Tuesday, October 8, 2013

Speaking of Madness...


Brownie—big, medium and petite, or rather resin, earthenware, and porcelain. Besides the shrinkage, also note the different color tones each hasinteresting!

Today we're going to take a bit of a detour from our regularly scheduled programming for a kind of public service announcement about A WHOLE LOT OF AWESOME.

And when I mean "awesome" I don't mean the kind of awesome associated with finding a $100 bill on the ground. Or finally getting that box chock full of brand new art supplies that just showed up on your doorstep. Or even when your husband buys you a pile of mongomonolith Rice Krispie Treats "just cuz." 

No.

I'm talking about the kind of AWESOME that warrants capital letters in italics and bold print. THAT kind of AWESOME.

As you may have surmised from some of my previous posts about my excursions into porceland, my big goal has been working towards a full spectrum of slipcast works along with handbuilt busts, basreliefs and full sculptures in this stuffand last month I hit a major milestone. And not only hit, but hit spot on. I'm still giddy with delight. Can you tell? Is it that obvious? GOOD. Because it's AWESOME.

I kicked up the stakes this year by attempting the first fullbody castings and claybody customs in slipcast porcelain. I actually poured the initial bodiesa Brownie, a Collier and a couple of Limericksat Mudhenge 2012. I chose these pieces because they had thicker legs in relation to their mass, and that's important for reasons we'll get to in a moment. That said, I have to admit they languished for some time in the wet box before I could get to them. Fortunately, this didn't prove to be a problem thanks in large part to vitrification

I started first with the Brownie. I assembled and cleaned him as usual, but left him unchanged since I wanted a baseline with this porcelain. As for the three minis, I tweaked them starting first with the Collier which got just a bit of alteration then finishing with the two Limericks who got the most extreme changes. I wanted a progression to make clearer deductions later. I used all the same techniques one would use with stoneware or earthenware, trusting that vitrification would melt everything together as I learned from the claybodied Reflectives.


This is the brand of porcelain slip I use. Other colors are made, which would be fun to explore.

But I did employ one extra step: burnishing. Slipcast porcelain dries very quickly. Honestly, it's not unusual for me to pour, clean, and bisque fire such a piece within 12 hrs during a hot, dry Idaho summer. That means by the time I get to the final stages of blending and refinement, the clay may be rather dry despite regular spritzing with a water spray bottleand that spells cracks and lifting during the mature fire. It seems that vitrification can only do its magic if it has something to grab onto at that critical moment, and burnishing seems to give the parent clay "fingers" by truly mashing it together with the additions.

Becauseyessometimes this step is needed despite wetting, scoring and slip, especially with large additions. To burnish, I used circular motions with just enough pressure and just a dash of water to mush and squish the two together without destroying things. It's essentially grinding in the edges of the larger added sections, those usually entailing the torso, hindquarter, and neck. You'll also want to do this with the edges of sections that were added to make portions longer, such as lengthening a neck, torso or leg. Any tool with a curved, domed smooth surface will doI used the back of my favorite sculpting tool.

This is the spoonlike shape I mean—the back of this shape is really handy for all sorts of sculpting tasks. That's green vet wrap around the tool on the left to help my grip.

I also tend to burnish the area before I start sculpting in earnest because I want a good bond before I really get to work. Afterwards, I roughly block in the area followed by generalized smoothing (with water and a soft brush) to create a blank slate of sorts. Then I allow it to rest for a bit, just to toughen up and dry out enough to avoid becoming a mushy mess, and then I start my actual sculpting. Nevertheless, a lift or crack can erupt despite it allit's rare but happens sometimesbut it's an easy fix: just add more slip, reburnish, resmooth and proceed as usual. As for delicate bits like legs, ears, tendrils and such, I've been able to burnish them as well, albeit not so aggressively.

Assembling the Brownie, who has a separate mold for his head and front legs, and the start of the long, sad, tedious series of breaks on the Dutch Draft Limerick.

So I motored along like this until a distraction pulled me away and I had to pop them back into the wet box where they waitedand waitedand waited. And. Waited. By the time I'd gotten back to them, to my dismay I found they were bone dry! Thanks to my preoccupation I'd completely forgotten to periodically rewet the plaster inside the wet box that, ohactually made it a wet box. GAH. Such a gross oversight would have been a deal breaker with earthenware or stoneware. Either I'd be forced to make the best of it as they were or throw them into the dump bucket. Alas, reconstituting these clays back into the proper consistency for claybodying just doesn't work very well. That lovely pliability so necessary for the process just disappears when the clay is allowed to dry and, even more, it doesn't offer the same strong bond it would produce when damp. But in the hopes that vitirification would generate a different outcome, I forged ahead and prayed that everything would fuse together despite my startling incompetence


The Collier suffered his share of breaks, too. It got to be ridiculous.

The Brownie went easy as pie. The Collier was easy, too, as was one of the Limericks. The other Limerick, however, was a real trick pony simply because I decided to input some really ambitious changes after he was dry. It was my own fault—I'd sculpted myself into a corner with him. See, I initially beefed him up to make him more like a Dutch Draft (as a study for Himmy). Fine—all great and dandy. But after I came back to him, I was completely convinced that he needed a longer back and forearms to synch better with his new proportions. Okay, that was tricky enough, but as it so happens I accidentally destroyed his already completed head while doing just that, forcing me to sculpt an entirely new one. From scratch.

And when we're talking 1:32 scale in dry greenware porcelain, piecing together a tiny pile of body parts, let alone making new ones, is a really dicey proposition. Not to be daunted though, I made his new head from a puddle of porcelain slip transformed into a consistency more like pug clay. To do this, pour the same slip onto a plaster mold to suck out just enough water to make it malleable like pug clay. Pull it up (be careful to pick out any plaster bits or debris) knead it, and sculpt accordingly. When leatherhard just hollow out those portions that are too thick to dry or fire safely. This is a handy trick for creating bases, new body parts or manes and tails, and I use it often.

But dry clay, and dry porcelain in particular, is really delicate. Being unfired, it's basically just dried dirt held together by the adhesion of its own particles, what we call greenware. Now because any ability to flex is gone, pressures, harmonics, or vibrations beyond its ability to withstand will then result in breaks. And since I'm so darned clumsy, the legs on this particular Limerick were flying off like shrimp at a Benihana. SNEEZE. Boink! HAND SLIP. Bink! KNOCK TABLE. Twink! HICCUP. Doink! 


An inprogress shot of the Dutch Draft Limerick. You can see the repair on that one forearm, too. As you can tell, he got entirely new ears along with his new head. When I wipe something out, apparently I really wipe something out.

All that's fixable, of course, but fixes usher in their own problems all the same. For one, a break usually remains even more delicate an area, and so really precarious repairs should be done last just to hedge your bets that an intact piece will make it into the bisque fire. Or for another, you can do such a good job repairing a break that it actually becomes stronger than its surrounding areas, forcing them to break around the repair. I've found this to be a peculiarity with porcelain, which is exactly how I ended up with a congaline of breaks up each leg on this Limerick, all of which then added weight to that structural column to exacerbate the likelihood of yet another break. It got to a point where I could actually hear circus music in my head. 

Now if he'd been a larger piece, I would have sculpted and cleaned each broken piece perfectly and then reattached it (again, leaving the repair "for last"). But at 1:32 scale, this isn't only a logistical problem, it's a creative problem; the smaller the piece, the more necessary it becomes to sculpt in situ to maintain coherent anatomy and proportion. So after the circus music had played through its many loops, the final toll was at least three separate breaks on each of his tiny legs! It was like operating on butterfly wings. I didn't even dare breathe! Thank goodness Dutch Drafts have thick feathering, that's all I can say. But I was determinedone could even say obsessive—and this wasn't going to stop me. Being bullheaded does have its perks in art though, as it tends to add new troubleshooting skills to one's repertoire. You know what they say about necessity and invention

For example, there's definitely a trick to working through a congaline of breaks. Wet and score your surfaces as usual, but use the least amount of slip necessary to reduce the amount of scraping, i.e. pressure. Then let that leg "rest" after reattachment, to allow the clay to solidify and toughen. Don't let it get too dry though, just "hard damp." Then use a soft brush (I like to use a pointed round or angled flat) to dampen only the immediate area you're working on to clean, sculpt, and refine. This minimizes pressures and helps to mediate weakening the area with oversaturation. Also, don't work on the whole thing or even on sequential portions all at once. Give the leg time to rest between each repaired portion, then when you do come back to it, work on the area opposite where you just finished. This creates selfreinforcing weld points that seem to hold up better.

When you're done, use a soft damp brush to smooth the entire leg, starting with the hoof and moving up to the bodythat is to say you don't want to first soak those areas that will have to withstand the pressures of smoothing. Be painfully light in the touch and take extra care not to saturate. Allow the leg to rest when needed, and remember that any additional smoothing can be done later in the bisque with sandpaper. Now granted, it took some time to fix all the legs in this painstaking way, but it worked! I learned a greater feel for this stuff in the process, too.

Here's another tip: when sculpting in slipcasting porcelain, do your sculpting, especially your details, a little sharper than usual. During vitrification your sculpting will soften a little bit. Think of butter in a warm oven. So those features you want really preciselike eyelids, wrinkles, chestnuts, hoof chips, or hairyou want to make very defined and crisp, so don't blend them too much with your water and brush. Let vitrification do that for you. But any hollows you sculpt, like for muscle groups, the underside of the hooves, or nostril and ear cavities, will remain as they are—they don't "fill" from seepage. You'll get a feel for how this medium behaves the more pieces you create with it, which is where basrelief and medallion work really comes in handy!

Anyway, so here they are in greenware going into their bisque Cone 04 fire


The Brownie.

 The Collier.

One of the Limericks, made into a Cob.

The Dutch Draft Limerick.

All four were bisque fired on their sides because I felt I'd already tempted Fate plenty by this point. Bare clay won't stick to anything in the bisque fire because glaze isn't involved and the temperature doesn't get high enough to cause fusion. I often stack my tiles and ornaments in the bisque fire to really pack Big Al, for instance. The next morning then, I popped open Big Al to find they'd all bisque fired just fine and dandy. And that was great. Really great.

But there was a problem. One big problem actually. And if you know anything about firing full body porcelain sculptures like this, you may have already deduced that one big problem by now. Again it was my seemingly instinctive propensity for distraction and subsequent gross negligence at the root of this big problem to boot. I swear, sometimes I think I'm too incompetent to work in ceramics! 

See, here's the thing: had I not been so fixated on sculpting, as per usual, and actually been thinking about what I was really doing, I would have remembered a vital component to these piecesthe stilts. The blessed stilts! But I hadn't. Of course I hadn't. That would have required thinking ahead and we can't have that now, can we?

To understand why this is a problem, let's backtrack a bit. At vitrification, the porcelain momentarily turns into a jellylike substance as it chemically changes into its glass–like final form. That means any sticky–outy parts (like tendrils, ears, legs, etc.), or slender portions that support weight (like legs or tails) are vulnerable to warping and slumping as gravity pushes downward on the mass of the piece. Clearly then, equine sculptures are a smorgasbord of every conceivable pitfall one could encounter with porcelain in this regard, aren't they? And this problem is more a function of mass than of size, too, which gets back to the reason why I chose sculptures with thicker legs in relation to their bodies. It also explains why there's a threshold mass where porcelain just isn't feasible anymore and a metal like bronze is the better choice.

But getting back to the issue: ceramists have managed this problem through the process of "stilting," of creating a series of supports, like flying buttresses, to shore up vulnerable portions and to support the mass of the piece. For a production piece, stilts would be designed specifically for and alongside the original, and have their own molds that would be poured at the same time in the same slip as the sculpture itself, and they'd be dried at the same rate, too. For this reason there's a comparable amount of clay used in the casting of the piece that's discarded at the backend of the process in the form of fired stilts. Add in the approximate 30% loss rate on top of this, and you may now understand some of the reasons why porcelain (and fine bone china) is so expensive and exclusive.

But for oneofakind pieces like these claybodied guys, I have to make oneofakind stilts for each of them, made from the same pour and allowed to dry right alongside them at the same rate. Or rather I should have. So I was in a real pickle—not only did I already have fired bisque sculptures, but I was also left with a jar of slip from another batch of porcelain. There I was with everything wrong.

But why the same clay? Made the same way? Dried at the same rate? Good questions! Here's why. Due to its chemical composition and its lack of grog, porcelain shrinks quite a bitabout 13%15%. That's a lot. In fact, it's the highest shrink rate of all ceramic clays. This is why porcelain casts fired to maturity are so much smaller than the original sculpture, or casts poured in other clays. Such casts also tend to be much heavier because porcelain is quite dense. 


Look at the shrinkage! A resin Brownie (left), an earthenware Brownie (middle) and the porcelain Brownie (right).

