|
|
|
|
|
THE INTERACTION OF GRAIN AND FORM IN TWO VOLCANOES -1
|
Navigation
Page 1 |
|
THE TWO VOLCANOES
|
|
Kent's Three-Star Volcano |
|
Teddy's Partial-Sandblast Volcano (2004) |
Grain and form: a comparative analysis (Originally written 2004) |
|
1. Introduction Two attractive volcanoes by Kent Rasmussen and his pipe-mentor, Teddy, provide a fascinating study into the aesthetics of pipe-design. The notes and photos below sketch out the following points that a more detailed discussion could elaborate:
By the familiar, contemporary standards of pipe-appreciation, Kent's volcano displays much beauty and quality. The lines of the composition are clear and sharp, the straight-grain is vivid and regular.
The shape of Teddy's volcano, like its graining, is more unusual and "diffuse." With its low, elongated body and flaring base, Teddy's composition gives up some formal clarity but gains energy and movement: our eyes and fingers are drawn along and around the flowing surfaces and textures. The briar seems to pulsate with life.
The juxtaposition of these carvings suggests that the beauty and "quality" of a pipe need not be measured only by the regularity of the grain pattern. Other elements that can enhance our experience of a briar carving include: attention to a pipe-maker's use of form, line, and texture; an appreciation for how grain lines (straight or otherwise) work to clarify and energize a pipe's overall design; and a sensitivity to the underlying creativity of a pipe-maker's imagination. Tuning in to some of these extra dimensions of pipe design, as we notice them, can enlarge our enjoyment of briar carvings and open us up to a whole new range of "briar delights."
|
|
2. Comparative Analysis
The Lines
Consider first the overall line of each pipe, from bowl through shank to mouthpiece. Though both curves are attractive and fluid, Teddy's is a little more "continuous" (the line bends at the same slope throughout its length) and it's also longer, since the central line extends smoothly out to the tip of the bit, whereas Kent's shank-end characteristically breaks up the visual connection between the body of the pipe and the ebonite mouthpiece. (A continuous line is not necessarily more beautiful or "better" than a non-continuous one - it's just a different approach and creates a different tone or mood.) |
|
Note as well the very different shaping of the top of the shank in each pipe. Kent's abrupt, swooping arc creates a traditional volcano shape. Teddy's more gentle angle responds to the curve along the bottom of the pipe: complementing without imitating, it provides a harmonious counterpoint to the overall flow of the composition, backwards and forwards.
Teddy's pipe is filled with movement: its fluid lines carry our eyes and fingers continually around its curved surfaces. This volcano seems as dynamic as a lava flow.
Kent's design has a different kind of gracefulness and beauty; it's more formal, more dignified. The shapes of the pipe are supple and simplified, its surfaces defined by its vivid grain.
The lines of Kent's pipe seem less "kinetic" - less in motion - than Teddy's ... in part because of the more upright slope from shank to the top of the bowl and the way it relates to the bottom curve of the pipe. |
|
The Grain
While Kent's straight-grain is quite lovely in itself, it seems to me, from a compositional point of view, that all the vertical lines cut across the sweep of the curve from shank to bowl. The vivid grain inhibits - however slightly - my eye-movement across the entire pipe's surface: I find myself looking up and down more than right-to-left. (This is one reason the pipe feels more stable and restrained in form, while Teddy's carving contains more dynamic energy.)
By contrast, Teddy's rather unusual birds-eye (broken up, imperfect, and thus not a premium wood surface) could be said to enhance the horizontal energy implicit in Teddy's dramatic composition. Its swirls and eddies encourage my eye to move from side-to-side as well as up-and-down, and I "swim along" with the surface currents as they flow along the powerful curve from shank to bowl.
Discussion of The Grain concludes on the next page. |
Navigation
Page 1 |
