I agree that many commercially sold low fire pottery wares are something to be cautions of...with most being downright unsafe!
yeah making art is sketchy, the glazes and the chemicals and doing all sorts of unsafe stuff!
perhaps its a good thing most artists are at least a little bit crazy =P
the worst part of this potential toxic element of pottery is with the weird glazes people use. without using toxic glazes thats a different thing.
but theres better glazes without much weirdness, and if you get them to the right temperature will seal off the clay and then make it not pourous.
sometimes you see a lot of bowls that are raw on the outside, and just glazed with a simple glaze on the inside, i like that style. thats up to standards of "food safe" pottery, while still having the raw and simple look. using the non toxic glazes available and being careful to get it to its maximum temperature.
i am inclined to think that with the right clay and a capable person knowing what they are doing this raw unglazed clay MIGHT be ok food use...but they would have to be very precise about getting to the exact right temperature with their specific clay.
like i said i am not really good at being the voice of reason, i'm much more crazy ideas girl, and count on the more grounded people around me =)
but perhaps the ideas about "food safe" pottery are erring too much on the side of overly cautious.
so here i will borrow some voices from internetsland.....some relevant notes....actually this is linked up to the link on the last page, some very interesting reading and artists pages there...
http://www.potters.org/subject92923.htm
"I suppose you could use some kind of plastic sealer, but not in order to use
the piece as functional ware. Pit-fired and bonfired wares are not for
food-service use. In the cultures where they use unglazed pottery, the
children grow up with resistance to the bacteria that grow in the clay. If
you or me prepared and ate food out of unglazed pitfired wares, we'd likely
experience intense gastrointestinal distress. Best to just accept that
pitfired and bonfired wares are decorative and non-functional, and make
glazed wares to drink your coffee. "
"Because the pit fire is low fire the pieces are not food safe but
enjoyed for their beauty."
"I wouldn't have coffee out of any pot! ptooy. Now if you had asked
would I try Dr Pepper out of a pit fired pot I would have said, "No,
it a waste of perfectly good Dr Pepper." The only function of pit
fired pots fired here in NA is the function of looking really cool.
The bodies I use in the pit are nowhere near fused enough to contain
water without leaking. Also, when I've fired pots with copper
sulfate, copper carbonate, miracle grow, etc. I don't want to lick the
pots afterwards no matter how yummy they look."
"Please do not
take offense, Earl, but I think that trying to seal a pitfired piece to make
it hygenic is a ridiculous idea. "Modern times" has nothing to do with it.
There are appropriate methods for making utilitarian pottery, and pit firing
certainly is not one of them. Everything about the pit firing process makes
it inappropriate for functional pots. "
"> Maybe I'm missing something here, but isn't pit firing exactly how we got
> our first functional wares in history? I'm not trying to be a smartass or
> anything, but surely I'm missing something here."
Philip -
Well, no, they were bonfired rather than pitfired. And as I clearly
explained in a previous Clayart post, in our culture we do not have
resistance to the bacteria that grow in porous clay, and thus would
experience severe intestinal distress if attacked by those bacteria. You
have to grow up from birth with those bacteria in order to develop such
resistance, and in those cultures, the resistance may even be inherited.
The idea of sealing pitfired wares in order to use them as utilitarian pots
seems incredibly impractical and inappropriate. I am surprised that anyone
would even consider it."
Bonnie Staffel on thu 6 apr 06
Back in my early days of making pottery, there was a sealing remedy for
teapots where the glaze had crazed.. The premise was that the tea
itself
would seal the pores, and that one never washed a teapot in soapy water,
but
let the tannin (?) build up inside the pot. Another remedy that was
widely
used was to soak the pot in milk. I did not like the latter remedy as
then
you got the "pantry" odor to your dishes from the soured milk residue in
the
pores. It might be interesting to test using strong tea as a sealant.
However, there might be a stain left from the tea.
Nori wrote:
"I'm selling some saggar pit-fired pots for the first time, and i want to
make a card for each pot, on care & use. But every time I write the
contents, it's full of don'ts, can'ts & not's. Pretty negative. Can anyone
suggest some positive wording for this?"
"
Nori -
I am not sure that you can complete eliminate the negative warnings, because
they are necessary. I think that the best explanation statements in such
situations start out by emphasizing the positive qualities of the work. I
would include a brief explanation of the process and then a statement
pointing out the nature of celebratory ritual in the bonfire, pit, or sagger
firing, and the importance of the finished ware as the record of that
process.
I have a statement like that in my "Intro to Clay" syllabus in
reference to the blackware bonfiring that we do. My statement goes like
this: "The bonfiring process has the quality of celebratory ritual, and the
wares have an evocative beauty that speaks of the firing process, but
bonfired wares are more fragile and porous than those fired in other
processes, and cannot be used to contain food or liquids."
"
Vince wrote:
<usage throughout the world, and contemporary pottery usage in many tribal and
Third-World cultures. But it is important to point out that there are
significant health concerns to be considered here. In cultures which use
unglazed, porous pottery for daily cooking and eating, children grow up
exposed to the bacteria which live in the porous clay, and develop strong
immunities.>>
I think the last sentence should read, "children that survive grow up ..."
Otherwise I agree with Vince's point. The user that a studio potter faces in
the US is uneducated in the use and appreciation of highfired, non-Walmart
ceramics. These same people are Wildly uneducated about the use of pitfired
ceramics as functional vessels. To call a pot functional assumes the
potential user understands what that functionality is. For example, if a user
expects a pot to survive stovetop use, exposed to flame, then no stoneware
object is functional. The question of functionality assumes that the maker
and the user have an understanding of the limits of meaning of that word"
"
History
A pit firing is one of the most universal, primitive firings executed today. Firings of this type were an adaptation to firing the ware in bon fires. At some point it was discovered that digging a pit in the ground and firing the ware in a pit led to higher temperatures resulting in a more hard, enduring fired clay. As time continued pit firing evolved to digging holes in the mountainside, a primitive version of today's Anagama. "
from:
http://www.claystation.com/technical/firing/pit_techniques/intro.html