Color blog

I have always been infatuated with color ever since I was a child. Color gives life, love, anger and many more emotions to a painting or a piece of art that an artist created. Without color life would be dual and plain, like a poor acted black and white film with no real plot. I found it real interesting how Huxley talked about Hallucinations and how true a color can be and his take on life. How Dorothy’s life in Kansas is like the world around us, Grey. I would have to say that colors can be overwhelming sometimes but so can everything in large doses.
I must say that I feel very strongly with the quote stated by John Gage, “The Feeling that verbal language is incapable of defining the experience of color.” I agree with the quote because sure you can write about a sunset on the flat ocean while on a cruise, but to experience it and to see the blends of red, fuchsia, blue and orange and then that quick flash when the sun goes down cannot be written. It can only be seen or expressed with color to get the full beauty.

"Color and its meaning in our World"

While reading through this chapter, I thought it was interesting to read how deep some people look into the meaning of color. I have my own spin on colors however some of the ideas that are written obviously are on a whole other level then mine. First of all, I have never been on LSD and I don’t plain to try it. Yes colors are fascinating but having to take a drug to understand them is insane in my opinion. I agree with John Gage when he says in a brief quote, “the feeling that verbal language is incapable of defining the experience of colour”. For example, you know the certain feeling you get every time someone you know walks into the room? Every person gives you a different sense of feeling which describes them to you personally. In my opinion that’s what I feel happens with color too; everyone has a different aura. Our society tends to separate most common colors and match them with meaning. Red means love, yellow expresses the feeling of a mellow emotion. On the other hand, these colors have different shades which can express different emotions. We use these common meanings of color to teach young children concepts while consuming our life with making sure particular colors are purposely around us; color matters to most everyone. Notice how most newborn, baby rooms are engulfed with pastel colors. Blue stands for a baby boy and pink for a girl. If you don’t know what gender you are having, it is accustomed to incorporate them all. Most people don’t know this but it doesn’t even matter to the child at birth because they are born color blind. In actuality the best colors to have surrounding them is red, black and white. Over several months the child begins to see the color red first. Having these three colors combined in mixed patterns, helps babies cognitive thinking at the earliest age possible. Point being, there are so many different ways to look into the meaning of colors. There is no true answer and I believe everyone is entitled to their own opinion. We see it every day with the choices in colors people make concerning their attire. Color has always been a part of us and it will continue to be express in multiple ways throughout the world, forever.

Blog

In this reading they state how color and language have a close relationship. People always state when someones clothing or anything that has bright colors is "loud". But in the reading given they say how silence is something color may provoke with its power and autonomy. Also how we use color to speak with silence, in which we try to say something that moves us beyond language. Also how color is connected to the body in two ways which is when its applied to the body as make up and the body in its resistance to verbalization. I think its interesting how the reading goes on to say how color interacts with people not only physically but also mentally.

"Hanunoo"

I think this article invokes some rather curious ideas in using the words “chromophobia” and “chromophillic” to describe man’s relation to color. They also serve to give the idea of color, as a whole a certain weight, something we should be tentative of because it is something we are so profusely involved with, that it suggests a relationship which exceeds that of an obsession. Color is indeed a very intricate and complex part of ourselves and the world around us and the article references that intimacy in a number of ways. Color has the ability to make us feel, change our ideals or opinions. In any given situation, color can dictate a number of reactions or cause the circumstance to pivot to a decline or an incline. Conversely, we can use color to do all of these things, and create our own narratives. Regarding color being a living and breathing thing, I could not agree more. Color in and of itself is indeed full of living things and is capable of expressing an exponential number of concepts. Furthermore, it lives on life itself. If color did not posses the ability to convey, it would still ornament all things that do actively and tangibly convey (Humans, Animals, plants, etc.).

Ceramics

My painting teacher last year had an entirely different view of color. Rather than the poetic praises of color written in Hanunoo, he used to tell us the whole world was just different shades of gray, but some grays contained more pigment of a certain color. In some ways my teacher and the article are similar, both emphasizing the fact that there is a much wider spectrum of color than blues, reds and yellows.
I don’t agree with the statement that color loses its “intrinsic appeal (79)” as we grow older, our taste in color changes. We may no longer be surrounded by the obvious primary and secondary, saturated hues of color; instead we begin to appreciate the “grays”. Color plays a large role in the clothes we buy, the paint we cover our walls with, and the items we use to decorate our apartments and so on. Perhaps we lose the lose the childhood fascination and obsession one once had, feeling the need to proclaim ones love of a certain color, claiming it is one’s favorite and it is the only color one is willing to wear, but our love of color never truly diminishes.

