Ethical pot: Difference between revisions
imported>Gazamp m Cleanup |
imported>LIUCfede22 m copyedited |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
{{Use dmy dates|date=April 2022}} | {{Use dmy dates|date=April 2022}} | ||
[[File:Studio Ceramics set by Bernard Leach (YORYM-2004.1.2022).jpg|thumb|Ethical teaware by the [[Leach Pottery]]]] | [[File:Studio Ceramics set by Bernard Leach (YORYM-2004.1.2022).jpg|thumb|Ethical teaware by the [[Leach Pottery]]]] | ||
The term "'''ethical pot'''" was coined by Oliver Watson in his book ''Studio Pottery: Twentieth Century British Ceramics in the Victoria and Albert Museum'' to describe a 20th-century trend in [[studio pottery]] that favoured plain, utilitarian ceramics. Watson said that the ethical pot | The term "'''ethical pot'''" was coined by Oliver Watson in his book ''Studio Pottery: Twentieth Century British Ceramics in the Victoria and Albert Museum'' to describe a 20th-century trend in [[studio pottery]] that favoured plain, utilitarian ceramics. Watson said that the ethical pot "lovingly made in the correct way and with the correct attitude, would contain a spiritual and moral dimension". Its leading proponents were [[Bernard Leach]] and a more controversial group of post-war British studio potters.<ref name="Collecting Ceramics">[http://www.aber.ac.uk/museum/collections/collectingceramics.shtml Collecting Ceramics]</ref> They were theoretically opposed to the ''expressive pots'' or ''[[ceramics (art)#fine art|fine art pot]]s'' of potters such as [[William Staite Murray]], [[Lucie Rie]] and [[Hans Coper]].<ref name="Collecting Ceramics"/> | ||
The ''ethical pot'' theory and style was popularized by [[Bernard Leach]] in ''A Potter's Book'' (1940).<ref>[http://www.adelaidereview.com.au/culture_review.php?subaction=showfull&id=1170379314&archive=&start_from=&ucat=3& Adelaide Review]{{Dead link|date=August 2019 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}</ref> He expanded the theories that ethical pots should be [[utility|utilitarian]], "naturally shaped" and originally | The ''ethical pot'' theory and style was popularized by [[Bernard Leach]] in ''A Potter's Book'' (1940).<ref>[http://www.adelaidereview.com.au/culture_review.php?subaction=showfull&id=1170379314&archive=&start_from=&ucat=3& Adelaide Review]{{Dead link|date=August 2019 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}</ref> He expanded the theories that ethical pots should be [[utility|utilitarian]], "naturally shaped" and originally derive from "oriental forms that transcended mere good looks".<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://www.studiopotter.org/reviews/?review=book020 |title=Studio Reviews |access-date=2007-02-09 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070516135019/http://www.studiopotter.org/reviews/?review=book020 |archive-date=2007-05-16 |url-status=dead }}</ref> Leach had previously spent considerable time in Japan studying eastern crafts and [[mingei]]. His ethical pot idea was a rough interpretation of [[mingei]] for the western world; he advocated simplicity (ideally the best pots are so quick to make that they could be "thrown before breakfast"), and pots made to look natural and hand crafted. [[Soetsu Yanagi]], a leading figure in the mingei movement, said that a craft object "must be made by an anonymous craftsman or woman and therefore unsigned; it must be functional, simple, and have no excess ornamentation; it must be one of many similar pieces and must be inexpensive; it must be unsophisticated; it must reflect the region it was made in; and it must be made by hand."<ref>Transcript of Yanagi's talk at the first International Conference of Potters and Weavers, Darlington Hall, Devon, England, 1952</ref> | ||
According to ceramic art critics of today, this pot style was intended to be modernist, useful, and "democratic in usage" as opposed to the ''[[ceramics (art)#fine art|fine art pot]]''<ref name="Collecting Ceramics"/> and also opposed to industrial art. | According to ceramic art critics of today, this pot style was intended to be modernist, useful, and "democratic in usage" as opposed to the ''[[ceramics (art)#fine art|fine art pot]]''<ref name="Collecting Ceramics"/> and also opposed to industrial art. | ||
Latest revision as of 15:44, 26 September 2025
Template:Short description Template:Use dmy dates
.jpg){kind=link}
The term "ethical pot" was coined by Oliver Watson in his book Studio Pottery: Twentieth Century British Ceramics in the Victoria and Albert Museum to describe a 20th-century trend in studio pottery that favoured plain, utilitarian ceramics. Watson said that the ethical pot "lovingly made in the correct way and with the correct attitude, would contain a spiritual and moral dimension". Its leading proponents were Bernard Leach and a more controversial group of post-war British studio potters.[1] They were theoretically opposed to the expressive pots or fine art pots of potters such as William Staite Murray, Lucie Rie and Hans Coper.[1]
The ethical pot theory and style was popularized by Bernard Leach in A Potter's Book (1940).[2] He expanded the theories that ethical pots should be utilitarian, "naturally shaped" and originally derive from "oriental forms that transcended mere good looks".[3] Leach had previously spent considerable time in Japan studying eastern crafts and mingei. His ethical pot idea was a rough interpretation of mingei for the western world; he advocated simplicity (ideally the best pots are so quick to make that they could be "thrown before breakfast"), and pots made to look natural and hand crafted. Soetsu Yanagi, a leading figure in the mingei movement, said that a craft object "must be made by an anonymous craftsman or woman and therefore unsigned; it must be functional, simple, and have no excess ornamentation; it must be one of many similar pieces and must be inexpensive; it must be unsophisticated; it must reflect the region it was made in; and it must be made by hand."[4]
According to ceramic art critics of today, this pot style was intended to be modernist, useful, and "democratic in usage" as opposed to the fine art pot[1] and also opposed to industrial art.
Potters in the movement
The potters apprenticed to Bernard Leach include: Michael Cardew, Katherine Pleydell-Bouverie, Norah Braden, David Leach and Michael Leach (his sons), William Marshall, Kenneth Quick and Richard Batterham. His American apprentices included: Warren MacKenzie, Byron Temple, Clary Illian and Jeff Oestrich. He was a major influence on the leading New Zealand potter Len Castle, and they had worked together in the mid-1950s. Through his son David, Bernard was the main influence on the work of the Australian potter Ian Sprague.
See also
Sources
- ↑ a b c Collecting Ceramics
- ↑ Adelaide ReviewScript error: No such module "Unsubst".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Transcript of Yanagi's talk at the first International Conference of Potters and Weavers, Darlington Hall, Devon, England, 1952
- Britt, John. Critical Ceramics: The "Unknown Craftsmen" is Dead. File retrieved February 10, 2007.
- de Waal, Edmund. A Ceramic History: Pioneering Definitions 1900-1940 The Studio Pot. File retrieved February 10, 2007.
- Leach, Bernard. A Potter’s Book, Faber and Faber, 1988. Template:ISBN
- Watson, Oliver. Studio Pottery: Twentieth Century British Ceramics in the Victoria and Albert Museum.