Amanda Lyness on fri 26 may 06
I am interested in your views about the implied function of ceramic wares
through form. I am sure you are all familiar with "art teapots" that are
strictly decorative and not intended to be functional. Through the form it
is easily recognised as a teapot despite it not functioning as a
utilitarian tea pot. I feel in ceramics, more than any other media, there
seems to be a notion that a vessel should be functional. In the same vein
a painting or sculpture is not expected to have any utilitarian function.
Is the value of a ceramic piece linked to its implied function? As a
ceramacist or potter have you ever had people ask what the function of an
ambiguous piece is? There seems to be an expectation with ceramics that it
should be functional. In response to that notion I know one ceramacist who
makes grand functions for their work. For example a platter for persimons
or a plate for whole Baramundi.
I am currently researching implied function in ceramics. I feel it is an
under explored area, although I am sure you understand what I am refering
to. I am interested in your thoughts and ideas about this topic and any
relevant articles or books you may have read.
In the end it is the end owner or user who gets to determine what if any
function they use your ceramics for. Just because you made a cup or a jug
doesn't mean it will be used for drinking or pouring.
BJ Clark | Stinking Desert Ceramics on fri 26 may 06
Amanda,
You might check out the book "Pots in the kitchen". Might spark some idea's.
BJ Clark
Colorado
On 5/26/06, Amanda Lyness wrote:
>
> I am interested in your views about the implied function of ceramic wares
> through form. I am sure you are all familiar with "art teapots" that are
> strictly decorative and not intended to be functional. Through the form
> it
> is easily recognised as a teapot despite it not functioning as a
> utilitarian tea pot. I feel in ceramics, more than any other media, there
> seems to be a notion that a vessel should be functional. In the same vein
> a painting or sculpture is not expected to have any utilitarian function.
>
> Is the value of a ceramic piece linked to its implied function? As a
> ceramacist or potter have you ever had people ask what the function of an
> ambiguous piece is? There seems to be an expectation with ceramics that
> it
> should be functional. In response to that notion I know one ceramacist
> who
> makes grand functions for their work. For example a platter for persimons
> or a plate for whole Baramundi.
>
> I am currently researching implied function in ceramics. I feel it is an
> under explored area, although I am sure you understand what I am refering
> to. I am interested in your thoughts and ideas about this topic and any
> relevant articles or books you may have read.
>
> In the end it is the end owner or user who gets to determine what if any
> function they use your ceramics for. Just because you made a cup or a jug
> doesn't mean it will be used for drinking or pouring.
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________________
> 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.
>
--
BJ Clark
Stinking Desert Ceramics
bjclark@stinkingdesert.com
www.stinkingdesert.com
| |
|