Reading Response 3

I remember reading the "Hanunoo" chapter before and the slight confusion I had for the book title's name Chromophobia. The fact of being afraid of color seemed a little odd to me. Who is afraid of color? It is harmless, right? Well after reading the "Hanunoo" chapter for a second time, I was intriqued by the answers I found to these questions. The author makes some very important and poetic conclusions about color that can be applicable not only to artists but to people's everyday lives. For one, I agree with the author's statement that colour is alive and active. It can have a mind of its own and pull you into another world, another realm of being by just interacting with the color. This kind of "otherly" expereince is further explained when the author that colour has the power to make us silent because there are no words, only body language, to express our reaction to colour. For example, in my intereactions with colour, I think of my facial expressions that I make. I smile, or frown, or stare, or even turn my head at the sight of some colours. At those moments the power of the colour has forced me to describe it only through the means of my body.
This intereaction of body language and colour leads to what I think is the most poignant theme discussed in this chapter in that "to attend to colour is to attend to the limits of language." I think colour has the power to "take our breath away" or move us in such a way that the word, "blue" does not suffice for the nuance, beauty and poise that the colour presents to us. Colour is alive so it should be able to be described as such instead of being shoved into a dull and unfullfilling word.

Chromophobic Response

I personally found the article to be very interesting due to being a painting and drawing BFA and always being the one scared and confused about color. Although there were some points that I couldn’t wrap my head around there were just as many good points. I thought it was very interesting with Huxley’s idea that color is “entirely natural” in regards to being untouched by language, they are fresh to us as they are presented due to color not being able to be verbally taught. I also think that Klein is right about color being “enslaved” by line and becoming writing. I thought that quote as a pun as I found myself reading a book on how to use and make color which uses language and line to convey ideas about color which contradicts Klein’s statement. Faber Birren brings up an interesting statement that “youngsters are more responsive to color that to form and will delight in it with sheer pleasure.” I think that the idea that children are more open to color, without judging, analyzing, and appreciative to art and color is so true due to doing a speech on a teacher, philosopher, and writer Ken Robinson. Ken speaks about how schools are squashing children’s personal expression and the arts by teaching analytical things where things are right and wrong, yeas or no. Therefore as children grow up they lose the love and appreciating for art and color due to growing up in a world of disciplines where we are told to question and think into the meaning of things. I think that it is also so true that color does not correlate with language and is not capable of defining itself verbally. My art teacher last year Helen O’Leary was trying to teach us color (which is very difficult already) but especially when in elementary school we are taught that basic definition of colors for example: that a tree stump is brown. Helen would scream that tree stumps are not just brown they can range from either ends of the spectrum of multiple browns. One thing I would like to bring up when discussing the idea of color is a question that I constantly ask myself. It may be out there but… how do we know that we see the same colors? We can describe and make gestures all we want but how do we as individuals and as a part of society know that the blue I see is the same version of blue others see? Especially with the idea of people who are color blind. Another point that is interesting is that it is believed that Newton divided his color spectrum up into 7 colors to correspond with the 7 notes that make up the musical scale. I agree with the article that color is alive, fluid, independent, dependent and use for different jobs depending on what we are trying to convey. And hopefully one day it won’t be another language and we will understand it rather then fear it.

CERAMICS, oh yea!

The reading for this week entitled, Hanunoo was very interesting to me. I was very fascinated with the in depth discussion about color from various scholars. Previously I had not given much thought to the intricacy of color; however, after reading this article I became aware of the unimaginable complexities involved in the debate of color. The beginning of the article which discusses color as abstract and formless was a very enchanting concept. I enjoyed that color is regarded by some as a remote or original state of being as well as part of the unconscious mind. Another part of the article that I found to be beautifully descriptive was the portion involving speechlessness. The article describes color as being one of the few things that can move someone to the point beyond language, an idea I found to be quite truthful. I enjoyed also the debate regarding whether colors exist at all. It was interesting to find out that there are so few names for the basic colors in different cultures. I also enjoyed that different cultures divide the colors into different basic categories. Overall, I found that this article gave me a different perspective on the concept of colors. I found the theories to be well supported and very informational.

