[Madison Mitchell]

I like ducks as much as the next person, but I am puzzled as to what is going on here.
As you can see, this is an example of ceramic "art" on the cover of a recent magazine. But I am puzzled as to what is going on, what is this piece trying to say? It's a duck holding a lute, or guitar of some sort...but it isn't a lute, it has a drill bit coming out of the fingerboard.
Is it ironic? Is it cynical, is it making fun of culture? I have to admit, this new kind of ceramic art kind of baffles me, I apprectiate the skill that goes into making it, but what is being said?
Or is the whole idea just to generate posts like the one you're reading now?

[Chris Campbell]

Rubber duckie as a garage band musician?
I think you have to put controversial stuff on the cover to get people to buy it.
BUT ...

[phill]

maybe the photo is misleading? if we had the whole sculpture my guess is we would see it differently. it looks to me like it is a figure that just happens to have a duck head, just like it happens to have a drill bit coming out; its like the artist is saying "just because i can."

i think this piece is dumb.

[AmeriSwede]

... or perchance it was just a clever (?) idea by the cover's photographer to include a piece causing the viewer to question, ...'What the ...', trying to tie in (somewhat) with the magazines subheading of Art and Perception.


Maybe the actual ceramic piece didn't actually include the drill bit, but it was added by this 'clever' person merely as a meaningless marketing ploy.

[Idaho Potter]

I know a ceramist who happens to like ducks, and has done a whole series of sculptures from famous paintings (including Gainsborough's Blue Boy) where all the heads are duck heads. I asked him why and he replied why not? The one on the cover could easily have been one of his. Just a slightly skewed look at art and life. Has it caused any harm? No, just the opposite--started a discussion which is always a good thing. I'll go with clever and imaginative anytime.

[Madison Mitchell]

Nah, it's cool.

[phill]

haha. i am glad we are discussing it. i'm still standing by my low opinion of the piece.

photographs make viewing the work difficult just because you see a 3-d object in a very 2-d way. this piece could be just fine, but from what i see in the photo i think it's a poor work. i just don't like it.

by the way, where did the photo go?

[JBaymore]

research the work of "Duck" Baldwin.

best,

...............john