Abstract South African studio pottery of the later twentieth century has consistently been described as “Anglo-Oriental” because it was perceived to adhere to the standard forms of utilitarian wares as promoted by the Anglo-Oriental tradition of studio pottery. This article investigates the validity of such an epithet, based on evidence that the pioneer South African studio potters and their successors were exposed to broader pottery influences, and that their oeuvres reflected what they borrowed, adapted and re-interpreted from such influences. The careers of South Africa's pioneer studio potters and some of the second generation of studio potters are investigated. The finding is that South African studio pottery of that period was an expression of mostly utilitarian pottery forms reflecting many influences but not dominated by any single pottery tradition. The term “Anglo-Oriental” is useful if used judiciously to describe the aesthetics and ethics of some, but not all, South African studio potters of the later twentieth century. The article further explores whether the era's studio potters contributed towards the creation of a distinctive South African pottery identity and presents the finding that at best, the collective character of the studio pottery can be considered expansive rather than geographic- or culture-specific.

中文翻译：

---

20 世纪后期的南非工作室陶器及其盎格鲁-东方绰号

摘要 20 世纪后期的南非工作室陶器一直被描述为“盎格鲁-东方”，因为它被认为遵循了由盎格鲁-东方工作室陶器传统所提倡的实用器皿的标准形式。本文基于有证据表明南非工作室陶艺先驱及其继任者受到更广泛的陶器影响，并且他们的作品反映了他们从这些影响中借用、改编和重新诠释的东西，从而调查了这样一个绰号的有效性。调查了南非先驱工作室陶艺家和一些第二代工作室陶艺家的职业生涯。调查结果是，那个时期的南非工作室陶器主要是功利主义陶器形式的表达，反映了许多影响，但不受任何单一陶器传统的支配。如果明智地使用“Anglo-Oriental”一词来描述 20 世纪后期的一些（但不是全部）南非工作室陶艺家的美学和伦理，则它很有用。这篇文章进一步探讨了那个时代的工作室陶艺家是否为创造独特的南非陶器身份做出了贡献，并提出了一个发现，即工作室陶器的集体特征充其量可以被认为是广阔的，而不是特定于地理或文化的。二十世纪后期的南非工作室陶艺家。这篇文章进一步探讨了那个时代的工作室陶艺家是否为创造独特的南非陶器身份做出了贡献，并提出了一个发现，即工作室陶器的集体特征充其量可以被认为是广阔的，而不是特定于地理或文化的。二十世纪后期的南非工作室陶艺家。这篇文章进一步探讨了那个时代的工作室陶艺家是否为创造独特的南非陶器身份做出了贡献，并提出了一个发现，即工作室陶器的集体特征充其量可以被认为是广阔的，而不是特定于地理或文化的。