Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'esthetic choices'.
I used to fall into the affectation camp. Back in the day, if I could sell a mug for 6 bucks, I was pretty happy. I can throw pretty fast, and I'd throw the mug, undercut the foot slightly with a wooden knife, wire it off, and it was done, except for the handle. I'd wipe the edge with a sponge, and leave the wire marks. High volume was the key to making my ration of macaroni and cheese. But recently I got into throwing yunomis-- handle-less cups for tea and wine Most of the great potters whose yunomis I looked at used turned footrings, even if some of them were what I would call a little crude. I really liked the way these cups looked. I've always felt that a nicely turned footring was a prerequisite for an elegant bowl, but it never occurred to me before that they would work well with mugs. I tended to think stability was the big thing with mugs, so the wider the base, the better. In any case, I started looking at the yunomis I was throwing, and realized that some of the forms would work pretty well for mugs, too, with the addition of a handle. Lately I've been dividing my drinking vessel production into mugs and yunomis, both with turned foot rings. I really like them. Am I wrong to think that I have improved my forms? (I know, I know... each potter has to decide if a particular form demands a foot ring, but I apparently operate on a much more concrete form of esthetic judgement.) What are your thoughts?