Jump to content

Why Is Our Work Better Than Imported Work?


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 77
  • Created
  • Last Reply

But what makes it non-toxic?  Like, it's non-toxic to breathe and doesn't cause silicosis?  Or it just doesn't contain and harmful salts like barium carbonate?  I think that's where Chris was going with her query.

Right, good question, you can eat it.  It is fine.  Perhaps inhaling it would be unwise; I think that it is presumed that ordinary care is taken as with any clay.  I mop rather than sweep.  Obviously it cannot be exempt from the potential to cause silicosis over time. You can eat it in wet form, when fired to appropriate witness cone range with proper heat work it is non-toxic in that it does not leach toxins. It is clay that is methodically tested and approved.  Unfortunately other aspects are not as rigidly respected, things like texture, malleability, moisture content, workability, glaze fit, you sort of have to work around that.  Having said that, I don't think that we should be eating the clay.  The point is that it is tested and certified to be comprised of non-toxic components. I am not personally interested in arguing the semantics of certified non-toxic clay distinctions beyond the posting of the image; we are all on our own in terms of defensibility of our end product from all of the perspectives that we consider relevant.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

> And sorry if it offends but, generating good pottery doesn't have to take a decade or even a single class to accomplish - welcome to 2014 - and if it is taking a decade, that might be cause for concern. <

 

I am not offended at all, but must respectfully disagree. I think good potters work gets better as time goes on and a decade barely starts the journey.

Also, do not know how anyone could get the knowledge they need without taking instruction. Even watching videos of accomplished artists working is a "class" of some kind. They took the time out of their lives to present information to others therefore that is teaching 2014 style.

 

If watching videos, collecting and reading books, calls to suppliers and putting all of that into practice full-time nearly every day for most of the day for well over a year, not working any other job, on top of what I already knew is instruction, then I've been present in class for sure. I have been selling for a much shorter time frame. Yes they are teaching, it is just sometimes more anonymous.  I have been talking to a local potter about taking informal classes with him. And I owe what I know to all of those sources of information, my good work is thanks to them, my mistakes are my own.  I have instructed in a way as well; I got a tool tip in the May 2014 issue of Ceramics Monthly.  If I think that I have figured something out, I share freely, I have an open process.  And I've been asked by the district superintendent to demonstrate throwing at my high school.  Not that I'm saying I'm good at it, it is not an ego thing it is just another person stepping in to encourage young people from another perspective.  

 

How do the aboriginals not burn the leaves?  Did they put hot stones from below a fire in the leaves with water which were themselves in woven baskets? That's what I was told. I did not get the collector's card, should have!  About the niche marketing thing, sure that's a valid perspective on it though I think of it more like, ensuring that stuff with my mark on it is nontoxic as possible as it makes its' way through the future without me.  Since for instance I don't know as much about clay as you do, or about my suppliers perhaps as you might about your suppliers, I lean on the certification to gain the confidence that I need. Even that could be wrong at times I suppose, it is no guarantee. Someday with enough education I'll be able to make my own nontoxic clay with confidence, or afford to have my own formulations tested.  No doubt it would save money in the end.  Apologies for my perspectives, I don't mind being proven wrong or rigorously tested, or criticized, I'm not perfect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the non-toxic label is probably a requirement of some sort for school systems?? Legalese.

I have never had the urge to search out local clay and use it .... Dealing with it in my yard is enough joy for one person!

 

As far as I was told the aboriginals of Australia cooked on very large green leaves. Yes, probably hot rocks from the fire were put in to heat the water. They travelled light. It was the westerners who taught them about pottery and there are now some extremely talented potters from that tradition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

How do the aboriginals not burn the leaves?  Did they put hot stones from below a fire in the leaves with water which were themselves in woven baskets? That's what I was told. I did not get the collector's card, should have!  About the niche marketing thing, sure that's a valid perspective on it though I think of it more like, ensuring that stuff with my mark on it is nontoxic as possible as it makes its' way through the future without me.  Since for instance I don't know as much about clay as you do, or about my suppliers perhaps as you might about your suppliers, I lean on the certification to gain the confidence that I need. Even that could be wrong at times I suppose, it is no guarantee. Someday with enough education I'll be able to make my own nontoxic clay with confidence, or afford to have my own formulations tested.  No doubt it would save money in the end.  Apologies for my perspectives, I don't mind being proven wrong or rigorously tested, or criticized, I'm not perfect.

