take away the right for anyone to do art, do three dee
>expression. it just always smacks me as arrogant when untrained, unskilled
>folks think they can do art and show it without paying dues.
>mel
>
>From:
>Minnetonka, Minnesota, U.S.A.
>web site: my.pclink.com/~melpots
>or try: http://www.pclink.com/melpots
>new/ http://www.rid-a-tick.com
>
>______________________________________________________________________________
>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.
_________________________________________________________________
Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee®
Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
Debbie on mon 16 aug 04
Yes, this has been so for a long, long time.
I don't dwell on it, it's just the way it is.
There are a lot of fake artist and as sad, fake viewers of art. I think they
are like a lost tribe, searching for what they don't know (but think maybe a
stuffed ego will fill the void)
(I need add here that I consider art not distinct from craft.)
A rare treat for myself last night gives perspective. On the way home from a
wonderful performance at the Hollywood Bowl, I was stuck that thousands of
people had come to see the performance, (I was in the nose bleed section and
could see them all). And the ride home after on the commuter bus was filled
with people so joyous and uplifted by what we had experienced it was
glowing! Art can do that. That's what art should do, give something to
people. Everyone there knew that.
The world is a big place. There is room for a lot of idiots here. But where
there are idiots, there is hope and they will never completely displace
art. Art is always here, independent of time, commerce, popculture. Geez, if
some of the idiots live long enough, they may even discover it!
Yes, I'd like to see more art in life, but I'll be happy for what I can
find!
Debbie
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Clayart [mailto:CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG]On Behalf Of mel jacobson
> Sent: Monday, August 16, 2004 9:59 AM
> To: CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG
> Subject: big questions/art
>
>
> had a long discussion the other day with a group
> of outstanding calligraphers. i mostly listened, it
> was an old story for a potter. art is just catching up to them.
>
> the story goes like this:
>
> big show last month, many of the pieces did not have
> any written words that could be found. just marks
> all over the paper. color, tricks, watercolor, acrylics
> but no calligraphy. just art marks.
> IS IT CALLIGRAPHY?
> it was a calligraphy show, suppose to be done by
> calligraphers, but it was `abstract painting`. it is like if
> you want to be good, recognized, don't do craft things,
> don't show your skill, do art tricks.
>
> same thing is happening in fabric shows. textile exhibits.
> nothing to wear. all hangs on the wall. images, metaphor,
> nothing to do with skill or craft. all art. it seems the
> crafts people are embarrassed. don't wear it, put it on the
> wall.
> (several years ago i wrote a paper saying `some of the best
> art in america is coming from female textile artists..honest,
> good control of the craft...unimposing...people who love
> their materials and are working hard with them. i have to amend
> my paper. now many want to show art, many of them don't want
> to be associated with the craft....want to be `big time artists`.
> sorry, it does not work.)
>
> the big trouble is, they are not full time artists..they are
> messin in areas that they do not have expertise. it is
> faking art. (look in the magazines, see what to do) it is not good
> calligraphy, textiles, and it sure is not
> good painting. very average.
>
> same thing we see in clay. not good pots, not very good
> 3d art. caught in the middle. the training in skill is poor,
> and no training in art. makes for a sorry mess. but, thank god
> for typeset. they can tell us all about it on the wall. paragraph
> after paragraph. the story of their lives. illustrated wall stories.
>
> anyway. it is what i am sorting out right now. i have no
> perfect answers.
> should make a good discussion for clayart.
> i just don't want to be embarrassed because i have skill, and years
> of knowledge. it seems that is what we should all strive for.
>
> don't ever want to take away the right for anyone to do art, do three dee
> expression. it just always smacks me as arrogant when untrained,
> unskilled
> folks think they can do art and show it without paying dues.
> mel
>
> From:
> Minnetonka, Minnesota, U.S.A.
> web site: my.pclink.com/~melpots
> or try: http://www.pclink.com/melpots
> new/ http://www.rid-a-tick.com
>
elca branman on mon 16 aug 04
I know that I am a better creative artist than I am a craftsman , but
I also know that I would be a better artist if I were a better craftsman.
And isn't that true for all of us, except those who are bad artists and
good craftspeople or bad artists AND bad craftspeople as well.( no names
here , please)
Elca Branman
http://www.elcabranman.com
________________________________________________________________
The best thing to hit the Internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
Surf the Web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!
Mark Strayer on mon 16 aug 04
Not exactly sure how to respond to this debate, but I felt the need to sa=
y
something. I am an Industrial Designer by education and a part time pott=
er.
So I have a formal design education and feel some creative talent. Perh=
aps
we are getting hung up on the word "art" and loosing the meaning of why
it's being created in the first place. Participating in pottery or other=
creative endevours should be done because the person who is creating it
is finding some personal meaning and satisfaction in it...it is filling
the need to create and express one's self that is important. If it becom=
es
a marketable object great! If you make money on it and someone else takes=
it home and gets personal gradification out of owning it, great!
>-- Original Message --
>Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 14:26:21 -0500
>Reply-To: Clayart
>From: Anne Webb
>Subject: Re: big questions/art
>To: CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG
>
>
>Ignorance is bliss.
>
>Its kinda like those stupid reality shows on tv.. the first one may have=
>been good, but when the networks saw how much money it brought in, every=
one
>jumped on the bandwagon with reality this reality that.. shows are getti=
ng
>worse and worse... its not good but they still pawn this crap out, not
>because they think its good, but because they think they can get away
>selling it to the public.
>
>There is a self-proclaimed "artist community" just down the road from
>here..what a joke. Everyone wants to be an artist. You take one art cla=
ss
>and pick up a paintbrush.. and voila! you're a painter.
>While there are definitely some good artists down here, they are vastly
>outnumbered by these "artiste" types, largely untalented individuals who=
>dont take the time to master the fundamentals, but they can sure crank
out
>"art". Funny I never viewed art as something to be "cranked out".
>
>Unfortunately the public down here where we are, are relatively uneducat=
ed
>when it comes to art or pottery, and dont know good art from bad. And
>thanks to these "art"-cranking "artists", most of the legitimate artists=
>cant get a decent price here for their work so they have go elsewhere.
What
>a loss for everyone.
>
>I dont see this as being about the legitimacy of part time vs full time
>artists. Its about our motivation for doing art.
>
>Anne
>
>>From: mel jacobson
>>
>>had a long discussion the other day with a group
>>of outstanding calligraphers. i mostly listened, it
>>was an old story for a potter. art is just catching up to them.
>>
>>the story goes like this:
>>
>>big show last month, many of the pieces did not have
>>any written words that could be found. just marks
>>all over the paper. color, tricks, watercolor, acrylics
>>but no calligraphy. just art marks.
>>IS IT CALLIGRAPHY?
>> it was a calligraphy show, suppose to be done by
>>calligraphers, but it was `abstract painting`. it is like if
>>you want to be good, recognized, don't do craft things,
>>don't show your skill, do art tricks.
>>
>>same thing is happening in fabric shows. textile exhibits.
>>nothing to wear. all hangs on the wall. images, metaphor,
>>nothing to do with skill or craft. all art. it seems the
>>crafts people are embarrassed. don't wear it, put it on the
>>wall.
>>(several years ago i wrote a paper saying `some of the best
>>art in america is coming from female textile artists..honest,
>>good control of the craft...unimposing...people who love
>>their materials and are working hard with them. i have to amend
>>my paper. now many want to show art, many of them don't want
>>to be associated with the craft....want to be `big time artists`.
