Bowls

A few weeks ago I posted a poll on the Liberty Stoneware Facebook page asking, "what qualities make a good mixing bowl?" I received some good feedback including specifications on the lip, curvature, and the comfort of holding it while mixing. I thought I would share some photos of a set of bowls I made recently with some of the comments and recommendations in mind.

Graduated set of bowls

One of my biggest considerations in making these bowls is how I am going to fire them. I intend to put them in a wood-fired salt kiln, which can be a rough atmosphere. In order to have strong pieces for the kiln firing, I chose to make these bowls with rather heavy rims, and thicker sides. Each bowl also has a mate which will stack on top of it (rim to rim) in order to keep chunks of kiln debri, or other materials from sticking to the interior of the bowls.

Big Bowl

These bowls are graduated with the intention of stacking them into one another. One of the comments on the Facebook poll mentioned a handle on the side, as well as a pouring lip. I think this would be a good design element for a very large bowl, which would then be the base bowl for holding/stacking other bowls into it. However, I remember at Berea College when we made batter bowls now and again that the design never seemed to be fully functional. The handle didn't allow the bowl to be neatly stacked or stored, and the lip didn't allow the bowl to always be used for other functions unless the bowl was deep (whatever was being mixed in it would slosh out of the lip). I did go with a slightly curved exterior wall for holding it comfortably in one arm, and a fairly wide base. The interior has a smooth curve to it as well. After these bowls are fired I will post the end results!

Side and interior of bowl

Remembering David Weaver

It is sad when we lose anyone, and especially sad when the world and community of artists lose one of our own. David Weaver, potter, forensic scientist, and proprietor of Midland Trail Gallery in West Virginia passed away suddenly on Sunday, September 19th. David is also the father of a dear friend, Rachel, who I worked with in the Ceramics Apprenticeship Program at Berea.

David Weaver gallery card, courtesy of Cherese Weaver's photos

I will be forever grateful to David and his family for opening their home and studio to me several years ago. I spent almost one week with them attending a nearby music festival, working in the studio, and helping to fire their wood kiln. It was an early interaction with firing wood kilns and began an interest in learning more about the techniques and strategies involved.

David Weaver's pottery, courtesy of Cherese Weaver's photos

That summer in West Virginia kindled my interests and fueled my future. Thank you David. Keep the Weaver family in your thoughts. 

David Weaver with pottery, courtesy of Cherese Weaver's photos

Reflections on Rims

I've been trying some new rim styles, and looking more closely at how my rims have evolved over the years. As an apprentice at Berea College in the Ceramics Apprenticeship Program I remember often taking a mug in the green state, and putting it to my lips to decide how it felt. I've continued to use this method, but have also been critiquing my past work and the rims of cups and mugs which have made their way into my cupboards. So I wanted to post some thoughts and photos to see what other people and potters thought!

The slightly flared rim:

This style of rim has been my usual go-to rim for a long while. However, I've found that the thinness that this rim tends to take lends it to chipping. Mugs with this rim  that I made several years ago now have chips on the rims. I am not satisfied with a thicker, slightly flared rim as I find that liquids tend to dribble more with a thicker, rounded rim.

Slightly flared and thinner on the left, thicker, slightly flared on the right.                                                                                Both of these mugs were made by me 2+ years ago.

The inverted rim:

I am not often attracted to an inverted rim. I think it feels and looks awkward, and unless it is accompanied by a straight outer edge, I do not personally find an inverted rim functional. A man once said to me at a show that he preferred a rim which dips in so it doesn't spill out all over him. I have an aversion to this type of rim usually because I (with my wild imagination) picture the liquid in the mug being held back only slightly behind this inverted rim, and then jumping over the edge and attacking my lips.

Mug made by Karin Solberg, current resident potter at Berea College.                                                                                    This is a rare case of an inverted rim in my cupboard!

The thicker rim with some transition at the top:

This has become my happy medium. A slightly heavier rim (also because I have been focusing on wood kiln firing) with a straight outer edge, and the interior transitioning to a rounded peak at the top of the piece. It feels good on the lips, doesn't seem to cause much dribbling on the side, and withstands a good knocking about and intense firing. 



Mug made by Jim Dugan



My new developing rim



Historical contemplations:
I've also been thinking about how rims on mugs, cups, and tankards developed historically. Did potters sit around in their factories judging other potter's forms, testing them out? I can hear them (in a good, thick English accent),"Gee, John, that rim just does not feel right nor speak to me in a proper manner, perhaps we should go back to the wheel and adjust it." I doubt it. It started with the design patterns created for the proprietors of the pottery factory (I'm speaking more in terms of English pottery as I am more familiar with the entirety of that process and have seen more design books, molds, etc. for this type).

