Fred Parker on mon 10 jul 06
After hanging around Clayart for a while now, soaking up whatever I could
from this wonderful community of talent and generosity, I hope some of you
will let me know what you think about some of the stuff I've made.
Examples are at
Thanks. Be candid. I need guidance...
Fred Parker
Crista Nelson on mon 10 jul 06
In a message dated 7/10/2006 6:29:00 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
fhparker@PRODIGY.NET writes:
After hanging around Clayart for a while now, soaking up whatever I could
from this wonderful community of talent and generosity, I hope some of you
will let me know what you think about some of the stuff I've made.
Examples are at
Thanks. Be candid. I need guidance...
Fred Parker
Dear Fred, I would love to look at and comment on your pottery and will do
so.. Will get back to you after doing so.... but be fore warned I asked this
very thing of clayart a few weeks ago to look at some of my stuff and give me
some guidance or opinions or just a kind word and didn't get one reply so good
luck..... and happy potting, Crista
Crista Nelson on mon 10 jul 06
In a message dated 7/10/2006 6:29:00 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
fhparker@PRODIGY.NET writes:
Examples are at
Thanks. Be candid. I need guidance...
Fred Parker
Fred, I absolutely love your sculptures, they remind me of a combination of
things in nature, such as blades of grass and spider webs, or even basket
weaving .. very interesting and different in a nice way..... and your colors are
very complimentary to each one.. hope to see more in the
future....Crista......
Snail Scott on mon 10 jul 06
At 06:25 PM 7/10/2006 -0400, Fred Parker wrote:
>...I hope some of you
>will let me know what you think about some of the stuff I've made.
>Examples are at
I like the webby texture and the open effects, but
I think that their relationship with the vessel
tops is a little unresolved. The best of these in
this respect is the green one, in which the more
precise and geometric lid/neck/shoulder set off
the organic texture by contrast. The others in
this style, with the less precise geometry of
their tops, actually don't feel as strong: they
seem less organic and more random because they
lack that contrast. Less decided.
I don't like the face design on the green one,
though. Faces are such a strong element. We are
driven by our human psychology to focus intently
on face-like forms, and even a small one can
become the focus of interest. This one doesn't
seem intended to be a focal point, though. It
seems like just one element among several, but it
dominates more than I think it should, distracting
from the nice balance of the other aspects. (I'm
not even positive it's a face, but it's our nature
to see faces everywhere - anyone remember the
'Face on Mars', or the Virgin Mary on a grilled
cheese sandwich?)
The last of these is a nice form, but I find the
poured glaze (or more precisely, the unglazed
sections of red clay) to be fighting the design.
It's just a bit too extreme a color contrast for
the delicate subtlety of the texture. The
variegated glaze effects elsewhere on the piece
work better, IMHO.
Of the last two pieces, I find the architectural
one the better of the two. The face is nice, but
I find myself asking questions: why is it attached
to this form? Is it being subsumed? Emerging? It
seems a bit arbitrary, in that I don't have a
sense that more thinking about it will bring me
an answer. The coloration emphasizes the
discontinuity between the parts of the piece
without offering meaning. (Blue face = drowning?)
Could the face and form be made is a way that
seems more integrated? Or if contrast is intended,
how can its purpose be made clearer?
Not everything has to mean something, and not
everything that does needs to be laid out like a
roadmap or a rebus for the viewer. But it's nice
to have a sense that an implied meaning might
be understood in time. It's not wrong to say that
the meaning belongs to the viewer to construct,
but it's too often used as a cop-out by artists
who can't be bothered to create a meaning of
their own. Set yourself apart from them!
The form with the window is not extraordinary, but
it seems to be in harmony with itself, and its
surface and form work well together. But can it
be more than nice? Can it be fabulous? How?
Talk is cheap. Making the work is the hard part,
and it's always easier to pick apart someone
else's effort than to make the stuff yourself.
So, I hope you take this critique with a grain
of salt and as nothing more than my opinion.
This is good work, with the potential to be
even better, so go for it!
-Snail
Hal Giddens on tue 11 jul 06
Cristas, I had the same response when I posted the address of a couple of
blogs I have created a couple of weeks ago. I got no response, good or bad.
I missed you post and went back and found it and looked at your work and
you do some awesome work. You should be very proud of your work and please
keep on doing it.