>>sorry, it does not work.)
>>
>>the big trouble is, they are not full time artists..they are
>>messin in areas that they do not have expertise. it is
>>faking art. (look in the magazines, see what to do) it is not good
>>calligraphy, textiles, and it sure is not
>>good painting. very average.
>>
>>same thing we see in clay. not good pots, not very good
>>3d art. caught in the middle. the training in skill is poor,
>>and no training in art. makes for a sorry mess. but, thank god
>>for typeset. they can tell us all about it on the wall. paragraph
>>after paragraph. the story of their lives. illustrated wall stories.
>>
>>anyway. it is what i am sorting out right now. i have no perfect answ=
ers.
>>should make a good discussion for clayart.
>>i just don't want to be embarrassed because i have skill, and years
>>of knowledge. it seems that is what we should all strive for.
>>
>>don't ever want to take away the right for anyone to do art, do three
dee
>>expression. it just always smacks me as arrogant when untrained, unski=
lled
>>folks think they can do art and show it without paying dues.
>>mel
>>
>>From:
>>Minnetonka, Minnesota, U.S.A.
>>web site: my.pclink.com/~melpots
>>or try: http://www.pclink.com/melpots
>>new/ http://www.rid-a-tick.com
>>
>>_______________________________________________________________________=
_______
>>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.
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee=AE=
>Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3D3963
>
>________________________________________________________________________=
______
>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@pcli=
nk.com.
Snail Scott on mon 16 aug 04
At 12:14 PM 8/16/2004 -0700, Joe wrote:
>Personally I have no interest in the title "Artist"...It would suit me
>near total to be remembered as a potter...
Well, good. I don't need the competition!
Seriously, it's just dumb to say that pottery
is a lesser thing than art. Or vice-versa. The
point is, it's a _different_ thing. Judging
pottery by the standards of art is like judging
dogs by the standards of cats. Sure, there are
a lot of similarities in form (quadrupedal
mammals) and function (adding fur to the couch)
but a cat that can't catch a frisbee is not
deficient by feline standards, and one that
could would not necessarily be an improvement. ;)
Art you can eat off is not necessarily better
than non-food-bearing art, and pottery whose
function is fulfilled just by being looked at
is surely not superior to pottery that ought
to be used, either.
("Man, that painting really sucks! I bet a
decent lasagna would just slide right off it!")
-Snail Scott
Ivor and Olive Lewis on tue 17 aug 04
Dear Mel,
It all depends on what your colleagues mean by "Calligraphy". If they
are confining their opinions to the production of letters, scripts and
ideograms their arguments will be lead in one direction. But if they
choose to have a wider definition which includes ornamentation then
alternative, even contradictory opinions could appear.
I'm not sure how good your Latin is but you might read the
introduction to Johann Georg Schwandner, "Calligraphy", 1756. Your
colleagues will be familiar with this text if they are at the mark of
excellence and knowledge you portray them to be.
An further discussion will wander around the way we perceive the
meanings of the terms employed to express our opinions.
I like your proposition that Art can be Faked, it intrigues me. I know
there are fake paintings, fake Leach pots, fake coins and sundry other
fake artefacts. But "Fake Art" seems to be some sort of misnomer. In
fact, without a clear definition of "Art" it seems to be an
impossibility, if not an oxymoron.
Best regards,
Ivor Lewis.
Redhill,
S. Australia.
----- Original Message -----
From: "mel jacobson"
To:
Sent: Tuesday, 17 August 2004 2:28
Subject: big questions/art
> had a long discussion the other day with a group
> of outstanding calligraphers. i mostly listened, it
> was an old story for a potter. art is just catching up to them.
>
> the story goes like this:
>
> big show last month, many of the pieces did not have
> any written words that could be found. just marks
> all over the paper. color, tricks, watercolor, acrylics
> but no calligraphy. just art marks.
> IS IT CALLIGRAPHY?
> it was a calligraphy show, suppose to be done by
> calligraphers, but it was `abstract painting`. it is like if
> you want to be good, recognized, don't do craft things,
> don't show your skill, do art tricks.
>
> same thing is happening in fabric shows. textile exhibits.
> nothing to wear. all hangs on the wall. images, metaphor,
> nothing to do with skill or craft. all art. it seems the
> crafts people are embarrassed. don't wear it, put it on the
> wall.
> (several years ago i wrote a paper saying `some of the best
> art in america is coming from female textile artists..honest,
> good control of the craft...unimposing...people who love
> their materials and are working hard with them. i have to amend
> my paper. now many want to show art, many of them don't want
> to be associated with the craft....want to be `big time artists`.
> sorry, it does not work.)
>
> the big trouble is, they are not full time artists..they are
> messin in areas that they do not have expertise. it is
> faking art. (look in the magazines, see what to do) it is not good
> calligraphy, textiles, and it sure is not
> good painting. very average.
>
> same thing we see in clay. not good pots, not very good
> 3d art. caught in the middle. the training in skill is poor,
> and no training in art. makes for a sorry mess. but, thank god
> for typeset. they can tell us all about it on the wall. paragraph
> after paragraph. the story of their lives. illustrated wall
stories.
>
> anyway. it is what i am sorting out right now. i have no perfect
answers.
> should make a good discussion for clayart.
> i just don't want to be embarrassed because i have skill, and years
> of knowledge. it seems that is what we should all strive for.
>
> don't ever want to take away the right for anyone to do art, do
three dee
> expression. it just always smacks me as arrogant when untrained,
unskilled
> folks think they can do art and show it without paying dues.
> mel
>
> From:
> Minnetonka, Minnesota, U.S.A.
> web site: my.pclink.com/~melpots
> or try: http://www.pclink.com/melpots
> new/ http://www.rid-a-tick.com
>
>
______________________________________________________________________
________
> 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.
Hal Giddens on tue 17 aug 04
>
> From: Anne Webb
> Date: 2004/08/16 Mon PM 03:26:21 EDT
> To: CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG
> Subject: Re: big questions/art
> Unfortunately the public down here where we are, are relatively uneducated
> when it comes to art or pottery, and dont know good art from bad. And
> thanks to these "art"-cranking "artists", most of the legitimate artists
> cant get a decent price here for their work so they have go elsewhere. What
> a loss for everyone.
Anne, where is "down here"?
Hal Giddens
Home Grown Pottery
Rockledge, Georgia USA
kenhal@bellsouth.net
Tig Dupre on tue 17 aug 04
mel-san, and all Mudbuds,
Mel is correct. Far too many self-styled "artists" are merely trying to shock the
public so they can be a "name." Simply that one works in a certain medium does not
qualify that person as a Master.
I have long maintained that our collective medium of clay requires the efforts of the
Muses Skill, Knowledge, and Dedication. We work with craft, art, and science. All three are requisite. None may be omitted.
The science is in the chemistry, the thermodynamics, the fluid mechanics, the physics, and the engineering of the materials we use, the machinery we make and use, and the
processes to finish a piece. The chemistry is not all that difficult, it just takes a
little getting used to, a little memory work, and the knowledge of what we don't know (so we can ask). The art is that all-encompassing, elusive quality that makes one mug
more desireable than another.
