A crafts forum. CraftBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » CraftBanter forum » Craft related newsgroups » Pottery
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Land Rover Commercial



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old March 26th 04, 07:06 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Yeah, I'm not sure if it's intended to be a literal comparison. A little
underdog humour.

The reason for mentioning the story is that there is a tendency to
underestimate what goes into the creation of art - it seems to get boiled
down to time it took to make, or cost of the supplies, or amount of debt
incurred, because the other stuff is intangible and I think we tend to try
to quantify things to make them fit neatly into our understanding of value.

Another example here in Canada was the purchase of a very famous modernist
painting by Barnett Newman called Voices of Fire for several million
dollars. The painting is very large and consists of three large stripes of
colour. That there should be debate around the expenditure of public
dollars is right and good, but the thing that was most disheartening was
that the most commonly voiced criticism was, "I could do that." Same with
Jackson Pollock. Seems to miss the point to my mind - an aesthetic object
has intrinsic value.

Now that I think of it, how much the neurosurgeon has studied or went into
debt doesn't gauge their value either - it's their ability to save lives.
And the amount they are able to charge is built on the amount the public is
willing to pay for the service they provide - in the case of successfully
removing brain tumours, quite high. In the case of an enriching object of
aesthetic value that will have a subtle impact on your day every time you
see or touch it, a little harder to judge. The point that I'm making, or
even rather the question that I'm asking, is, "Have we internalized the
devaluation of what we do?" Or is there even a devaluation of what we do?
Self-deprecating humour like "underwater basket-weaving" (from another post)
and magnificent pieces of pottery being sold for far below what I believe
they should be suggests to me that perhaps we have. Or perhaps we're merely
responding to the market reality of what a person can reasonably expect to
receive in return for their work. What I do know is that I've never gone up
to anyone, potter or otherwise and offered them more than their listed
price.

And it seems to me, that in such a solitary profession, communities such as
this newsgroup are a useful forum for discussing these things. Just the
fact that there have been 31 posts in response to an ad about someone who
decides not to do pottery because they want a Land Rover, suggests to me
that the issue raised - society's valuation of our chosen profession - hit a
few nerves, and I'm fascinated by the responses it has generated.

Cheers to everyone.
Simon


"Bob Masta" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 24 Mar 2004 20:23:57 -0500, wrote:

This puts me in mind of a famous story about my other profession, one

that
pays slightly less than pottery: writing. Legend has it that a very
celebrated Canadian novelist, Margaret Laurence, was at a gala and was
engaged in conversation with a neurosurgeon. At a point in the

conversation
he confessed that he had always wanted to write a novel and was thinking

he
might do it when he retired. At which she exclaimed, "What a

coincidence!
I'm planning on becoming a neurosurgeon when I retire!"


Of course, the difference is that just about anyone can write a novel
or make pottery, with minimal training. Whether the novel or pottery
is popular with the public is another matter. The neurosurgeon put
in plenty of years in training before he became certified, and now
he can have a whack at brain tumors and collect big bucks to do so.
I sure wouldn't want to see writing or pottery limited to those who
spent 8 years in training and went $100K in debt to get certified.

Let's face it, these are two different worlds. The neruosurgeon
picked a career in a field where there was an established critical
need, and he paid his dues to get there. However much effort
an artist expends in training (and I imagine it's nowhere near what
an MD expends), it's simply not a "critical need" field.

We can each pick our own chosen path. If someone really
has a craving for material success, there are paths that make
that more probable. Those who choose paths for other reasons
can't expect that the material rewards will be the same.

Another aspect is that MD training is *extremely* selective
about who gets into medical school, but once you are
accepted they make every effort to insure you are a good
doctor before turning you loose. But since anyone can
take up art, and no certification (thankfully!), there is a wider
distribution in skill levels and quality of end product.
If I pick up a novel by a brain surgeon and decide I don't like it,
it's no big deal. Not so with brain surgery by a novelist!



Bob Masta
dqatechATdaqartaDOTcom

D A Q A R T A
Data AcQuisition And Real-Time Analysis
www.daqarta.com



Ads
  #32  
Old March 27th 04, 12:58 PM
Eddie Daughton
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Talking about the fact that we is a solitary bunch... Spending most of our
lives alone in our workshops, only emerging, blinking in the unaccustomed
sunlite to sell our wares to an under (or over) educated public that neither
knows nor cares what we do but only if it matches the curtains.... It's hard
to get the constructive criticism that we got @ art school.... What we've
done is to bunch a few of us together based on the fact that we all live and
work within a few miles, and work in our backyards, and formed a group thta
meets every month or so, with a few beers and a bit of food, to look @ each
others pots with the critical eye, and discuss problems (glazes, forms, all
sorts).... Helps with the solitude
try it sometime
Hugz
Eddie
wrote in message
. ..
Yeah, I'm not sure if it's intended to be a literal comparison. A little
underdog humour.