Fred, I also looked at your work and I am really impressed with your work
also. It's different and you seem to me accomplishing what you are trying
to achieve. Keep it up also.
Hal Giddens
Home Grown Pottery
1578 Rockledge Road
Rockledge Ga 30454
kenhal@bellsouth.net
http://homegrownpottery.blogspot.com/
http://stpatricksproject2007.blogspot.com/
Fred Parker on tue 11 jul 06
Snail:
You have NO idea how much I appreciate your critique! It will be read and
reread many, many times as I absorb all of it. I will take some of it
with a grain of salt, other parts as wisdom and sound guidance and I will
reject other parts completely. In short, this is exactly what I was
hoping someone would do -- render a critical, subjectively objective
opinion, as an artist, of what I have done. It gives me MUCH to work with!
Thank you!
Fred Parker
>At 06:25 PM 7/10/2006 -0400, Fred Parker wrote:
>>...I hope some of you
>>will let me know what you think about some of the stuff I've made.
>>Examples are at
>
>
>I like the webby texture and the open effects, but
>I think that their relationship with the vessel
>tops is a little unresolved. The best of these in
>this respect is the green one, in which the more
>precise and geometric lid/neck/shoulder set off
>the organic texture by contrast. The others in
>this style, with the less precise geometry of
>their tops, actually don't feel as strong: they
>seem less organic and more random because they
>lack that contrast. Less decided.
>
>I don't like the...
Mark Tigges on tue 11 jul 06
On Mon, Jul 10, 2006 at 06:25:29PM -0400, Fred Parker wrote:
> After hanging around Clayart for a while now, soaking up whatever I could
> from this wonderful community of talent and generosity, I hope some of you
> will let me know what you think about some of the stuff I've made.
> Examples are at
>
> Thanks. Be candid. I need guidance...
I have no education in art, or even in ceramics outside of HS. So,
that's my disclaimer.
I like them a lot. I think they're quite beautiful.
Although, I kind of disagree with the other comment that some of the
pieces seem to have a disjoint relationship with the tops/lids. I
understand what caused that comment, I can kind of see it too, but
really only in the red / brown one (ag 201.jpg).
I'm sure it's no coincidence that it is the least phallic.
Obviously it is still to some degree, but all the others are, how
shall I put this ... indicative? I hope I'm not out of line pointing
that out, or asking this: ... Was that on purpose?
Again, to be sure, I think they're quite beautifull.
Best regards,
Mark.
--
http://www.m2crafts.ca
m2crafts [at] gmail
Antoinette Badenhorst on wed 12 jul 06
Fred,=20
I had to think a little bit about them to realize that you do have =
something
special going. My very first reaction was: "just more pots that I see
everyday" but:
-You have strong, sturdy, masculine shapes.
-You have exceptional design elements (which get lost on the grass on =
which
you chose to do the images)
Unfortunately you cover too much of your design with glaze and your =
glazes
are the one thing that makes the pieces "everyday-looking-pottery" It =
seems
like you are working with a ^6 electric firing method. (Nothing wrong =
with
that, but very limiting for what I think you try to achieve) I can see =
that
you've tried to play with the glazes and that is good, but you loose too
much defined design under the glaze.=20
Work to get those lines more defined. This might be a subjective =
comment,
but I think if you work a little bit more on the pieces to get a "crisp"
appearance, that would "lift" them up. (If you are unsure by what I =
mean,
you are welcome to contact me off line.)Explore materials to help you =
get
the right covering for your pieces. Look at different decorating methods =
to
help you make the most of what you do.
I hope you see this in the light that I mean it and not see this as mean
comments.
Best wishes and happy potting!
Do you need sharp trimming tools that will not wear out quickly? Contact =
me
for information.=20
Antoinette Badenhorst
105 Westwood Circle
Saltillo MS, 38866
662 869 1651
www.clayandcanvas.com
www.southernartistry.org
=20
=20
-----Original Message-----
From: Clayart [mailto:CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG] On Behalf Of Fred Parker
Sent: Monday, July 10, 2006 5:25 PM
To: CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG
Subject: Look at/comment on my work?
After hanging around Clayart for a while now, soaking up whatever I =
could
from this wonderful community of talent and generosity, I hope some of =
you
will let me know what you think about some of the stuff I've made.
Examples are at
Thanks. Be candid. I need guidance...
Fred Parker
_________________________________________________________________________=
___
__
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.
| |
|