Saw one potter's work at a farmer's market--won't say who or where. In *my opinion,*
this person should a) find another line of work , or b) go back to school and practice
a lot more. The pieces were surprisingly heavy, not very well constructed--as if
primitive-appearing made it more attractive, and to my eyes, not appealingly glazed.
I hadn't the heart to ask how sales were.
There are many of you out there who are far better than I at the forming, the glazing,
the firing, and the marketing. I do this more for the relaxation and the fun. But I
put my heart into each and every piece I make. And I manage to sell a few now and
then. :o) (Taking orders for Christmas right now.)
The point is that using a saw to cut a piece of wood does not necessarily make a
person a carpenter. If someone else wishes to think of me as an artist, that's fine
by me. On my tax return I state something entirely different!
But, let's try this... If I take a piece of clay, color it with a mix of iron and
cobalt, build a seige catapult, load the clay into the catapult, and fire it against a
brick wall, does that clay then become part of a performance piece? Suppose I take
some wood and construct a frame around the point of impact. I "sign the work." Is
the area where it struck and stuck now a work of art? Am I then, because I work in
clay, considered a potter? Or, because I work in wood and clay, am I then a sculptor?
I could carry this farce out to an extreme, but I'll stop here.
Art is in the eye of the beholder. The judgement of art is in the eyes of the public.
Back to the wheel...
Blessings to all, especially those of you still digging out from Charley.
Tig Dupre
in Port Orchard, Washington, USA
Anne Webb on tue 17 aug 04
> > From: Anne Webb
> > Unfortunately the public down here where we are, are relatively
>uneducated
> > when it comes to art or pottery, and dont know good art from bad. And
> > thanks to these "art"-cranking "artists", most of the legitimate artists
> > cant get a decent price here for their work so they have go elsewhere.
>What
> > a loss for everyone.
>
>
>Anne, where is "down here"?
i'm down in the south west corner of alabama, not far from mobile.
>Hal Giddens
>Home Grown Pottery
>Rockledge, Georgia USA
>kenhal@bellsouth.net
_________________________________________________________________
FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar – get it now!
http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/
Hal Giddens on tue 17 aug 04
>
> From: Anne Webb
> Date: 2004/08/17 Tue AM 10:54:16 EDT
> To: CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG
> Subject: Re: big questions/art
>
> > > From: Anne Webb
>
> > > Unfortunately the public down here where we are, are relatively
> >uneducated
> > > when it comes to art or pottery, and dont know good art from bad. And
> > > thanks to these "art"-cranking "artists", most of the legitimate artists
> > > cant get a decent price here for their work so they have go elsewhere.
> >What
> > > a loss for everyone.
> >
> >
> >Anne, where is "down here"?
>
> i'm down in the south west corner of alabama, not far from mobile.
>
>
Thanks Anne. I was just wondering.
Reminds me of the joke about the war between Alabama and Georgia folks. The Alabama folks were thowing dynamite at the Georgia folks and the Georgia were lighting them and throwing them back at the Alabama folks.
Hal Giddens
Home Grown Pottery
Rockledge, Georgia USA
kenhal@bellsouth.net
Lee Love on tue 17 aug 04
I can never understand why folks are so concerned about what
other people do. For me, it is only a distraction.
Focus on the positive aspects. Let it be an inspiration.
--
Lee in Mashiko, Japan http://mashiko.org
http://www.livejournal.com/users/togeika/ WEB LOG
http://public.fotki.com/togeika/ Photos!
Ivor and Olive Lewis on wed 18 aug 04
Dear Tig Duper,
If, as you say, "The chemistry is not all that difficult, it just
takes a little getting used to, a little memory work" would you please
explain why we continue to use so many out dated concepts to explain
some of the processes we use. You mention Thermodynamics, yet when
the principles of this facet of chemical science are applied to some
of our processes the numbers show that what we believe and continue to
teach is factually impossible.
Or by "Chemistry" do you just mean making calculations to establish a
Unity Formula for a glaze? I wonder?
Best regards,
Ivor Lewis.
Redhill,
S. Australia.
---- Original Message -----
From: "Tig Dupre"
To:
Sent: Tuesday, 17 August 2004 10:51
Subject: Re: big questions/art
> mel-san, and all Mudbuds,
>
> Mel is correct. Far too many self-styled "artists" are merely
trying to shock the
> public so they can be a "name." Simply that one works in a certain
medium does not
> qualify that person as a Master.
>
> I have long maintained that our collective medium of clay requires
the efforts of the
> Muses Skill, Knowledge, and Dedication. We work with craft, art,
and science. All three are requisite. None may be omitted.
>
> The science is in the chemistry, the thermodynamics, the fluid
mechanics, the physics, and the engineering of the materials we use,
the machinery we make and use, and the
> processes to finish a piece. The chemistry is not all that
difficult, it just takes a
> little getting used to, a little memory work, and the knowledge of
what we don't know (so we can ask). The art is that all-encompassing,
elusive quality that makes one mug
> more desireable than another.
>
> Saw one potter's work at a farmer's market--won't say who or where.
In *my opinion,*
> this person should a) find another line of work , or b) go back to
school and practice
> a lot more. The pieces were surprisingly heavy, not very well
constructed--as if
> primitive-appearing made it more attractive, and to my eyes, not
appealingly glazed.
> I hadn't the heart to ask how sales were.
>
> There are many of you out there who are far better than I at the
forming, the glazing,
> the firing, and the marketing. I do this more for the relaxation
and the fun. But I
> put my heart into each and every piece I make. And I manage to sell
a few now and
> then. :o) (Taking orders for Christmas right now.)
>
> The point is that using a saw to cut a piece of wood does not
necessarily make a
> person a carpenter. If someone else wishes to think of me as an
artist, that's fine
> by me. On my tax return I state something entirely different!
>
>
> But, let's try this... If I take a piece of clay, color it with a
mix of iron and
> cobalt, build a seige catapult, load the clay into the catapult, and
fire it against a
> brick wall, does that clay then become part of a performance piece?
Suppose I take
> some wood and construct a frame around the point of impact. I "sign
the work." Is
> the area where it struck and stuck now a work of art? Am I then,
because I work in
> clay, considered a potter? Or, because I work in wood and clay, am
I then a sculptor?
>
> I could carry this farce out to an extreme, but I'll stop here.
>
> Art is in the eye of the beholder. The judgement of art is in the
eyes of the public.
>
> Back to the wheel...
>
> Blessings to all, especially those of you still digging out from
Charley.
>
> Tig Dupre
> in Port Orchard, Washington, USA
>
>
______________________________________________________________________
________
> 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.
pdp1@EARTHLINK.NET on wed 18 aug 04
Hi Ivor,
The resolution for me at least, is to accpet that the term
'Art' means many things to many people, and least of all
deferes in any way 'to' the Artifact itself in terms of
itself, whatever those terms may be.
There is the use someone has for something, and the kind of
use that is...thus are attributions made to something, as
become the something, to everyone's confusion, assayed or
not...as such.
Phil
el ve
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ivor and Olive Lewis"
> Dear Mel,
> It all depends on what your colleagues mean by
"Calligraphy". If they
> are confining their opinions to the production of letters,
scripts and
> ideograms their arguments will be lead in one direction.
But if they
> choose to have a wider definition which includes
ornamentation then
> alternative, even contradictory opinions could appear.
