17.08.07-throwing the torus

Last week was spent writing about the making process and throwing some torus forms based on the model I had designed on Rhino. Like all attempts to develop new work there is a need to adapt skills and improve techniques. I was keen to reproduce the Rhino design as accurately as possible, the first attempts [torus 01-08] were thrown the ‘right way up’, but I found it was very difficult to create a shallow, open bowl form. Throwing the form ‘upside down’ meant that I had gravity assisting me, particularly useful in forming the outside wall. Much more control was possible and the resulting toruses [09 and 10] are quite pleasing. However, the cross section is not an accurate reproduction of the Rhino design. I am looking forward to producing the Rhino model by CNC milling, to be used as a mould for slipcasting or pressmoulding the piece. It will be interesting to compare the results of the two methods. Which will prove to be the most successful, what are the criteria I will use to make a comparison?

The torus has been chosen because it is a one-sided surface; it doesn’t have a separate interior and exterior, but can be produced to challenge the habitual understanding of the container. Does it matter that my thrown toruses are not a true reproduction of the one designed to carefully proportioned dimensions on Rhino? With nothing to compare my thrown pieces to, I cannot answer that question. I will have to wait until I return to College to find the answers.

Along with my last clay order I bought a gallon of bone china casting slip. To test it I used an old tealight mould, which is basically a torus with a base, on which the tealight sits. They were fired to 1000, sanded smooth, then fired to 1260 after which they were sanded with wet & dry paper. They have come out successfully with very little distortion, a beautiful sheen and are translucent when held up to the light. I think there would be the potential to evolve the design to one where the tealight is positioned to shine through the bone china.


Between house renovations, visiting Kielder Forest and having visitors I have continued my attempts to throw a Ø45cm torus in white earthenware. I am now up to my sixth try with only one saved for turning. As I said above, learning to make a new form takes time, and eventually I will succeed to produce one of the right size, but I’m sure the cross-section won’t be as accurate as I would like, and for me that is essential.

20.07.07 - thinking about the thesis

Since arriving back for the summer I have been concentrating on commercial work, producing more figures for the interior designer we have worked with for the past few years. The work is physically demanding but does allow me some thinking time. One of the things that has come up is linked to how quickly the first year has gone and how soon the end of the second year will come around. I will need to prepare for that moment so that I “hit the ground running”, I think I’ll find it difficult to return to production throwing, supplying galleries and doing the round of potters markets, but I may have to if I don’t follow up other possibilities and take advantage of the opportunities that come up.
I have also been thinking about the thesis and the need to write. One pretty obvious thing that has occurred to me is that the title of the project ‘The Hand and the Glove- Actual and Virtual Explorations of the Ceramic Container’ requires that I make comparisons between hand and digital processes. This raises the issue that, apart from my use of Rhino 3D modelling software I haven’t used any digital manufacturing as anticipated. Over the summer I must prepare models for CNC milling and rapid prototyping. They need to be the right ones, forms that explore the container, but the essential thing will be to experience the process. Another area of exploration is to analyse the practice of other makers who use digital tools, such as those involved with Autonomatic at Falmouth and some of the exhibitors at last year’s exhibition at The Guild of Devon Craftsmen’s gallery in Bovey Tracey. These can be used as case studies and depending on what I find will be used as supporting material in the construction of a ‘position’ or ‘argument’ to be explored in the thesis.

Week ending 05.07.07- end of year 1

I returned to College after a weekend of feeling unsure of the next step in my research. I have plenty of writing to do, but found it difficult to settle because the previous writing [see 22.07.07- Sensing the Container], where I have tried to focus on the core of the experience of perceiving the container has left me doubting that the practical work is coming close to provoking the sensation that I’m looking for. So Monday, a nice quiet day in the house was mostly wasted.
I had a good chat with Steve Brown, one of my fellow researchers about my recent doubts. He expressed having experienced similar feelings and talked about using case studies as material if I couldn’t provide the material myself. This was a new thought for me, I know I need to use examples of other artists work in the thesis, but I had thought that would be solely for contextual purposes. Steve is a very supportive and has a strong insight, our conversations are always stimulating and productive from my point of view, and I hope that I give something in return.
I had planned that this week would be spent getting together the reference material I would need for the thesis writing over the summer but realised that I would have time to do some practical work. I made a replacement for one of the flat cone pieces that I lost through firing too impatiently. It came out well and didn’t require much fettling, so either my skill is improving or the mould is drier and releases the clay more easily.
I find that taking a pen, sketchbook and cup of tea across into Kensington Gardens can be a fruitful experience. For the last couple of weeks the weather has been so wet and cool that there haven’t been many opportunities, but Thursday was a bit kinder so off I went. I made some notes about the container, about its deconstruction, separating the parts- rim, interior and exterior surfaces or making a container without those distinct parts. In relation to deconstruction I think of Malevich and the Cubists periods of Picasso and Braque; in relation to a continuous surface I think of the torus and then the Möbius strip. Which is what I was thinking about before starting at the RCA. I had shelved it as too complicated a structure, but find it maybe the way forward. I must return to the Rhino models and see if they can be used to produce a CNC milled model.
It felt like I’d found a way forward so got some clay and threw three torus pieces, one in white earthenware and two in porcelain.