With this in mind, you now have a big clue as to why the stilt problem was a big one. How so? Well, while each batch of porcelain may be mixed according to a recipe, slight differences in chemistry always exist induced by supply, bacterial flora, and circumstances that can slightly change the properties of each batch—or more specifically, slightly change the shrink rate of each batch. How the clay was stored and used by the artist can also add further peculiarities that affect its nature, i.e. its shrink rate. Put all this together and we can think of each pour session of porcelain as unique. And we want those stilts to shrink exactly the same as the sculpture itself; otherwise support will be compromised to either mar or even destroy the piece.

Which is why my woeful oversight concerned me so much. All my hard work, painstaking care, and dogged determination may have all been for naught simply because I'd spaced this one critical component. Trust memy neurons and basal ganglion were in a frenzy assigning blame because I couldn't really leave these pieces as bisque porcelain either. I've found bisque porcelain to be surprisingly fragile. It just doesn't seem to have the gumption of bisque earthenware or even bisque stoneware. It needs to be vitrified. As with all things in life, the only way around it is through it then. I had nothing to lose, right? So I decided to mush on, to see what happened.

Nevermind that I'm totally ignorant in the whole stilting gig, a fact that neither impeded these experiments nor deterred my resolve. As you've probably guessed by now, my modus operandi is to just dive in and learn to swim later—it's reckless, I know, but new ground isn't found by playing it safe. I also must admit that the Universe has been unquestionably generous with my adventures in clay, something I choose to interpret as an open invitation to get crazier. Can do.

Nonetheless, even though I knew what had to be done, I still had no idea how to do it. Having sculpted myself into a proverbial corner, traditional stilting wasn't going to be feasibleI deduced that much. I had to cheat construct a strategic engineering remedy. Gawd, I'm pretty sure Fate is going to catch up with my shenanigans at some point, whip around and chomp me in the hinderuntil that happens though, onto cheating strategizing

After consulting with fellow mudhens, Joanie suggested belly supports rather than actual stilts. They'd bridge my howling deficiency in the logistics of stiltmaking while simultaneously creating a workaround for the compositional disparity between the supports and the sculptures. A basic scoop that supports a belly is far more forgiving than flying buttresses of exact measurements. Brilliant!


Here's the Brownie on his belly support. Note the "prongs" projecting outward from his belly and back between his hindlegs, designed to keep him balanced and upright.

To make these belly supports, I turned porcelain slip into malleable clay in the same way I did for sculpting that Limerick's new head and then went about customshaping little contraptions for each piece. This wasn't a haphazard endeavor, however. Each support had to achieve five nonnegotiable goals:
  • Lift the sculpture off its feet to remove gravity's effect as downward pressure of the body's mass during the critical moment of vitrification to protect the legs from warping. Equine legs should adhere to a very specific set of anatomical and conformational angles to remain viable, so protecting my sculpted legs from warping or misalignments is a priority.
  • Not interfere with the sculpture as both shrink. The support had to steer clear of the hooves, feathers, legs and tail so it couldn't influence the "shrinkage pathways" and potentially cause distortion. It also couldn't interlock with the sculpture. It's amazing just how quickly those legs and body features can create a kind of Chinese Finger Puzzle effect with the support if the ease of removal isn't given equal attention as support. Lastly, the supports also couldn't hook onto or cause drag on any feature sculpted into the torso which could damage the piece. Support wasn't necessarily served by a mirror image. In theory, too, I could make two or three base supports for a particularly complicated piece if these problems warranted that, but I haven't gotten to that point yet.
The Limerick turned into a Cob on his base. Note the sharp right turn on that one buttress. Functionality is the motto here!
  • Maintain support while shrinking. As both the sculpture and support shrink, it's possible that the sculpture's center of gravity will shift to alter its balance. If that happens without accommodation, the sculpture could tip, rollover, or fall right off the supportand even a tip is unwelcome by changing gravity's angle of influence. In line with that idea, each support had to keep the sculpture at a perpendicular angle to maintain the desired angle for the legs. I want those foot bones, cannons, and long bones straight! So while I made the supports snug, they weren't too snug. They had just enough wiggle room, like a comfortable T–shirt. I also made them with the idea of a cupped hand rather than as a flat tabletop, with the rims a snidge higher. As a test, I slightly jiggled a sculpture atop its support to determine how it all balanced—carefully, of course! If the sculpture stayed where it was, I figured it was a suitable base. If it shifted, adjustments were necessary. (Remember, too, that I was making greenware bases for bisque sculpturesideally they'd have been made together. I imagine in the future I'd allow the sculpture to dry so I could lightly make a good belly impression into a fresh clay base. A gentle wiggle and squirm would then help generate the accommodating room necessary.) 
The Dutch Draft on his belly support. You can see what I mean regarding all those goals in these images.
  • Be stable. The base had to be big enough, splayed enough, and have enough weight so if the sculpture shifted or rocked, it would stay put. It had to be the rock. The supports were first formed solid for straightforward shaping, but were later hollowed to minimize the possibility of exploding air bubbles. Not too much though—they had to keep some weight and durability to do their job.
Here are the belly supports on their sides so you can see how they were hollowed out, and their odd shapes.
  • Not stick to the sculpture. Because vitrification causes the porcelain to essentially melt, any bits that touch will actually fuse together, just like glaze. So if the sculptures were simply plopped onto their supports for the mature fire, they'd melt together into a big wad of NOPE. So I coated the entirely of each support with three coats of kiln wash (except the bottom of each support since I wanted an unfettered surface on the underside, plus my kiln shelves were already kiln washed). The wash was about the consistency of pancake batter and applied with a brush. Nothing fancy, just purely functional. And only the belly support was kiln washed. The bisque sculpture was left bare and pristine. In bated breath I hoped that the kiln wash would act as a barrier, allowing me to simply pop the sculpture off the base when the mature fire was completed.
Getting kiln washed.

Needless to say it was a delicate balancing act to get those belly supports just right. Trickier than I expected, and they certainly took on odd forms, but function was the only name of their game. And thinking about it more, I expect all these issues, especially that of base stability, to become increasingly important as scale increases. Mass is a big issue with porcelain. To be quite honest, I think I skittered by despite my mistakes thanks to the small scale of these pieces as I'm not sure bigger pieces would've been so forgiving. I must pay better attention to the process the bigger I work!


All done and ready to do their jobs! They kinda look like tree stumps, don't they? The one in the upper left has a hole in it where my hollowing cut through, but it proved to be no big deal. Those bare spots are there so I could see the identifying abbreviations for each sculpture, so I knew which bases went with what sculpture.