> I'm not sure how good your Latin is but you might read the
> introduction to Johann Georg Schwandner, "Calligraphy",
1756. Your
> colleagues will be familiar with this text if they are at
the mark of
> excellence and knowledge you portray them to be.
> An further discussion will wander around the way we
perceive the
> meanings of the terms employed to express our opinions.
> I like your proposition that Art can be Faked, it
intrigues me. I know
> there are fake paintings, fake Leach pots, fake coins and
sundry other
> fake artefacts. But "Fake Art" seems to be some sort of
misnomer. In
> fact, without a clear definition of "Art" it seems to be
an
> impossibility, if not an oxymoron.
> Best regards,
> Ivor Lewis.
> Redhill,
> S. Australia.
Vince Pitelka on thu 19 aug 04
> it just always smacks me as arrogant when untrained, unskilled
> folks think they can do art and show it without paying dues.
WHOA!! Hold on there, Mel. If someone who has only a marginal command of
the English language writes a poem or a song, would you say that they have
no right to be expressing themselves that way without all the "proper"
training and experience? Of course not, and what you say above is equally
unrealistic. Art is self expression, and ANYONE, and I mean ANYONE, with or
without training or experience, has as much right to make art and exhibit
it. Paying dues??? They gotta get the training and develop the skills
before they are allowed to express themselves through visual art? Okay,
their art might not be very good in the grand scheme of art, but it will
still be self-expression, representing their own individual experience. And
as you have no doubt noticed, novice artists who really have something
significant to say in their work often produce very good art.
Okay, that's my rant. This is one of my pet peeves. We need to work to
make art as accessible as possible. The term "artist" does not necessarily
imply skill or training. It just refers to someone who makes art. There is
no qualitative judgement there. It might be bad art, but the maker is still
an artist.
- Vince,
writing from a motel room in Erick, Oklahoma, on my way back to Tennessee by
way of St. Louis. I had intended to camp for a few days at a favorite spot
in central Arizona, but the weather and a nasty head cold conspired against
me.
Vince Pitelka
Appalachian Center for Craft, Tennessee Technological University
Smithville TN 37166, 615/597-6801 x111
vpitelka@dtccom.net, wpitelka@tntech.edu
http://iweb.tntech.edu/wpitelka/
http://www.tntech.edu/craftcenter/
Vince Pitelka on thu 19 aug 04
> There are a lot of fake artist and as sad, fake viewers of art. I think
they
> are like a lost tribe, searching for what they don't know (but think maybe
a
> stuffed ego will fill the void)
This is a good point, but who makes that judgement? I suppose it becomes an
individual call. I have certainly seen lots of people who have little
substantial to say, and yet are posturing as artists, and lord knows that
there are plenty of people posturing as afficionados of art. Shallow,
vacuous artis are abundant, as are shallow vacuous people who pretend a deep
understanding of art.
But this brings up a good point. Mel complains about people claiming to be
artists and marketing their wares when they have little or no skill or
training. But what about the individuals who have no training but really
have something to say and are driven to make art? That can be some of the
most genuine and pure art. On the other hand, someone with little character
and no real message can go to art school and learn materials and process and
"invent" an artistic persona - with significant training they can become the
"artist" they want to be. I think this happens a lot more than we are
willing to admit. There is no mechanism in art school to cull out these
people, because art is subjective. The student with the "persona," the
bluster and hubris, can often bluff the critics.
Okay, enough for now. I got along way to drive tomorrow. But I'm not
sleepy yet, because today I drove from Pacific time through Mountain time
and now I'm in Central time, and it feels two hours earlier than the clock
says it is.
- Vince
Vince Pitelka
Appalachian Center for Craft, Tennessee Technological University
Smithville TN 37166, 615/597-6801 x111
vpitelka@dtccom.net, wpitelka@tntech.edu
http://iweb.tntech.edu/wpitelka/
http://www.tntech.edu/craftcenter/
Vince Pitelka on thu 19 aug 04
> There is a self-proclaimed "artist community" just down the road from
> here..what a joke. Everyone wants to be an artist. You take one art class
> and pick up a paintbrush.. and voila! you're a painter.
Okay, I couldn't resist one more. Yes, if someon takes one art class and
picks up a paintbrush, then he or she IS a painter. Doesn't say whether he
or she is a GOOD painter, but the term "painter," like the term "artist"
contains no qualitative judgement. The ideal situation would be to remove
all the stigma from the terms "painter" or "artist" so that people would not
be afraid to say that they are a "painter" or an "artist." Like I said, we
need to make art as accessible as possible, and we need to get away from the
concept of an exclusive, highly trained clique of artists who have some
higher level of understanding that the plebian public cannot understand.
If we make art more accessible, then it will be easier for people to
understand art. Good artists will still stand out as good artists, but more
people will be willing to consider the possibility that they can be artists.
- Vince
Vince Pitelka
Appalachian Center for Craft, Tennessee Technological University
Smithville TN 37166, 615/597-6801 x111
vpitelka@dtccom.net, wpitelka@tntech.edu
http://iweb.tntech.edu/wpitelka/
http://www.tntech.edu/craftcenter/
Tig Dupre on thu 19 aug 04
Ivor,
My responses are embedded.
Tig
----------------------------------
Dear Tig Duper, (The name is "Dupre," please.)
<takes a little getting used to, a little memory work" would you please
explain why we continue to use so many out dated concepts to explain
some of the processes we use. >>
Which concepts or methods of explanation are outdated? I am not making any claims to be scientifically grounded, certainly not in the same class I sense you and some others on this forum are. But, to define a glaze and its interaction with the clay body underneath in terms of chemistry and thermodynamics does not require a doctorate-level degree. We deal with a fairly narrow group of elements from the Periodic Table. We use fire to make permanent objects of utility and beauty.
There are more modern methods and materials available to us than were available to our forebears. But, much of the methodology remains the same. We understand more of the science, but the "magic" remains. There is something primordial in digging materials from the earth, molding them, and burning them in fire. Where are the outdated concepts?
<the principles of this facet of chemical science are applied to some
of our processes the numbers show that what we believe and continue to
teach is factually impossible.>>
Oh, sure! Throw "facts" in the soup! We don't need no steenkin' "facts!" Seriously, Ivor. "Facts" will prove that a bumble bee cannot fly. Facts will show that blooming plant life should not grow above the snow line. In the early 1900s, it was a well-known fact that travelling at speeds over 20 miles an hour would cause suffocation. Yet, contrary to facts, behold! It exists! My opinion is that some of our facts are in need of revision. It took me a little while to understand the difference between "heat work" and "temperature." But, once it sunk through this thick skull of mine, it became clear.
Not having access to expensive, ultra-modern laboratory equipment to analyze my personal processes, I have to accept on faith that if I do things a certain way, I get predictable results.
<Unity Formula for a glaze? I wonder?>>
Pencil analysis of a glaze is one small part of the chemistry. Yes, I understand that. If you wish to engage in discussion of molecular attraction, ion combination, and other higher-level aspects of the science, you'll have to contact my brother. I understand enough to be curious about what happens when I use this material instead of that one? I can analyze a glaze recipe, convert it into a formula, predict a temperature range for maturity, and hazard a guess at a color and surface. Time and experience.