 

Cooking with leaves is actually quite simple.  You make a fire and let it burn down to nothing.  Meanwhile you make a packet out of large, green leaves  and your foodstuffs, tied together tight with "twine" made from the same leaves.  These packets usually contain things like a protein (fish, previously roasted or dried meat), a starch (some kind of starch paste, mushed up banana/plantain, or root veg), and some herbs/vegetables.  Tamales are of this lineage of cooking, though now steamed in steamers.  You just bury the packet in the ashes/hot earth and wait.  The leaves don't burn because they contain moisture (they're green leaves, after all), as does the food in the packet.  On a large scale you can bury a whole animal in a pit lined with hot rocks then layers of green vegetation, then vegetables/other foods.  Traditional clam bakes are another variant, using seaweed.  The cooking is accomplished in all cases through steaming.  Oddly enough, one of the original forms of barbecue, practiced in the caribbean used green allspice wood as a sort of grill over a low and slow fire.  The wood would impart its flavour throughout the cooking process.

 

As for clays being non-toxic, as long as you're not adding anything to it (I believe one member here adds a little barium carbonate, and I know that neph. sy is pretty bad for you if ingested), all cone 10 stoneware bodies, porcelains, and most run of the mill earthenware bodies are non-toxic in their wet state.  Every now and again I use bisque fired pots to cook rice, beans, and bread.  Nothing cooks them better. The only regularily iffy product in clays is nepheline syenite and that's because it leaches alkali.  Nepheline syenite is the usual flux in midfire stoneware bodies.  Sometimes some weird salts will be added, but they're on the MSDS sheets you should have for everything in your studio.  Other than that, unless you're colouring it, it's non-toxic in its wet state.

 

A VERY old practice among African populations (especially pregnant women) during times of famine is to make kaolin cookies to eat, seasoned with salt and baked in the sun.  It was taken up again in Haiti after all the disaster there.  They'll tell you it's hard on the digestion, but it gives them necessary minerals when nothing else will do.

 

If I may say this politely, and I do mean it in the best possible spirit, this is why I believe it takes years of experience to make a good pot.  I'm not there yet, and I rely heavily on the expertise of others, but making a good pot appropriate for its intended use, be it functional or otherwise, requires a full and thorough knowledge of your materials and processes.  To me, being a good potter means being able to work with absolute freedom and facility with my materials, making exactly what I can conceive of in my head.  Limited not by skill or knowledge only by imagination.  That's when the art really begins.  I'm nowhere near that yet, but I've seen many around here and elsewhere who are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The one thing that stands out to me when defining experience by number of years is that it is really all over the board how much experience that is. I think there are very serious people that work in their studios regularly, even daily, accumulating less experience over 5, even 10 years than a new, really dedicated, full timer working really hard might put in in a year or two. 

 

It also seems to really matter what the objectives are as that is going to really shape the experience accumulated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the point that the collector that I mentioned was making, is that the process Tyler describes above, takes all day and you hunt or forage from where you are until the process completes.  It is easier to stay where it's an ongoing process as compared to moving around all of the time, seeking new materials to continue the process, which might not be available etc.

 

I am not seeing your point Tyler that leads to your conclusion that it takes years of experience to make a good pot.  Are you saying that Nepheline Syenite is toxic in the quantities present in my non-toxic clays?  Are you certain about this?  In what state does it as you say leech alkalais? My working understanding is that it is an inert and non-toxic ingredient. Nepheline Syenite is present in clay products conforming to ASTM D4236/LHAMA as well as products carrying the AP seal, the AP seal being of an independent business that tests and confirms non-toxicity if the clay is ingested.  

