CM: What kind of considerations or planning steps go into a body of work that is meant to be variable as well as cohesive?
AG: There is definitely a specific aesthetic that I’m looking for in my work that is a direct result of how I approach making pots. It’s a tricky thing, making pots, because so much of the time I want everything to happen all at once and in a hundred different ways, but as is the case with most things (especially in ceramics), they rarely ever do. But it doesn’t keep me from trying.
I think the success of most work, presented as a whole, is dependent on how alike or different the individual pieces are from one another, which then dictates how the pieces react as a group. But what constitutes a set? There’s so much to explore when making pots: form, color, surface, volume, pattern, process. The possibilities are endless.
With the wares I am currently making, I’m very interested in the idea of customization—a process where the customer, provided with a sampling of options, could (potentially) direct the artist/crafter/designer towards a finished end product. At the moment, such a scenario really only exists in my studio with myself acting as both customer and maker.
Using this idea as example, I provide customizable options (glaze, clay color, resist pattern, decal imagery), impose a limitation on those options (five colored clays, six colored glazes, etc.) and then create a piece that is but one amalgamation of countless possible combinations (a black mug with blue stripes and ants for example). Through this finite structure and the capacity of my imagination, I hope to make pots that explore seemingly infinite possibilities.