GENERAL: Ceramics.

From: IN%"[email protected]" "Ceramic Arts Discussion List" 20-NOV-1992 17:
35
:52.31
To: Howard Lawrence <[email protected]>
CC:
Subj: "In The Year Of American Craft"

Message-id: <[email protected]>
Received: from JNET-DAEMON by PSUARCH.Bitnet; Fri, 20 Nov 92 17:35 EDT
Received: From PSUVM(MAILER) by PSUARCH with Jnet id 6874 for HRL@PSUARCH; Fri,
20 Nov 92 17:35 EDT
Received: from PSUVM.BITNET by PSUVM.PSU.EDU (Mailer R2.08) with BSMTP id 7318;
Fri, 20 Nov 92 17:29:42 EST
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 16:50:35 -0500
From: [email protected]
Subject: "In The Year Of American Craft"
Sender: Ceramic Arts Discussion List <[email protected]>
To: Howard Lawrence <[email protected]>
Reply-to: Ceramic Arts Discussion List <[email protected]>
Comments: Warning -- RSCS tag indicates an origin of CLAYART@UKCC

IN THE YEAR OF AMERICAN CRAFT is the title of a lecture given this fall
by Matthew Kangas (art critic/Seattle, WA) at Southern Illinois
University, Carbondale. I thought I'd share a few of his thoughts with
you as to where ceramics is in 1992/3.

To begin, he says that of all the craft mediums, ceramics is "the most
deeply embedded in an identity crisis." This, he feels, threatens the
stature clay as being the first of the craft materials to "break into
the fine-art world." He makes note of the 1961 CRAFT HORIZONS essay by
Rose Slivka, "The New Ceramic Presence" as being "thoroughly dissipated
32 years later because of the artists' self-exhaustion, changing times,
and a failure of the supporting institutions and magazines to sustain
the public's interest in major and emerging figures." His thoughts are
more pointed towards the decline of American ceramic sculpture.

He goes on to say that "despite elaborate lip service to the contrary,"
organizations like NCECA have not been able to raise the standards of
such things as exhibition and publication design. This has, however,
much to his surprise, only occured in private galleries and museums
(i.e., Philbrook Museum of Art in Tulsa, OK) with exhibitions such as
THE ELOQUENT OBJECT (1987). Also, he points out that, besides the
American Craft Museum, there are some (like the Everson, Syracuse,NY and
a few others) that have made significant steps in recognizing the field
of ceramics, but much more is needed.

He goes on to say that the rivival of art pottery of the past decade has
hampered the development of ceramic sculpture. he says, "Now a dominant
force in the market, art pottery or gallery vessels, as I call them, are
an uneasy hybrid of function and sculpture, often degrading both." He
believes that we must begin to pay more attention to handmade pottery,
and that too many of us are giving up on making fine functional work for
the more lucrative work of art pottery (gallery vessels). He says, "The
result is an impoverishment of the quality of our everyday lives."

He then goes on to state how the claywork of Michael Lucero is capable
of renovating American ceramic sculpture. (For those unfamiliar with
his work, you'll find examples in both American Ceramics and Ceramics
monthly from the past 2 years, indexed.) He says about M. L.'s work,
His recent work involves the transformation of thrown and handbuilt
forms into figurative sculptures of great intrigue and beauty. He draws
upon his hispanic heritage by commenting on pre-Columbian terra-cotta
figures and on the bizzare Spanish side of Surrealism, Dali and Miro."

Also, Kangas goes on to say how American ceramics does not have a strong
connection to international developments. It does not have a strong
global market or allaince. And, it needs to restore "the serious status
of fine handmade functional pottery."

He does say that writing about ceramics is the best of all the craft
mediums. He applauds the magazine AMERICAN CERAMICS and says it "shows
every sign of maintaining its early maturity, serious support, and high
standards of publication design." He concludes his comments by saying,

"The fine line between opinion and promotion is frequently blurred,
however, and remains the major stumbling block for this important
field."


These comments have been extracted from his lecture and I hope it gives
you enough information in order to comment. His thoughts are worth our
consideration, and perhaps we can discuss them on this list. Opinions,
while they may be biased and personal, are, I feel, still valid. Next
year (1993) IS the year of American Craft. How does it (or will it) effect
those of us out there who work in the craft mediums on a daily basis?
How has the field of ceramics changed over the years and has it been for
the good or bad. There are interesting questions raised about
functional vessels and 'gallery' vessels. Kangas makes a plea for us as
ceramists to return to fine handmade functional pottery, and re-define
ceramic sculpture. What exactly does this all mean to those of us
making works in clay and teaching clay here in 1992. A lot of
questions, few answers. Maybe that's why Gertrude Stein, while on her
death bed, when asked by Alice B. Toklas "Gertrude, what IS the answer",
she responed by saying, "in that case, what IS the question," she went
on to say that answers aren't nearly as important as questions,
afterall, who do you know that has ALL the answers, who will you check
with to see if you're right!?

Maybe our discussions on this list, and how they effect our thinking, is
where we all gain.

Thanks for enduring such a long message!

Joe

*************************************************************
Joe Molinaro
Department of Art BITNET: artmolin@eku
Eastern Kentucky University VOICE: (606) 622-1634
Richmond, KY 40475
*************************************************************
Partial thread listing: