EC: Yes, what a difference this was when you see it in comparison to the work by Bernard Leach and Staite-Murray. It's a completely different tradition. You feel that you're dealing with a whole new way of thinking about ceramics and it's a tremendously refreshing thing about it, you feel that there's such a lot of thought gone into not only the actual pot itself, but actually what it's about in terms of today. Whereas with Staite-Murray and with Bernard Leach you never for a moment think that they're thinking about today, they're thinking about the past, history, how they interpret history. With this you think how, how do we interpret architecture? How do we interpret the modern world?
[video clip starts] And so they seem very modern, indeed very moderne, almost, in the way that they reflect the ideas of the 1930s. Enormous simplicity, this idea that you want to go back to basics, this Bauhaus idea that it's form, form, form, no decoration, nothing to interrupt a profound understanding of function and the simplicity of the shape itself. The actual making is very skilled, to actually bring your clay up, to bring it like that and to bring it in is actually quite difficult to do when you're a thrower. The form itself... how this short spout actually operates I don't know, but there's something terribly nice about that. This is not a pot in a sense for everyday use three times a day, it's a special pot. [video clip ends]
You're going to use this for very special occasions, it seems to me, and the handle [is] beautifully made. The moment where you suddenly realise that there's beautiful craftsmanship gone into weaving it, and make a very pleasant and rich contrast between the actual pot itself so that this suddenly has a particular life of its own. It's not just any old handle, it's not metal, it's woven cane which is very sympathetic. And the actual form... this kettle-type teapot is very functional because you're not picking it up from the side and it's quite a big teapot, and it's much easier ergonomically to handle when you're picking it up like that and rocking it, and this is an Eastern form in actual fact rather than a European form.
But of course in Bauhaus design that didn't matter. You called on anything that was appropriate and of course she did. And she was influenced by the Bauhaus. She didn't study at the Bauhaus, she studied under people who had worked there. She was born in Vienna, lived in Vienna and studied in Vienna and was very much in tune with what was going on. Her friends were architects and she was very aware of what architecture was. And I remember about ten years before she died I went to see her in her studio in Bayswater, and we were talking about where she'd been, and she'd just been to a big exhibition at the Royal Academy of Architecture. [so] there was this old lady of eighty popping off to see an exhibition of architecture because it was an interesting thing to do. It was what she was about and what her work was about.
The interesting thing is that she was making these in Vienna, and when she came to this country in 1938 or thereabouts she met Leach, and Leach pooh-poohed these pots. He thought they were absolutely terrible. He said they were like paper. And you can see that they are almost like paper. It is so thin. And when you feel it, it is almost as if it could have been slip cast rather than thrown on the wheel. There's a slight irregularity which makes me think that it was thrown on the wheel. But the precision of throwing... [it's] beautifully thrown on the inside, [with an] absolutely smooth curve like that, and then you look at the foot ring which is beautifully turned. And when you compare that to a foot ring by Bernard Leach this is indeed like precision engineering in comparison to his rather often clumsy and rather quick working.
Look at the handle, again how precise [it is], it's almost like metalwork. And you feel that it could be metalwork, that the whole thing could be metalwork. And of course it goes with this. It forms the complete unity. You feel that the same degree of analysis of form that's gone into the teapot has gone into the jug, with its tiny little rudimentary lip here, just so that you can pour your milk. Whether this actually functions or not is another question. How well it functions... I suspect it doesn't function very well. But again it's almost there. Its style has suddenly become more important than function, but in fact that wasn't generally true for Lucie Rie's work. She was just as interested in function as she was in the actual way that they were going to look.
When Leach saw these you know he said, 'Oh they're like paper,' and it really must have been pretty demoralising. There was this woman in her late thirties. She'd come to this country from Vienna, she'd already won several gold medals for her work on the continent. She was very highly regarded, and she came to this country, she knew of Bernard Leach when she came here, Bernard Leach had never heard of her, and she went to see him. He was then working at Dartington. [She] showed him her pots and he said how awful they were. She was trying to build up her career at the age of 38. Her marriage had failed, she'd had to leave the country where she was born, her husband went off to America, she decided to stay. She'd got to build up a career, she'd got to establish a pottery, she'd got to find a style and of course Leach was pretty awful to her. And it made her rethink what she was going to do.
So the only lasting effect was that this is earthenware, she moved to stoneware, and that was the big influence he had. For a time she tried to make pots after the war rather like Bernard Leach. They were a terrible failure, they were all lumpy and heavy, and not her at all. And her friend Hans Coper said, 'Look you know they're not you, you must do what you believe is right,' and then she started to evolve her own style. And this is the beginnings of her style, and although her work changed later it never changed in its spirit, in its simplicity, in the way that she could bring out the best [from] the material. And there's still an element to this which maybe is a bit sweet, maybe is a bit saccharine, a bit too meek, a bit too resolved in a way, but its a very handsome object and a very beautiful thing to look at in it's own right, quite apart from whether it is going to work as a teapot. Because the whole proportions are quite lively, they're quite vibrant. And you can look at it almost like a piece of sculpture, it's almost like a big, fat stone, and it's got that sort of quality. And the quality is brought out by the surface, heaven knows how she got it, but it's obviously a mixture of various processes. And of course the interesting thing for a potter is that where you've got a drip of glaze, obviously in a kiln something fallen off another pot, and you get that effect. Now to Bernard Leach or somebody from the East that would be a pure example of a Zen, that would be a pure example of an accidental happening quite beyond the control of a human being, as it were. And just falling at exactly the right spot so you get that element of disruption. This contrasts with this, the colour works, this is very glossy and this is pretty matt in comparison, and I think that's absolutely terrific.
The other thing about Lucie Rie was that although she accepted Bernard Leach's advice and moved to stoneware, she also started to make two types of ware. She made functional ware in the way that he did and she made individual pieces. And I think that she got that from Bernard Leach. She, what she admired about Bernard Leach was his unity, his wholeness, pottery as a way of life, lifestyle if you like today. And although she didn't go along with that in one sense because she came from a different tradition, that wasn't how she saw herself, but in fact she did want to make these two types of work. And you feel that when she was making this, before she'd met Leach... is this wonderfully elegant, this extraordinary confident object which is both functional and sculptural at the same time. Later her work became more functional. It retained its sculptural qualities, of course, but it became more functional. With this you feel function is an element because of the short spout and, on this jug, this little lip here. But when you look at this you just wonder how she actually did it, whether it was made up to here, up to this neck, this shoulder here and then another piece added on and it all smoothed over. You can see the turning marks where she wanted to get this flat, but the whole thing does hang together as s a very satisfying resolution to the eternal teapot.
MP: Would Bernard Leach's opinion of Lucie Rie's work [have] affected her reception in this country in ceramic terms?
EC: I think that it would have affected it, because not only did Bernard Leach not like her work, but W B Honey who worked here at the Victoria and Albert Museum also didn't like her work, and they were both very critical of it and felt that it wasn't English enough or British enough [and] it wasn't right, it wasn't oriental in other words. They admired oriental work. And in fact to start with she actually sold in Northern Europe, in Scandinavia and in New York rather than in this country. It did affect her market. But that was not so much I think because Leach didn't like it as because it then didn't suit prevailing taste, which was very much Leach orientated.