This is a design page from Hartley Green & Co. and is in the collection of the Victoria and Albert Museum. The image comes from a blog connected to the V&A (http://www.vam.ac.uk/things-to-do/blogs/sketch-product/duly-noted)

So a separate individual from the potters drew the designs for the wares, often specifying the dimensions and the details. Where did the critique and assessment of the pieces take place? I cannot say I have read nor heard of wares being pulled off of the line after being thrown (for those that know this better than I, please correct me!). In a factory setting, no one was paid until the wares were out of the final glost (glaze) firing, and really only assessed for flaws, not function or aesthetics.
Rims from various stoneware vessels vary in style, shape, and size. The fragility of white salt-glazed stoneware accompanies the often narrow, sometimes overly-flared rims. It is no surprise to me that the hollow ware forms in white salt-glazed stoneware do no survive as well as other heavier stoneware vessels. I know that it was meant to be more refined, but I do wonder what the consumer/user thought of this rim as they used it for tea, etc.

White stoneware from the Pottery With a Past: Stoneware in Early America exhibit at Colonial Williamsburg, Fall 2009. 

English brown stoneware rims are all over the place. They vary from thick, rounded rims to very thin. I enjoy the thinner rims much more, but have seen many surviving pieces with severe chips and cracks on the rims, which is not a terrible surprise. One thing that I admire the most about English brown stoneware are the small linear patterns and lines which are usually found just below the rim.

Brown English stoneware from  from the Pottery With a Past: Stoneware in Early America exhibit                                         at Colonial Williamsburg, Fall 2009

German stoneware rims always seem a little more beefy and thick. This would definitely stand up to heavy use and transportation. I have yet to put my lips to the edge of a thick German ware or to test it out and see whether it dribbles. Maybe someday!

German stone from  from the Pottery With a Past: Stoneware in Early America                                                                    exhibit at Colonial Williamsburg, Fall 2009

So, in closing, should there really be consistency? Or is this the case of "to each his own?"

Getting all Fired Up!

Several weeks ago (I've been a delinquent blogger) I had the honor of participating in the kiln firing of Sid Luck at Luck's Ware in Seagrove. Sid Luck is a fifth generation potter, firing with a traditional "groundhog" kiln and making more traditional forms and ware. Charles Zug in his publication, Turners and Burners, compares the "groundhog" kiln to the German-style Cassel kilns and kilns which were made in Newcastle England (chapter on Burning, page 224 for a diagram). The sides of the kiln are surrounded by soil, with the top arch, chimney, and front opening above ground.

Sid Luck's "groundhog" style kiln

Sid Luck's kiln has been modified on the interior distinguishing it from a more traditional "groundhog" kiln. Sid, like Vernon Owen at Jugtown Pottery, installed a series of levels on the interior of the kiln, making deep (about 4' back, 2-3' up) steps that rise toward the back of the kiln. Traditionally, "groundhog" kilns were basically an open rectangle, but as Sid told me, this design was uneven and not as efficient. Sid said, "you could fire earthenware in the back of the kiln and stoneware in the front." I suppose for potters historically, maybe that worked for them since some made both stoneware and earthenware, but I imagine that is also why so many archaeological kilns sites have wasters!
On Monday the bisque ware was prepared, wadding was made, last-minute glazing was done, and the kiln was cleaned out. One thing I noted was how little the kiln holds with the modification of the interior. Below is an image of the back of the kiln while Sid was cleaning the ceiling and as it was being loaded. I would estimate that there were less than 200 pieces in the kiln.

I had the opportunity to help salt the kiln when it came time. I think this largely had to do with the fact that I was one of the few people there who brought a long-sleeve shirt! Either way, it was great. Sid uses a leaf blower in order to distribute the salt through the front opening of the kiln. Potters are very inventive creatures, and Sid's design for the salting leaf blower was attaching an old metal drain pipe to the end, with a small opening on top into which we put a funnel. The leaf blower was turned on, salt loaded into the funnel, and with the door partially opened, the leaf blower made for a serious dousing of salt. Several cupfuls of salt were put into the top ports of the kiln as well.