The reason for mentioning the story is that there is a tendency to
underestimate what goes into the creation of art - it seems to get boiled
down to time it took to make, or cost of the supplies, or amount of debt
incurred, because the other stuff is intangible and I think we tend to try
to quantify things to make them fit neatly into our understanding of

value.

Another example here in Canada was the purchase of a very famous modernist
painting by Barnett Newman called Voices of Fire for several million
dollars. The painting is very large and consists of three large stripes

of
colour. That there should be debate around the expenditure of public
dollars is right and good, but the thing that was most disheartening was
that the most commonly voiced criticism was, "I could do that." Same with
Jackson Pollock. Seems to miss the point to my mind - an aesthetic object
has intrinsic value.

Now that I think of it, how much the neurosurgeon has studied or went into
debt doesn't gauge their value either - it's their ability to save lives.


And the amount they are able to charge is built on the amount the public

is
willing to pay for the service they provide - in the case of successfully
removing brain tumours, quite high. In the case of an enriching object of
aesthetic value that will have a subtle impact on your day every time you
see or touch it, a little harder to judge. The point that I'm making, or
even rather the question that I'm asking, is, "Have we internalized the
devaluation of what we do?" Or is there even a devaluation of what we do?
Self-deprecating humour like "underwater basket-weaving" (from another

post)
and magnificent pieces of pottery being sold for far below what I believe
they should be suggests to me that perhaps we have. Or perhaps we're

merely
responding to the market reality of what a person can reasonably expect to
receive in return for their work. What I do know is that I've never gone

up
to anyone, potter or otherwise and offered them more than their listed
price.

And it seems to me, that in such a solitary profession, communities such

as
this newsgroup are a useful forum for discussing these things. Just the
fact that there have been 31 posts in response to an ad about someone who
decides not to do pottery because they want a Land Rover, suggests to me
that the issue raised - society's valuation of our chosen profession - hit

a
few nerves, and I'm fascinated by the responses it has generated.

Cheers to everyone.
Simon


"Bob Masta" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 24 Mar 2004 20:23:57 -0500, wrote:

This puts me in mind of a famous story about my other profession, one

that
pays slightly less than pottery: writing. Legend has it that a very
celebrated Canadian novelist, Margaret Laurence, was at a gala and was
engaged in conversation with a neurosurgeon. At a point in the

conversation
he confessed that he had always wanted to write a novel and was

thinking
he
might do it when he retired. At which she exclaimed, "What a

coincidence!
I'm planning on becoming a neurosurgeon when I retire!"


Of course, the difference is that just about anyone can write a novel
or make pottery, with minimal training. Whether the novel or pottery
is popular with the public is another matter. The neurosurgeon put
in plenty of years in training before he became certified, and now
he can have a whack at brain tumors and collect big bucks to do so.
I sure wouldn't want to see writing or pottery limited to those who
spent 8 years in training and went $100K in debt to get certified.

Let's face it, these are two different worlds. The neruosurgeon
picked a career in a field where there was an established critical
need, and he paid his dues to get there. However much effort
an artist expends in training (and I imagine it's nowhere near what
an MD expends), it's simply not a "critical need" field.

We can each pick our own chosen path. If someone really
has a craving for material success, there are paths that make
that more probable. Those who choose paths for other reasons
can't expect that the material rewards will be the same.

Another aspect is that MD training is *extremely* selective
about who gets into medical school, but once you are
accepted they make every effort to insure you are a good
doctor before turning you loose. But since anyone can
take up art, and no certification (thankfully!), there is a wider
distribution in skill levels and quality of end product.
If I pick up a novel by a brain surgeon and decide I don't like it,
it's no big deal. Not so with brain surgery by a novelist!



Bob Masta
dqatechATdaqartaDOTcom

D A Q A R T A
Data AcQuisition And Real-Time Analysis
www.daqarta.com





 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Commercial Bertrand M. Jewelry 0 July 20th 04 04:10 PM
commercial manufacture of lenses and mirrors Allan Adler Glass 13 January 8th 04 01:44 AM
Blatant Commercial Post, But its such a deal!! Javahut Glass 18 November 22nd 03 03:19 PM
Commercial Glassblowers? GOD Glass 13 September 4th 03 01:53 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:40 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CraftBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.