CORRESPONDENCE
Dear Sir:

I would like you to note the date of this letter (Feb. 7th, 1969)
so that you will observe that the jurying of the Canadian Biannual has
not yet taken place and I cannot, therefore, be accused of prejudice.

I travelled for two hours on a cold winter's night to attend
Warren Mackenzie's lecture at the Art Gallery. Iwas more than a
little surprised to find that, confronted by a slide of 3 mugs, the sex
of the potters was the subject of comment.

Iwas not aware that pottery was a man's world; or that I
was in competition with men potters or, indeed, potters of any sort.
Most naively I believed that I was involved in a perfectly serious re-
lationship with clay - that Iwas involved with pots qua pots. The
sex, religion, age, nationality, indeed the identity of the potters has
never seemed of any importance. I went to find out what Mr.
MacKenzie thought about the potters' art and craft and it is my feeling
that discussion nus centre on the objects themselves, not the potters.
History, Philosophy, Geology is relevant - surely the rest is on the
level of gossipmongering ?

Do homosexuals make different pots to other men? Does
a lefthanded, butterscotch orientated celibate Nova Scotian make
different pots to a righthanded, Mars bars-eating father of 10 in
Timbuctoo? Probably - but what's important? The potter - or his pot?
If we're going to talk about pots let's do it on an intelligent level.

And if the sex of the potter is going to affect the attitude of
the jury, let's have anonymous competitors - is that what we are? -
rather than anonymous juries.

I remain, Sir, though you are madam,
Yours truly,
Gillian Hodge -
(Right-handed, animal-raising, country living, coffee drinking mother

of 4)
23