Salience, qualities and narratives in the making of contemporary British hand-thrown tableware

Abstract

This study investigates British workshop practices of making commercial tableware by hand on the potter’s wheel. It is a practice-led study of making processes situated within research on contemporary pottery and, more generally, on craft and design. Ethnographic Fieldwork was conducted in three professional workshops: Ewenny Pottery in Wales, the Leach Pottery in Cornwall and Maze Hill Pottery in London. Methods included producing pots by following procedures as close as possible to those observed on site. An interpretive mixed-method approach uncovers meanings in making operations from observation, video analysis and conversations with potters. The study employs an original framework based on the concept of salience: ‘manufacturing salience’ is defined as the relative importance of a given operation to produce tangible physical qualities in the ware; ‘cultural salience’ identifies narratives associated with its makers and production processes. The systematic analysis of the salience of pottery making operations locates the origins of qualities and narratives in the sequence involved in the production of mugs in the three case studies. This is used to generate a critical account of contemporary British pottery practices which discusses the interrelation among the physical qualities of hand-thrown tableware, the narratives associated with its production, and the operations required to make the pots. The findings reappraise the importance of phases widely described in literature (e.g. throwing, glazing and firing) and draw others to attention (e.g. making handles). They show brief operations such as opening out, centring and ribbing can illustrate a potter’s style of making associated with early training. The study contributes to craft research by making the co-production of qualities, narratives and processes accessible to inspection, and discussing it in relation to social, cultural and technical contexts. The critical discussion of professional pottery practices addresses limitations identified in literature and demonstrates the effectiveness of the study