Vince Pitelka on wed 15 jun 05
I have been forwarding all the messages in this thread to my son Morgan =
Pitelka, who is a scholar of Japanese ceramics and tea culture. He =
asked that I post the following message.
- Vince
Dear Clayart members,
Sorry to post from off-list, but my Dad has been forwarding me the =20
messages related to the recent discussion of Mingei and Edmund de =20
Waal and I would like to offer my two cents.
But first, some shameless self-promotion. My book, _Handmade Culture: =20
Raku Potters, Patrons, and Tea Practitioners in Japan_ is in =20
production at the University of Hawaii Press and should be out in =20
October. Unlike the anthology I previously edited, _Japanese Tea =20
Culture_, this new book is going to be available in paperback and =20
thus will be very affordable. Hooray for cheap paperbacks! Pre-order =20
yours today through Amazon!
On to the topic at hand. I should say from the start that I first =20
encountered de Waal's writing when I wrote a review of his 1998 book =20
_Bernard Leach_ for _Ceramics: Art and Perception_ in the late 1990s. =20
I found the book to be refreshing and provocative because it didn't =20
recycle the same old truisms about Leach and because it was based on =20
both careful analysis of Leach's pots and his writings. I didn't =20
always agree with de Waal's conclusions or his tone, but the point =20
is, he was trying to say something new. It is also important to note =20
that de Waal's arguments have been supported by more recent =20
scholarship on the politics and culture of modern Japan. Kim Brandt =20
and Yuko Kikuchi have both written about the connection between =20
Mingei and Orientalism, by which I mean the view of 19th-20th century =20
Westerners (and to a certain extent, Japanese) that Asians are =20
backwards, uncivilized, and in subtle ways, childlike. They have =20
also called attention to the fact that much early Mingei collecting =20
occurred during the exploitative and horrific Japanese occupation of =20
Korea. They do not argue that this means that the aesthetic and =20
philosophical fundamentals of Mingei are evil, or that the pots are =20
bad, or that Leach, Hamada, and all the rest are to be condemned. =20
Instead they invite us to see the Mingei movement for what it was: a =20
complex and at times contradictory/hypocritical movement of diverse =20
artists with diverse goals.
Later, I had the chance to encounter de Waal's ceramics through the =20
introduction of Louise Cort, my mentor. When handling and viewing his =20
works in person (and perhaps seeing the real thing is a bit more =20
reliable than a google search, don't you think?), I was impressed by =20
the references to traditional Japanese AND British ceramics, and by =20
the sense of what I would call stylistic consistency that one only =20
encounters in the works of very serious and thoughtful potters. When =20
I had the chance to talk with de Waal at shows, at his studio, and =20
last fall, at the Harvard conference on Japanese ceramics (where we =20
were both presenters), he impressed me with his extremely erudite =20
knowledge of world ceramics, Japanese history, and even the recent =20
theories that drive scholarship in art history and anthropology. His =20
rhetoric may be a turn-off for some, but for me, as someone who has =20
been trying to bridge the gap between the historians of and the =20
makers of ceramics for my whole life, it was incredibly exciting.
I cannot speak for de Waal, but I think that it is worth noting that =20
he has extensive and important connections to Japan. He became an =20
apprentice to Shimaoka at a very young age and has spent a fair =20
amount of time in Japan. He also has deep connections to some of the =20
top potters in the Mingei tradition in Britain. He does not, however, =20
exploit those names and those connections as so many potters (and =20
academics, like me!) tend to do. He has chosen, very carefully and =20
very deliberately, to critique his origins, to forge a new path, to =20
be a philosopher, a critic, a polemicist, AND a potter, rather than =20
simply to advertise his connections to great Japanese and British =20
potters and reap the rewards. I think we need both kinds of potters =20
to make the world of ceramics great: those who work within traditions =20
and those who make their names by challenging traditions; those who =20
receive attention for mastering the techniques and the rhetoric of =20
the past, and those who receive attention for "mixing it up." And I =20
also think that de Waal, contrary to Lee's declarations, actually =20
deserves the attention he has gotten. It is easy for any of us to use =20
email to badmouth an extremely productive potter or author, but to =20
put our money where our mouths are, we really need to MAKE something =20
that is entered into the public record. De Waal doesn't criticize =20
Leach and Hamada behind closed doors, but has put his ideas into =20
print. He has, in other words, proven that he can do the research to =20
make his arguments, can write well enough to get his work published =20
by legitimate presses, and at the same time has succeeded in making =20
pots that people and museums want to buy.
I also want to point out that the accusation that de Waal is making =20
up a "fake language" to appeal to gallery owners is both unfair and =20
disingenuous. It is unfair because all artists who decide to speak or =20
write about their work have to use language of some sort, and all =20
language is "fake" in the sense that it is trying to describe a world =20
that is more complex than any grammar could ever be. And it is =20
disingenuous coming from a potter who constantly peppers his posts =20
with references to his Zen teacher and his experiences in the Zendo. =20
Why is using the language of contemporary art and academic art =20
history "fake" while using the language of Zen is completely =20
authentic? Why is it acceptable to pepper discussion of ceramics with =20
references to one kind of intellectual tradition, namely that of =20
"traditional Japanese culture," but unacceptable to be engaged with a =20
more immediately relevant (for residents of "the West") intellectual =20
tradition like postmodernism/cultural studies? I know that the few =20
potters out there who are actually practicing Zen Buddhists must feel =20
that the language of Zen is important to them. Likewise, potters like =20
de Waal who are engaged with the academic world feel that scholarly =20
language is important to them as well.
In conclusion, I would simply encourage the members of Clayart to =20
seek out de Waal's writings (not the half-baked ones we can dig up on =20
the internet, but the stuff that has actually been published) and =20
judge his writing first hand. I have to admit that when reading the =20
summaries of what de Waal supposedly believes and argues posted here, =20
it hasen't sounded very familiar to me. De Waal tends to build =20
articulate and complicated arguments with reference to many different =20
sources. He doesn't toss off one-liners without context as has been =20
repeatedly alleged.
Morgan
*****************
Morgan Pitelka
Asian Studies Department
408 Johnson Hall
Occidental College
1600 Campus Road
Los Angeles, CA 90041
OFFICE: 323-259-1421
FAX: 323-341-4940
mailto:mpitelka@oxy.edu
*****************
| |
|
