Perfection (related to teapots)
This is a train of thought I’ve been developing for a while – and maybe something of interest to others, so I am sharing my musings here. Deeply personal and subjective, hopefully written in a way others can follow and maybe share some of their own thoughts…
–
When I am talking about perfection, I mean the golden ratio or balance of the elements that shape a teapot: Body, spout, handle, lid and lid-knob and how they stand in relation to each other in curvature, size etc.
What sparked this topic is a teapot that I acquired a few years back, a Biandeng in Zuni clay. As some might know, Biandeng, or Shendeng is my favourite teapot shape and initially set off my quest into Yixing teapots. Essentially it is by definition an oil lamp shaped(Chinese oil lamp) pot, a characteristically curved body. Overall a flat shape and it can come with straight or curved spout.
The pot in question presented the pinnacle of my collection at that point – it was perfect. Perfect in that it was flawless to start with. It also has a perfect balance of all elements, nothing is too large or to small, too long or too short, perfect harmony.
Time passes and one day I realised that for some reason I do not reach for it very often… but why? Why did I prefer to use most of my other Biandeng over this one?
–
When I am talking about perfection, I mean the golden ratio or balance of the elements that shape a teapot: Body, spout, handle, lid and lid-knob and how they stand in relation to each other in curvature, size etc.
What sparked this topic is a teapot that I acquired a few years back, a Biandeng in Zuni clay. As some might know, Biandeng, or Shendeng is my favourite teapot shape and initially set off my quest into Yixing teapots. Essentially it is by definition an oil lamp shaped(Chinese oil lamp) pot, a characteristically curved body. Overall a flat shape and it can come with straight or curved spout.
The pot in question presented the pinnacle of my collection at that point – it was perfect. Perfect in that it was flawless to start with. It also has a perfect balance of all elements, nothing is too large or to small, too long or too short, perfect harmony.
Time passes and one day I realised that for some reason I do not reach for it very often… but why? Why did I prefer to use most of my other Biandeng over this one?
- Attachments
-
- 09447A74-E14A-4560-9D80-6F2F36EF8970.jpeg (87.76 KiB) Viewed 3854 times
Looking at the pots I reached for, it became more clear: the ones I preferred were not quite that 100% harmonious. Spout a little long, body a bit more compressed, base a little wide in relation to the body, etc. Small details of the essentially same shape, that made them more interesting to me. A little tension here and there.
A bit like a perfect model-looking person can actually be quite boring in their perfect symmetry and beauty, compared to one where maybe the nose is a little bigger or other “imperfections.” (Excluding any thoughts of value here!).
A bit like a perfect model-looking person can actually be quite boring in their perfect symmetry and beauty, compared to one where maybe the nose is a little bigger or other “imperfections.” (Excluding any thoughts of value here!).
- Attachments
-
- B199E4C7-A232-4F13-B8E1-B8409C779162.jpeg (104.58 KiB) Viewed 3853 times
-
- F3147D23-EA6D-48CB-92BA-BF4C76990E93.jpeg (105.41 KiB) Viewed 3853 times
So, while objectively not perfectly symmetrical and balanced, these are “perfect” for me. Character trumps (oh, how this word is becoming almost unusable…) perfect beauty for me. The pot below is my favourite expression of
– side note –
I am aware that all these pots are still quite perfect compared to a lot of others and I am really nit-picking over very subtle differences. I find it fascinating how vastly different the same pot shape can be interpreted by the most minute changes in curve and proportions.
– side note –
I am aware that all these pots are still quite perfect compared to a lot of others and I am really nit-picking over very subtle differences. I find it fascinating how vastly different the same pot shape can be interpreted by the most minute changes in curve and proportions.
- Attachments
-
- 061C1738-A3B4-4C57-AB3C-F9619F3E38CF.jpeg (94.11 KiB) Viewed 3852 times
Thank you for the post. I always enjoy seeing these kinds of posts about aesthetics and other factors which I don't really think about much, like the recent carvings etc post, because I am not artistically-minded or trained, but I like to learn and hear from others.