Ceramics response.

After reading this article I realized how relative color really is. I also realized how color is essential to everything around us. Color makes something what it is, without color we would be nothing. Color has a big impact on our lives because color is everywhere. Without color in our lives I feel that there would be no meaning because color is in everything. Color is what everything is made from.

This article helped me to realize that when someone writes about color it seems to lose meaning. Color must be d because it is a visual experienced. Someone cannot just write what they see because that might not be what the other person pictures in their head. For example, if I made a glaze and told someone about it, that person would not know what exactly I was talking about until they actually saw it. Even after telling someone I cannot even be sure that this person really sees what I see. The experience of color is a very personal feeling.

When we are learning about color we first learn what color is because color is all around us. Then later we learn what color is in words and writing. We find that the words are just symbols of what color actually is.

The idea of making color is a great experience because we actually are working with it. It seems more like an object than an idea.

Response3 - Chromophobia

Hanunoo is an interesting article. Firstly, it was unusual to me to make so many religious and biblical references in an article about color. It was more of a digression than making a valid proof. I also found their terms for color to be unusual. I took Abnormal psych last semester and we learned about phobias and fetishes. With that background, the term "chromophobic" implies an immense fear, rather than the general dis-favor the article seems to sugest for hte term. Also, "chromophilic" implies a sexual connotation along with an obsession. I do not believe these are the true meanings. I personally see how color can be an obsession. In Batchelor's terms, I would classify myself as a chromophilic. It was interesting to see that to Des Esseintes, color was more important than price. The author also states that "colour is active; it is alive." I like this description a lot. It brought me a new way to observe color. It is true that color can being "life" into an object. Color also can catch our interest from the corner of our view. Another ponderance of mine is that the say language and color are opposites. Why can't they be joined? I have such a positive attitude with color; yet "colorful language" is negative word. The last ponderance i will leave with is: if your soul were to be one single color, what would it be? The author mentions that souls have color and we may be subconsciously attracted to a color. What would our color say about us?

Blogtizle twizzzzle

I feel that Ceramics made centuries ago is overlooked as art work. I believe that people look at pots and ceramic pieces as just bowls or pots; used to carry water or for other forms of containing things. I feel that instead of looking at the piece as a tool, people should look at it as more of a form of art; people would appreciate ceramics more. The detail that goes into some pots is unbelievable. To think how tedious that work was for the creator is un-real. I have to admit that I really didn’t understand what the author of the article was trying to say until I read what other people wrote. I found that the article was a run-on of what could be a paragraph long. What I did get from the article though is that the grave detail people put into a piece they create whether it is a reproduction or an original piece that looks the same as another is its own individual fingerprint in the ceramic world.

DISCOURSE AND DECORATION

While carefully and thoroughly reading this article, I was initially confused and dumfounded as to why this theory was so important to the author. Honestly, a part of me (with the outmost respect) questioned in my mind, why the author would care so much about this topic? Not until the end of the article did I truly understand and think to myself, wow I have never thought of ceramics in this context before. I realize that I have only begun to get wrapped into the art of ceramics. Even so, after reading the article, I have formed an opinion in which I feel is important to remember. No two objects are ever exactly alike. Vases from the past for example may look identical with the average human eye, but in reality, there is always something different that subsides in each piece. For instance, it may have a different maker, a slight defect one cannot see, or even something as tiny as the slightest change in the molecular structure each vase contains; this makes them different. Albeit much historical pottery has no artists name attached, each piece has its own unique story from the moment and time it was made; even if we do not know that exact story. On that note, I don’t believe in getting all wrapped up with what may sound like a hard concept to grasp. It is actually in retrospect, an easy idea to understand. Though the object may seem to be repetitive and unoriginal, it is still an individual piece of art. It’s just easier for people to say that it’s not because it’s what they are used to seeing. The creation of pottery from the past is traditional art; art made for the sole purpose to be used as a tool in society. I feel that it is important to know the past, but even more important to continue to make ceramic art in any form you desire. Even if the form is not original, it will always have only your own solitary touch. Enough with the deep stuff, I hope you understand what I am getting at. When a human being creates a piece never done before, I believe that it is rightfully their own creative idea. People may recreate the same idea; however it is proper to give credit where credit is due.

response to ceramics 2

After reading Paul Greenhalgh’s article I find it very interesting that we base our history and art history off many of our early ceramic pieces which reflect the time period they were made in as well as the heritage of the maker and the culture. The fact that these pieces are made and can outlast their makers is very fascinating due to having one meaning in the maker’s generation and function in a different way in the next generation. For example what could be used as a water container or to store food could also be an antique decoration in a modern home. I think that it is so interesting that we as society can observe a “vessel” or a ceramic piece and learn about the artists and their personality due to the size, color, texture, shape, form, and subject matter. Greenhalgh brings up another interesting point of the “intimacy” that is shared by touch between the producer and the consumer which is something that a lot of us over look. Due to living in such a quick, fast paced, and mass producing society where all these details are over looked we as consumers buy things that are aesthetically appealing or functioning and don’t take time to look at the effort and detail put into a simple coffee cup or a bowl. I know that there have been many times where in an art gallery I found myself walking right past the ceramics part of the exhibition and not really putting much thought into the work. But after taking this class I have a deeper appreciation for the time, the form, the art, and the attention to details.

2nd Blog

Throughout this whole essay Paul Greenhalgh, from my opinion, is stressing how art history doesn't do much good for the art of ceramics. He also goes on to say that found ceramic objects gives historians ideas to develop theories about the certain time that the objects were found. They also show the type of society and class of the people by the analysis of the medium of the ceramics used to compose the pieces.
He also went on to say that ceramics apparently is not "avant-garde". Which I'm guessing is the courage to go try something new and different that no one else has seen before, from the military sense definition he has given in the essay. Even though he says in a cultural sense avant-garde movements "did not wish to change art, they wished to change the world". But cubism was a part of the movement and even though it wasn't used to change art, it did and made a huge impact in the art world.

Don't miss all the beautiful colors of the rainbow looking for that pot of gold.

Paul Greenhalgh’s article on the struggle for historic space was both intriguing and thought provoking. I certainly agree that there is not enough space carved out in the history of art for ceramics. I can honestly say that I know very little about the history of this art form. Of course I know that ceramics have been around for quite a long time, and that pots have been used in many different ways, from religious ceremonies to every day kitchen use, and in my eyes they are equally important. But none of this I learned in any classroom. So what does this say about our modern critics and historians?
Since Duchamp's fountain, that art world has been turned upside down and is still trying to recover. There has been a great change in the way to look and perceive art, and I think the way we view ceramic has been a part of that change. Though, as this article points out, there is still a long way to go, ceramics has come so far from how it has been viewed in the past.
Greenhalgh also discusses the affect that language has on a piece of art. By labeling things we can sometimes be distracted from what that object is and what it is trying to say.
My only critique is that the article is written with to mush attitude, and at sometimes it almost seems that he is whining which I found slightly unprofessional.

Ceramic Repsonse 2

Ceramics are stuck between the realm s of fine art and craft. It can be functional, but also decorative. I have never studied a famous potter in any of my art history classes. When studying ceramics we usually talk about pieces in a more historical sense. The artist is usually unknown, so we don’t spend time talking about the person who created the piece, trying to figure out their life, why the created a form in a certain shape or used a certain glaze the way we analyze paintings. In art history, the painter is just as important as their paintings. We analyze the artists, study the period they were from, their lifestyle and events that happened to better understand their work. Whereas with ceramics we use the artist’s piece to have a better sense of how the society lived. I had never considered the fact that ceramics generally do not go through art movements the way paintings do. Potters are sometimes influenced by certain movements, but not to the extent of other art forms. Ceramics generally focus much more on aesthetics than trying to push the limits of art.

Discourse and Decoration

While reading this essay, I caught myself thinking back to when I took art history 111 about ancient to medieval art history. I was trying to remember certain ceramic pieces that our class had gone over during the course. I remember certain Greek amphora shapes, but this is honestly all I could conjure up. Because of this, I found myself agreeing completely with Greenhalgh and his ideas. Ceramics as a history really don’t have a major or even minor presence. The art knowledge I acquired growing up really stuck with the famous artists of their media. Primarily, I could recognize famous paintings, painters by their works, sculptors, and even some drawings. The downfall is that I don’t have any knowledge of ceramic artists or famous ceramic pieces. Ceramics as a whole doesn’t fall under other media forms because of the many movements and important changes that have occurred.

