Revelation over a beautiful sushi meal at Tokyo Marina, while meditating on my work and reading Robert Turner:

My aim was to make pieces with a presence far beyond their size: “that don’t just sit, over there, on a table, not bothering anybody …. that demand to be dealt with, that confront the viewer …. with which one has a physical relationship …. to which one has a visceral reaction. “

Sheer scale came to mind. And that evolved into exploring the space between the pieces – I think that evolution was concurrent with photographing the first ones, the green trio, in the spring. And now that concept has evolved into something even more architectural, playing the forms against each other, against their context. Which is a whole other animal.

Scale may or may not accomplish my aim. It occurred to me, as I learned that Turner’s pots were fairly small, that presence isn’t dependent upon scale. I had strayed from my original argument and didn’t realize it; now I do.

I was dining alone. To be more complete, the meditation was in considering a seeming conflict between the current direction of my work (sculpture, big, and not necessarily clay) and my interest in clay (loving the physicality and tactility of it, as well as my desire to have technical – fabrication, material, process – mastery of it), in light of my intention to apply to grad schools this winter. And I had taken along my book on Turner and his work, was reading it while I ate.

So now I am understanding it as a different critter: two bodies of work stemming from one formal idea. And I have some ideas on what pieces to make next.