I was pleased to move away from the feelings I was experiencing at the weekend and this seemed like a step in the right direction. I don’t know where these pieces will lead but they also help to alleviate my concerns that the work shares too many similarities to Martin Smith’s.

A couple of weeks ago I put in an application to take part in a mentoring scheme that the RCA and the Royal Designers for Industry are pioneering. I have chosen Martin Hunt of Queensbury Hunt as the person most appropriate for me and on Wednesday received a call from the chap [Barry…?]co-ordinating the scheme at Innovation RCA to say that it looks like I’ll get the placement.
I emphasised that at this stage of my career a review in light of my RCA experience will be invaluable. I need to change direction, as the studio pottery model is increasingly difficult to sustain. Basically, that is where my experience lies, with some teaching experience, my knowledge of other models is limited.
I’m now writing this sat on the 18.45 Virgin Pendelino train heading north for the last time this academic year. I may have to pop down to use the library at College during the summer but would rather make use of time at home to balance production work and practical and written College work. Plus I have to do some DIY on the house and we definitely need a bit of time off. We’ll see.

Week ending 29.06.07

This is the official last week of term, though I am returning on Tuesday for one more week of tidying up & making use of the library.
My overwhelming feeling is how fast the year has gone, it has been a tremendous experience, I have met many wonderful and talented people and feel lucky to be part of a very special College. Regarding my project, I feel somewhat daunted by the amount of work required to complete it by this time next year. The past 9 months have been spent finding out how to conduct research, developing a context for the project and attempting to produce work in response. The practical part of the project hasn’t moved as fast as I would have liked, partly for technical reasons – learning new techniques takes time, and for the practicalities of working in a studio with very little space which is often cluttered up.

Tuesday:
Arrived to find that the kiln I had booked for tomorrow was empty and very hot, so let it cool for a while then loaded the first of 2 pieces. They are difficult to handle and I broke a small section off the internal rim, more or less ruining it. The second piece had its internal & external cones separated at the rim, with bridging pieces inside. I managed to load it, then left the kiln to cool further, allowing the pots a pretty hot drying period.
At 5.00 I had a tutorial with Martin to discus the writing of the thesis. I had prepared a draft contents page that Martin had asked me to develop into abstract length sections. It had been an interesting exercise, making me realise the importance of writing it in the correct order. For instance I started to write the introduction, then went onto the first section ‘Sensing the Container’, soon beginning to realise that I was duplicating myself and that the ideas were far better expressed in that part than the intro. Martin had a lot to say, plenty of sound advice and didn’t actually say that my efforts were dismal. I felt pretty daunted by the task, though I have found that the writing, when I work at it has improved and is an enjoyable experience. I think that Martin’s main advice is to justify every statement and to write clearly in my own voice.

Wednesday, Thursday and Friday:
Attended the Atoms to Art 2 conference held at University College. Though there was an impressive range of speakers from science, ceramics and glass the attendance wasn’t what it deserved. I must admit to cherry picking a little as some of the subjects were either incredibly specialist or potentially interesting, but not relevant to my work at the moment. Besides, on Wednesday I had to cycle back to College to unpack the kiln and discover that rushing things definitely does not pay off. Both pieces had cracked, they should both have been lifted off the kiln shelf, loaded into the kiln when it was cooler and allowed to warm through for much longer. One of them can possibly be used as a mould for vacuum forming so perhaps all is not lost.
Meanwhile, back at Atoms to Art 2 I was very impressed with Marek Cecula and his approach to ceramics. He showed images of work he has selected for a forthcoming exhibition in Toronto. The makers/artists/designers chosen don’t often have a ceramics background and their approach to ceramics is very fresh. Of the work shown many were utilising ready-mades, over-layering or creating contemporary and sometimes political imagery. I think he would make a valuable contribution at the RCA and I plan to put his name forward as a visiting lecturer.

