John bedding a viewpoint

http://www.waspjournals.com/journals/artontheline/journal_20031/articles/pdf/20031_08.pdf

this is an interesting viewpoint from st ives potter John bedding

That was very interesting Ed, I can understand what he says about damaged items but not sure that I agree though, it's difficult to get past the mindset of everything having to be perfect.

Glad that you picked up on that point Dave , that was the most interesting bit for me , i know what you mean , it's nice to have things as perfect as can be , but having looked at studio pottery in the museum collections etc. with a litle chip here and there it somehow doesn't seem that bad and as bedding says they can be picked up for a fraction of the price , also they can be restored if required ,good to hear a potters view though .

Interesting article. Funny isn't it... My aunt and uncle went to art school to pot, were lifelong potters and both used and still use all the pots they made and collected with the exception of a few by Harry and May Crowan (who they say were THE ones to follow when they were at art school) and some Leach pots they have (not sure which Leach sorry). The rest got used as bread bowls, soup bowls, flowers etc, whatever they might have a function for really. And I'm just taking an educated guess here, that many of them will now be chipped in some way . They don't and have never cared. They see the beauty in the form and the glaze and that is it. However, I can understand that. I have a growing collection of slightly chipped pieces that I just couldn't resist because they had the 'it' factor for me. I have lots of pieces of glass that are also chipped somewhere. Again because on display they don't show and the pieces are rare and beautiful. That said, I'm never going to be a millionaire because it seems that not many people feel the same way. m

Obviously I meant Harry and May Davis !! late posting... sorry.

I remember being told that at one of Michael Cardew's last exhibitions he was shown one of his early Winchcombe jugs by a collector. The collector enthused about it, as it was in perfect condition and barely used, to which Cardew replied that it was clearly a poor jug. He added that if it had been any good it would have shown signs of the use for which it was made.

I buy quite a lot of my collectable pottery direct from the potters,I tend not to tell them the pieces will be put in a glass cabinet because most share the Cardew view

Studio pottery is generally durable and I use it every day but do have a glass cabinet for other pieces.

I remember being approached by a lady about 15 years ago,who seeing that I was trying to sell some studio pottery, said that she had a vase that she used to keep brushes etc. in near her kitchen sink and had always wondered who had made it. I told her to bring it along next time, which she did. It was a squared cylinder vase by Lucie Rie and in perfect condition and had been used by the sink for around 20 years. Sadly after I told her what it was, it went in a glass cabinet.

Right ! that's it then , I'm not putting my lalique in the dishwasher any more

most of the pottery I have was made for meer decorative puposes my wife complains that there isnt even a practical vase for flowers

I get that too from kath , tons of vases/pots ,but not for flowers

ooh I use mine. Unless it's glass and I think it's going to be water stained, I use whichever seems to fit the flower bunch best. I happily use pottery vases cos I find them easier to get clean afterwards. I once bought a fabulous studio pottery flower pot, old, collectable, great maker. I bought it filthy with years of calcium deposits etc from the plants/pots/water that had stood in it. A good clean with a steradent tablet and a wash and it was as if it were made yesterday.
m