petethepotter003@YAHOO.COM on fri 10 jun 05
Hello Lee,
Firstly you defame me on your weblog and now on ClayArt. You describe my
comments as spam; both you and I know were they not, and neither were they
anonymous. Why do you publish & promote a website, ask for comments and
then delete anything that is not uncritical praise? And to reply with
profane insults is simply childish, hopefully you ve now thought better
and removed these which only demean yourself
In response to my comments you suggested that I =91didn=92t know my pots.=92=
You
have no way of knowing my background, and I wouldn t bore others on
ClayArt with my resume, however I ve spent a lifetime in ceramics, studied
the subject extensively, taught it, travelled to many countries and worked
with potters from different cultures. I think its fair to say I know
something. Conversely do you have any experience of anything other than
the tradition about which you are so vocal? If not please realise that
many other traditions exist that are no less valid than those you
treasure. How you express your beliefs often appears that of a
fundamentalist, and as with all fanatics repels more than it attracts.
Today=92s potter should be allowed to ignore and adopt as they choose.
After censoring a comment on your blog you stated =91Glaze faults are
desireable in many traditional glazes=92 This shows limited experience; some=
styles within a few traditions may use such effects but pinholes, for
example, have very largely, both historically and currently, considered
unwanted defects
Of course I don=92t know but I wonder if you are a little insecure about
yourself, and unsure about the pots you produce. Certainly the number of
messages you post to ClayArt, more than anyone else, and the self
publicity of a blog is evidence that you a seeking reassurance from
others. Perhaps more time at the wheel and less at the computer would help
Pete
| |
|