Another fortunate happenstance was this: I poured the sculptures rather thickly in anticipation of claybodying, and even the Brownie was a thick pour. So not only did these pieces have thicker legs in relation to their mass, but they had thicker body walls, too. I believe this was a boon when it came to the belly supports since these thicker walls could better support the piece's mass without distorting. Plus, an arch is a sturdy architectural structureso hooray for hollow torsos! I must keep all this in mind for future work!

The Collier on his belly support. This one was especially tricky, since it posed the most risk of interlocking with the legs. Thankfully I avoided that with a more "puddled" design.

One complication I couldn't escape, however, was porcelain's memory. I had to make the bases as close to my intention as possible right from the getgo because its memory could reform them back during the final fire, and that could be a problem with balance and stability. So I had to have a pretty good idea of what I had to do before I did it. It's helpful that the brain quickly develops a knack for anticipating how a sculpture might behave in shifting conditions. It catches on pretty quick.


Here they all are on their bases.

As a workaround, too, I found that first making a block, then getting a belly impression, then forming the avoiding cavities and stability features, and then making adjustments seemed to be the best approach. After hollowing them, removing sharp edges and being allowed to dry, they were then bisque fired to Cone 04 to bring them to the same stage as the sculptures. It was after their bisque fire that they were then coated in kiln wash. That is to say I didn't fire the greenware supports, already covered in kiln wash, straight up to Cone 5 with the sculptures.

Still and all, none of these supports are reusable for future pieces. Being specifically custommade is one thing, but being specifically pre–shrunk is another. So they're essentially nothing more than curiosities now. I'm half–tempted to stick them in my garden as fun novelties, or even include them with the piece as a relic of the process. Still cogitating.

In Big Al, ready for the mature Cone 5 fire. Rather than placing the belly supports into Big Al first, then popping each sculpture onto them, instead I secured each piece on their belly support first on a tabletop so I could be sure of their exact balancing, then gently clamped my fingers around the whole kitnkaboodle to pop each onto the kiln shelf. That worked much better to get them just right. 

Another element I had to cogitate was how to fire them. Up until this point I'd used this slip to make bigger basrelief pieces or sturdy boxes, but never before with such tiny pieces, let alone in fullbody compositions. And that was a concern. If this midfire porcelain gets too hot, it turns into a puddle of lava, with bubbling, puckering and general catastrophe all 'round. So I definitely couldn't let that happen, but which could so easily be the case with the delicacy of their tiny bits.

Now the way a clay gets too hot during a fire happens in two ways. First, the actual temperature can be set too hot, which is easily amended by simply firing at a lower temperature. But the other, and more overlooked, way a clay can become too hot is to be fired at its correct Cone for too long. At least I've found that to be the case with midfire porcelain. Indeed, firing this clay isn't just a matter of temperatureit's equally about time. The longer this clay is allowed to "soak," the more intense the result. (This is the basis for "ramping" a fire, but we won't get into that since it doesn't apply here.)

So I definitely didn't want these guys to soak for too long. I knew that Big Al's Cone 5 on Fast was perfect for the larger, thicker porcelain works I previously fed him. But that's a problem, seeI'd already maxed out the time with the Fast setting. So my only other option was to fire at a lower temperature, at Cone 4. I knew that Big Al fired on the hot side, so I anticipated that Cone 4 would suffice with such small pieces. (There's a way to program Big Al to fire at Cone 4.5, but I haven't figured it out yet.) I knew I could always refire hotter or longer if Cone 4 on Fast was too cool for vitrification to take place, but there's no way to fix boiled, bubbled blobs. So through the night, Big Al cooked them at Cone 4 on Fast, and I waited anxiously for the morning.


Here's the Dutch Draft Limerick all spiffy after the mature fire. You can see the amount of shrinkage in the composite image in the upper left. Hooray! Cone 4 on FAST was sufficient to vitrify these tiny fellows!

As you might have surmised already thenit all worked, and it all worked beautifully! Big Al popped out four perfect little porcelain pieces with zero slump, warpage, or distortion, all vitrified and with a lovely, glassy sheen. And heavywow! More still, each popped off his belly support with absolutely no fusion, marring, or interlocking. Success! I'm also happy to report that the customizing and even all those leg breaks melted together so flawlessly, it's as though they never happened, confirming my predictions on what vitrification would and could do for such circumstances. And when it comes to clayand especially to porcelainbeing able to predict anything involving such extremes is a real boon. It tells me that all those claybody Reflectives were impeccable teachers, and also that this slip porcelain was indeed a viable medium for this type of work.

But one thing that did prove to be inescapable was the matter of the glaze. Earthenware and fine bone china are brought up to maturity first for the clay. Earthenware clays generally fire to maturity at Cone 04 while fine bone china mature fires much hotter, anywhere from Cone 210 depending on the recipe. Once they've been mature fired, however, they're "in the clear" so to speak, and then the glazes are fired on afterwards and at lower temperatures. This means they're available for more glazing options such as underglazing, overglazing, and even art glazes.

Not so for porcelain. Porcelain and its glaze must come up to maturity together or the glaze will flake off. This means that underglazing isn't available for porcelain because the final "sealing" clear glaze cannot happen. It also means that applying a midfire or highfire clear glaze to the bisque porcelain for chinapainting, or even art glaze, isn't an option because how could that happen with stilts, let alone belly supports? Not only would that risk fusing the support to the body, but a lip or ridge would remain where the glaze met the bare porcelain, giving the impression of a massive ringworm infestation. 

It's conceivable that belly supports with little prongs could be made to minimize the surface area that touched the sculpture, with glaze applied everywhere except those areas that contacted the touch–points. But not only wasn't I that motivated (or even that skilled), but I believed that was asking for way too much to go wrong. For one, what if the sculpture shifted during the shrinking, moving the prongs out of the bare areas? What if the prongs couldn't dissipate the weight of the sculpture well enough and slumped or collapsed? What if the belly wall puckered or blew inward under the weight focused on those touchpoints? 

Ultimately, I decided that I'd rather have a pristine unglazed sculpture than a marred glazed one. And that decision was the right one for me as preserving the integrity of the sculpture will always be my first priority. And regardless, I figured I could at least coldpaint the pieces if push came to shove. But even so, it's obvious how much I adore the look of bare bisque porcelain anyway, based on my claybodied Reflective work. To tell the truth, I plan to leave much of my future handbuilt porcelain work plain bisque precisely for that reason. I fundamentally consider myself a sculptor more than anything else and, in my opinion, bisque porcelain is an ideal medium for showcasing a sculpture entirely on its own terms.

