Reading 2

This chapter introduces the idea of conceit in ceramic sculpture as being the act of making something that looks like another object but is not actually that thing.  A pot that mimics an apple with a caterpillar on top is in the end a pot, not an apple.  There are cases explained where the representation of an object in other materials can be both representational conceit and metaphor when the object being represented is significant on multiple levels. 

The reading also highlighted different types of space, as ceramics exists within it. The first was the total environment, in which ceramic decoration and sculpture were arranged in a way that they become the environment.   Potters space is described as the space which a pot or vessel contains literally as well as metaphorically.   It becomes something of use but also representative of spiritual meaning that is associated with its specific use. 

I was most interested in how Rawson talked about ceramic sculpture being the point where a pot-as-vessel moved away from being a “container of its own space and becomes simply a clay medium for a sculptured image”.  A ceramic sculpture in this case still has “potters space” but also carries metaphorical weight.  It is interesting to me that all dimensional ceramic forms will maintain a relationship to the vessel simply because the material requires them to be built hollow.  This inner volume continues to be “the basis for and image of sculptural ‘life content’”.  It almost gives ceramic forms metaphorical content automatically simply because they are part of a very meaningful ceramic history. 

In his conclusion Rawson is very optimistic.  He mentions that potters should explore meanings that “have no basis in immediate life needs” and assures that elements of pottery will remain important even if pots are made of other materials.  He encourages potters to look to ceramic history and borrow from past ceramic achievements to develop those ideas in new and radical ways. 

The thing that stands out most to me in this reading is the idea that the entire history of pottery has an input into how work now will be seen.  It is impossible to remove your work from this history and ultimately the history informs the way that someone will approach your work.  I think it is important to be able to see how your work might sit within this history; what association will be made between your work and historical ceramic traditions.