An analysis of a ceramic artwork by Henry Pim, from the Art Gallery of Western Australia collection, by Graham Hay.
Kemp (1989) criticized the crafts for the lack of serious criticism of work, stressing that. .. "Intellectual debate is about ideas, and relevance, and notions of the future and prodding people to shift, and look ... Pursuing a higher goal if you like." 1
While Pincus-Witten (1984) maintains that the creative critic's role is to lend art/craft work "something of his soul...[so that] his "own individuality becomes a vital part of the interpretation." 2
In this paper I will address both these expectations in applying a semiotic analysis3 of English ceramist Henry Pim's intent in creating "Pair of pots"4.
The mid 1980's self-examination within the American, English and Australian craft industry has been well documented by Clark (1987), Lynn (1990), loannou (1989). 5
Pim would have been aware of this debate, particularly as his work sits in that theoretical grey area between art and craft. Since the fine arts and crafts have "stretch[ed] traditional categories to the point of meaninglessness," 6 one response was for craftspeople to take on the label "Designer". 7
Not surprising much of what is written about Pim stresses the way he designs and builds 8 rather than what he is attempting or appears to be saying in his work. Instead analogues to dressmaking, 9 sculpture maquette making and painting 10 have all been made about his work. 11
This lack of creative criticism of Pim's work is disturbing and signifies, to some extent, this crisis of identity within the craft world generally.
A detailed examination of Pim's "Pair of pots" triggered thoughts of parallels with Moore's comments on a recent craft exhibition "Ornate shapes embellished with intricate designs of colour; interwoven; or overlaid, … details within details, pattens within patterns. There is more to see than you could possibly digest." 12 For feelings of visual vertigo occur until I had to focus on only a single aspect of "Pair of pots". As I dissected "Pair of Pots", the more it raised questions as to why this combination of design, construction, glazes, and presentation?
I do not totally support Gareth Clark's view that ceramics is unique because the thin walls potentially become "pulsating membranes recording the subtleties of the interplay between containment and displacement", 13 rather I also see the ability of clay walls to record thought through action because it is so unstable and impression- able. For something to be hand-made and valued because of this is to recognise the hands role as "... a means of reaching out and attachment. It connects knowing with being- the hand feels and expresses knowledge in action. The hand mediates subject and object, the material and the immaterial, the animate and inanimate." 14
Consequently I minutely examined Pim's hands made the pots, in order to see his thought processes. The very methodical template construction and application of an irregular pattern to both sides of all panels, prior to assembly: Yet a rather haphazard application of slip and glaze, highlighting the texture pattern in some places, hiding it in others. These indicate a concern with form but a freer approach to decoration. Therefore when applying semiotics, importance must be placed on the structure of the pots, rather than their decoration.
If we accept the title and number of pots as indicative of the ideas that Pim was intending to trap within his work; then they signify the duality that dominates nature.
The proportions of the six panels on each of the two walls that make up each pot and the angles at which they are joined convey the impression of broad planes of a human face.
The thinness of the pots' walls and angular shapes allude to early bronze age potters imitation of soldered together metal vessels 15 and has connotations of something human but not human, such as a role, while the imitation cracks imply restoration.
Their large size suggests people of importance and wealth. 16 This idea is reinforced by the pattern rolled into the clay surface, which looks like bird's-eye view of these “ship"-like people moving through a sea of smaller dots. The directional nature of the oval ships in the pattern creates a feeling of movement or current, which is echoed in the splashed nature of the final blue glaze splashing like spray across both pots.
As the same faces reappear on the front, back and sides it suggests that they always turn their face to the viewer because they are on show to the public.
Because the top is wide open we can see that they are empty behind the role they live. The exterior textual pattern is repeated on the interior of the walls, which conveys the impression that the role is on the private side too. Because the faces are on all four sides it is difficult to decide whether they are moving side-by-side, backwards or forward, or following each other laterally. Even the rolled on pattern does not satisfactorily resolve this issue. Consequently there is tension created between the connotations of movement, yet a lack of direction.
I maintain that the roughness of the pattern was deliberate. Too often craftspeople attempt to imitate a machine with perfect finishes and even application of colour. 17 To remove such "imperfections" smacks of Taylorism and the alienation of maker and object through mass production, which often imitates the smoothness of historical craft objects in order to gain prestige.
More importantly in this case the patchy darker glaze signifies the throwing of something, while the blue slip is almost like a biro scribbling or something being squirted all over the two roles.
During a time of uncertainty, particularly a confusion of identity, people initially rush to traditional values or forms. Pim has based his title and forms on the traditional duality in nature and marriage. The size and shape indicated people of importance and/or wealth. The imitated metallic wall implied endurance over time yet repeated restoration of these two roles. Collectively the visual signs imply the English Monarchy or members of the royal family. The blue scribbling suggests detrimental media reporting or spilt blue blood close to the English royal family.
To crack the code and finally understand the objects as “a cultural fact embedded in a matrix of interrelated meanings and significations"18 the question of implied movement but with no clear indication of direction needs to be considered. The domestic situations facing the House of Windsor were beginning to appear when Pim made these pots. The marriage breakdowns undermine the traditional role model of the married monarchy in contemporary society and Pim's intent was to raises serious questions as to whether these people-vessels-roles should change.
Such an interpretation would sit well with the view that craft objects reflect significant social influences working through the craftsperson, consciously and subconsciously. 19
1. Bronwyn Kemp in Ioannou, N. (1989) The Culture Brokers: Towards a Redefinition of Australian Contemporary Craft, State Publishing: South Australia. p 47.
2. Pincus-Witten, R. (1984) Eye to Eye, Twenty Years of Art Criticism. Michigan: University Microfilms International. p. ix.
3. Ioannou, N. (1989) The Culture Brokers: Towards a Redefinition of Australian Contemporary Craft, State Publishing: South Australia. p 56
4. Made and acquired in 1984, held in the Craft Collection of the Art Gallery of Western Australia, Perth.
5. David Walker more recently has taken up this issue locally.
6. Lucie-Smith, E. (1981) The Story of Craft, London: Oxford Phaidon Press. p. 279.
7. Ioannou, N. (1989) op. cit., pp.12-23.
8. Pim plans and then constructs a full-size paper model, before pressing a pattern into clay slabs cut from the paper templates and assembling them into the work.
9. Lucie-Smith, E. (1981) The Story of Craft London: Oxford Phaidon Press. p. 116.
10. Vaizey, M. "Henry Pim: Ceramics" in Crafts: (1988) London: July/August 1988. Volume 93. pp. 52-3.
11. I would add printing because Pim uses customised carved plaster of Paris roulettes to roll a relief texture into the soft clay slabs.
12. O'Connor, P. (1992) Opulence, Perth: Craft Council of Western Australia. p.6.
13. Clark, G. (1981) American Potters. The work of 20 modern Masters. New York: Gareth Clark. p. 27-29.
14. Fry, T. "Re -inventing Craft for Re--creation" in Thompson, B. (ed) (1992) Forceps of Language. Sydney: Craft Realities. p. 85.
15. Morley-Fletcher, H. (1984) Techniques of the World's Great Masters of Pottery and Ceramics, U.S.A.: Chartwell Books. p. 138.
16. Each of the two pots measures approximately 80cm high, 30cm wide and 15cm deep.
17. This has connotations of the American Midwest fetish finish school see Clark, G. (1987) American Ceramics, 1876 to the Present. London: Booth-Clibborn Editions.
18. Ioannou, N. (1989) Op. cit., p.56.
19. Ioannou, N. (1989) Op. cit., p. 55.