In spite of all that though, I later learned that I could still apply fired pigment directly onto the bare porcelain if it contained enough flux, and if it wasn't applied too thickly. Swooping into my rescue then was a fellow mudhen who just happened to find a source for exactly that kind of pigment! Thank you a million bajillion times Jen! And thank you Karen for bringing this sacred stuff to Mudhenge 2013 so we could see it in action! I cannot wait to go shopping. I'll be like a kid in a candy store!

Along with all the highfives, hoopla, and highlights, however, there's always a price to be paid, isn't there? A tribute to the ceramic powers that be for such good graces. And remember that Fate thing coming back to bite me in the hinder? Well, it took a goodly bite. CHOMP. For the unprecedented generosity such powers saw fit to bestow on me for these experiments, they demanded a sacrifice of equal measureand they got it. They took the Cob. As I was staging his photograph, I clumsily bumped the table and he leapt onto the concrete floor, shattering into seven perfect pieces at seven perfectly clean breaks.


The Cob, after he was sacrificed.

But, heyseven is one of my favorite numbers! And perhaps this was the Universe's way of forcing me to keep him for myself. I'd originally decided to do just that as he seriously grew on me during his creation, but life happens from time to time, forcing me to sell individuals from my own personal collection who are hard to let go. He's stayin' with me though! After some glue (and eventually a new ear because I haven't found it yet) I've pieced him back together, and he's my new studio mascot, christened "Eggar" in reference to Humpty Dumpty. Admittedly, too, I inadvertently sculpted his head a teensy bit too thin in my enthusiasm (as seen from the front). I decided against amending that odd aspect, however, because I already liked his head exactly as it was from the sides so darned much anyway. So either which way, it's a happy ending.

It's been a couple of weeks since I pulled this lot out of Big Al—this post being delayed by Mudhenge 2013 (another post coming on that, stay tuned)and yet I'm still tickled pink! The potential for my sculptures to also be offered in porcelain as castings, claybodies, and handbuilt works is like Christmas, New Years, my Anniversary, my birthday and winning the lottery all wrapped up into one ecstatic, blissful package.


The Collier after the mature fire.

Add into that the new Ferro Sunshine options for pigment, and lemme tell ya—I've been pinching myself a lot lately! See, I told youa whole lotta AWESOME! In the meantime, this calls for kicking the madness up another notch, don't you? Onto bigger sculpturesas my orbs meander on over to those PixieDafydd and Stormwatch molds

"Far away there in the sunshine are my highest aspirations. I may not reach them, but I can look up and see their beauty, believe in them, and try to follow where they lead." ~ Louisa May Alcott

Share/Bookmark

Friday, April 12, 2013

The Method, The Madness and The Mystery—Part 4



Welcome back again to The Method, The Madness and The Mystery, a sculpting series that follows the creation of Himmy, a Dutch Draft Stallion in approximate 1:12 scale. It's been a bit longer than I planned to post this Part 4, so if you need to come up to speed vamoose over to Part 1 to restart.

So, onward…in this installment, we're going to delve into more sculpting concepts so you'll understand my creative choices as we go along. I promise the actual hands–on sculpting is right around the corner, but I work so fast and get so absorbed, I figure it's better to get all this on the table now before things get really crazy. Let's dive in

The Three Ps

As we'll explore in greater detail throughout the series, I rely on three primary elements I call the Three Ps ("3Ps" for short). They kick in the moment I envision a new piece and remain front and center until completionand they are, in order of importance:
  1. Proportion: The dimensions characteristic of the species we're sculpting, factoring in breed or type, gender, age, individual, and posture. 
  2. Placement: The anatomical orientation of each body feature consistent with the species we're sculpting, factoring in breed or type, gender, age, individual, and posture.
  3. Planes: The angle, slant, curve, or twist of each body feature characteristic of of the species we're sculpting, factoring in breed, gender, age, individual, and posture.
Using the 3Ps to block in the big ideas, they create a kind of sculptural map of the figure. In this way, Proportion can be thought of as the point–to–point layout, like the roads, Placement pertains to where towns or cities cluster while Planes refer to the mountains, hills, plateaus, valleys and rivers of the landscape. Indeed, a piece can register as "horse" with just these three components. Take the work of Herbert Haseltine, for instance—his horses were pretty much just studies in the 3Ps and they're lovely! [You can learn a little bit more about Planes in Part 1 of my anatomy series.]


Considering this then, my first priority with Himmy will be to lay out the 3Ps correctly. I'll pay close attention to them throughout the process, too, only because the problem with something as fundamental as the 3Ps is that when they go haywire, they tend to do so in ways so subtle and systemic, they'll contaminate just about every aspect of the piece. And that means their ensuing complications take on that elusive "I can't put my finger on it" quality, and that's no place I want to be. There's an upswing to this, however: if such a problem does arise, it's a sure sign an error lies within the 3Ps, and so immediately rechecking them usually pinpoints the problem without excess hassle. We'll get to all that as it comes in this series though, since this kind of hiccup tends to be situational.

Now About Proportion…Again

Proportion has the #1 slot and a second mention here, becausewellyesit's really that important. Big Picturing all this, recreating a realistic horse in clay is actually about recreating a series of specific proportional relationships, isn't it? Every length and bend of our armature, every stroke of our tool, every dollop of clay, every point we decide "that's enough," and even "I like that," are all actually manifestations of Proportion. It's no surprise then that Proportion exists within a builtin trip circuit, one that can bust our illusion right from the getgo if it's off. Like if we were to make our piece 5x life–size, make one hock 2x smaller than its pair, make the head a 2x bigger than natural, or any other Proportional anomaly, the believability of our sculpture will be trumped almost immediately, and even before our brain gets to anatomy, motion, expression, etc.


With that in mind, there are a few curious aspects of Proportion definitely worth mentioning now. For one, certain Proportional skews can become habitual, either as a byproduct of our aesthetic or as an outcome of inadequate technique. For another, the effects of Proportion can change as a function of scale.

We each have our own aesthetic, our own unique artistic style that happily makes our work distinctive. So if a sculpture is a manifestation of a specific set of Proportional relationships, then our aesthetic can be thought of as our own set of habitual Proportional relationships, yes? Contained within that set, of course, are our strengths and quirks, but also our deficiencies, most commonly in the form of blind spots and biases—and it's here where our Proportional skews reside. And being biases and blind spots, these skews persist right under our radar—we think we're doing it correctly—but which only reiterates the importance of our Proportional tools and techniques. This gets back to the recalibration of our Reality Filter we discussed in Part 2 and Part 3, and we'll get to how all that works as we go.