If what you're asking is, "Do you do more than dabble?" I can say that I take my hobby seriously. I am working to turn pottery into a job I can retire into. I wish to teach pottery when I leave the world of military simulations. I don't have the room to make a huge studio, install multiple kilns, have an analytical lab, and experiment with a large number of techniques. I do what I can with what I can.
I'll let others make the judgements as to my skills.
Best wishes,
Tig Dupre
in Port Orchard, Washington, USA
Earl Brunner on fri 20 aug 04
You know as well as I do what Mel is talking about, It has MUCH more to do
with attitude than skill. Mel doesn't have anything against sincere
beginners anymore than you do. He LOVES beginners and is a good teacher.
So on that basis, what is he talking about? He's talking about that pseudo
art speak and art crap and lack of skill, with little desire to GET the
skill. The people that want to have all of the status without paying the
price. Right, I would go to a neurosurgeon who set up shop like that......
Earl Brunner
Las Vegas, NV
-----Original Message-----
From: Clayart [mailto:CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG] On Behalf Of Vince Pitelka
Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2004 9:34 PM
To: CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG
Subject: Re: big questions/art
> There is a self-proclaimed "artist community" just down the road from
> here..what a joke. Everyone wants to be an artist. You take one art class
> and pick up a paintbrush.. and voila! you're a painter.
Okay, I couldn't resist one more. Yes, if someon takes one art class and
picks up a paintbrush, then he or she IS a painter. Doesn't say whether he
or she is a GOOD painter, but the term "painter," like the term "artist"
contains no qualitative judgement. The ideal situation would be to remove
all the stigma from the terms "painter" or "artist" so that people would not
be afraid to say that they are a "painter" or an "artist." Like I said, we
need to make art as accessible as possible, and we need to get away from the
concept of an exclusive, highly trained clique of artists who have some
higher level of understanding that the plebian public cannot understand.
If we make art more accessible, then it will be easier for people to
understand art. Good artists will still stand out as good artists, but more
people will be willing to consider the possibility that they can be artists.
- Vince
Vince Pitelka
Appalachian Center for Craft, Tennessee Technological University
Smithville TN 37166, 615/597-6801 x111
vpitelka@dtccom.net, wpitelka@tntech.edu
http://iweb.tntech.edu/wpitelka/
http://www.tntech.edu/craftcenter/
Kate Johnson on fri 20 aug 04
Art is self expression, and ANYONE, and I mean ANYONE, with or
> without training or experience, has as much right to make art and exhibit
> it. Paying dues??? They gotta get the training and develop the skills
> before they are allowed to express themselves through visual art? Okay,
> their art might not be very good in the grand scheme of art, but it will
> still be self-expression, representing their own individual experience.
And
> as you have no doubt noticed, novice artists who really have something
> significant to say in their work often produce very good art.
Much of this is referred to in the art world as Outsider art, as you
probably know. And as you say, Vince, it's valid self-expression. It may
not be Michelangelo, but there is some truly amazing stuff out there. Watts
Towers in CA for instance (may have spelled that wrong, sorry!), and The
Garden of Eden in Lucas, Kansas, constructed by S. P. Dinsmoor, a Civil War
veteran, using over 113 tons of cement to make scores of primitive but
evocative figures. And what was the name of the elderly woman who cured
herself of depression by doing rather primitive but incredibly moving self
portraits? Oh yes, Elizabeth Layton, also called Grandma Layton.
Look at folk art of many centuries, much of it done by untutored people
under isolated conditions. It's not MY particular cup of tea, normally
(except the pottery), but I will admit to owning a few amazing bits of
sculpture from that school--if you can call it that.
Regards,
Kate Johnson
Graphics/Fine Arts
http://www.cathyjohnson.info/
http://www.epsi.net/graphic/
Iris Artist on fri 20 aug 04
Creating Art with a capital 'A' is not for everyone. For one thing, what you consider to be "Art" may not be "Art" to another and vice versa... ie Is Broccoli Art? I'm teaching 110 students this year from age 4 to 68 and 89 of them are in 1st through 8th grade. Some of them have a natural feel for a medium, others do not.. What always surprises me, is when after I have given a private lesson or my student's work is on the wall outside the classroom, the parent exclaims that the child's work is impressive and then adds "but I could never do that." A friend of mine used to joke that she was so bad at drawing that even her stick figures came out fat. The point is that some people are afraid to create "Art." Whether they are afraid of the outcome, the frustration, the work, the challenge, or their or other's disappointment in their work, they shrink away from it. Breaking through that barrier is perhaps the hardest part of my job, to get someone to realize that I can show them how
to do what I am doing is a gargantuan step for some people. As artists, we visualize ourselves doing something, and then we do it, that's the biggest barrier for non-art folk. If you cannot visualize yourself sky diving, what are the chances you are going to try it? And, no I'm not saying that "Art" is as dangerous as sky diving... although in some cases it can be.. But for me, I get the same adrenaline rush from producing work and helping others produce something they can be proud of, that I'd get from jumping out of the plane only... with less chance of immediate death at the end,(smiles).
~Stäcy, who has been so incredibly busy with work, that this is the first time she has had a chance to reply to anyone in several weeks. Near Houston, the fog rolls in with humidity and we pray for another cold front.
Laurie Kneppel wrote:
We talk a lot about why some people create art or feel the need to
create art.
My question would be why does it seem like some people do NOT create
art or feel the need to create art?
This is something I have always wondered about.
Laurie
Sacramento, CA
http://rockyraku.com
Potters Council, charter member
Sacramento Potters Group, member
______________________________________________________________________________
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.
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
Snail Scott on fri 20 aug 04
At 10:28 PM 8/19/2004 -0600, you wrote:
>...I have certainly seen lots of people who have little
>substantial to say, and yet are posturing as artists...Shallow,
>vacuous artis are abundant, as are shallow vacuous people who pretend a deep
>understanding of art...
Aren't the vacuous among us entitled to make art,
too? And if there is insincerity in the making,
can't the work still reach a viewer whose own
relationship with the piece gives it validity?
I've seen a lot of sincere, heartfelt work
which, owing to ineptitude or poor execution,
utterly failed to reach anyone but the maker.
And I've seen work for hire, commissions or
commercial art, which has touched people deeply.
As artists, we make the work for our own reasons,
but it's the viewers who create its 'second
existence' on their own terms.
I'd hate to think that in spite of aptitude,
training, and effort, someone could still be
unqualified to make art due to some inner lack
of character. How 'deep', morally enlightened,
or psychically profound do you need to be?
I once met a (vacuous but sincere) collector at
a gallery opening who said "I think all artists
are such _centered_ people, don't you? I think
you need to be, to be able to make art."
I said "Well, maybe, but I try not to let it
hinder me too much."
I don't think that artists in general are
better than the average run of the population.
Maybe the best are. Or maybe not. Better
adjusted, more sincere, deeper, more 'in tune'?
Nah. Just more likely to make art.
-Snail Scott
Jon Pacini on fri 20 aug 04
Greetings All------- Kate brings up an interesting example --- that of the
Folk Artist/Craftsman. These people occupy a world unto themselves. They
generally are untrained, and driven to produce what they do. They have
produced some truly amazing works. Here in Los Angeles---Watts to be
exact ---we have Simon Rodias Towers. Bits of pipe, cement, glass and tile
soaring nearly one hundred feet truly inspired feet.
