Interesting Pots Have Interesting Bases

Not necessarily. I think Rosemary Wren disproves the premise :)

If you didn't know who Denise Wren was then I doubt you'd pay any attention to these two pots.

Would you say Terry Davies' bottom was particularly interesting?

The point I'm making is that sometimes we get a bit sniffy about incised or written names and dates; I've been guilty too of the knee jerk reaction that it's probably Student Work, because we're so used to seeing stamped monograms. But there are a number of US, Australian, etc, etc, studio potters who, tbh, must be dyslexic considering the way they sign their work; it's little better than how a student would do it.

philpot wrote:I cannot think of many 'collectable' modern potters who actually just use a signature. Peter Hayes, Derek Davis......?

....modern British potters....

Nic Collins could be added too, and the ones who don't mark their work at all.

Tbh, it's becoming more common these days as the 'Leach effect' wears off and potters fresh out of Art College are less likely to use a stamped monogram. The majority still do, but there are plenty of new faces in the Galleries signing or using a wax crayon or some other way of marking their work - Yuta Segawa for example