 

I believe that products demonstrating both of these conformities are more defensibly used in the studio than products that only demonstrate the former; others would disagree. If you read the MSDS sheets, this information is there. Independent testing seals are not government required and they cost money for companies, making product more expensive.  And I feel, more defensible.  Others are welcome to look at it any way they want.  

 

Much more important might be the confident use aspect, the control aspect of the studio environment.  I work in a private studio.  There are no other potters and no other materials present, apart from what I bring in.  If I am not actively potting my studio is secured and not in use.  The same can't be said of shared materials studio space.  Let's say a pottery class studio has several glaze dip buckets present; these are used by several instructors and classes with different individuals, all on their different trips throughout the week.  No one person is there to supervise what is dipped into the bucket at any given time.  Or even loaded to the bucket.  Potter X (drat that potter X), accidentally drops his piece of radioactive crap found earth greenware, that shouldn't even be in the studio, into the dip bucket, He tries to fish it out but it's crap and it falls to pieces in there, decomposing into the rest of the contents of the 20 gallon bucket.  He's busy though, so he says nothing and just keeps dipping the rest.  Now there is contamination in that dip bucket that nobody else knows about.  Everybody else then dips their greenware or bisque I suppose, in the bucket.  Personally, I think that it is this type of thing that adds up to pots that are not good, more than relative years of experience of the potter.  In a private studio using certain prepared clays in a controlled making and firing process, I believe that good pots can be made.  You do what you know, and what you don't know isn't that relevant because you are not doing what you do not know.  

 

Several times in this thread folk have mentioned how they strain to reach 'good', have taken many years to get to 'good', have not yet got 'good.'  I have to wonder, what was the fate of all of those 'not good' pots that have been made?  Were they given away?  And if so, what sort of gift would that be?  Were they all destroyed?  I suppose that they were not functional ware, back then.  But would not they, looking back at their past works, become the subjects of their own criticism? There is no perfect path to the good pot though some seem convinced that they have been walking one, whereas less experienced potters, cannot possibly be, almost as if by definition.  In an analysis that is not logical, based instead upon circles around the sun, which has little to do with any given pot. Potting, is such a simple thing really. Pulling mud up through gravity and then cooking it.  There is no 'one-upmanship' from the wise, for they know better.  Something to think about.  Make what you make. use pots that you feel that you can trust to be safe & functional.   Give advice, not demeaning presumption or negative generalization.  On the other hand to each his own neurosis. I've got mine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Congratulations Patsu on a good show. If I remember right this was a arts and craft event instead of a farmers market but in the same local community. 

Was it a different crowd or were they just in a buying mood this weekend? 

Thank you Stephen.  It was a different crowd.  Saturday there were townspeople, parade-watchers, soapbox derby watchers, but on Sunday, there were tourists!  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With pots you always get better over time. The 1st 10 years I thought I'm ok but looking back after over 40 years those where not good or very ok.

Yes you could sell them and I did but still compared to my present day work -not up to speed. I think I will be able to say that about work now in say 20 more years-Its always getting better and thats the way with ceramics.

Mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed Mark.  What you are honestly expressing, is that we have all been in the same boat at one time or other, some of us simply having had more time to bail... As for me, I'm in water up to the gunwale & still firing.  I'll get to bailing eventually.

 

And better is determined by one's personal aesthetic, not necessarily by whether the potter has officially bought their way into some inner circle and grown from there.

 

I know of many garage mechanics who are professionals, having done what they do for 20 - 30 years.  From experience I know as well, that a few of these guys, are somehow, still not very good mechanics  :rolleyes:

 

And then there is the business aspect, and the personality aspect.  If a potter beats his wife & kids, is he a good potter?  By 1950's standards, of course he would be.  By 2014 standards, - not so much.  All of these things being a part of the human potter.