I don t think these people generally go around posing as accomplished
artists or craftsmen breaking rules. My experience with the few I ve met is
that they know they don t produce mainstream academic art or produce craft
in the traditional manner. They are just driven people. Just needs to
be in quotes, I have nothing but admiration for them. And their position is
quite different from the person who produces work, saying they are breaking
the rules , when in fact that person hasn t yet mastered the rules .
Let me pose another example----Had George Orr only produced crazy handled
and spouted pots, pots that are twisted and distorted, I have my doubts
anyone would be considering his pots masterworks. But the man knew how to
make a crock, make a mug, make a baking dish and he produced thousands of
them. He knew how to be a craftsman ---then, he went out and broke all the
rules---way ahead of the game.
This is the crux of the biscuit---my apologies to Frank Z
Best regards
Jon Pacini
Clay Manager
Laguna Clay Co
Laurie Kneppel on fri 20 aug 04
We talk a lot about why some people create art or feel the need to
create art.
My question would be why does it seem like some people do NOT create
art or feel the need to create art?
This is something I have always wondered about.
Laurie
Sacramento, CA
http://rockyraku.com
Potters Council, charter member
Sacramento Potters Group, member
Elzbieta Sekula on fri 20 aug 04
I have always wondered that myself. I'm looking forward to people's theories.
Elzbieta
In a message dated 8/20/2004 2:19:42 PM Central Standard Time,
clayart@ROCKYRAKU.COM writes:
My question would be why does it seem like some people do NOT create
art or feel the need to create art?
This is something I have always wondered about.
Vince Pitelka on sat 21 aug 04
> That is really interesting. I never knew that there were cultures where
> everyone is expected to make art. I'd love to read more about this. Could
> you name some of these cultures, Vince, so that I could read up on them.
Martin -
We'll be interested in hearing what you find in your reading. In many
ancient and tribal cultures, aesthetic ornamentation and surface design were
a part of every child's experience. Art-making was just a part of everyday
life. In many East Asian cultures, children grow up with far more exposure
to art and design, and regardless of their career direction later in life,
often have a comfortable willingness to make art, and a remarkable design
sense. I wish all American children had the same opportunity.
- Vince
Vince Pitelka
Appalachian Center for Craft, Tennessee Technological University
Smithville TN 37166, 615/597-6801 x111
vpitelka@dtccom.net, wpitelka@tntech.edu
http://iweb.tntech.edu/wpitelka/
http://www.tntech.edu/craftcenter/
Vince Pitelka on sat 21 aug 04
> We talk a lot about why some people create art or feel the need to
> create art.
> My question would be why does it seem like some people do NOT create
> art or feel the need to create art?
> This is something I have always wondered about.
YES! Thank you, Laurie. I've expounded on this repeatedly on Clayart, so
I'll be brief, but for many reasons, our culture does not "expect" everyone
to make art, while many other cultures do. Too many people in our society
have this odd notion that the art must be "good" (whatever that is) to
justify the making of art. No wonder so few people ever become "good" at
art making. It's really like telling someone with poor language skills that
they shouldn't bother to try to talk at all. From now on, only people with
great diction can speak. How about that?
All kids start out as artists, but we break them of the art inclination when
we tell them that the horse has to have four legs and cannot be green and
the colors need to stay inside the lines. I know, you don't tell them that
and I don't tell them that, but too many of their parents, teachers, and
peers tell them that. So, most of the kids give up art and any sense of
being artists.
- Vince
Vince Pitelka
Appalachian Center for Craft, Tennessee Technological University
Smithville TN 37166, 615/597-6801 x111
vpitelka@dtccom.net, wpitelka@tntech.edu
http://iweb.tntech.edu/wpitelka/
http://www.tntech.edu/craftcenter/
Ivor and Olive Lewis on sat 21 aug 04
Dear Vince,
Correct me if I am wrong, but are there not those to whom the
appellation "Naive" is accorded as artists, in the sense that they are
untutored and self taught.
Was there not an Appalachian Lady called "Grandma Moses", famous for
her paintings, who was spoken of in this manner when she emerged in
her later years.
Perhaps this is the category in which Mel might pigeonhole those whose
work he saw who had chosen the world of graphic letters as their node
of expression.
"Naive Potter" may also be appropriate term for some of us who,
without the assistance of teacher or mentor, took up the quest for
plastic expression through clay .
Hope the "Head Cold" has departed.
Best regards,
Ivor Lewis.
Redhill,
S. Australia.
Lee Love on sat 21 aug 04
Earl Brunner wrote:
>You know as well as I do what Mel is talking about, It has MUCH more to do
>with attitude than skill.
>
Attitude and skill are independent attributes. I was trained by
some very skillful folks that had attitudes you wouldn't believe. ;-)
But in the end, the proof is in the puddin'. It seems like a
fruitless task to critique "hypothetical" art or craft. What usually
happens is that the critic puts up his best case against his opponents
worse case. (I am guilty of this too, so I try to avoid generalizations
and stick to specific examples.) So, without the objects in front
of us there is no way to have an intelligent discussion about it.
>art speak and art crap and lack of skill, with little desire to GET the
>skill. The people that want to have all of the status without paying the
>price. Right, I would go to a neurosurgeon who set up shop like that......
>
>
Sometimes expression rules. If you look at the work by
folks like Rosanjin (who often had the forms made for him) or even folks
who didn't necessarily have the fabricating/technical skills in specific
mediums like Noguchi in clay or the Oldenbergs' large sculpture: they
developed the expression and had skilled people execute them. In this
we have examples of creative expression being directed by "artists" but
executed by craftsmen who might not have any creative or expressive
abilities. You often see this happen when creative people move
outside of their primary medium. You could say that all bronze casted
work have a little of this in them. (Noguchi didn't like to work in
bronze because he thought of it as "copies.")
So, both artistic expression and technical skill are
important. It would be ridiculous to look for a brain surgeon who
was "expressive" in the way he cut you open and stitched you up. We
don't want his dreams stitched onto our skin or our organs replace in a
novel fashion. But artists should have this talent. Apples and
oranges.
--
Lee in Mashiko, Japan http://mashiko.org
http://www.livejournal.com/users/togeika/ WEB LOG
http://public.fotki.com/togeika/ Photos!
Martin Rice on sat 21 aug 04
On 8/21/04 12:04 AM, "Vince Pitelka" wrote:
> our culture does not "expect" everyone
> to make art, while many other cultures do.
That is really interesting. I never knew that there were cultures where
everyone is expected to make art. I'd love to read more about this. Could
you name some of these cultures, Vince, so that I could read up on them.
Thanks,
Martin
Santiago de Puriscal, Costa Rica
Wes Rolley on sat 21 aug 04
At 12:00 AM 8/21/04 -0400, you wrote:
>Mel complains about people claiming to be
>artists and marketing their wares when they have little or no skill or
>training. But what about the individuals who have no training but really
>have something to say and are driven to make art? That can be some of the
>most genuine and pure art. On the other hand, someone with little character
>and no real message can go to art school and learn materials and process and
>"invent" an artistic persona - with significant training they can become the
>"artist" they want to be.
Vince, I guess this explains the success of celebrity pot. When I say
celebrity pots, I don't mean those made by a "celebrity" like motion
picture actor Lance Henrickson. http://www.bylancehenriksen.com/ I really
mean those pots that are imitative of some signature characteristic of any
well-known potter, especially ones who give multiple workshops in a
year. The one that really bothers me is the mis-matched attachment of a
huge pouring spout on any kind of vessel.
