How Pottery Throwdown is a better programme than Artist of the Year

There have been a number of television programmes over the years about creating/making things in a competitive context and I've commented on a lot of them (see my Art on Television page)

I've been writing reviews of the Portrait and Lansdscape Artist of the Year series (and others) since 2018 and I've been watching The Great Pottery Throwdown since it started - but never reviewed it.

However this year, I feel prompted to say why I think Pottery Throwdown is a better programme

This is in the context of the multiple criticisms over the years of PAOTY and LAOTY, many of which are shared by viewers.

The Love Productions pic for The Great Pottery Throwdown

So here goes

Observations about the differences in format

How they are made

• Artist of the Year has two strands - 
• landscape moves around three or four sites during the heats; plus a new site for each of the semifinals and final
• PAOTY is now always based at Battersea Arts Centre throughout
• Throwdown involves making pottery at the Gladstone Pottery in Stoke

When they are made 

• each PAOTY / LAOTY heat takes one day to film (with the Artists)
• PAOTY Heats are filmed in April - with the semifinal, final and commission following in May/early June
• LAOTY Heats are filmed in late June - with the semifinal/final/commission in July
• Throwdown is filmed over a 9-10 week period during August, September, October and November (I've always had the very distinct impression it is done at or around weekends given each episode takes two days)

Number of artists/potters

• PAOTY / LAOTY have nine artists in each heat and hence multiple artists are selected but only one from each heat gets to the semi-final
• Throwdown has 12 potters at the start - and one leaves each week. 
• Both have a final with just three 

Time allocated

• Artist of the Year artists have just four hours to produce their portrait / landscape
• the smart portrait artists can forgo lunch and breaks and keep painting - but with no sitter. 
• (Not sure what happens with the landscape artists but I suspect similar)
• The potters are set two tasks
• a major make - with a different theme each week. Typically they are allocated six hours+ for the main make. This is dictated by the time it typically takes to make and the fact the clay needs to be dried and fired twice in a kiln (bisque firing and then final firing after decoration and colour has been applied. It's a complex process.
• they also participate in a skills task where the allotted time typically does not exceed 20 minutes. They have absolutely no idea what this will be each week.

The philosophy of Keith Brymer Jones - who has been "making" for years

Observations on the differences in quality

Output and Objectives 

PAOTY / LAOTY 

OBJECTIVE: present the artists with a subject or view and basically say "get on with it"

• artists create one artwork - 
• they choose how to make it and what media to use 
• but their subject matter is proscribed
• artists have no knowledge in advance of what they will be doing
• there are no objectives other than "create a landscape / portrait"

The Great Pottery Throwdown

Pottery Throwdown: potters create have to create two sets of work

• one is bigger, more creative and a longer task. More typical of artisan pottery.
• they get notice of the objective in advance
• they arrive with sketchbooks of their ideas. 
• the "no notice" task is more about operational production of pottery 
• keeps a clear focus on the way most pottery is made 
• and the skill, speed and accuracy involved

To my mind, Throwdown provides a much better appreciation of the potter's knowledge, skills and creativity.

Criteria

PAOTY / LAOTY 

No specific objectives are provided - other than "create an artwork of what is in front of you"

• there is no requirement re what you can exclude or style or size or media
• the only criteria is that it should have "something that makes it different / has a contemporary edge" i.e. very unspecific. You could as easily say "what Kate Bryan likes"

The Great Pottery Throwdown

Each episode and each task provides VERY SPECIFIC DETAILS of:

• what is required in terms of a very specific outcome
• what is expected in terms of the standard and quality (and functionality if appropriate) of the work eg 
• a teapot must hold tea, not leak and the spout provides a good pour
• bowls must a uniform size for the purpose

The HUGE advantage that Throwdown has over Artist of the Year is it is VERY SPECIFIC about output, standards and criteria.

Educational Content

PAOTY / LAOTY 

Any decent educational content tends to come from the artists rather than the Judges.

That's because only one person (Tai Shan Shierenberg) is an artist - and he has demonstrated on numerous occasions that he is not well acquainted with different media and different ways of working.

There is a lot of "artspeak" for want of a better term (with Kate Bryan being the prime culprit) which is uninformative and not helpful. I have commented on this at length in my reviews so will not repeat here.

The Great Pottery Throwdown

I personally think Throwdown is infinitely superior in terms of educational content. Each programme provides EXPERT comments about making and what is said is edited such that each provides a summary of 

• key aspects to know
• skills which are important
• criteria against which pottery outputs which be judged - in the wider world and not just the programme

This is a VERY EDUCATIONAL programme.

Judges

PAOTY / LAOTY 

Judges with the presenter

Judging is one of the aspects which attracts the most criticism about this programme.

In part, this is because of the deficits in the realms of objectives, output and criteria - as outlined above.

As such, 

• judging tends to be very "partial". While human judgement is inherently NOT impartial (ie. it's subject to personal experience and bias), the scope for making judgement more impartial exists - but is neglected.
• judging is also done towards the end in the absence of us being able to see which artwork they are talking about. 
• The programme ACTIVELY MASKS THE PROCESS OF JUDGEMENT. 

It always leaves me thinking that the winner was decided before they even started the heat.

The Great Pottery Throwdown

Judging on the programme is:

• open and transparent
• accessible by ALL the participants and ALL the viewers i.e. everybody learns all the time
• related to the criteria stipulated at the beginning - which is the only way to judge fairly
• covers the spectrum from excellent to appalling in terms of the vocabulary used to describe outputs and outcomes
• rendered with humanity and decency and care for the maker.

To me it is a model programme which others would do well to copy.

It should be emphasised that the exactly the same can be said about other Live Productions i.e.

• The Great British Bakeoff and 
• The Great British Sewing Bee.

The very distinctive difference which allows Love Productions to deliver on judgement is the use of EXPERTS IN THEIR FIELD as Judges 

i.e people who have been and still are "makers in their field of expertise"

That to me is the overwhelming reason why their programmes are better and have such a very faithful following.

So - what do you think? Comments on Facebook are welcome.

Companies who make the series

The Artist of the Year series are made by Storyvault Films for Sky Arts. These and variations on a theme (Celebrity / what Christain Hook did next) are the only art programmes they make.

The Great Pottery Throwdown is made by Love Productions Limited for Channel 4 who make a variety of similar programmes within the field of arts and crafts.