 

I have a quote - from a book that I slept with last night, The Craft And Art Of Clay by Susan Peterson.  Last thing I read, made me feel okay.  Lucy Rie - "I work in a completely unorthodox manner, no longer using any form of scientific method."  I haven't learned enough about her, but it seems her journey went from experienced to ditching the science, and just doing whatever moved her, based on this quote from a caption.  She also was a friend of Schroedinger which is cool.

 

Our pottery is better, because we are meat popsicles and not machines.  Perhaps when I can make pots that rival a machine cast pot, I will somehow value that over the current humanity in my pots.  I fear though, that I will at that point have arrived at the losing, of my direction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re Lucie Rie, :) , She knew it then she tossed it aside, knowing it, I think she tossed it to another part of her massive brain, but still had awareness of it.

Have a great image of lucie from a documentary where in her ninties i Think, she is unloading her top loading kiln. The person interviewing her can be seen struggling with himself as he resists placing a hand on her body as her feet leave the floor of the kiln each time she dips head first in to retrieve another treaure! :D

Is our work better than imports? Sometimes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest JBaymore

Hamada Shoji (the great "folk" potter).......... had what amounted to a ceramic engineering degree before he became a potter.

 

I have used his approach as  an inspiration for my approach.  Master the technical... so you can step back and work intuuitively.

 

best,

 

.......................john

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep, doing pottery without technical knowledge is like writing poetry without speaking the language fluently. ;)

 

Your statement may awe-strike high schoolers , but is flawed logically as it presumes that any individual work in ceramics necessarily pulls from all areas of ceramics technical knowledge, which is not the case.  False Analogy.  Allow me to explain.

 

A thorough understanding of technical knowledge, relative to the chemistry and mechanics of one's actual process and pieces in one's chosen subset of ceramics, is pretty important; this, is true.  

 

Few here would doubt that in the first place however so it becomes moot.  They may doubt me and that is fine, but they do not doubt that.

 

If one does not do or intend to make Raku, for instance, explain to me why the absence of thorough technical knowledge and experience in Raku process, debases the quality of their functional non-Raku cups? How does it insert flaw into or disqualify their completely unrelated process? It simply does not!  

 

Speaking for myself, some areas of the ceramics realm, are just not applicable to my working area of competency and practice, and I have not studied them with a mind to making in that area. I am not however entirely ignorant of them, having read many books on the subject of ceramics, having seen lots of ceramics.

 

Why is it necessary for a production tilemaker to know how to throw to perfection on the wheel?  Please explain.

 

Why would a potter skilled in pulling handles, have his mug work disqualified because he hasn't used an extruder.  If one practices wedging clay with competency and it suits their process, then they do not need to know how to disassemble a pugmill.  They might be interested, but it is not necessary to their process.  Many skilled potters have never used their own found clay, personally dug formulations.  This does not disqualify their work in Laguna B mix.  

 

All of these things are a part of the broad scope or 'language' of ceramics, yet they do not have to apply to all of us in order to ensure that our work in our chosen part of the realm, is good. The probability that there is something out there, in the ceramics realm, that each one of us does not know, is very high. 

 

Then there is the concept of the 'reference book collection.'  I know a few good potters doing lovely work, who can't hold complex chemical detail in their head, jumble numbers in conversation and freely admit that they are not know-it-alls, but they have solid reference material at hand, so necessary technical knowledge, is still immediately available to them if and when they need it.  I have a few dozen reference works myself, some recommended by masters.  They don't tell the entire story but many technical aspects are covered in repetition.  Including Raku, and though I've read much on it, I do not work in it, just not my bag, baby. Nothing wrong with that, I don't make space shuttle tiles either.  All a part of the realm of ceramics.

 

If approached responsibly, it is not difficult or particularly time-consuming to get a grip on the skirt of the medium that interests you, accrue sufficient technical knowledge in it, and from that point forward it is just a matter of working toward the purity of your personal goal.  You have to do it until you are confident that it is a successful working cycle of a process.  When you discover a blind spot you say oops, forgive yourself & then permanently fill it in. 

