Thread: Article to discuss "The case against the vessel"

My two bob's worth. As far as I can tell wood turning has been used over the centuries to make functional objects. The obsession with the 20/21st century "artiste" is a recent blip in the progression of aesthetics. Objects were turned to become more useful, ie a bowl is more useful than the log it came from, similarly a recorder makes better music than a stick. It can also be made to be attractive, even beautiful.

To impose the "artiste" upon this artform is to hijack the artform in the service of an intellectual ideal. I wonder how Jackson Pollock would have approached a lathe, or Picasso, or Stravinsky, or Utzon, or Albert Namatjira. You get the idea, the medium informs the output. This wally might be a great critic, but I can criticise as well.

Sebastiaan

First paragraph: 100% understood.

Second paragraph: 100% understood if you replace "artform" with "instrument" (or tool, or technique). Is this what you meant? If not, please explain? (I am not a Queensland politician, but I can say this as well ).

Hi Frank&Earnest,

I meant to strike a distinction between artform which invariably includes a high degree of craftsmanship and "artiste" which is the 20/21st C persona. The persona is larger than life and the bloated ego is called the "artist", often severely lacking in craftsmanship. The art industry breeds a symbiotic leech called "critics", a bit like society breeds "politicians". It is the critics who have this ideal in their heads, that we need to push boundaries etc. For most of human history tried and true designs prevailed and the criteria for an object ranked 1. functionality and then 2. aesthetics. 20/21st C art is primarily aesthetic and occasionally functional.

Inevitably great artists are great at their craft as well, hence the listing of some greats. My point is that the medium does determine the output. This critic is stirring the pot.

I guess thats a bit like separation of the powers..... tee hee....

Sebastiaan

As a Visual Arts student I can totally agree with your comments Sebastiaan, regarding current "artists" lacking craftmanship. As a matter of fact, one of the points I constanly debate with students and teachers about is how little skill a lot of the art you see at commercial galleries displays. Nothing disgusts me more than a painting that looks like it was drawn buy a 12 year old sell for a couple of thousand dollars, give me break!
Anyway, I can agree with what the article says about woodturners concentrating on "vessels" but I don't see what the big deal is. Allain Mailand's work is all based on vessels and I consider his work the most amazing "wood art" I have seen (seriously, check out his website if you don't know his work (no...I don't know how to do a link, stop being lazy and goole his name))
With regards to his point about turners considering the vessel the way an artist considers a canvass well.....artists (painters) still use canvasses and, well, gee, they have only been doing that for a few hundred years. Considering we have only been playing with vessels for a couple of decades we had better change now before it becomes boring and overdone (just in case it wasn't apparent this last paragraph should be read with lots of sarcasm).
Anyway I could rant on and on about what a tool the author is (being at art school I can rant on and on for quite a while about nothing because that is what is recquired of us) but I think I will end it here.
Cheers
Josh

Well, Josh, thank you for clarifying what is required by your teachers... spelling is obviously not a requirement.
From the high ground of your artistic education, would you then say that
a) you would not buy a Chagall for a couple of thousand dollars
b) Chagall could draw
c) you are studying art for its snob value but would prefer to be a craftsman
d) you are failing art so you will end up as a craftsman anyway

Just in case it was not apparent, there is quite a bit of sarcasm in the above too

As a matter of fact Frank and Earnest, the only reason I am studying art is to get in to teaching. To be a teacher you have to have completed either a degree in teaching or in another field and do a diploma of education. I thought I was better off doing a degree in art, to work on my carving and turning, than to do a degree in education. Luckily I picked a course that has not been going to long so they were not all that picky about who they let in, and I have made my attitude clear to the teachers. Regrettably I will have to make up all the b.s. artists statements about my work to pass, but as long as I get my degree I will tell them what ever they want to hear. That's what education is about anyway....isn't it?
So, in summation I would say that you are pretty damn close to the mark with option "c" and as a whole painters don't tend to do much for me.
One semester down and all subjects passed 5 more to go !
Josh

"as long as I get my degree I will tell them what ever they want to hear. That's what education is about anyway....isn't it?"

Way to go Josh! the times where insitutional education was about questioning and exploring are long gone. When you are out you can start thinking,

Sebastiaan

It's great to read all the comments so far. I guess I go a bit cold when I read heavy intellectual critiques of the state of wood turning (vessells).
I read some of it, and saved it for another time, but I "glaze over" when I read this sort of stuff.
For me it has been a personal journey (as with most turners, novice and profesional I am sure), if I can coin a "corny" phrase.
I have gone from turning thick awkward bowls and am now turning more stylish and appealing forms. But I am now concetrating on "functional" turnings. I will probably move into another 'phase" as my skills improve, but at the end of the day, I don't take intelectual criticism too seriously.
Geting back on the "lathe" has given me a focus at a difficult time, and it is a personal journey for me, in exploring the beauty that timber can be revealed, as we work it.

