Reading 1

I read the article “Discourse and Decoration: The Struggle for Historical Space” by Paul Greenhalgh from the book “Ceramic Millennium, Critical Writings on Ceramic History, Theory, and Art.”  This article had some good points in how ceramics is viewed by Art Historians and how they compare it to other fine arts and especially the avant-garde.  Greenhalgh started out by describing that ceramics is misjudged and with regards to art history, ceramics isn’t looked at for its profession but only for its history of being art.  So, before people start judging or looking at ceramics as a profession they need to look into the history and past of it as a profession before we can judge or make assumptions on it today. 

Ceramics is also not like any other art form and should therefor not be compared to anything else.  Greenhalgh stated that it should be viewed as its own medium and nothing else.  There was great emphasis on the avant-garde in this article stating that ceramics is nothing like it. Art history is very interested in the avant-garde and they describe it as wanting to change the world, but ceramics doesn’t want to change the world, it only accepts the world its in and the styles change with its time frame or surroundings. 

The most important point that Greenhalgh made was about the history of art and how we interact with it now.  It is not about the process of making an object but the outcome, and how it is handled and viewed.  But, this is such an old art form that no matter who is enjoying the ceramics, either the maker or the viewer, both are taking part in something that is bigger than themselves.  They are taking part in a vast history known as ceramics.