Vince Pitelka on sat 21 aug 04
Stäcy wrote:
"Creating Art with a capital 'A' is not for everyone. For one thing, what
you consider to be "Art" may not be "Art" to another and vice versa... "
"Some of them have a natural feel for a medium, others do not.. What always
surprises me, is when after I have given a private lesson or my student's
work is on the wall outside the classroom, the parent exclaims that the
child's work is impressive and then adds "but I could never do that."
"The point is that some people are afraid to create "Art." Whether they are
afraid of the outcome, the frustration, the work, the challenge, or their or
other's disappointment in their work, they shrink away from it. Breaking
through that barrier is perhaps the hardest part of my job, to get someone
to realize that I can show them how to do what I am doing is a gargantuan
step for some people.
Stäcy -
The above shows that you ARE accomplishing exactly what I am hoping for. We
need to demystify art - to make it more accessible. Chances are very good
that when your students grow up to be parents, they will treat art as a
wonderful and natural part of life that all children can do. We need to
eliminate the whole notion of "Art with a capital 'A'" That change will not
diminish the extraordinary nature of great art or the wondrous
accomplishments of the great artists, and in fact will make people more
receptive to approaching and understanding the great masters. For those of
us who have art as a large part of our lives, as artists and/or afficionados
of art, we would wish that everyone could enjoy and appreciate it as much,
because we know that art is a powerful, humanizing, often life-changing
force.
Yes, sometimes it is a gargantuan step for people to break through the
barriers that have kept them away from art, but with ever person who makes
that leap, we decrease the magnitude of the barrier for others who come
later. Of course, this depends absolutely on our commitment to demystify
art and get rid of the notion of "Art" with a capital "A." So, in teaching
people that art is so powerful and extraordinary, we should also be teaching
them that art is a natural and expected part of life.
- Vince
Vince Pitelka
Appalachian Center for Craft, Tennessee Technological University
Smithville TN 37166, 615/597-6801 x111
vpitelka@dtccom.net, wpitelka@tntech.edu
http://iweb.tntech.edu/wpitelka/
http://www.tntech.edu/craftcenter/
Ivor on sat 21 aug 04
I find it very difficult to appraise my work against others. So many
styles, so many possibilities, clay is rich.
and I suspect I'm not alone. but I know where I want to get.
I'm very critical of my work and I'm determined to make progress.
The next lot will avoid the short-comings of the present batch.
Little by little I'm going to get there. and I enjoy the journey.
Is'nt that how we all move forward?
Ivor
Ivor J Townshend
Macclesfield UK
John Jensen on sat 21 aug 04
Martin;
I'm not any sort of expert or cultural anthropologist, so my comments
must be taken with a bit of salt. I know the culture of Bali has
changed a lot in the last generation or so; but it wasn't so long ago
that art was the underlying method by which the Balinese understood
life. Everyone approached every activity as an art. This is what I've
come to believe about this culture from having talked to people who
lived there, and from reading and watching documentaries on TV. So that
would be one example. Maybe Vince knows of some other....
John Jensen, Mudbug Pottery
John Jensen@mudbugpottery.com
http://www.toadhouse.com www://www.mudbugpottery.com
On 8/21/04 12:04 AM, "Vince Pitelka" wrote:
> our culture does not "expect" everyone
> to make art, while many other cultures do.
That is really interesting. I never knew that there were cultures where
everyone is expected to make art. I'd love to read more about this.
Could
you name some of these cultures, Vince, so that I could read up on them.
Thanks,
Martin
Santiago de Puriscal, Costa Rica
Ivor and Olive Lewis on sun 22 aug 04
Dear Ivor,
Looking back on those works of your own that you still retain because
they excite you, are there any where you regard them carefully and
wonder "How did I achieve that?".
Does this apply to Mel, Vince and the others who have been making
lucid and informative comments in response to Mel' original prompt.
Best regards,
Ivor.
(Ivor Lewis.
Redhill,
S. Australia.)
Ivor and Olive Lewis on sun 22 aug 04
Dear Wes Rolley,
You direct our attention to an interesting site at
http://www.bylancehenriksen.com/
Is this person a Painter or a Ceramist?
After a while I wondered. Are these made to be displayed as wall
hangings. I mad the assumption that they might be. Then I thought, to
make their detail visible they would need a midnight Blue background.
A pity you could not direct our attention to those examples with
mismatched spouts.
Best regards,
Ivor Lewis.
Redhill,
S. Australia.
Kate Johnson on sun 22 aug 04
> Dear Ivor,
> Looking back on those works of your own that you still retain because
> they excite you, are there any where you regard them carefully and
> wonder "How did I achieve that?".
I don't know about Mel, Vince, or Ivor, but I still have a press-mold jar I
made in 2nd grade--or rather when I was that age. I took ceramics that
summer, from a lady who had a shop a few blocks from my home. I still
remember and sometimes apply some of the things I learned from her...sans a
clay-rolling machine, I still use a straight rolling pin and two spacers. I
still impress leaves into my work from time to time. I remember the
absolute sense of magic, the alchemy of clay, discovered in my 7th summer.
And I still love that crazy little jar...
The little jar is of a whitish clay with darker, sparkly mica-like bits in
it--I'd love to find some of that now--and the glaze is a gorgeous varied
transparent blue-green. Funny how the loves of our youth stick with
us--that was over half a century ago.
Regards,
Kate Johnson
Graphics/Fine Arts
http://www.cathyjohnson.info/
http://www.epsi.net/graphic/
Vince Pitelka on sun 22 aug 04
> Looking back on those works of your own that you still retain because
> they excite you, are there any where you regard them carefully and
> wonder "How did I achieve that?".
> Does this apply to Mel, Vince and the others who have been making
> lucid and informative comments in response to Mel' original prompt.
Ivor -
This is an interesting question, and I hope others will respond. Without
going all the way back to undergraduate school in the early 70s, I cannot
think of any specific examples of my own work where I am unclear how I
achieved a certain effect. That shouldn't be surprising, because I tend to
do my work in a very methodical way, especially in the colored clay work I
have done over the last 20 years, and I try to fire in a very controlled
fashion in order to avoid obscuring the colored clay patterns. I expect
that the potters who do a lot of glaze experimentations, especially with
glaze layering or multiple firings are more likely to look back at their
earlier work and wonder how a particular effect was achieved.
- Vince
Vince Pitelka
Appalachian Center for Craft, Tennessee Technological University
Smithville TN 37166, 615/597-6801 x111
vpitelka@dtccom.net, wpitelka@tntech.edu
http://iweb.tntech.edu/wpitelka/
http://www.tntech.edu/craftcenter/
Ivor and Olive Lewis on mon 23 aug 04
Dear Vince,
Thank you for those insights.
Another way I might put it. When I look back at some of the work I
have done I have a sense of awe, an inner surprise that I could
achieve such things (more so of paintings than pots). This is an
immediate impression. Then I start thinking and in most cases the
"Recipe" surfaces in my memory.
I know I have a "Signature " which I recognise. The Son of a friend of
ours is an illustrator. Olive came home one day recently to tell me
that he had used one of my pots in an illustration, with a little
artistic licence to fit the story being illustrated. When I was shown
this illustration I said immediately, "That is not a pot of mine"
So to get back to my original question, How many people are in awe of
what they are producing. I am sure Mel is with his new series of
glazes.