When I started drinking tea a while ago, think that I sought 'perfection', but I now think that the kind of perfection which I sought back then was only skin-deep, and also misguided (which is even more subjective, and perhaps insulting), and that included looking at perfectly-formed teapots, which I think is a constant temptation, whether people look for modern pots, or the 'best' antique or vintage clay. I'm guilty of that.
I think that the concept of perfection is highly contextual, and it may also vary between different languages and cultures. I think that it does not necessarily need to mean absolute perfection, or perfection in every applicable sense (nor a 100/100 score, whatever that means or connotes). An old pot can be perfect, even if someone can imitate it perfectly today. Those are two very different conceptions of perfection, among others.
When I looked at your photos, I thought that your latter pots were more 'perfect' than the first, but it may be that they suited my preferences more, or that they showed more character, or that they showed more typicité or some such, or perhaps simply that I would have preferred to use them.
And on top of that, a photo can never describe a pot fully; I've taken photos of my pots, looked at them next to the pot, and thought that the photo does not really resemble the pot at all.
(I will try to post some photos here too if I find my version of perfection, but it may take a while...)
(also: even if pots like yours are perfect compared to most, that does not invalidate a search for perfection from which we can all learn)
Andrew
When I started drinking tea a while ago, think that I sought 'perfection', but I now think that the kind of perfection which I sought back then was only skin-deep, and also misguided (which is even more subjective, and perhaps insulting), and that included looking at perfectly-formed teapots, which I think is a constant temptation, whether people look for modern pots, or the 'best' antique or vintage clay. I'm guilty of that.
I think that the concept of perfection is highly contextual, and it may also vary between different languages and cultures. I think that it does not necessarily need to mean absolute perfection, or perfection in every applicable sense (nor a 100/100 score, whatever that means or connotes). An old pot can be perfect, even if someone can imitate it perfectly today. Those are two very different conceptions of perfection, among others.
When I looked at your photos, I thought that your latter pots were more 'perfect' than the first, but it may be that they suited my preferences more, or that they showed more character, or that they showed more typicité or some such, or perhaps simply that I would have preferred to use them.
And on top of that, a photo can never describe a pot fully; I've taken photos of my pots, looked at them next to the pot, and thought that the photo does not really resemble the pot at all.
(I will try to post some photos here too if I find my version of perfection, but it may take a while...)
(also: even if pots like yours are perfect compared to most, that does not invalidate a search for perfection from which we can all learn)
Andrew
Thank you for your kind words.
It will be enriching to see how others interpret perfection and the quest for it.
For a non-artistically-minded person you do pick your teapots quite well I have to say.Andrew S wrote: ↑Fri Sep 02, 2022 1:43 amThank you for the post. I always enjoy seeing these kinds of posts about aesthetics and other factors which I don't really think about much, like the recent carvings etc post, because I am not artistically-minded or trained, but I like to learn and hear from others.
It will be enriching to see how others interpret perfection and the quest for it.
Interesting thoughts, thanks for sharing.
I don't have much to contribute here, but reading through the posts (and particularly the points about "perfect symmetry" vs harmonious/nature-like "imperfections", different aesthetic sensibilities) brought me back to lectures with John Minford, who would often contrast British and Chinese garden concepts and ideals to make a similar point.
I don't have much to contribute here, but reading through the posts (and particularly the points about "perfect symmetry" vs harmonious/nature-like "imperfections", different aesthetic sensibilities) brought me back to lectures with John Minford, who would often contrast British and Chinese garden concepts and ideals to make a similar point.
I think that what seems to be perfect and what is perfect in the realm of teapots (and everything else) is highly subjective. While I've seen photos of many teapots, I've really liked maybe 2 or 3. I've found shapes that I really like from the aesthetic view point and those that don't excite me at all. Unless you hold the teapot and see it in action you can't say for sure if it's perfect for you. Many teapots look great from one angle and bad from another and it's very confusing if you want to judge whether you will like it or not just from the pictures. I think that, past some general details (recently I've found that I don't really like the look of straight, conical spouts), what matters is that it is a pleasure to use. We might consider a teapot visually perfect, but if it doesn't handle well, it will not be used as often as teapots that do feel good in hand. Also, thinking that something is perfect may restrain us from using it, so as not to damage it.