Now while some of these skews may be caused by a glitchy Reality Filter, interestingly enough some can be shared. This is likely due to certain ideas about conformation getting exaggerated in clay, as sculptors attempt to perfect their visuals. Some examples are "fine bone" turning into spindly legs, a "long neck" becoming more giraffelike, and "well muscled" resembling more a Marvel® character than equine athlete. Many sculptures also possess backs so alarmingly short, one wonders where a saddle would fit if it were a real horse! Yet despite the want for a "short" back," equine torsos are far longer in lifeby designthan what many sculptures would have us believe. The truth is, indulging the "more is better" philosophy may work for chocolate, but for realistic equine sculpturenot so much. All things are relative.


Another plausible reason is simply this: our subject is a complicated form to interpret let alone sculpt, and we may distort thingseven unconsciouslyto make them more familiar. For instance, I've seen pieces with humanized features, like eyes that face more forwards, nostrils with a more funnellike configuration, and gaskins muscled more like human thighs. Similarly, I've seen sculptures imbued with features from companion animals such as the eyebrows of a dog or the ears of a cat.

In particular, humans have an inborn penchant for neotenous characteristics. Constant and unconscious, this tendency influences what we judge to be endearing, attractive, and even beautiful. We even breed companion animals to more resemble our babies. Ask any group which is cutera Papillon or a Desert Tortoiseand the winner is an easy prediction, and all simply due to instinctive drives to favor infantile features. (For the record, I'll take the tortoise!)


But when it comes to equines, neotenous features are diametrically opposed to the wellbeing of the animal. For instance, short heads, small muzzles, deep profiles that create a "stop," inordinately large or bulging eyes, or any other feature neoteny would convince us is "more attractive" are questionable at best. The long, robust and purely functional head of the equine is a result of 65 million years of practical evolution, so attempting to force this efficiently engineered nonhuman design to align with our neotenous proclivities doesn't make much sense, does it? But being instinctive, neoteny will find its way into our work regardless, so we must be "ever vigilant," as myfiender friend, Laurie, once described her eternally watchful blenny. If it does seep in, a common example is making our sculpted eyes notably large, "soft" and "liquid," to the point of being unnaturally large. It may be appealing, since it triggers that instinct, but nevertheless we should still recognize this is our equivalent of a bigeyed child velvet painting.


Now as for how scale influences Proportion—here's where things get funky. On large pieces, like monuments, Proportional errors can go undetected more readily because our brain is forced to scan over a piece to then reintegrate that patchwork into a cohesive whole. Compound that with perspective distortions, and scale alone can mask just about any Proportional error. Imagine trying to determine the overall Proportions of The Da Vinci Horse at Meijer Gardens when standing by the sculpture's knee. We stand well back from a monument to "get a better look," don't we?  And there's good reason we pointup a maquette.


Yet the opposite kicks in with small scales—when our brain can process the entire piece at once, Proportional errors can pop out front and center. Even more, Proportion becomes an everincreasing issue as scale diminishes, for some key reasons. For one, absolute precision gains greater importance the smaller the scale, since even the tiniest of Proportional errors become massive deviations. Take Dante for instance, sculpted in 1:16 scale. Being that the average length of a Murgese head is about 20", Dante's head is 16x smaller at 1.25". So imagine the equivalent of 1" on Dante—an equivalent measurement that makes a world of difference with nearly every aspect of his structure at that scale. There's little room for error. The smaller the piece, the greater the precision.


It also means we cannot apply the same sculpting ideas to smaller scales as we would to larger ones. For example, sculpting the coronet ridge on a 1:32 scale actually equates to extreme ringbone, and becomes increasingly extreme as size diminishes. Or defining the eyelids and zygomatic arches on a small scale in the same way we would a larger piece can result in Frankenstein–like effects produced by excessive definition. When it comes to detailing, too, such as moles and veins, hinting at them becomes increasingly effective as scale decreases. This can even impact which tools we use and how we use them. I've seen small scale pieces with disproportionally enormous eyes, ears, joints, cannons, hooves, or muzzles simply because the tools used were mechanically unable to manipulate the clay in scale. Our tools must shrink with our sculptures!


Put all this together and it's evident that scale matters more than literal definition when it comes to realism. Put another way, scaling up and scaling down doesn't apply only to the mean size of the sculpture; it applies to every feature of the piece. Since realism demands no discernible difference between scales, our thinking and tools also have to adjust to the size of our piece, and our only ally in this is an effective application of Proportion. It alone brings the issue of scale to the forefront and, in so doing, asks us not only to sculpt with absolute precision but to also rethink how we're sculpting in order to maintain the sense of scale.

Subsequently, I'll be making very different decisions for Himmy in his 1:12 size than I would if he were 1:9 or even lifesize, and yet even different decisions for Zuggie in 1:64 than with Himmyand all due entirely to scale. In many ways, sculpting convincing small scales is a real test of our abilities by forcing key elements to the fore. Practically speaking, any developmental deficiencies will become increasingly obvious the smaller the scale we attempt. So if our teeny pieces appear disproportionate, clunkier, coarser, less detailedless believable overallthen we have some clear ideas on what to amend in our skillset.

And there's more good news in all this: being so fundamental, if we get the Proportional relationships correct on our piece, then Placement and Planes simply fall into place as a natural and inevitable outcome. And being tangible and objectivewe can measure Proportion, remember—necessary corrections become selfrevealing when we know how to correctly determine those measurements. See, sculpting realism isn't so impossible! We just need to understand the fundamentals and their practical applications, that's all.

The Equuscape

But to effectively apply the 3Ps, we gotta be able to recognize anatomical landmarks as well. Landmarks? On the body? OK…let's backtrack a bit. What's the defining characteristic of any map? What makes a map a map? Yes—fixed points of relative position to each other. We use these points to determine where we are to then decide where we want to go and how to get there.

Well, anatomical landmarks work much the same way. These palpable points of the skeleton and key muscle groups act much like constellations to guide us over the animal's body whether it be life study, our references, or our sculpture. And though we may be talking about a gooey living body, a 2D static photo, or a lump of wire and clay, anatomical landmarks are still just fixed points of relative position to each other. Together then, they create a kind of topographical equine map, or Equuscape

Just as a conventional map gives our feet freedom and direction, so does the equine map for our hands. The beauty here, of course, is that all these coordinates are directly transferable between the living animal, anatomical charts, reference images, and our sculpture. And being as how the Equuscape applies to the entire genus, any equine subject can thus be extrapolated using the very same map. It also means that no posture is beyond our capabilities either, since we can orient, measure, and predict our progress from any point to any other point with that same map, too.