I am writing this, as usual on the train home, hoping that this journey isn’t a repeat of last week’s diversions and delays due to flooding. I finally got home at 12.15 a.m., three & a half hours late. But I was dry & warm and the house wasn’t flooded.

Week ending 22.06.07 -Sensing the Container

Since my brother’s wedding, I have continued to work with the flat cone 01 mould that had dried out well whilst I was away. Martin worked with me, demonstrating how to smear the surface of the mould with soft clay then build up another couple of layers until it is the correct thickness. We added a coil around the inside of the base to strengthen and stop it from distorting. When the piece was taken from the mould it needed relatively little fettling and appears crisp. However, I was a bit disappointed that the lower, internal rim is higher than I had anticipated, so I threw an insert with a smaller diameter to form a false base.

Later I had a meeting with Martin to discuss the preparation for starting the thesis. I had prepared a draft Contents page that Martin has now asked me to flesh out to abstract length. Since then I have spent some time working on the Introduction and the beginning of the first section dealing with the perception of the ceramic container. I have tried to make it engaging and straightforward, but writing doesn’t come easy to me, so it’s not the easiest part of this project. Having said that it does focus the mind on what the practical work is designed to articulate. I’ll include some of the first draft below, if anyone actually reads it with interest please let me know!

Sensing the Container:

I have made thousands of mugs, cups and saucers, bowls of different sizes- ceramic containers of all sorts of shapes and sizes. Function and aesthetics were the main concerns in their gestation. The mug for instance, is a humble, everyday pot but one of the most difficult for a potter to successfully make. Being practiced and attuned to subtle differences will determine its success. Fingers should fit the handle comfortably, there should be a sense of balance when lifting it, it should hold the preferred amount of liquid and the mug is almost unique as it is often in intimate contact with one of our most sensitive organs- the lips.
So we use sight and touch to perceive the mug, sight, touch and smell to perceive the contents. Hearing plays a part in the experience when the tea is poured [and my youngest daughter hates anyone to slurp his or her tea].
We analyse and respond to all that sensory information just to have a cup of tea and we are barely conscious of the complex processes involved. If we stop awhile to look again, what do we see? Firstly, the fabric- decorated red earthenware if I made it, yours may be stoneware or porcelain. Each of these materials has a particular quality that will affect your experience. Then there is the form- it could look like a small bucket, a barrel or a can. It has an interior and an exterior surface, is that one surface or two? A barrel shaped mug will make you think of two surfaces, an open form will be more ambiguous. The rim is the dividing line, but pour a cappuccino and the rim doesn’t restrain the contents, it foams outwards to the ‘exterior’. So where is the dividing line between the inside and outside space?
I like to drink Darjeeling tea, it is a golden translucent liquid and if the interior surface of my mug is pale I can still see its form. If I was to fill the cup with water, I can have the best of both worlds, something to drink and I can still apprehend the interior.
The empty mug is actually full; air is made of matter and energy in the same way as tea, but our perception of it is liminal. However, looking at my empty mug isn’t a lot different than my experience of looking at it when filled with water.
The container actively frames and shapes the matter around it.

That’s as far as I’ve got for the time being, I’m hoping to add to it over the weekend before my next meeting with Martin on Tuesday.

Going back to the mould- it is made of 2 sections, the outer cone and the inner, which is removable. This allows me to make variations of the inner cone, enabling me to produce a series of related forms. I made a second inner cone, deeper than the first and dried it overnight. Since then I have made 2 variations from it, in the first the cones are joined, whereas the second has a gap between the inner and outer cone. I plan to raise it of the surface so that when it is filled with light all three rims will be defined.

We have 2 Swedish post-graduate students on an exchange from Kontsfach in the department. They haven’t been around much, but I spoke to them for the first time last week and they described how they collaborate on installation projects that deal with material, space and object. I asked them if they would make a presentation to the research students so at lunchtime with cakes provided by Heike they showed some photographs of their recent graduation installation in Sweden. It was comprised of a series of ‘rooms’, some bright, white and airy, others very dark with scorched wooden walls and polished concrete floors. The objects ranged from a group of white porcelain teabowls to glazed earthenware ‘mirrors’ and free blown glass container suspended from the ceiling slowly leaking water onto the floor. They describe their work as a desire to connect the viewer with a calm contemplative environment, something that is in short supply for most people in the busy modern world.