- The spout is 1.5″ long.
- Each handle extends 1.25″ from the body and is 3.1875″ high.
Karen Charlie is a fine potter and this large canteen is the form, size and design for which she is best known. The size of the vessel impresses. The structured “shard” design is so complex that it is difficult to comprehend, requiring a dialog between the viewer and the pot.
Form:
The canteen is formed from a grey clay that fired a light tan color. A small unpolished surface can be seen inside the spout. The exterior surface was slipped and stone-polished leaving noticeable parallel striations below the thick framing line and on the back of the canteen. The striations on the front of the canteen are less noticeable, perhaps because this surface is thickly painted with designs. The outdoor dung firing left a very even dark tan blush on the vessel. The walls of this 4-pound canteen are substantial, as are the two handles at the 10 and 2 o’clock positions.
Karen Kahe Charley is of the Butterfly Clan and the canteen is signed on the back with Karen’s abstracted butterfly monogram and her initials: KKC.
Design:
The design is edged by a thin framing line that floats 0.375-inches above a single thick framing line that encircles the jar but is interrupted by the two handles, resulting in three segments. The diameter of the painted surface is 11-inches.
The design is bifurcated by two parallel bands of design and there are also bands of design perpendicular to these central bands. As a result the design is cut into quadrants, though the intersection of the linear bands is not centered in the design space and thus the quadrants are of slightly different sizes.. At the center of each quadrant is an abstracted avian form. Bowls and canteens laid out in quadrants with central curvilinear elements in each quadrant is a typical balanced design pattern at Hopi, so an initial look finds this pattern familiar. However nothing about the design is symmetrical and each quadrant has its own unique pattern of design. The painting is a complex puzzle of micro design elements set into bands, but unlike the typical pot from Hopi, the patterns of design do not symmetrically repeat.
In my terminology, painted “elements” cluster to form “patterns of design.” It might be possible to describe each pattern of design on this canteen, but the discussion would be pages of detailed text which I do not have the patience to write, nobody would have the patience to read, and, if read, would just obscure the beauty of the vessel. On this canteen, patterns of design are separated from neighboring patterns by three parallel lines, “two-lane highways.” These highways are demarcations that indicate where Karen finished one pattern of design and began another. Thus defined, there are 79 patterns of design on canteen 2024-11 plus the boundary “highways.” Each of these patterns is different from the other 78 patterns of design; each pattern is unique.
Gaging how many elements cluster to form a particular design is a matter of judgement that is quite variable. For example, look at the diagonal band of design consisting of 7 parallel lines forming a 6-lane highway overlaid with a pointed zig-zag line. Clearly the design is composed of (7 + 1) 8 elements. Nearby is what Barbara Kramer called a “clown” face that was favored by Nampeyo (1996:188). I see this pattern as being formed by 3 elements: the red forehead/nose and two half-moon eyes. The unpainted area in the segment is crucial to defining this pattern, so others might count it as a 4th element but since it is an unpainted residual space, I did not. I also made judgements quickly as I examined all 79 sections of design and I may well have been inconsistent in my judgement. Nevertheless, saying that the 79 patterns of design are formed from 277 elements is a pretty accurate estimate; I counted several times. Thus the average pattern of design is built from about 3.5 elements, though I’m not sure this ratio has much meaning.
The four curvilinear avian figures share an overall form: each has a squared off end and an end that is caped with pointed elements, but the internal segments of design are unique to each rendition. Notice that close to the center of the design, directly below the spout, is a red rectangle cut by an unpainted “two-lane” diagonal. Fifteen additional red elements are scattered throughout the design. The number of red elements per quadrant varies widely.
Design Analysis:
This visual complexity of the design on canteen 2024-11 unsettles and dazzles. As Karen began painting the next pattern of design, I don’t know how she remembered the patterns already painted and thus was able to make each of the 79 patterns unique. How is it possible to create 79 different patterns with no duplication?
The line drawing is very precise. Notice that the seven lines of the diagonal 6-lane highway are all thin and exactly parallel, although 11-inches long. Design elements are paired closely but are spaced precisely apart. Karen had superb control of her yucca-leaf brush when painting this pot.
An additional example: Along the outer edge of the curvilinear bird on the lower left quadrant is a design consisting of five parallel lines (a “4-lane highway”) that follows the curve of the bird. One section of this design is 4.75-inches long and is interrupted by the boundary to the next segment of design, then this highway continues for an additional 2-inches closer to the head of the bird. Superimposed across the center two lanes are a series of solid black balls, 8 on the longer section and 3 on the shorter section. The two outer lanes are free of these black balls. The black balls are perfectly round and of a consistent size. They are evenly-spaced and exactly fill the two center lanes beneath them, leaving the flanking lanes free of obstructions. The openness of this design highlights the avian image, much as Nampeyo often used empty space to highlight her designs. I have never seen this design before; it is imaginative, delicate and elegant — and only one of dozens of examples I might have used to demonstrate the prowess of Karen Charlie’s painting.
With a less-skilled artist the 79 different design patterns on canteen 2024-11 would have become just a jumble, as so-called “shard” designs tend to be. (See bowl 1999-10.) Because of her care in assembling her 79 patterns of design, the painting on canteen 2024-11 is both structured and asymmetric, giving the design great energy. Remember that red rectangle near the center of the design bifurcated by a diagonal 2-lane unpainted highway? The design is much like a scuba-diving flag, though such activity would be difficult at the dry Hopi mesas. Given its central position this red flag design attracts a viewer’s eye and centers the design layout. The scattering of 17 additional red elements across the painted surface helps visually unify the scattered placement of disparate elements.
The four-quadrant layout with curvilinear avian forms at the center of each quadrant attracts and somewhat centers a viewer’s eyes, but then the eyes encounter masses of dissonant designs drawn in great detail. This discontinuity of vision is unsettling as one’s brain tries to form patterns when the eyes see macro design structures composed of random micro design patterns. Human perception tries to organize forms into recognizable patterns. It’s why we see carved human faces in photographs taken on Mars.
As a result, a viewer does not just see canteen 2024-11, one engages with it to make sense of the pattern of designs. In this sense Karen has created a canteen much like an impressionist painting. A viewer needs to work at understanding what she sees and thus develops a relationship with the art. Such encounters are memorable.
I am particularly pleased to add this canteen to the collection for several reasons. Karen and I spent a good portion of the 1989 Indian Market in Santa Fe visiting with each other (see 1989-01) and I visited her home in Keams Canyon 10 years later. Karen introduced me to her mother (Marcella Kahe) who I visited each time I returned to Hopi until her passing in 2008. Karen was taught by her Mother and began making pottery about 1980. She has become active with the Museum of Northern Arizona but their collection does not contain one of her signature large canteens, and now it will when the remainder of my collection is absorbed into the museum collection.
