Extract from CANADIAN GUILD OF POTTERS NEWSLETTER
- January, 1967

ZDITORIAL

Why is there no serious criticism of Pottery Exhibitions in this
country? Is it because pottery is not an art form, or possibly because
ao one presumes himself worthy of the task? There are so many
styles prevalent, and so many subtle levels of achievement in each
style that it is easy to find oneself asking 'Who am I to judge?"

To take a simple case: On occasion one may criticize a potter's
standard of workmanship, only to find that the sloppiness is part of
the aesthetic in question, apparently making nonsense of the criticism
and giving the potter the last laugh.

One form of criticism which serves to blanket shows with respecta-
bility is the Jury System, As long as a show is juried it is acceptable,
or so we are led to believe. All serious judgement is made before the
show is presented - a few whimpers of our discontent may be heard
later, but these are naturally directed at the jury and not at the work
included in the exhibition. Seldom is the load made to fall where it
should, on the craftsman himself. In fact, by supporting the jury
system in preference to a show by invitation, potters abandon the right
to be criticized and to learn from that criticism. How many of us
withheld from 'Canadian Ceramics 67' pieces that were real ideas,
sending instead pieces that would be more likely to be accepted?
Criticism of shows is seldom undertaken from the point of view of
history or considering the responsibility of the artist to think his way
into the environment. I can think of only one attempt, that of Arnold
Rockman in Canadian Art Magazine (on Ceramics '65) and that fell on
pretty stony ground.

As practised today it is undeniably true that pottery as a pursuit is
defensive. Before a potter embraces a line of thought, the necessary
defense or philosophy is prepared. Perhaps this is natural as we all
are, in one way or another, the product of schools and we no longer
perform a simple function in a society that believes we are needed.