 

Gotcha statements can be entertaining and sparring over issues can be a healthy exercise.  It is more important to do what you know, to know what you do, and to hold yourself accountable for what you make.  Others' presumptions, aren't all that relevant unless they are actively working against you, and even then, there will always be people like that.  

 

It has been said that the more that you know, the more you know that you do not know.  That tends to make people insecure.  Work your area of core competency well and it becomes its' own best defense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep, doing pottery without technical knowledge is like writing poetry without speaking the language fluently. ;).

My take on this is pretty simple. If I can understand how the underlying principles of clay or glazes works, then I have a starting point to fix errors I have made that show up in my ware. If I am getting cracks, I try to understand why, get help from some of the numerous books I have, and here on line. If my glaze is coming out too dry or glossy, analyze why? If my greens are not green, but brown is it the opacifier I am using or some other element of the glaze? All of these things become easier with the more knowledge I amass. I have taken courses, but do not have near the knowledge of many here like John. My small amount of understanding comes from reading, reading, reading, and lots of trial and error. I am finally at the point where I can self assess and make changes, but the short cut would have been to have had classes in more of the chemistry and physics of clay. I even wish that I had had some history/appreciation courses that were more on Ceramics also. My biggest exposure to that was the Nelson book we used for a text back in the 70's. I am terrible with names, so over the years I have seen and admired a great number of pots, but to remember the name of so many of the artists. . . . I can't.

 

So I heartily support John in his Inspiration of Hamada, and Tyler in his simile about poetry. Patsu, the only thing I have to say to you at this juncture is that the Peterson book is excellent and a great resource. I have read it through several times. You might take some interest in the creative aspects of scientific knowledge by reading the page on Otto Heino.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Though perhaps not so ignorant as some presume, I accept a place below on the ladder as far from you Pres as you might see yourself to be from John.  Cool that Otto Heino was involved in the League of NH Craftsmen as I may be as well, some day. As I receive more negativity here toward approach and work than positive reinforcement, it makes sense to step away from this forum and let the more experienced continue to inform the community as they do so very well.  Perhaps I am wrong in the end. Perhaps my process in ceramics is not valid despite the end result being safe ware that others want to own.  After all, I have not received university degree or equivalent, and others presume that I have not a scientific mind.  My questions, such as the question re:  Neph S, are not answered anyhow. My work is not important in the grand scheme of ceramics, but it is safe. When I realized this, I saw no further reason to make them wait. Perhaps I was wrong.  Thank you for your thoughts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I work, much like you Pres.  I started with the base understanding, of ceramics and clay, that I learned in college, and have built upon that.  When something doesn't work, I find out why it didn't, and how to avoid the problem in the future.  

 

I wouldn't say, that understanding the technical, is a prerequisite to working with clay.  There are cultures around the world, that have been creating ceramics for eons, with no prior technical knowledge.  However, the initial creators, had to deal with a lot of trial and error, to gain the experience necessary.  After that, the skills and techniques have been handed down.  And while they might now understand the true technical side of it, they still know what to do, and not to do, from generations of experience.  

So a technical understanding, isn't necessary, but it will definitely save you some time, materials and headaches.

 

This is why, I explain and demo the characteristics of each stage of clay, to my students.  Then they have a base understanding, of why the clay behaves the way it does, in each state.  This leads to less issues later, and less students trying to connect pieces of bone dry clay together...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Patsu, nothing negative here. However, your even though your search for creating commendable glazes is commendable, and when used in the strictest of parameters the "safe" commercial glazes are such, you should realize that one cone difference in firing, changes in application and other variables will render many of them unsafe. At the same time, we should all realize that commercial materials are not necessarily safe by future standards. Case in point, Enamels that my school purchased as safe in the early 70's were considered unsafe by 1980. Turned out that the manufacturers were using uranium and other radioactive materials for certain colors. When we walked through the room with a Geiger counter we found all sorts of things we had to dispose of. We have no idea what future knowledge will bring us in the understanding of much of what we use. All we can do, as you are, is the best we can with the knowledge and understanding we have

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get that a well rounded technical knowledge of all things pottery is helpful in understanding and correcting errors but I think it is a lot more than that in the long run.