I've got a porcelain mug that I love. I've had it for maybe 10 years. It's got a hairline on the handle, but it's a joy to use. The size is perfect. It fits into my hand perfectly. It's not too heavy. It's white inside, so I can see the colour of the beverage. Everything tastes great from it. I've used it hundreds of times, even though I've got many other mugs.
What we think is right for us, is not always what makes us happy and satisfied, and what leads to a desirable outcome.
It's probably the same with everything, we've got a favourite pen, clothing element, MMORPG class, guitar, music album and so on. You use it and say "Yeah, that fits",
I've got a porcelain mug that I love. I've had it for maybe 10 years. It's got a hairline on the handle, but it's a joy to use. The size is perfect. It fits into my hand perfectly. It's not too heavy. It's white inside, so I can see the colour of the beverage. Everything tastes great from it. I've used it hundreds of times, even though I've got many other mugs.
What we think is right for us, is not always what makes us happy and satisfied, and what leads to a desirable outcome.
It's probably the same with everything, we've got a favourite pen, clothing element, MMORPG class, guitar, music album and so on. You use it and say "Yeah, that fits",
I have twin teacups by Yamane Saigon: same size, shape, clay, glaze. The first one that I bought has a small unglazed spot on the inside of the cup. When I saw a similar one appear on eBay a few months later, smoothly glazed over the interior surface, I bought it eagerly.
And yet, I reach for the spot cup with the “imperfection“ much more often than the “perfect” twin. There is more going on visually, more interest, more wabi Dani in the “imperfect” cup.
And yet, I reach for the spot cup with the “imperfection“ much more often than the “perfect” twin. There is more going on visually, more interest, more wabi Dani in the “imperfect” cup.
I feel the same way. It doesn't matter if a teapot looks great if it doesn't pour well and isn't easy to handle. I'm not as concerned with aesthetics as I am with functionality, though I do like the shape of some pots more than others. I'd love to own a Biandeng pot someday!Bourder wrote: ↑Fri Sep 02, 2022 5:43 amI think that, past some general details [...] what matters is that it is a pleasure to use. We might consider a teapot visually perfect, but if it doesn't handle well, it will not be used as often as teapots that do feel good in hand. Also, thinking that something is perfect may restrain us from using it, so as not to damage it.
When I first got my Zhuni-Hongni pot from Bok, I was nervous when using it and was sure I'd damage it in some way. I accidentally chipped the lid a bit, possibly because I was so anxious, and though I was kind of upset, I became less worried about using the pot, to the point that I now use it almost daily for oolong. I don't think this is the best way to get used to handling clay pots, but it worked! I wouldn't say the chip gives the pot character, but at least I feel more comfortable interacting with it.
Daily wear will inevitably weather, if not damage, perfect teaware, so why not aim for something that's pleasant to handle but that won't break your heart if something happens to it?
I've had another think about this post, and why I like each of the pots.
I think that what strikes me about those four pots is that each one balances different elements in different ways, and hence emphasises different aspects of the pot. So, even if the first pot might have a classic 'golden ratio' of elements, the others play with that ratio but nevertheless keep the elements balanced.
For my part, I think that 'perfection' in this context is more likely to be found in a balance of elements than in a particular classic shape or classic ratio of elements.
Perhaps that tends to explain why I like all of the pots, since I think that they each have a balance to them. So, a big, wide flat body can have a small but proud spout and a thin handle, or a body with a very curved shape can have a long downward-pointing spout and a thick handle, or a pot with a strong rim around the mouth and the base can balance that out with strength in the spout and the handle.
Just my thoughts while sipping on some old tea...
Andrew
I think that what strikes me about those four pots is that each one balances different elements in different ways, and hence emphasises different aspects of the pot. So, even if the first pot might have a classic 'golden ratio' of elements, the others play with that ratio but nevertheless keep the elements balanced.
