On 31/03/2013 3:41 PM, graham wrote:

>>> I think you missed the whole point of the article and interactive.
>>> It is about art, and craft.
>>> Nobody said the bowls had to be used for food although many are if you
>>> read the captions.
>>
>> I didn't go though it very carefully. I thought the reason it was
>> posted was they were supposed to hold food and that's why I went
>> there. None I saw were shown with food, all looked like some pot
>> throwers idea of art and I thought everything I saw was butt ugly, so
>> I had no incentive to read about them or look any more thoroughly.
>>
> So you don't know much about art, but you know what you like{;-)


I suppose some people confuse form and function. When one is talking
about a bowl it is not big stretch to assume they are referring to a
function piece of kitchenware. IMO, a bowl is something that should be
used.... for something, rather than just an objet d'art. To make a bowl
that really can't be used as a bowl is IMO, silly. There are some
beautiful bowls around that are useful as bowls. The others are just props.