Vince Pitelka on wed 4 oct 06
Charley Cummings wrote:
> I'm really torn over the issue of Artist's statements. I read
> hundreds of them each year. Most of the time they are a showcase for
> bad grammar and worn out cliches.
Charley -
I appreciate your comments, and mine below don't disagree with yours at all,
but rather are just responses to your thoughts. At Tennessee Tech, each of
our BFA grads is required to write an artist's statement to go along with
their thesis project and exhibition, and I can assure you that there is no
bad grammar or worn out cliches in those statements by the time they make it
to the exhibition. Writing a proper artist's statement requires some
serious coaching, and most artists never receive that coaching. I think
that some university faculty in big art programs actually encourage their
students to write statements where the language obscures rather than
clarifies the work.
You wrote:
> The argument that a pot should stand alone is valid. Valid in some
> situations at least.
When we see a functional pot that we like, the function is probably obvious,
and the design is pleasing, so in a certain sense the pot does stand alone.
But why limit it to that, when the pot has been made by a sentient human
being. Who is the artist? Where does she/he live? Why does she/he make
functional pots? How long has she/he been making pots? What's her/his
background? There is so much valuable information that can put that pot
into context (as you mentioned) and can be provided in an artist's
statement. Our appreciation of the pot can be greatly enhanced by knowing
something about the potter and the circumstance of the pot's creation.
Is it that we are so accustom to buying factory-made goods, where we neither
know or care about the circumstances of production or the designer's
motives? Are we just spoiled by that circumstance, and thus it doesn't
occur to most people that learning more about the artist/craftsperson makes
buying and using the art or craft a richer experience?
You wrote:
> Does a humble cup need an artist's statement?
Of course it doesn't need one, but like you say, it makes sense to provide a
little information. When I am drinking tea, my appreciation of that cup is
greater when I find out that the artist is fascinated by the history of
tea-drinking around the world, and has experimented with hundreds of
variations on the tea cup and has come to this design after rejecting all
the others, and how the artist wants tea-drinking to be viewed as a domestic
ritual to begin the day and provide repeated repast throughout the day etc.,
etc. That's just stream-of-consciousness, but you get my drift.
You wrote:
> The Statement is a learning tool in school. It is a marketing tool
> in some situations. It serves many purposes. In the end, providing
> context is the one thing that is does consistently. The real
> question is, who is your audience? Are you writing to get an A+ from
> a professor? Are you writing to persuade a customer to buy into your
> ideas? Are you writing to impress your fellow potters?
Ahh, excellent. That's really the point, isn't it? I think that many
people who are put off by the idea of artist's statements have only read the
ones that are convoluted hype written by mainstream art primadonnas, or the
slick ones designed just to sell the work. I guess those artist's
statements serve their purpose, but they sure are not what I am talking
about when I support the idea of artist's statements.
Good luck with your artist's statement.
- 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/
Mitchell Sewall on sat 7 oct 06
Hi Lili,
Indeed, "restrictive, elitist & an embarrassmet".
To put it more simply if I wanted to write about pots (or anything else) I'd
be a writer not a potter.
In another life I was a food writer (not a restaraunt reviewer) nor one of
these cooks that added exotic ingrediants for the sake of being exotic? I
cooked and wanted to share both the experience and history of cooking. And
of how some dishes came about.
This is true of the history of pottery as well. But it's far from writing
about a philosophy. The "philosphy" comes through the work and should need
no verbal explanation.
This was Clement Grennberg's shtick. The philosophy was what made the art,
nevermind the paint on the canvass.
Mitch
Vince Pitelka on sat 7 oct 06
Mitchell Sewall wrote:
> To put it more simply if I wanted to write about pots (or anything else)
> I'd
> be a writer not a potter.
Mitchell -
I hate to be the curmudgeon, so often, but apparently it is my fate on
Clayart. The above is completely ridiculous, of course. Writing is a tool
useful for clarifying and illuminating almost everything one does in life.
Your statement above could be applied to any sort of communication, in which
case you apparently are abandoning the use of writing altogether. If you
use writing for anything else, then it is equally applicable to your ceramic
work, and can clarify and illuminate what you do with clay. This is all so
obvious, and it is such a pointless excercise to rant about the uselessness
of writing about your artwork. There's no defense for NOT writing about
what you do, and so much to gain by the writing.
- 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/
| |
|
