Bob Simon wrote:
>
> I have a set of four hand-made stoneware plates with tri-color glazes
> that I consider art pieces as much as dinnerware. Years ago, we also
> purchased a set of Royal Doulton porcelain plates for everyday use.
> My wife says that since she has noticed scratches on the porcelain
> plates, we should only serve meat on the stoneware which will resist
> scratches from knives.
>
> Does anyone happen to know which is usually harder: stoneware or
> porcelain?

Well, I'm going to reply even though I don't really *know*.
I would say porcelain is less hard as one tends to think
of porcelain as being "delicate", and the term is used
metaphorically as when describing "porcelain" skin, meaning
"delicate. Also, the name "stoneware" implies hardness so
I'm thinking it would be harder. But then maybe it just
seems harder because it's so big and heavy compared to
porcelain, which is thinner and lighter.

> Even if the glazes are typically about equally scratch-resistant,
> wouldn't it make sense to generally use the commercial porcelain
> plates, reserving the decorative stoneware plates for special
> occasions?

I find it curious that, from what you've written above,
you seem to think of the porcelain as "everyday" ware and
the stoneware as your "good stuff". To me it would seem
to be the other way around. Generally porcelain is more
refined and used for "good", while stoneware is more mundane
and used for everyday. That being said, my stoneware *is*
my *good* stuff, but then I don't have any porcelain. And
also I suppose one can have cheap porcelain that would not
be as "nice" as some really good stoneware.

Kate

> --
> Bob Simon
> remove both "x"s from domain for private replies


--
Kate Connally
“If I were as old as I feel, I’d be dead already.”
Goldfish: “The wholesome snack that smiles back,
Until you bite their heads off.”
What if the hokey pokey really *is* what it's all about?