Gabby

Very interesting! What are the dimensions?

Thank you for the explanation. I don't think I have seen a dream catcher in thirty or forty years, since everyone was doing, for example, macrame. Present day popularity may be regional. Interestingly, the art that in Australian Aboriginal cultures is called Dream-time also has nothing to do with dreams. It refers, rather, to a period in their ancient history, or perhaps legendary history, like creation stories.

I think some ideas are getting intermingled here that are not the same. Learning about other cultures is not at issue here. No one disagrees with this. Producing something that coincidentally resembles something else is not the issue. Doing something because one feels, or gets richer, for it is not adequate reason to take an action that hurts others. When people produce knockoffs of something, say, and make a business of selling them, they do this precisely because they will be richer for it. We need to be conscious when something that makes one group richer makes another poorer, whether you think it should make them feel poorer or not. And the fact that something is beautiful is not adequate defense for reproducing it as ones own. I am imagining an art forger making this case.

If I remember correctly, in some Native american tribes, a family owns a dance or song or cultural element the way in the US you might own your home. To use their material in your own production on the basis of some argument that cultural elements cannot be owned would be like for someone to make camp at your house on the theory that land cannot be owned. I have seen the work of several artists who got explicit permission from families to use their symbols in their art. If I remember, within aboriginal cultures, the meaning of the symbols they use is largely secret. Some symbols are not secret but some are. I think it is respectful for people to generate their own symbols or symbolic languages rather than to appropriate from a culture they admire. Many people will overlap in the images they use, but people should attach their own meanings and avoid other people's particularly sacred images if they mean to be respectful. Obviously there is a great deal of art that specifically means to be disrespectful. The standards for that sort of work will be different.

I actually prefer pots without foot rings.

My work often has unplanned asymmetry that has become part of my rustic style,

Those were the two I was asking about- not the stacked pieces at bottom left in the original photo. I will look forward to seeing the results! I am waiting for my raku opportunity. A place nearby offers the chance to put three medium pieces in the first Saturday of every month. The first one of those I don't have a conflict is January 5. So it may be the first New Years resolution I fulfill.

This looks like some new kinds of shapes for you, right? The tall squared vessel in the bottom left looks different from things on your website, and I am trying to figure out what that middle item with the lid is.

I prefer matte or nearly matte glazes on red clay.

I see them using Chrome as my browser. Often when I cannot see something it is because I am using a browser that doesn't work as well for things on some sites. Sometimes Internet Explorer or Firefox works better.

Because craft is aimed at practical use, workmanship may be more important there than in art. Art typically appeals to the senses and can without particularly fine workmanship or durability or even intention. Art tends to embody an aesthetic idea or interpretation.

I love your results here, particularly the front left.

I usually use my own things at breakfast and at dinner time. I have one tall handle-less mug for tea and another for cold, only because I like to see them side by side near my computer. I have a stocky little bowl I use for dried fruit and nuts and many just like it, only glazed differently. At dinner time I strongly prefer a large bowl to a plate, and I always use my own, choosing from among four or so..

Yappy, I do not think you are an upstart. I responded because my observation about who usually raises this topic across the many venues where I have seen it raised is inconsistent with your conjecture that it is elites reassuring themselves of the value of their credentials. I thought sharing my observation, indeed the sharing of different observations and experiences, is exactly what I forum like this is for. Offering an alternative observation is not, I think, disrespectful. No disrespect was intended. I am sorry your teacher is absent. Unless she had an excellent reason, it is very irresponsible. The only time I was absent in my many years of teaching was when my father died. And I am sorry that whoever handled the firing in her place mistook your wet vessel for kiln ready.

I don't know if you offered this speculation is jest, but my observation is actually opposite. I think the desire to learn, in whatever area, is universal, and therefore considering how best to learn is interesting to people. Those interested in an area often ask those already competent in an area what are the best or viable possible routes to gaining competency. I have heard actually quite heated discussion of this outside of the arts, with the most strident, typically, those whose education in a subject was not classroom-based. I have heard this question discussed in the most heated way among those interested in advanced sciences (say, quantum physics) whose knowledge of those subjects comes from the internet and are disappointed that their theories are not more seriously examined by those in academia or invited to the TED stage.

There are many people who worry that learning common ways of doing things, or other people's ways of doing things, will keep them from discovering uncommon ways of doing things or a unique personal style. These are often the same people who believe that small children have better judgment and instincts than people who have been exposed to a range of other people's ideas. I don't think there is any evidence that exposure to a range of ideas or techniques is stifling. More likely it is stimulating. There are others who loathe formal education because they were either bored or humiliated by the particular education they received and generalize that to all formal education. I have also encountered people who are convinced that formally educated people are less disposed to becoming life-long learners than people without formal education. I don't think there is any validity to this assumption. The question of how much it is reasonable to go into debt or how much time it is reasonable to devote is entirely legitimate. There will also be people who have an exceptional alternative resource available to them that is uncommon, someone who is willing to devote all the time it takes to teach them privately. Most people will not have this option. I have taken two ceramics classes. One was an open studio sort of thing with lots of studio access but little instruction. The other involved formal instruction but no access other than during class time to practice space or equipment. I learned much more from the second than from the first, but these experiences made me wish I had had an opportunity to take a class from a teacher over the course of a three or four month term in which I also had access to the studio to practice. At this point I am unlikely to be able to do that.

I am attempting to hand build something simple but pretty large for me, using the advice I have gathered here in the last couple of days. Usually when I have hand-built I have done things with the clay pretty wet, so this is my first attempt to attach parts at leather hard.

If they were to see a wheelchair, do you think they would make accommodations? You are right that most of the time organizations just don't get it. Even organizations specifically charged with providing services for the disabled have procedures that make no sense. I hope in your case that the organization puts the subject of disability accommodations on the agenda. I think the fact that the NHIA has a rule the Potter's Guild could copy is important. Drafting new rules can seem scary for people not used to doing it, but adapting existing rules requires way less effort. If I lived nearby, I would do the eight hour shifts for you.

When I participated in a barrel fire, I used banana, dried mushroom, copper scrubby, coffee grounds, horse hair, and a feather. Yesterday I opened a previously unopened bag of red clay I have had since March and was surprised to smell and see some mold on the outside. So that's in a couple of things I threw yesterday. Is that safe? What will mold do in firing? My unintentional organic addition.

These are really beautiful, Pres. I will look forward to seeing them featured on the Savannah Bee website.

Look in this forum at the second thread. It is called QofW: Participants Questions...

Similar here. Three large-ish hand-built pieces are kiln bound. I would like to do some hand-building today, but my studio adjoins my husband's wood shop, sharing the air, and he is staining and using his table saw today. So no clay for me until he is out of there. I can plan, though.

I am naturally messy and so have to clean up as I go. I wipe down with paper towels or sponges, depending on what it is, and I wash my hands and tools right after use. My studio is in the basement, so I go straight to my utility sinks.