I love Greenhaulgh’s reference to thread and beads, because this is the truth. The ceramics art needs to be brought out into mainstream teachings and histories, therefore beginning a historical content and knowledge to students and the public alike. At this point, ceramics is my chosen medium and I would feel so much more connected with my art if I knew the history behind the movements and pieces that I make on a daily basis. I want there to be a background for future ceramicists and a common appreciation of ceramics as a true art form.

Greenhalgh Response

In this article you can really see the love the author has for ceramics. He takes the fact that ceramics isn’t recognized very personal. At the beginning of the article Greenhalgh, explains how ceramics doesn’t fit into the traditional mold used by art historians to asses art. He then goes into a definition of avant-garde. To Greenhalgh, avant-garde should not be used to judge ceramics. He states that avant-garde was a movement that originated in Europe. Avant-garde was used by various groups to try and transform society through radical use of arts. Using this definition I completely agree with Greenhalgh. You can’t use avant-garde to judge ceramics. Like other art, ceramics should be judge using guild lines that strictly apply to how ceramics is made, and why it is made.
Since Greenhalgh doesn’t agree with using avant-garde to rate ceramics he doesn’t five distinct areas that could be used. Greenhalgh also talks about the “afterlife” of objects (ceramics in this instanst). He feels that this concept is important in seeing the form and the “language” of the piece without be distracted by who made the piece or why. I agree with Greenhalgh again. By not knowing the exact person or the exact reason behind the piece, you are allowed to see the piece only for what it is at that moment. You aren’t distracted by the name of the creator like you sometimes are in paintings.
By the end of the article Greenhalgh had me convinced about the lack of history in ceramics and his thoughts on changing that.

Reading Response 2

One of the points that I was drawn to in this chapter selection by Paul Greenhalgh is his comments and questions about one's response to ceramics. In connection with ceramic theory he points the reader to how ceramic objects are perceived rather than conceived. I find this idea of perception and response to be most interesting and how that generates a relationship between people and objects. Granted, this relationship can be built lots of different ways with many artworks, but I am more intrigued the relationship in regards to ceramics. As stated in the article, this art form has developed its language over thousands of years, but probably has had the most interaction with people over that time period than any other art form. The perseverance of ceramics is truly incredible and it has assimilated itself into the world instead of radically changing it in a few large productions.

Our responses to ceramic objects can be through the aesthetic or informative lenses which give us more perspective on what was going on in art, in society, in the lives of people when the object was created. I sort of enjoy the fact that ceramic history is not as developed within the art history profession because it allows me to see the works with open eyes. Sometimes I feel that there is so much information about the art and art forms studied in main stream art history classes that I find it hard to see the pieces with a fresh perspective. In particular, I enjoy the ability to have the response of looking at a ceramic piece just for the purpose of aesthetics and nothing else which is something that does not happen for me that often with other forms of art (i.e. painting, drawing, etc.) I feel that there is this expectation to put a concept or story behind the piece, but with ceramics, I feel more freedom to just appreciate the aesthetic qualities to be satisfied with stopping there in my response to the object(s).

post 2

It is pretty interesting to try and fit your own art into the historical scene. I had wondered a couple of times if ceramics artists felt pressured by the history of ceramics to stay within those traditions. For example our class is making vases. It is a form that has been made over and over again. Our project even involved research on the history of our vase. Some of the forms used are hundreds of years old. Do ceramic artist feel like it is harder to branch out and be avant garde? or like the reading says, is it really just not their thing. Then again there are artists like Beth Cavener Sticher who are not making traditional pot forms, but her art could be influenced by traditional ceramic animal figurines. She is making them quite different but they are animals, and ceramic figurines none the less. After thousands of years of pottery how can you make something truly unique? Perhaps this is a challenge that some ceramic artists look forward to and enjoy. If after so much time they succeed in doing something awesome it will mean that much more.