Further to that, and I know I am straying from the subject, but "having just drunk a strong coffee" on a bitterly cold morning (god knows what it must be like down South!) I would have no qualms about selling a pen bowl to a highly paid CEO for $10,000 (not that it is likely to happen!) if that person likes it and wants to call it "art".
I will give away my best turnings to a penniless person if I see that it is greatly appreciated and loved. (maybe I can call that craft or art-who cares?)
What's in a name.
It is an inate instinct for us all to be connected with a peice of nature! No matter how devoid and stark our environment becomes. One might live in an apartment but they most likely buy flowers to bring a bit of "nature" indoors, and probably have a wooden item or two as well.
Thats the case with wooden forms, I beleive.
You don't see shoppers picking up plastic bowls and feeling them or looking under them! People buy wood because it brings "nature' into their lives. It also connects the creator of that object with the holder on a personal level. (A mass produced item in a factory canot do that) As a craftsman (ex carpenter) I get great joy revisiting places where my work has stood the test of time, 30 years later. Still there, and still good!
I don't imagine that vesel turning will sudenly stop because someone has raised the issue. There will always be people wanting to enjoy wood (whether for function or asthetics), and there will always be people wanting to make things from wood. It goes back to the begining of civilization.

OK Richard, you dropped this grenade ...what's your take?

(Good point Tony. Art costs! )

ok I read the article, interesting but its a bit of a wank isnt it?

It really started to me off when I got the part where is suggesting a moratorium on hollowing for a year for turners, ostensibly to promote exploration of non hollow items, meaning no vessels i guess. he is arrogant and stupid enough to suggest that turner 'shouldnt' make up thier own minds about what they make and instead follow his lead, which seems to going away from the core functions of skill development (hollowing be a defined skill) and earning a living from ones work, not to mention meeting the needs of buyers of woodturning work and producing quality items from beautiful woods.

To suggest innovation is not happening in various forms is not only disresepectful to the many talented turners who are pushing the boundries a bit creativley speaking but suggesting that the 'vessel' itself is not relevant anymore is ignoring the fundemental basics of the turning craft whether it is functionaly based (usable) or artistic (aesthetic sculture).

Woodturning will always be limited because it makes essentialy round objects (eccentric turning only adpats this propensity).

The term 'vessel is also a bit of a wank, vessel being any kind of container really.

Whilst bowls can get a bit boring, its probably impossible to define the 'perfect' bowl, so turners will always be able to stretch their skills and techniques whether its with carving, dying, decoration, hollowing or whatever.

I like the 500 bowls book, its full of different ideas but the really abstract stuff leaves me cold, might look good but its so far away from the original concept of woodturning that it becomes art or sculpture and then it purely subjective, some people will like it others not not, it's usefulness is gone and its becomes art, of which there is many forms.

The container-ness of the vessel, its ability to actually do something useful, like hold things is at the basis of bowl or box or vase turning, no matter what then adaptions.

My guess is that the articles writer, Peter Exton is just making exuses for his own lack of innovation and trying to build himself a case to produce more high selling 'art'. theres no way he could possible comment accuratley on the diversity of work from thousands of woodturners.

If he doesnt want to deal in 'vessels' or faceplate turning why bother turning at all, move into moulding clay or welding steel where he wont be restricted by the nature of the lathe or the wood.

At the and of the day is surely about the beauty of the wood and the skill of the practitioner. There has probably been more development in the nature of woodturning in the last 20 years than in the last 5,000 years so I dont think he has much to bitch about.

The art gallery market has given tuners fresh ways or making a living and exploring their craft, which will always have its root in the making of useful day to day objects no matter how decorative they get.

So I say drop the vessell crap, call it a bowl, or vase or pot or whatever, or call it an art sculpture, call it what it is and appreciate the work of the thousands of turners who in many different ways, strive to bring out the beauty of wood.

Then use that appreciation to develop your own skills and presentation as an example and inspiration to other turners, not a bland generalisation as criticism.

heres the guys site, http://www.peterexton.com/ a blurb but no turned examples

Originally Posted by reeves

If he doesnt want to deal in 'vessels' or spindle turning why bother turning at all, move into moulding clay or welding steel where he wont be restricted by the nature of the lathe or the wood.

When all is said and done, I think this sums it up.

yes i agree Frank.

On second thoughts maybe the future of turning is going the same way as painting did in the 50's when it had gotten pretty boring so 'action' painting came along to liven things up,a complete breakdown of form, represented by Jackson Pollock( ya know, Blue Poles in the national gallery), the guys gets drunk and throws paint at the canvas.

Maybe the guidance we get from the article is that we should just stick any old hunk of wood on the lathe, turn it on to the highest speed and just throw things at it, anything, really, chainsaws, chisels, paint, nail polish remover, small dogs, bodily fluids, car parts, underwear and takeway food...

then stand back and call it art.

From the guys site, which has a list of his achievments but no lathe work pics and from the article where his scuplture at page bottom is easily the least interesting, least skilled and most boring of all the turning work pics in that PDF, we could probably conclude that he is a careerist, trying to get awards and credentials to further himself rather than a genuine woodworker who loves woodturning and appreciate the efforts of other turners.

Hey, don't push it - of course you agree, you said it!