 

Understanding the Raku process as well as the many other possible processes and approaches, regardless of whether you employ them provides competence of craft. It opens up choices and options at each point in the process. The more knowledge, the more techniques mastered, the broader the approach can be to getting where one wants as an artisan (or artist if that's your thing).

 

Doing a piece a certain way because you think that will bring out the best in a piece is a lot different than doing the piece the only way you know how.

 

I think that holds true even if the latter turns out to be a wonderful piece.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All of that's true.  I don't mean to hijack the thread.  I suppose this search for synching is part of what makes our work better; the dialogue, forcing me to look at my way of thinking, though I am more advanced than some take for granted and my way of thinking is rather tight and focused on the technical detail of my work.  If I couldn't be wrong, then my pottery couldn't evolve to be right. 

 

Pres thanks;  I knew these things of which you speak, before my leaving a job to study ceramics work independently full-time for the past 18 months. This is most basic stuff, these come up countless times, with every firing in fact these and many other issues are always key both in result and off-result.  I thought that I had made the implication, that I know what I am doing.  I did only figurative work for some time.  I have 87 firings accrued this year alone, personally in my private studio doing all of the work with total control and believe it or not, I have learned something about my process in having developed it.  I use cones and a programmable kiln controller with custom ramp schedules proven by cones on every shelf. I correct issues.  I spend a lot of time on design. I use only 3 clays for functional stuff. I know the clays that I am working with. I could confidently write a long passage that goes into great depth on practice and process, in pen & ink, in a closed room, as well as things that I expect some folks here have never heard of or thought of. In fact I plan to do so in front of a jury soon, but I won't study, I don't really have to. I might get some figures wrong. But see, in this audience?  It's doomed, pre-doomed.  I can pick apart anything and so can any competent person here.  It is a matter of motivation. And presumption. As if that is a high road to anything. 

 

Try to understand how amazingly annoying it is to be considered a neophyte unaware of even the fundamental basics when you are as dialed in and immersed in what you are doing, as I am to what I am.  I am not sure why it is presumed otherwise.    Anybody ever hear of a compliment sandwich, at least?  It's like generic presumption and harshness up in here. I know when I've lost, but see, it is only a subjective matter of semantics in this case, and my information is not being reviewed.  So, I am not being understood.

 

It is fine if you do not comprehend my point or perspective, or work.  

 

Thanks Benzine, I think that I do well in your class, at least.  At least you don't come down on me like a blunt object.  You might like some of my work, might think that it shows promise.

 

Don't worry about it.  Just make good works, take responsibility for your creations, make it right for your customers.  Forgive my being a sensitive person; it is fine. We are all good people, with some motivations more helpful than others. 

 

I sell pots mostly because it is the most efficient way that I can think of to get my work into as many human hands and places as is possible in the time I have.  When you look at it that way the concept of making poisonous pots is not all that appealing.  Perhaps others look at it this way as well;  I wouldn't presume.   I know of these other areas.  I just don't care.  If I catch something relevant, do you not think that I would instantly assimilate it?  Sure one aspect can always inform another aspect.  It is no revelation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

wow Patsu, I hope you didn't think I was saying all of that. I was just responding to your challenge to explain why a potter should master pottery processes they don't use. I was just offering up why I think its important.

 

If I offended you I am certainly sorry, that was not my intent in the least.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Patsu, I don't think anyone here, meant to criticize you or your work.

 

Everyone here, is just expressing their beliefs, in general about ceramics and its role in the world today.  

 

Both John and Tyler appreciate the technical aspect of the ceramic world.  They are also very knowledgeable, which is awesome, as they help a lot of others, with that knowledge.  If something is dangerous, or ill-advised, in regards to ceramics, people here, will point it out.  It's not that they are trying to act superior, it's because they want other people to be safe and responsible.  John especially, is a life long teacher, and as he has many times stated, a life long learner as well.  We all have the same goal, to get better at our craft....or is it art.... hehe...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.