Ceramics Response 2

After reading this it made me appreciate and really notice how old and important the art of ceramics really is. The author makes ceramics feel like it is not an academic artistry but mostly an establishment in our history. He also explains how ceramics has changed over the decades and art movements and how ceramics is very multidimensional. He also brings up a very good point about how ceramics are totally different from what is going on in the art world at the same time.
I love how the author explains why ceramics look the way they do. The author went over why a certain piece was the way it was. The kiln dictated the size of the piece. The purpose of the piece dictates it structure and form. The color was always set by what glazes were available. This really made sense to me.
The build up to the end was really good because it concluded and brought everything together really well. After reading this I definitely do not feel the same way about ceramics. I see why ceramics have always been seen as decorations or pots because ceramicists were forced to make art that had a physical purpose. This essay really helped me to understand that ceramics should be considered more in art history.

On The Struggle for Historical Space

Though I would certainly consider myself an artist, I would not say that I am a cermasist. However, Paul Greenhalgh in his article provided me with a very specific lens. I was able to relate to a struggle that I believe every artist must undergo and I was able to see that struggle more specifically in the world of ceramics. Initially, I felt Greenhalgh’s way of writing was a bit disorganized, but his perspectives and deconstructions were no less valid. Cermaics shouldn’t be subjected to the processes of understanding and developing theories and histories for painting. For that matter, ceramics should not be tossed in a bucket with anything but ceramics. And that being said, the same standard should be followed for all art. You can’t expect a piece of ceramics or sculpture to occupy the same purpose a drawing or a painting would, and it very well may, but it shouldn’t be expected. Though, I do believe the history of each individual artistic practice can hold relevance to its comrades (those being the other arts). So while all art may fall on one large grid, no two sorts art should be measured, quantified, or assessed on the same spectrum.

Response2 - Greenhalgh

In Discourse and Decoration, Greenhalgh states that ceramics is a victim of art history. I believe that this is somewhat true because there is not many ceramic pieces that are taught since the ancients. Greenhalgh claims that ceramics can not be avant-garde which I completely disagree with. Avant-garde to me is about being modern and with or slightly ahead of the present styles and trends. Ceramics as an art can certainly be avante-garde. Many of the example we were shown for the contemporary surface portion of our assignment are very avant-garde and modern. It is unfortunate that they are not taught more often in art history; however, these pieces are trying to change the way ceramics can be viewed. Greenhalgh also claims that the marker of ceramic art is not important. This is not true for Grayson Perry for example, who depicts elements of his personality and childhood into his vases. Lastly, Greenhalgh says that ceramics doesn't change the world but becomes assimilated into it. This could be said for any type of art. I believe that every type of art changes what is desired in the world. Everything thing we own is effected by art. From clothing to bottle designs and packaging of products. For example, plates during our childhood were all round. Now, we desire more modern and contemporary shapes. We see many square plates and numerous other shapes for plates in homes and restaurants. Even wine glasses are changing in that some are designed without stems. Overall, I feel that Greenhalgh has some good points but he is too judgemental and jumps to conclusions about ceramics without looking at the new ceramicists.

Sierra Palochak, response 2

Discourse and Decoration was a very intriguing article involving the art of ceramics and how it is judged by the art world. I enjoyed the author, Paul Greenhalgh’s, interpretation of past judgments against ceramics as being poorly constructed. In particular, I found his view, which argues that ceramics is a different art form entirely and, as such, should be judged differently than other artistic movements to be very intriguing. The author made numerous arguments as to why ceramics are a different art entirely from other mediums such as painting and sculpting. However, the author then moved on to describe the art of ceramics which I found to be much more enjoyable. The point in the article which I found most fascinating was Greenhalgh’s description of the ceramic heritage and how long standing it is in history. The author seemed particularly passionate while he discusses the artist and their ties to the ceramic past. The way he describes ceramics as being a movement far beyond the artist is an interesting theory. In part, I do agree with the author that ceramics is an extensive field and that it is a collective form of art; however, I do not believe that the objects keep a distance from their maker’s personality. I believe that the artist can be viewed in the pieces they create and that ceramics can have a voice. Overall the article gave an interesting insight into the world of ceramics and was fascinating to read.

Jon's Response

I Thought that the reading was very interesting and full of information. I found it amazing how the tribe's people climbed all the way up the mountains for there clay as it was scarce where they lived and how it became their main form of trading latter on. that truly is fascinating. I also thought the reading was inspiring to me and I'm sure for the rest of the class seeing how we are all beginners in this new medium of ceramics. I never knew how far back clay and ceramics went until i read the reading.

