2009 Juror's Statement - Pete Pinnell

It is an enormous honor to be asked to jury the Strictly Functional Pottery National. The previous jurors for this exhibition are among the most important artists and teachers in American Ceramics, and the SFPN is one of the preeminent ceramics exhibitions in the country, so it is humbling to be asked to take part. As a juror, it's also the artistic equivalent of running the marathon. I've done a fair amount of exhibition jurying in the past, but nothing with this many applicants. In all, there were 1,152 entries from 514 artists, which I had to whittle down to just 108 objects. To put this into perspective, if I spent just 30 seconds looking at each entry, it would take almost 10 hours to look at everything just once (but only if I took no breaks in the process). To fairly jury a show, it takes a lot more than just 30 seconds per entry, and I had to go back over the same objects over and over, slowly weeding the images until I reached the final goal. It was a task that was equal parts pleasure and pain. It was pleasurable- and fascinating- to be able to see so many excellent examples of ceramic art. It was also painful because of the sheer amount of time it required (my rear end will be sore for awhile) and the difficulty cutting out some very beautiful pieces.

I took the name of the exhibition very seriously. This show is not called The Pottery National, which would allow a broader range of approaches to the idea of pottery. It is also not called the Functional Pottery National. It is the Strictly Functional Pottery National, and I took the title as one of the guides for making my decisions. I don't think this is the right show for a raku teapot, no matter how beautiful that pot may be (since it's obvious that a raku teapot cannot hold tea). I also excluded some beautiful cups that appeared impossible to drink from, as well has some jars (one exquisitely beautiful) that appeared capable of holding only our attention. On the other hand, I'm willing- in fact, interested- in challenging our notions about what can be functional or not, and some of the pieces admitted into the show will definitely raise some eyebrows. There are no bright lines separating functional from non-functional, and it's fun to explore the territory that separates the two.

I don't think of function as a destination, but as a very powerful vehicle that allows the artist to transport us to some other destination. If function were the sole goal of our work, then all of these entries would have tended to look like plastic travel mugs (or their ceramic equivalent). It's obvious from even a cursory look at the entries that most of these objects exist for reasons that go far beyond the mechanical needs of eating, drinking and serving food, to the aesthetic and sensual pleasures that we derive from these acts. You don't have to watch The Food Network to know that what humans derive from food goes far beyond physical sustenance. And, of course, functional pottery can play a role in our lives outside the kitchen, as well.

Function is the tool that allows a work of art to play an active role in the events and processes of our lives. Function pushes art out of the role of critic and outsider, and into the role of participant and insider. As viewers, we expect art to provide us with a strong visual and intellectual experience. Function provides a way for us to also appreciate these objects for their tactile and experiential qualities, and to accept them as intimate partners in our lives. Function allows art to stop being passive, and begin being active. As a juror, I needed to evaluate each object's visual qualities, and to also imagine that object in the hand, in use and within a life.

This was a blind jurying: there were no names or other details to sway me. I simply evaluated the entries based on their titles, descriptions and what I could see in the image (and, I'm sure, disappointed some friends in the process). I also chose to follow the wishes of the organizers and accept no more than one entry from an artist. This was hard to do, since the best artists sometimes entered three fantastic objects, and I had a hard time deciding which to select. In the end, I agree that accepting just one entry per person resulted in a broader, more encompassing show that showcases a wider range of approaches to the idea of functional pottery.