Here are some skeletal landmarks you can use to orient yourself on your map.

Here are some fleshy alignments related to those skeletal landmarks.

And that's nothing to sneeze at. The equine is a creature defined by motion and rich in variation, providing an abundance of inspiration to keep any artist busy for a lifetime. But remember that those of us who chose to work in realism are obliged to specific boundaries, all those precise biological rules set down by Equus. So despite all the creative ideas this animal generates in our head, we still can't just make it up.

How does this impact our work in practical terms? It means we have to mentally project where our clay has to go before we get there, or put another way, we always have to know exactly where we are in order to decide where we need to goand at any point in our process. This ability to project forwards, to predict the boundaries and influence of the rules well before we get to that point, is perhaps the most difficult skill specific to realism we're asked to master. Luckily for us, it's right here where the equine map can be extra helpful. 

Stepping back a bit, all those boundaries seem constraining at first, don't they? It's easy to interpret them as a series of "no," as unwelcome limitations to our creativity. Yet when framed within the concept of the Equuscape, of projection across the equine map, don't they instead become an indispensable boon? For if there are boundaries, we can anticipate them, can't we? Much like how our autopilot learns our neighborhoods and home turf, letting us navigate our familiar roads almost as second nature, so we can apply that mechanism to sculpting this animal. Learn the map well enough, in fact, and going "point to point" comes as naturally as driving to the grocery store. Learn to use the map well enough then, and our ability to predict forthcoming coordinates, no matter their configuration, comes just as easily. The end result is a faster process and more varied work, created in more confidence and clarity. See, limits aren't so bad!

In tandem, our ability to recognize how movement changes the 3Ps is a natural outcome. As discussed in Part 3, horses don't move like paper doll anatomy charts, or like jointed action figures. Our subject is a living, organic, fleshy creature, and his body is as changeable as the moment. If we cannot capture this quality in our work then, all we're really doing is just sculpting anatomy charts articulated into different positions, aren't we? This is representational art, work that is of something rather than about something. Realistic art is often criticized from this perspective, and for good reason. So if we want to achieve more in our own work, it may be time to rethink our approach and hopefully this series will provide some ideas.

Symmetry

But it doesn't end there! Being a sculptor, working in 3D, requires we account for all sides and all angles, and this ushers in some new stepsone of the trickiest being Symmetry. This refers to the bilateral halves of the animal, specifically those paired features that should be matched in dimension, orientation, and composition. That makes Symmetry not only an element of Viability (which we'll discuss next time), but also a perfect example of that idea introduced in Part 2 of how "my brain cannot take anything for granted so that yours can." 

So let's consider the equine skeleton from that perspective: all those paired skeletal featureswith all their tuberosities, condyles, shapes, ridges, planes, curves, pointy bits, dimensions, orientations, angleseach and every one of their characteristicsaren't all cattywompus, are they? No. They have structureorder, alignments, infrastructure. They have paired relationships; they mirror each other. They have Symmetry. If I haven't attended to Symmetry then, I've made a technical error all the same. 

However, Symmetry is one of those components of realistic sculpture that tends to get overlooked the most, for two primary and connected reasons. First, we can simply become blind to it, typically induced by the "wow factor." As sculptors, we can get so immersed in our work that we just lose sight of the rules and boundaries. We've all been there, done that. It's an easy slip. On the flip side too, we may be so blown away by the appeal of a piece, we just don't recognize its mismatched deviations. We've all been there and done that, too. Sometimes flawed molding techniques can skew an otherwise Symmetrical sculpture as well, such as when flexible molds are strapped too tightly.

It all boils down to this: our brain can only process one view at a time. We don't have a second pair of eyes (ideally those on stalks) that would allow us to wrap around the piece for a simultaneous second view. Instead, our brain interprets each new view as an isolated event, as a discreet package of data, a "snapshot" of sorts. To perceive a sculpture en toto then, it must link these separate views into a continuum, connect these "frames" backtoback into a "movie." And as we discussed, the larger the piece, the more of these frames it must connect.


But the wow factor seems to steer our brain's moviemaking magnificence right into the skids, causing it to either connect the frames improperly or to create errors in each frame to force consistency. Do we see every continuity flaw in a movie we're thoroughly enjoying? No. Well, it's the same here, too. It's in the skips "between" the frames where asymmetries persist, andagainit's our toolsour calipers, compasses and protractors—that provide the means to address them. As we become more skilled, the better able our brain gets at making those movies, allowing us to detect discrepancies more intuitively. With experience, we simply become better at detecting continuity errors, and with even more, our little moviemaking machine can even prevent us from making many of them in the first place.

All this distills down even further into the real reason why Symmetry is such a universal trouble spot: the uninitiated eye simply takes it for granted. It's one of those aspects of mental processing that just gets disregarded. Let's face it, we didn't pay attention to Symmetry when admiring a real horse before we got into sculpting equine realism, did we? Why? Because we never had to. Symmetry was already present in the living animal by default. DNA took care of it for us! So we didn't even think about it, enjoying the personality, mannerisms, movement, type, color, the way the mane or tail swished, or any number of more obvious features instead. Honestly, when you watched The Black Stallionone of the many mesmerizing things that struck you about the lovely Shetan wasn't Symmetry, was it? 


Not so with realistic sculpture! I don't get to sit back and focus on cherrypicked aspects of the subject. NoI have to recreate the entirety of the animal completely from scratch; I have to focus on everything. Nothing can be taken for granted only because DNA isn't involved in the creation of my sculpture. In practical terms then, my struggle with Symmetry exists on two fronts: not only is it a non–given with its own challenges, but the mere act of sculpting introduces totally new asymmetries unique to the creative process. Referring back to the previous discussion, we each have a unique set of habitual asymmetries that reside in our blindspots, or are integrated into our process or aesthetic. That makes them even harder to detect being so nestled within a conflict of interest loop, but we'll get to methods on how to spot and fix them as we go. Suffice to say that no matter how experienced we may be, these pesky little quirks linger. It's just that human element.