Ceramics

I love the idea that somewhere in the world at this very moment some is working with clay. With the billions of people that inhabit the Earth this could be said about nearly anything, but the fact that clay has been continuously been being shaped since before recorded history is remarkable. There is something extraordinary about clay, how simple and primitive it is and yet so vital even in today’s industrialized society. Occupying three quarters of the surface of the Earth, it is no wonder nearly every culture adapted this material into their daily use. It is strange to think that people traveled great lengths to acquire clay, whereas most of us encounter the substance everyday without considering the all the possibilities it provides. It has outlasted many societies and remains one of the few artifacts that prove that certain cultures once existed. The items people made not only remains proof that they once existed, but allows us to piece together what their values and lifestyle may have been like.

Reading Response1- The Ceramic Process

My experience with ceramics has been short, but I feel as though I have learned so much about it in this amount of time. I was able to take a ceramics class in high school my senior year with got me hooked on this amazing material-clay. This will be my second semester working with ceramics, and I still have a lot to learn! The reading gives a taste of the vastness of what clay has to offer including is extremely long and significant history, various uses, and observations about the processes of handling clay. The information from this reading provoked me to thing about the aspects of clay that intrigued me the most on my ceramic journey. These aspects are its flexibility, versatility, and the involved process of timing. What I mean by timing is this sort of choreography that happens when you make a ceramic piece. Depending of what you want to do with it, you might need to wait for a piece to dry out a little in order to attach it to another piece so it has stability, or waiting until the piece is the right hardness in order to carve a foot on the bottom of the piece. This choreography can be fluid but my experience with the ceramic process has seemed to be more incremental. From my past experience in this class, I have learned about this choreography, and it has not always been something very easy to pick up. This semester I hope to continue learning the nuances of timing within the ceramic process as well as investigating the versatility and flexibility (or lack of) embodied in clay.

Response to Fisher

Fisher brings out ideas in his writing that seem intuitive, yet I never really thought about before. Clay truly is one of the best kept materials. Throughout history, ceramic bowls have been found. Painting on the other hand, fades and can be lost or ruined. Once clay is fired it it permanent. It seems that even if it breaks, it still keeps some of its form and doesn't always go back into dust. I think it is really amazing how ancient civilizations were able to use an earthly material, decided to fire it, and make it permeate. Fisher also brings the idea of how clay is so extremely versatile. It can be used anywhere from basic tools to poorly decoration and any combination of the two. Fisher also seems very poetic in his last paragraph. It is interesting that he mentions techniques that we are using in the beginning of our class for clay making. There is a kind of harmony in the circles used and the round circular shapes we will be making with our vases.
Going along with some of the ideas of the rest of the class, I also had never made clay before. I never really thought where it came from. I thought it was just bought like paint of pencils. I did not realize how simple it was to get the raw material and to make a workable substance. Before this class, I was nervous that we would have to buy our own clay from places like the Student Bookstore. I believe that making you own clay brings you more contact with the material in a personal level.

Foreword Response

I have taken previous classes where I had the chance to experiment with clay. Even though it is not my specialty I always tried my best to get my point across when creating a piece. As said in the blog, clay is what we used to try and see what went on in the past, therefore looking at someone else's memories. So when it was stated that clay is something that is squishy in between your toes that's something that reverts back to memories. Since people think back on how something felt, smelled, or looked like when they try to remember something or someplace.

Also when Joel Fisher goes into depth about firing he explains how when clay is dried it isn't as effective as when its fired. Being able to form something that was water dependent, fire it, and place it in a moist area without it absorbing the water in its surroundings gives your piece the ability to possibly be permanent. This allows your piece from the minute you finish making it to stay stable for many years to come.

Ceramics response

After reading the article I have to agree with Jorrie in a sense that it was written in a poetic manner. Especially with the idea that man and clay are similar in substance such as being molded through our experiences and constantly changing. I myself tend to feel out of the loop in ceramics due to never taking any kind of ceramics, but just like in the article I feel that taking this class is not only therapeutic to the self and the mind, but a way for humanity to slow down and get back in touch with the simple things in life just as holding clay in your hands and feeling of a solid structure taken from nature. Being able to mold, shape, destroy and reshape something is freeing knowing that we can always alter and fix it to be totally changed or put back to its original form. This article brought up many interesting points such as having such a material that dates back to the early days and now is a form of expression as well as a functioning object in daily society. Being in the class and experiencing the ways of clay and how it is a metaphor of life and human beings hopefully will create a deeper respect for things that we use in our everyday life and learn to actually stop and look at the things that we constantly use and recognize the beauty and time put into the ordinary objects of life.