Brenda helping Sid salt the kiln

Sid Luck and his son, Matt, salting the kiln on the left and another of Sid and Brenda salting the kiln

I have seen another potter administering salt with a leaf blower before. And while at Berea I tried several different methods including small "burritos" of salt in a brown bag tossed in, and a piece of angle-iron on a pole to dump the salt in. I have contemplated whether a leaf blower is actually administering the salt any better than just pouring the salt into the top ports of the kiln, or into the side ports.
The firing went well. Sid kindled a fire overnight, and began the bigger fire at about 5:00 Tuesday morning. The salting began around 6:00 p.m., and the firing was basically done by 7:00. I did not get to see it, but Sid told me that at the end of the firing, many potters (including him) do what is called "blasting off" where they take large chunks of wood (he uses roots of heart pine) and toss them in at the end for one final push of heat and ash.

Several shots of the interior of the kiln while the front door was open for loading wood

I arrived to the opening on the following Saturday a little late to see the door opened and the initial pieces drawn out. That was no matter, the pieces which I saw coming out looked good. I was more fascinated by the concept of the kiln opening, and the throng of people who waited to snatch up a piece they liked as it came out. I believe Sid sold everything out of the kiln before it ever made it into the shop! Some day, maybe I will have that much luck selling my ware!

Kiln opening at Luck's Ware

I am currently registered to participate in a wood-firing in October with a kiln similar to a "groundhog" kiln, without the interior modifications. I will keep you posted!

A lone little pig made by another potter who participated in the firing which became adhered to the floor of the kiln!

Ode to the Cheese Slicer

Last spring, while taking a class at the Baltimore Clayworks with Jim Dugan I learned how to use a cheese slicer in order to add texture to the exterior of a vessel. I know this sounds simple enough, but I'm absolutely fascinated with my cheese slicer, and am hooked on the results. How does this work, you might ask? I have included a video showing how I make spiral facets on a mug form. It is basically using the cheese slicer to remove sections of clay in a variety of patterns. This leaves texture on the surface of the piece, which works really well in wood-fired and salt-fired kilns.  Aside from a spiraled texture, the cheese slicer may also be used to take smooth sections away, "boxing" in the sides of the piece. This can be seen in the photos of pieces made during the Baltimore Clayworks class.

Mug made at Baltimore Clayworks Spring 2010

Historically, potters used numerous tools in order to make texture. The Thompson family potters of Morgantown, West Virginia in the 19th-century used ribs, both wooden and some ribs of animals (look for an upcoming article in Ceramics in America highlighting the tools and techniques of these potters). Their tools are in the collection of the Smithsonian. I once helped butcher a goat, kept the bones in the freezer, but never got around to using them! When I was in Höhr-Grenzhausen, Germany in 2007 I had the opportunity to meet Elisabeth Dietz-Bläsner who operates Töpferhof Mühlendyck, which was begun by Frau Dietz-Bläsner's grandfather. Dietz-Bläsner uses a technique which has been used on Höhr-Grenzhausen pottery for centuries.

By using a flat-sided tool Dietz-Bläsner made a rocking motion while slowly moving the tool from left to right. This created a zig-zag texture. She had numerous sizes for the same tool giving her a range of options for the designs she made. Below are images of wares from 16th-18th century Germany which also used this technique. All of the pieces below are in the collections of the Keramikmuseum Westerwald.  

Two different patterns created on the shoulder and neck of the jug using the same tool

This piece was textured in rows with a broader flat-sided tool

It Takes All Kinds

        This summer I have been working as an intern at Stratford Hall Plantation on the Northern Neck of Virginia. I am wrapping up a project to create a furnishing and interpretation plan for their 18th-century kitchen outbuilding. I have enjoyed all of the research and it made me think more about the breadth of materials used in one space. You'll come to find that I adore utilitarian objects, and kitchens are one of my favorite spaces.
          Monticello's 2005 book entitled Dining at Monticello: in Good Taste and Abundance implies that copper was used primarily for French-style cooking in the 18th-century, and that copper was a rare material because of cost. But I disagree. After comparing 100 probate inventories from Maryland and Virginia, it seems that copper was commonplace in most kitchens, even those who had a few vessels to cook with. The materials of choice for the kitchen were determined by the recipe, as Marc Meltonville from Hampton Court Palace pointed out in a presentation at Winterthur this past spring (the video I've linked with Hampton Court is wonderful, and I wish I could do such a thing here!). Similar to my blog post on particular crocks for preserving and pickling, here's an example for the differences in metals. Hannah Glasse notes in her publication The Art of Cookery (1747) that “If you boil turnips for sauce, don’t boil it all in the pot, it makes the broth too strong of them, but boil them in a sauce-pan.” A pot (likely iron) would have cooked the turnips very quickly, and made a strong, heavy boil. However, a sauce pan would have simmered or cooked the turnips slower. This implies that the pot was used over direct flame, hanging from the crane in the hearth, while the sauce pan was used over coals on a trivet.

