This annual exhibition from the Victorian Ceramics Group (VCG) Collection was curated by students, Divia Sethi and Belinda Malcolm, and recorded ‘cultural concerns within ceramics in Australia over the past thirty years’.

In her floor talk, the current curator of the collection, Katrina Sandiford, referred to Rose Slivka’s essay, ‘The New Ceramic Presence’ (in G. Clark (ed.) Ceramic Art. Comment and Review). Slivka argued in 1961 that:

Today, the classical form has been subjected and even discarded in the interests of surfaces – an energetic, baroque clay surface with itself the formal ‘canvas’. The paint, the ‘canvas’, and the structure of the ‘canvas’ are a unity of clay.

The curators of this exhibition have clearly created a dialogue between surface and form, leading to an aesthetic tension and vibrancy in the show. As form evolves in industrial society from ‘serving function, it now serves to develop the possibilities of painting’. How is this evolution manifested in Australian pottery?

Increasing political and cultural links between Australia and the United States developed during the sixties and seventies. For artists Paris and London were no longer the centres of artistic innovation and inspiration, instead pilgrimages were made to New York, the centre for Abstract Expressionism. The growing interest in Eastern philosophy and religion, epitomised by popular publications such as Watts’ The Way of Zen  and Pirsig’s Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance, caused new links to be forged with Japan. Australia’s geographic proximity to Japan allowed freer movement of potters back and forth, and American potters visited Australia on a regular basis. The old ties with Britain slackened.

In California, Peter Voulkas, a leading figure in ceramics, started work in Los Angeles in the fifties. Voulkas, strongly influenced by Abstract Expressionism, applied a sculptural vocabulary to clay. His student  Paul Soldner spoke of their teacher/student relationship in an interview with Tom Zwierlein in 1997:

I think I was more influenced by the Zen and Japanese aesthetic than the New York abstract movement. But Pete was into the abstract movement. Because I was older … I tried to find my own way. Sure, I was influenced by Pete’s work because I wanted to be. But also, I didn’t want to copy him. That’s why I involved myself with throwing really tall pots that didn’t look like Pete’s.

In the VCG Collection and this show is a tall, unglazed raku vase by Soldner. The simplicity of the form is subtly enhanced with oxide, slip and ‘chance’ smoke decoration that flows up the pot. Acquired in 1983 when Soldner was visiting Australia, this work clearly illustrates the move away from the functional to the more sculptural and the emphasis on Eastern rather than Western techniques for decoration.

Two British ceramicists represented in this show include Bryan Newman and Ian Godfrey. Newman’s (1975) hand built ceramic boat form is wholly sculptural while Godfrey’s bowl with handle (1970) mimics a functional form yet through its fragility and black matt glaze denies its usefulness as a functional vessel. In contrast Alice Nixon’s (1984) earthenware vase maintains its usefulness as a vessel while appearing sculptural to the eye and touch. This whimsical piece reminds me of the drawing of Girl with hen (1956) by Joy Hester in which the innocence of the child is contrasted with the knowing look of the hen clutched tightly to the child’s chest.

Diogenese Farri Tianaucanu earthenware, burnished coloured slips, 1994, 38.5 x 38 x 27

Other purely sculptural pieces include those of Don Wordsworth (1986) Sacred Site III, in stoneware, and Diogenes Farri’s Tiananacu 4 (1994) in earthenware. Neil Barker’s (1973) slipcast piece with dry stoneware glazes, on a perspex base and Dianne Peach’s Lidded Square Box (1982), in porcelain with geometric resist pattern, reflect concerns with sculptural form and the inclusion of non-ceramic material. Brett Robertson’s (1988) large saggar-fired form is all the more powerful because of the incised decoration descending from the rim to the base, blackened through sawdust firing.

In a number of pieces there is a more balanced dialogue between form and decoration. These pieces maintain traditional shapes as bowls, vases and platters, however surface is also of importance. Paul Davis’ Round Vase (1980) is decorated simply, with a horizon-like line (an abstraction of the landscape) around the widest circumference of the pot, while his later piece Bulbous Vessel (1991) is airbrushed with dry glaze and has geometric decoration in low fired colours. Brush decoration continues to be popular combined with dipping effects as in Victor Greenaway’s Bowl (1982), and slip trailing in Kevin Boyd’s (1986) Hexagonal Bowl. Dulcie Herd’s (1980) Platter appears to be dipped and masked to create overlapping shades and textures. Dianna Gyngell-Taylor’s (1988) Platter is a striking example of brush decoration using cobalt and iron oxides.

While the use of dry stoneware glazes evident in this show became increasingly popular over the eighties, some potters have introduced lustres in the nineties. Peter Reiss’ (1994) Lustre Pot is a large earthenware classical form which glows and shimmers with its decoration, brushwork in reduced pigment lustre. Reminiscent of Middle Eastern lustres, the flowing line and boldness of the lustre brushwork contrasts with the ‘canvas’, an ivory surface crisscrossed by a fine pattern of crazing. Chris Myers’ (1995) Bowl  is a simple open stoneware form with a bold geometric pattern of gold lustre created through sand blasting.

Moving away from British pottery traditions since the sixties, Australian ceramicists have been increasingly influenced by Western individualism. Drawing on a wide range of techniques, including those of Japanese ceramics, they have explored many directions from sculpture through to traditional form with a greater or lesser emphasis on surface decoration to achieve ‘a unity of clay’. Over the period spanned by this exhibition, ceramics courses have become university based, allowing for research and development not only into past traditions but also into the development of a wider range of materials for use by potters. All these have contributed to the richness and diversity seen today in Australian ceramics. This richness and diversity is reflected in the dialogue between surface and form in this exhibition.