Tokoname Teapot: shiboridashis and hohins

[Chip]

I did not say I like it, actually truth be told, quite the contrary. I do not even care for the gold hand paint tbh. I ain't buying it. And I offer no argument to your comments.

But I simply appreciate an artisan thinking outside the box, right or wrong by any standards. And willing to let himself express himself as he pleases. I feel this in this kyusu.

Who knows, maybe this is the kyusu that sells for a small fortune one day while the more common designs/pieces sell for a few yen.

[Tead Off]

In either case...... it isn't working.
john

+1

[Robert Fornell]

I probably have to agree with Chip and John on this one...... if that's possible. It's a great piece in that it has generated a healthy discussion on aesthetics which, depending on your cultural perspective, may influence your feelings regarding the piece.

For example, if you consider the piece in say a Japanese pottery (catagory) Tokoname (sub-catagory) mingei (sub-catagory) context and then add Hamada Shoji to the mix, it's tough for this little teapot to hold it's own. If one considers it without it's Japanese ceramic baggage, see above, which I tried to do, to me it seems middle eastern, (excuse my lack of expertise here) in origin and somewhat fresh. While it's hard to imagine sometimes in the west with our lack of tradition concerning craft, the weight of such tradition, this represents to me a possible attempt to move Tokoname-yaki in a new direction. Yes the brushwork is somewhat clumsy and could be pushed further to negate the form which possibly could be another valid approach. Is the statement successful? I think of it as perhaps a step along the way for it's creator and in that sense, the shards which pave the alley behind my studio were "successes" as they were a necessary part of moving my work forward. It's a constant evolution....

Please excuse my rambling here.....

Best wishes,
R

[Tead Off]

I probably have to agree with Chip and John on this one...... if that's possible. It's a great piece in that it has generated a healthy discussion on aesthetics which, depending on your cultural perspective, may influence your feelings regarding the piece.

For example, if you consider the piece in say a Japanese pottery (catagory) Tokoname (sub-catagory) mingei (sub-catagory) context and then add Hamada Shoji to the mix, it's tough for this little teapot to hold it's own. If one considers it without it's Japanese ceramic baggage, see above, which I tried to do, to me it seems middle eastern, (excuse my lack of expertise here) in origin and somewhat fresh. While it's hard to imagine sometimes in the west with our lack of tradition concerning craft, the weight of such tradition, this represents to me a possible attempt to move Tokoname-yaki in a new direction. Yes the brushwork is somewhat clumsy and could be pushed further to negate the form which possibly could be another valid approach. Is the statement successful? I think of it as perhaps a step along the way for it's creator and in that sense, the shards which pave the alley behind my studio were "successes" as they were a necessary part of moving my work forward. It's a constant evolution....

Please excuse my rambling here.....

Best wishes,
R

You are referring to Mughal period work where gold and silver inlay was raised to new heights. However, if you look at Mughal work and then you look at this pot, the pot will wither even more so. It simply is not good drawing. Maybe this potter should have let a better artist do the illustration. Drawing and potting are 2 very different skills as you probably know. When the artist can do both well, some magic takes place. To try to fit it in to something in our minds, misses the point for me. I have to be drawn in on many levels at the same time. It's visceral.