CELEBRATING FINE CRAFT

ARTICLES: Review of Mel Bolen's Exhibition "Induction"

Written by: Mark Stobbe
October 15, 2009

Mel Bolen describes himself as “a vessel maker”.  It is, he says, “what I do”. Since he’s a potter and not a shipbuilder, that would mean that he sees himself as a maker of “a hollow or concave utensil, as a cup, bowl, pitcher, or vase, used for holding liquids or other contents.”

When Bolen’s new show Inductions opened at the SCC Gallery, my first reaction was rapture over the grace and beauty of the vessel’s on display. The exhibition is composed of containers of many sizes and shapes. Most are salt-vapour fired, with a scattering of reduction-fired pieces. All are stunningly beautiful and demonstrate the skill acquired by a master craftsman over 40 years of work. Technically and aesthetically, each and every piece is a masterpiece. Taken together, the collection is overwhelming.

And yet...at second look, something was troubling.

The vessels are all empty. Further, as practical holders of liquids or other contents, they would be profoundly impractical. In a sense, there was a room full of forms without contents. While this is, at one level, simply a manifestation of the functionality versus aesthetic appeal debate endemic to the literature on craft, it also represents something deeper.

Let’s begin by looking at the meanings of the words we’ve used. Form and content.

Upon turning to the dictionary, the first impression is that of diversity. Dictionary.com lists 17 definitions for the word “content” and 44 for the word “form”. Form can mean the external appearance of a defined area, the shape of something, the act of creating a shape or making an object and the “organization, placement, or relationship of basic elements, as lines and colors in a painting or volumes and voids in a sculpture, so as to produce a coherent image; the formal structure of a work of art.” Content can mean something that is contained. More profoundly, it can mean something that is expressed or the degree of significance of that which is expressed. Content can also mean satisfaction with what one has.

With these definitions swirling around, let’s return to Bolen’s exhibition.

Clearly, Bolen has “formed” exquisite objects. The shapes of his pieces are innovative and naturally pleasing to the eye. Form, in a sense, appears straightforward. Content is more complex. Our initial response was that the vessels, the forms, were without content(s) because they were not designed to hold anything. It’s clear that this response was too simplistic. Bolen’s forms do “contain” much of value. However, this is contained within the clay rather than being contained by it. Bolen’s pieces contain within them:

• The skill of a master craft artist at the height of his creative powers.
• A knowledge of clay, of salt, of heat, of complex chemical reaction.
• An aesthetic that is based, originally, on the Bucchero pottery of the Etruscans of the 6th century BC, and modified by both Mel’s individualized genius and the creative anarchy that he was introduced to at EMMA 2008.

Hegel argued that, in the end, content was inseparable from form, and form from content. When trying to separate meaning from aesthetic appreciation, we destroy the individuality of the piece, and make the content “no more than a husk, a discarded relic of a meaning that eluded us in the act of seizing it.” Therein lies the danger of trying to write about work as exquisite as Bolen’s. Discussing form and content renders the pieces sterile - they are meant to be seen and to be savoured. In gazing at them, one reaches the most appropriate definition of content - they make us “content” by their beauty touching our eyes, mind and soul.