Best regards,
Ivor Lewis.
Redhill,
S. Australia.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Vince Pitelka"
To:
Sent: Monday, 23 August 2004 2:13
Subject: Re: big questions/art
> > Looking back on those works of your own that you still retain
because
> > they excite you, are there any where you regard them carefully and
> > wonder "How did I achieve that?".
> > Does this apply to Mel, Vince and the others who have been making
> > lucid and informative comments in response to Mel' original
prompt.
>
> Ivor -
> This is an interesting question, and I hope others will respond.
Without
> going all the way back to undergraduate school in the early 70s, I
cannot
> think of any specific examples of my own work where I am unclear how
I
> achieved a certain effect. That shouldn't be surprising, because I
tend to
> do my work in a very methodical way, especially in the colored clay
work I
> have done over the last 20 years, and I try to fire in a very
controlled
> fashion in order to avoid obscuring the colored clay patterns. I
expect
> that the potters who do a lot of glaze experimentations, especially
with
> glaze layering or multiple firings are more likely to look back at
their
> earlier work and wonder how a particular effect was achieved.
> - Vince
>
> Vince Pitelka
> Appalachian Center for Craft, Tennessee Technological University
> Smithville TN 37166, 615/597-6801 x111
> vpitelka@dtccom.net, wpitelka@tntech.edu
> http://iweb.tntech.edu/wpitelka/
> http://www.tntech.edu/craftcenter/
>
>
______________________________________________________________________
________
> 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.
Ivor and Olive Lewis on mon 23 aug 04
<because they excite you, are there any where you regard them carefully
and wonder "How did I achieve that?".>>
Dear Kate Johnson,
Thank you for your response,
As I read your message I get the impression that you are saying "No",
in the sense that you are aware of how the task was accomplished even
though you are still excited by
your achievement.
Best regards,
Ivor Lewis.
Redhill,
S. Australia.
Kate Johnson on mon 23 aug 04
> <> because they excite you, are there any where you regard them carefully
> and wonder "How did I achieve that?".>>
>
> Dear Kate Johnson,
> Thank you for your response,
> As I read your message I get the impression that you are saying "No",
> in the sense that you are aware of how the task was accomplished even
> though you are still excited by
> your achievement.
I suppose that's true, Ivor, though I would LOVE to know what that clay with
the fascinating specks in it was...I do more scuplture now, and I can just
see a greenman mask made from that.
But yes, I am still very much excited by the handbuilding techniques I did
then, and still use them today. I have since learned to throw on a wheel,
also absolute magic, but unfortunately my ability to do so is limited either
by competition for wheels when I'm at school and arthritis in my hands. I
love the alchemy of clay, so I am delighted that I needn't give it up simply
because my hands aren't up to centrifugal force on a particular day...
Regards,
Kate Johnson
Graphics/Fine Arts
http://www.cathyjohnson.info/
http://www.epsi.net/graphic/
Kate Johnson on mon 23 aug 04
Ivor wrote:
> Another way I might put it. When I look back at some of the work I
> have done I have a sense of awe, an inner surprise that I could
> achieve such things (more so of paintings than pots). This is an
> immediate impression. Then I start thinking and in most cases the
> "Recipe" surfaces in my memory.
Ah, NOW I can understand. Yes...sometimes we just work pure magic, and at
those times I imagine that I wish I could always do that. But you know? I
don't. Those magic times are what keep me striving, improving, excited by
what is possible with art. I LOVE it when it feels like the angels--or the
fairies, or the Old Ones--have guided my hands, and I love it when I have a
beginning understanding of how that came about.
> So to get back to my original question, How many people are in awe of
> what they are producing. I am sure Mel is with his new series of
> glazes.
To that I can answer an unequivocal YES, I am...sometimes.
Regards,
Kate Johnson
Graphics/Fine Arts
http://www.cathyjohnson.info/
http://www.epsi.net/graphic/
Wes Rolley on mon 23 aug 04
At 12:01 AM 8/23/04 -0400, you wrote:
Dear Ivor,
I am glad you found something interesting there. I posted that site for
two reasons. One is to differentiate the use of the term "celebrity
potter" and the other was to feed the curiosity of those who make lists of
potters and pots in movies. I still don't know if Henriksen has ever made
any pots as a character in one of his movies. I also do not know the true
answer to your question about whether he is "a Painter or a Ceramist". I
would guess that he considers himself a potter or ceramist rather than a
painter and that may be answer enough.
As for the example of "mismatched" spouts, I am sure that you can find at
least one example in Chris Schaffle's Forms Gallery..
http://www.lightonecandle.com/formsframe.html
Wes
>You direct our attention to an interesting site at
>http://www.bylancehenriksen.com/
>Is this person a Painter or a Ceramist?
>After a while I wondered. Are these made to be displayed as wall
>hangings. I mad the assumption that they might be. Then I thought, to
>make their detail visible they would need a midnight Blue background.
>A pity you could not direct our attention to those examples with
>mismatched spouts.
Lori Leary on mon 23 aug 04
Wes,
I heard or read somewhere (maybe Clayart!) that Henriksen is planning
to make a movie about George Ohr. Not sure if it's true or not.
By the way, I think Henriksen is/was a potter first. He used to sell
mostly functional ware. I have a small teabowl of his that is very
nice....copper red with some blue in it...must be some titanium in the
glaze.
Lori L.
Mountain Top, PA
> I still don't know if Henriksen has ever made
> any pots as a character in one of his movies. I also do not know the
> true
> answer to your question about whether he is "a Painter or a Ceramist". I
> would guess that he considers himself a potter or ceramist rather than a
> painter and that may be answer enough.
>
> Wes
>
>
Earl Brunner on mon 23 aug 04
At one point, a lot if not all of Lance's stuff was RAM Pressed. He was
doing the "zebra look" with multicolored clays. Some of the stuff on the
site still shows this technique. Not sure how many new forms he makes; or
how often. I think his focus is on the decoration, but I could be wrong.
Earl Brunner
Las Vegas, NV
-----Original Message-----
From: Clayart [mailto:CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG] On Behalf Of Wes Rolley
Sent: Monday, August 23, 2004 11:48 AM
To: CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG
Subject: Re: big questions/art
At 12:01 AM 8/23/04 -0400, you wrote:
Dear Ivor,
I am glad you found something interesting there. I posted that site for
two reasons. One is to differentiate the use of the term "celebrity
potter" and the other was to feed the curiosity of those who make lists of
potters and pots in movies. I still don't know if Henriksen has ever made
any pots as a character in one of his movies. I also do not know the true
answer to your question about whether he is "a Painter or a Ceramist". I
would guess that he considers himself a potter or ceramist rather than a
painter and that may be answer enough.
As for the example of "mismatched" spouts, I am sure that you can find at
least one example in Chris Schaffle's Forms Gallery..
http://www.lightonecandle.com/formsframe.html
Wes
>You direct our attention to an interesting site at
>http://www.bylancehenriksen.com/
>Is this person a Painter or a Ceramist?
>After a while I wondered. Are these made to be displayed as wall
>hangings. I mad the assumption that they might be. Then I thought, to
>make their detail visible they would need a midnight Blue background.
>A pity you could not direct our attention to those examples with
>mismatched spouts.
| |
|