William Rogers Mug 2nd Quarter 18th-century

          You're probably saying, "Brenda, you're off on a tangent," and I am, but it is going somewhere. The ceramics in the kitchen were just as variable as the metal objects. We often go to historic house museums and do not see the variety of ceramics which would have been present. This is not because there were not a variety of ceramics in the kitchen, it is more likely due to the limited amount of potters making good reproductions for use and interpretation. It also has more to do with the limited survival rate of ceramic objects which were used in kitchens. Thus, we need to look below ground. I love sherds. Part of my research for Stratford Hall has involved looking at the archaeological material from Stratford, as well as comparing it to other kitchen sites. Below ground there are innumerable amounts of coarse red earthenware, "Buckley" ware, brown and gray salt-glazed stoneware, as well as refined wares such as creamware, pearlware, white salt-glazed stoneware, and even porcelain. The coarse wares go hand in hand with the everyday functions of the kitchen from storing materials, foodstuffs, preserving, and cooking. Earthenware has the advantage of being able to withstand localized heat, therefore, earthenware dishes may be found charred on one side, or on the bottom. Stoneware unfortunately (yes, I've experienced this), does not enjoy localized heat as it cannot evenly distribute the heat because it is vitrified. So, the coarse wares had their own particular uses like the metals. "Buckley" ware which I have developed a fondness for, is a wonderfully thick, coarsely-thrown ware which shows up archaeologically primarily in bowl and dish form. Even the imported wares could be brought in cheaply enough that local producers were not creating identical forms. For example, Kelly Ladd at the Colonial Williamsburg archaeology lab told me that the "Poor Potter" of Yorktown (William Rogers) was not creating the forms similar to "Buckley" ware, which implies that the "Buckley" ware could be made and imported cheaply. Rogers chose to challenge the English brown stoneware market as well as producing local red earthenware. The presence of refined wares, especially in the yard between the kitchen and the main house (at least where there are kitchen outbuildings such as at Stratford), exemplifies the use of the kitchen not only as a place for the preparation of the food, but also the plating. In short, a good kitchen setting should have a variety of materials which reflect the local foodways and trade, but also the archaeological evidence below ground.

What a Crock!

        I've been pickling lately, and have been thinking about the varieties of crocks which have historically been made for pickling and potting foods. Historically, there is not a clear definition for what a "pickling pot,"a "butter pot," or "preserve pot" was. These items show up frequently in probate inventories, and on rare occasions are specified in recipes. For example, as Janine Skerry and Suzanne Hood noted in their book Salt-Glazed Stoneware in Early America, a recipe from a 1753 manual read as follows:

       "Rules to be observed in Pickling. Always use Stone Jars for all Sorts of Pickles that require hot Pickle to them. The first Charge is the least; for these not only last longer, but keep the Pickle better; for Vinegar and Salt will penetrate through all earthen Vessels; Stone and Glass is the only Thing to keep Pickles in. Be sure never to put your Hands in to take Pickles out; it will soon spoil them. The best Way is, to every Pot tie a Wooden Spoon, full of little Holes, to take the Pickles out with...Cover your Pickling Jars with a wet Bladder, and Leather."(page 73)

       I recently came across the probate inventory of Daniel Hornby from 1750 which specified in his dairy 1 blue and white stone butter pot [likely "scratch blue"], 4 brown stone butter pots [likely English brown], and 2 earthen butter pots. It must have been understood as to what type of vessel to use for what was being processed, and it was not necessary to specify since most everyone understood those differences! There must have also been an understanding of shape and size related to what was being processed as can be seen in the photograph from the exhibit which corresponded with the stoneware book at Colonial Williamsburg. These were all roughly made in the same time period (18th century), but the collar, shoulder, belly, and rims are all very different. While this could have something to do with the potters who made them, it is interesting to think of shapes related to what is getting packed inside. Pickles float, so the high round shoulder may have been more appropriate, and potted meats may have been easier to pack in a straight-sided vessel.
       Then again, admittedly, I also understand how the glass industry overcame the pottery industry as I reach for my convenient Ball canning jar, ring, and lid to nicely pack the vegetables and store them in smaller serving sizes.