For my part, I think that 'perfection' in this context is more likely to be found in a balance of elements than in a particular classic shape or classic ratio of elements.
Perhaps that tends to explain why I like all of the pots, since I think that they each have a balance to them. So, a big, wide flat body can have a small but proud spout and a thin handle, or a body with a very curved shape can have a long downward-pointing spout and a thick handle, or a pot with a strong rim around the mouth and the base can balance that out with strength in the spout and the handle.
Just my thoughts while sipping on some old tea...
Andrew
Perfection.... a very dangerous but yet ambiguous word in the world of teapots.
Thanks for sharing master @Bok. Your pots are all perfect! IMO, each of us define perfection in teapots very differently, just like our preferences for tea.
Personally, I like my pots being imperfectly perfect. I find myself drawn to pots that defies conventional "pairings". To me, a perfect pot always brew up a storm and a good cup of tea. From a more philosophical point of view, a perfect pot allows one to connect and make new friends over a pot of tea. The chase for perfection often blurs the boundary of basic respect for fellow tea drinkers. Hence, a perfect pot must create conversations that transcends the boundary of time and locality. Be it aesthetics or symmetry, clay grade or pour rate, genuine or replica, if the pot can stop someone on their tracks to have a respectful (sometimes patiently annoying) conversation, it's a perfect pot in my books.
Do not be confused by a Collectible Teapot. That's another interesting topic that has sent many darts and arrows across the isle an no return...
my 2cents worth after a big pot of DanCong all evening.
Cheers!!
Thanks for sharing master @Bok. Your pots are all perfect! IMO, each of us define perfection in teapots very differently, just like our preferences for tea.
Personally, I like my pots being imperfectly perfect. I find myself drawn to pots that defies conventional "pairings". To me, a perfect pot always brew up a storm and a good cup of tea. From a more philosophical point of view, a perfect pot allows one to connect and make new friends over a pot of tea. The chase for perfection often blurs the boundary of basic respect for fellow tea drinkers. Hence, a perfect pot must create conversations that transcends the boundary of time and locality. Be it aesthetics or symmetry, clay grade or pour rate, genuine or replica, if the pot can stop someone on their tracks to have a respectful (sometimes patiently annoying) conversation, it's a perfect pot in my books.
Do not be confused by a Collectible Teapot. That's another interesting topic that has sent many darts and arrows across the isle an no return...
![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon_e_biggrin.gif)
![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon_e_biggrin.gif)
![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon_e_biggrin.gif)
my 2cents worth after a big pot of DanCong all evening.
Cheers!!
@Bok, I think you hit on something regarding tension. As you know there are various approaches to design. The golden ratio provides a kind of pleasing, mathematical symmetry. And scalene triangles are another design element that provides a sense of dynamic tension that generates interest because of the perceived asymmetry. While I don’t see scalene triangles in the above “imperfect pieces” they remind me of what a scalene triangle does. They have that dynamic tension that generates interest.
To your comment about models: a perfectly symmetrical face may seem perfect but it is well known that perfectly symmetrical faces look strange to us, even creepy. Asymmetrical faces actually look correct to us. Perhaps our minds need to be presented with a little aesthetic corruption for things to seem natural.
To your comment about models: a perfectly symmetrical face may seem perfect but it is well known that perfectly symmetrical faces look strange to us, even creepy. Asymmetrical faces actually look correct to us. Perhaps our minds need to be presented with a little aesthetic corruption for things to seem natural.
- Attachments
-
- 8EB9C6D4-BCC6-4F22-AFA9-D7F34D3105B7.jpeg (354.54 KiB) Viewed 3589 times
-
- E947AE1A-F5AD-4EB3-A957-2A81B94BE181.jpeg (182.45 KiB) Viewed 3589 times
-
- 41C0A6E0-148C-471C-9FD2-38E717B6FC8F.jpeg (189.41 KiB) Viewed 3589 times