Variations between the traditional fabrication of porcelain objects and contemporary artists\u2019 reuse of the technique provokes a discrepancy, a sense that the material and iconographic dimension of the object is somewhat \u201cout-of-phase.\u201d1<\/sup><\/a><\/span> 1 <\/a> - The term is borrowed from Giorgio Agamben, \u201cWhat Is the Contemporary?\u201d in What is an Apparatus? and Other Essays<\/em>, trans. David Kishik and Stefan Pedatella (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2009).<\/span> It prompts us to examine the nature of this know-how and its artistic and conceptual variations. True to the technical process entailed by the making of porcelain\u2009\u2014\u2009moulding and casting, assemblage, firing, painting\u2009\u2014\u2009artists Shary Boyle, Laurent Craste, and Brendan Lee Satish Tang nonetheless subvert the traditional object by exaggerating its ornamentation, transforming the original imagery, vandalizing it, or exposing its material qualities. More broadly, the gap between the origin of this manual know-how and its re-actualization in contemporary artistic practice cannot be dissociated from historical and socio-economic contingencies. Indeed, from porcelain\u2019s first production in the Far East and then in Europe a few centuries later, these contingencies have determined aesthetic and symbolic dimensions that the approach of these three artists compels us to re-examine. Metaphorical rather than narrative, the works of Boyle, Craste, and Tang reiterate a material and iconographic vocabulary that showcases porcelain as the historical archetype of decorative art. With a past steeped in economic conquests, the porcelain object testifies to the first mercantile explorations, providing the initial impetus to the opening up of continents, precursor to the current phenomenon of globalization.<\/pre>\n\n\n\n
Porcelain: Traditional Know-How<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Often called \u201cwhite gold\u201d for its immaculate whiteness and translucency, porcelain was the object of prolific naval commerce between China and Europe from the 16th to the 18th centuries\u2009\u2014\u2009before the discovery, by Germany and France, of the recipe for the white ceramic and of kaolin deposits. Each of these countries has developed its own stylistic language and distinct techniques. Boyle, Craste, and Tang have drawn inspiration from these particularities, to the extent that their works may even be distinguished by a predilection for one or the other of these decorative styles: the figurines in Boyle\u2019s Porcelain Fantasy<\/em> refer to the techniques developed in Meissen2<\/sup><\/a><\/span> 2 <\/a> - A technique developed by the Meissen manufactory used by Boyle in the production of her pieces includes lacework on porcelain, a technique that consists in placing  lace previously soaked in liquid porcelain directly on the figurine. When fired, the fabric burns away, leaving only its imprint on the ceramic. The Meissen manufacturer is also recognized for the brightness of its colours and for the mythological group scenes of Johann Joachim K\u00e4ndler\u2009\u2014\u2009a master sculptor who made the manufacturer\u2019s reputation when he joined in 1730. These group scenes were particularly influential on Boyle\u2019s treatment of mythological subjects in her work.<\/span>\u2009\u2014\u2009rococo ornamental styling marked by lacework and the proliferation of authentic flower motifs, as in Snowball<\/em> (2006)\u2009\u2014\u2009while those of Craste are inspired by the history and techniques of S\u00e8vres. This manufactory, founded by Madame de Pompadour for the royal court in the reign of Louis XV, exemplifies the ideological framework that governed porcelain production. Themes in Craste\u2019s Iconocrash<\/em> series (2010) suggest the vandalism and destruction of decorative objects belonging to the bourgeoisie and aristocracy during the French Revolution. The iconography in Tang\u2019s pieces, on the other hand, reflects that of the porcelain produced during the Ming dynasty in the 15th century. Traditionally rendered in hues of blue and white, these flower and plant symbols and motifs, along with the figure of the dragon, have since served to historically identify and inscribe these objects. Tang\u2019s Manga Ormolu<\/em> series (2009) juxtaposes these now standard Chinese visual elements with indeterminate and unidentifiable objects taken from Japanese Manga, now so popular in both the East and the West, highlighting a tension between these two Far Eastern icons. Manifestly, then, while subverting the tradition of the decorative object, these artists are nonetheless upholding it through the replication of artisanal techniques.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n
<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
\n
<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n