Responce from Amanda Metzler

Unfortunately, it was not into my junior year of high school did I truly get the chance to get my hands dirty in Mother Nature’s finest dirt. I can remember that year making two clay pots for my bonsai plant and two clay hands for my marionette; on top of only one more additional clay project. With the finish of the glazes I applied, I can remember telling myself I have to do this more often. I was saddened to see that there were no more projects assigned for the year. To fill that void I took art classes at a community college for two years that required clay projects from time to time; nothing serious. I’m extremely looking forward to taking this ceramic class at PSU. While reading this article, it was neat to take a peek into clays history and how it came be. It was very interesting and informing to see how it evolved throughout the centuries and how it affected several different cultures. I must say the most fascinating fact I learned about clay was that it has been one of the longest lasting resources on earth, yet it was so hard to get to; unlike today. The part I enjoyed most was reading about the Greek myth and the story of how clay came to be. I’m excited to start our newest project; making a vase modeled after a culture way before our time!!

JorrieMG

This article presented clay’s history in a rather poetic manner. It observes both its importance to mankind, and the ways in which it has been passed down as something functional and something expressive. However, I was curious that this article did not mention one aspect of clay that I feel is imperative to one’s understanding of the medium. That is, that clay is very much like a human being. We are birthed from a like form, as clay is birthed from a like form. We are molded and shaped by our experiences, by what we are taught. We endure sorrow and pain, a sort of firing process. We serve some sort of functionality to the world around us and we also represent an individual aspect of our kind as one single piece of art. One could say man is wrought from clay by a Master Potter. This idea of clay and man sharing some sort of likeness also carries over to other mediums. We could say, that the human is stretched and bent, and that their journey produces the colors of their life, similar to a canvas. We could also say, that the human being is much like a drawing, stumbling in scrawls off the page and through trial and error finally producing either a masterpiece or otherwise. We could simply say then, that human beings are art, as art is a human being. Be that the canvas of a painting, patiently awaiting the Master’s strokes, or the clay in the hands of the Master Potter

I have always liked pottery and ceramics, though I’ve admittedly never done much with them. One of the reasons that I like ceramics is because of a few things this article discusses. Ceramics is one of few things that has been around forever. It has seen the rise and fall of Rome, the palace dining room in Windsor castle, and the simplest tables of small villages. It has such historical importance and it is also such a great art form.

This article reminded me of a time when I was fairly young and at my great uncle Dennis’ house in England. I was digging around in his garden and found all these pieces of broken pottery. I was ecstatic about it and then had to dig up the rest of his poor garden to try and find more pieces. I collected as much as I could, and couldn’t fit any of it together. Dennis told me that it was probably from the home that had stood there before, which was taken down and replaced with many smaller homes. I thought that is was wonderful that although no trace of the old house existed, buried under the garden there were many chips of the white and blue dinner ware that had once belonged to someone who lived there.

Response Ceramics SP

I found the reading of this article to be of great interest to me. This being my first ceramics course, much of the information was fresh and sometimes astounding. When first taking this class, I knew very little about the complexities of clay and this article began to divulge a small bit of them as well as gave some intriguing information as to the origins of ceramics. I was fascinated to find out that clay was considered to be so precious that people would travel great distances in order to have it. The difficultly that these people underwent to receive a common resource befuddled me a bit. I enjoyed reading the information regarding the imperative nature of possessing clay because I believe that it attributes the importance of ceramics throughout history.
Another section of the article that I thoroughly enjoyed dealt with the changing nature of clay after it is fired. I was intrigued as the author described clay as being a substance that is easily manipulated and then afterward as he spoke about clay's ability to change its' structure completely after being fired. The thought behind the changing nature of clay really interested me. Overall, I found that the article was a good introduction into the world of ceramics. The article provided the audience with a general background on the history and physical nature of clay which I found interesting as an introductory student.