Soback to Symmetry…for instance, I have to make sure the sculpted eyes are matched, level and angled symmetrically, the fore cannons are of equal dimensions, the humeri are the same length and set, the pelvic girdle is intact, the teardrop bones match in length, angle and dimension, the ears are the same size and set, the Atlas "wings" mirror each other, the ichii are the same length and angles, the pasterns match in length, width and structure, muscle structure is consistent on either side of the neck…along with a multitude of other physical relationships inherent in any equine subject, and regardless of motion or posture. Indeed, if I listed the actual number of Symmetrical relationships I have to account for with every single piece, you'd be reading for quite some time.


And don't forget any errors the sculpting or molding process may introduce! Artistically generated asymmetries can range from blatantly obvious to painfully subtle, but they won't reveal themselves in movement, as one would pinpoint lameness in a living horse. Being embedded in a static sculpture, I have to assess them in situ, and that too is a learned skill (which we'll get to later on). A couple of obvious artistic asymmetries, for example, are flounderlike eyes or mismatched cannons, but subtler errors are an asymmetrical loin, mismatched sacral tuberosities, disparate radial features, or divergent elbows. When it comes to realistic equine sculpture then, no feature has less importance than anotherevery aspect of the piece is of equal merit.

All this is why Symmetry is so hard to achieve in clay and harder still to perceive in sculpture—not only are we asking our brain to switch to analysis mode when gorging on a visual feast, but we're asking our brain to put equal emphasis onto something it habitually interpreted as irrelevant in life. And that's trickier than it sounds. Going back to The Black Stallion, next time you watch the movie, give cranial Symmetry equal attention to more artistically obvious aspects such as Shetan's head type, expression, ear movement, eye motion, nostril dilation, whisker bump organization, eyelid wrinkling, venous structures, chin pooching, jaw action, or forelock wisping while enjoying the film. Not easy, is it? 

That's not because we're incompetent, however, it's because this kind of artistic acuity isn't naturalit's not how our brain evolved to process an image, as we discussed in Part 2. Asking our brain to afford the same consideration to the Symmetry of the ilia, for example, or the zygomatic arches, the femoral joints, the pisiforms, the mandible joints, the lateral cartilages, the nasal bone, the rib cageand everything elseas it would dedicate to conformation, type, coat texture, movement, gesture, the twist of the neck, curve of a muscle, lifting of a foreleg, or any more obvious element is making it work in new ways.

And so like most things in realistic equine sculpture, dealing with Symmetry is a learned skill. It's not one that comes automatically in life study, analyzing references, or working clay. As such, it's yet another skill unique to realism, and one of those invisible attributes of a convincing realistic sculpture because if it's well executed, you'll never notice it.

I got these puppies from MVS.

In all fairness, though, horses do have slight asymmetries to their faces and bodies just like us, some being inborn and others the result of injury, poor horsemanship, deficient nutrition, or problematic development. All this is fine for our clay, of course, given that these asymmetries are necessary (as with portraiture) or intended (as with a narrative). To invoke fairness again—Symmetry is tough to achieve, isn't it? We all have our "good side" and "bad side" of working, and some of us may also have a hard time flipping over a visual in our head. (Photo editing software is sure handy in the studio!) Some sculptors have also been known to distort Symmetry to manipulate the composition for artistic reasons. For example, some have arbitrarily lengthened a body part so that a piece will stand properly on a flat surface, or lengthen a flexed long bone so that leg doesn't appear shorter than its standing pair. 

Lucky for us, unintended asymmetries are avoided with technique (which we'll explore as we go) and with casting methods that don't cause distortion. We can also use the 3Ps and the Equuscape to guide us towards Symmetry, since they organize all those reference points into more predictable order. Stepping back and thinking about it then, Symmetry is a natural outcome of their application, isn't it? Indeed, if any aspect of our sculpture's topography is off, how could Symmetry even be possible? Therefore, rechecking our map as we work is an invaluable habit to adopt—just don't forget to check it from all angles. Our work is 3D and so requires a 3D inspection!
I say that the art of sculpture is eight times as great as any other art based on drawing, because a statue has eight views and they must all be equally good. Benvenuto Cellini
For more discussion on topography, download my article, "Mapping Out Success; Equine Topography for Sculpture" I wrote in 2007 for The Boat here.

Trouble Shooting

I'm going to make mistakes. A lot of them. It's inevitable. Himmy may also change his mind and demand tweaks throughout the process. It happens. So here's the deal: I don't believe the main characteristic of a skilled realistic sculptor is necessarily an ability to avoid mistakes. Rather, I believe it's the ability to problem solve one's way through the impending challenges presented by any sculpture.
A painting is a series of corrected mistakes. Robert Bisset
Mistakes aren't the enemy. In fact, I welcome them. They reveal a lot more than what I get ballpark right, and so provide stepping stones for further advancement. They also reveal a lot about me as an artist, and may illuminate areas I need to address personally.
Where you stumble, there lies your treasure. Joseph Campbell
What's the enemy then? Ourselves. If we interpret a mistake as a failure, as an indication that we're incapable, we betray ourselves. If a failure compels us to quit out of frustration, that's a learning opportunity lost. And if we believe we're so adept and knowledgeable that we're no longer capable of making mistakes, a new set of emperor's clothes are in the making for us.
Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes. Art is knowing which ones to keep. Scott Adams
So you're going to watch me stumble and deduce my way through Himmy like a crazy person. We'll discuss various strategies and logic for all that as we go because, suffice to say, I have legions to share!
The higher up you go, the more mistakes you are allowed. Right at the top, if you make enough of them, it's considered to be your style. Fred Astaire
And I freely admit that I feel paralyzed by intimidation at times. Despite my 20+ years sculpting this critter, some pieces are so overwhelming in scope and novelty, it's hard not to be. I'm human. I often expect so much of myself, that I become my own most demanding critic. I've chosen perhaps one of the most difficult subjects on the planet to sculpt, since I not only have to juggle the technical specs, but all the variations, hidden nuances, and value judgments that go along with this animal, too.

Who says Excalibur is embedded in a rock? My impossible challenge is embedded in clay! Each new piece isn't just a new sculpture—it's a new journey, a new endeavor that will require my full investment of focus, emotion, dedication, discipline, and hard work. It will ask 100% of my commitment. I'll be exhausted afterwards and hopefully by the end, I'll be satisfied with how all that investment panned out. I cannot stop this journey until I am.

So chew on all that while I prepare… 

NEXT TIME: Part 5: Three Critical Realizations

"When you slow down enough to sculpt, you discover all kinds of things you never noticed before." ~ Karen Jobe

Share/Bookmark
Related Posts with Thumbnails