Hannah McAndrew sent us this campaign from Craft Potters:
Dear friend of Ceramic Review,
You may have heard - from Bonnie herself or from other sources - that Dr Bonnie Kemske's contract as Editor of Ceramic Review was recently terminated by the Craft Potters Association.
We feel strongly that this decision is not in the best interests of the future of the magazine.
We urge you to read the letter below which we plan to send to the CPA board with a list of signatories.
If you would like to join us by adding your name, in solidarity with Bonnie and in the interest of maintaining the magazine's high editorial standards and international outlook, please reply to this email (to: WeAreCeramicReview@gmail.com) with YES as your subject line by midnight on Friday 20 September.
Please send this on to anyone you think might also like to add their name. Apologies for cross-posting.
Dr Claudia Clare
Dear Craft Potters Association Board Members,
We write to express our deep disappointment at the recent removal of Dr Bonnie Kemske as editor of Ceramic Review.
We feel strongly that, under her editorship, the magazine has taken on a new lease of life. Over the last three years we have welcomed the publication’s broader perspective, particularly enjoying the international dimension, and the inclusion of a wide variety of ceramic production. The range of articles about industry, studio pottery, installation work, sculpture, and public and community art projects, have provided an excellent overview of the breadth of production and the scale of ambition that defines our field.
It is this mix, combined with the international coverage, that gives Ceramic Review its considerable, and currently unparalleled, national and international status.
Our shared concern is that the broad-based appeal of Ceramic Review, its inclusive, democratic, and international content, and tone of open debate, is set to become increasingly conservative and narrow. This would be a great shame. At best, these are very challenging times for magazines. Narrowing the Ceramic Review remit will, almost certainly, reduce its readership and threaten its survival.
Many of us are CPA members, Ceramic Review subscribers and contributors as well as readers. We are all stakeholders in the Ceramic Review enterprise. The welfare and future success of this magazine affects us all. We urge you to retain a progressive and inclusive agenda for Ceramic Review, under an independent editorship.
We would welcome an opportunity to discuss these issues further and call for you hold an extraordinary general meeting for that purpose.