𝕮𝖗𝖊𝖆𝖙𝖎𝖛𝖊 𝕻𝖗𝖔𝖈𝖊𝖘𝖘 𝕵𝖔𝖚𝖗𝖓𝖆𝖑
ℌ𝔢𝔩𝔩𝔬 𝔯𝔢𝔞𝔡𝔢𝔯, 𝔐𝔶 𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔢 𝔦𝔰 𝔚𝔢𝔰𝔩𝔢𝔶 𝔅𝔲𝔩𝔩 (𝔥𝔢/𝔱𝔥𝔢𝔶) 𝔞𝔫𝔡 ℑ’𝔪 21 𝔶𝔢𝔞𝔯𝔰 𝔬𝔩𝔡. ℑ’𝔪 𝔞 𝔰𝔢𝔫𝔦𝔬𝔯 𝔦𝔫𝔱𝔢𝔯𝔡𝔦𝔰𝔠𝔦𝔭𝔩𝔦𝔫𝔞𝔯𝔶 𝔰𝔠𝔲𝔩𝔭𝔱𝔲𝔯𝔢 𝔪𝔞𝔧𝔬𝔯 𝔞𝔱 𝔐𝔞𝔯𝔶𝔩𝔞𝔫𝔡 ℑ𝔫𝔰𝔱𝔦𝔱𝔲𝔱𝔢 ℭ𝔬𝔩𝔩𝔢𝔤𝔢 𝔬𝔣 𝔄𝔯𝔱. ℑ 𝔥𝔞𝔳𝔢 𝔟𝔢𝔢𝔫 𝔞𝔱𝔱𝔢𝔫𝔡𝔦𝔫𝔤 𝔣𝔦𝔫𝔢 𝔞𝔯𝔱 𝔰𝔠𝔥𝔬𝔬𝔩 𝔰𝔦𝔫𝔠𝔢 6𝔱𝔥 𝔤𝔯𝔞𝔡𝔢 𝔞𝔫𝔡 ℑ 𝔥𝔞𝔳𝔢 𝔟𝔲𝔦𝔩𝔱 𝔞 𝔠𝔞𝔱𝔞𝔩𝔬𝔤𝔲𝔢 𝔬𝔣 𝔰𝔨𝔦𝔩𝔩𝔰 𝔞𝔫𝔡 𝔱𝔢𝔠𝔥𝔫𝔦𝔮𝔲𝔢𝔰 𝔯𝔞𝔫𝔤𝔦𝔫𝔤 𝔣𝔯𝔬𝔪 𝔞 𝔡𝔦𝔳𝔢𝔯𝔰𝔢 𝔭𝔞𝔩𝔢𝔱𝔱𝔢 𝔬𝔣 𝔪𝔢𝔡𝔦𝔲𝔪𝔰. ℑ 𝔥𝔞𝔳𝔢 𝔤𝔞𝔦𝔫𝔢𝔡 𝔢𝔵𝔱𝔢𝔫𝔰𝔦𝔳𝔢 𝔨𝔫𝔬𝔴𝔩𝔢𝔡𝔤𝔢 𝔦𝔫 𝔱𝔯𝔞𝔡𝔦𝔱𝔦𝔬𝔫𝔞𝔩 𝔪𝔢𝔡𝔦𝔲𝔪𝔰 𝔩𝔦𝔨𝔢: 𝔡𝔯𝔞𝔴𝔦𝔫𝔤, 𝔭𝔯𝔦𝔫𝔱𝔪𝔞𝔨𝔦𝔫𝔤, 𝔴𝔬𝔬𝔡 𝔞𝔫𝔡 𝔪𝔢𝔱𝔞𝔩 𝔴𝔬𝔯𝔨𝔦𝔫𝔤 𝔱𝔬 𝔪𝔬𝔯𝔢 𝔲𝔫𝔦𝔮𝔲𝔢 𝔭𝔯𝔞𝔠𝔱𝔦𝔠𝔢𝔰 𝔩𝔦𝔨𝔢: 𝔰𝔱𝔞𝔦𝔫𝔢𝔡 𝔤𝔩𝔞𝔰𝔰, 𝔣𝔦𝔩𝔪, 𝔭𝔢𝔯𝔣𝔬𝔯𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔠𝔢 𝔞𝔫𝔡 𝔡𝔦𝔤𝔦𝔱𝔞𝔩 𝔣𝔞𝔟𝔯𝔦𝔠𝔞𝔱𝔦𝔬𝔫. 𝔉𝔬𝔯 𝔪𝔶 𝔱𝔥𝔢𝔰𝔦𝔰 ℑ’𝔪 𝔭𝔯𝔬𝔡𝔲𝔠𝔦𝔫𝔤 𝔞 𝔣𝔦𝔩𝔪 𝔴𝔥𝔦𝔠𝔥 𝔢𝔵𝔭𝔩𝔬𝔯𝔢𝔰 𝔱𝔥𝔢 𝔱𝔥𝔢𝔪𝔢𝔰 𝔬𝔣 𝔢𝔳𝔬𝔩𝔲𝔱𝔦𝔬𝔫, 𝔞𝔯𝔱 𝔥𝔦𝔰𝔱𝔬𝔯𝔶, 𝔞𝔫𝔡 𝔯𝔢𝔩𝔦𝔤𝔦𝔬𝔫. ℑ’𝔪 𝔳𝔢𝔯𝔶 𝔦𝔫𝔱𝔯𝔦𝔤𝔲𝔢𝔡 𝔟𝔶 𝔲𝔫𝔢𝔵𝔭𝔩𝔬𝔯𝔢𝔡 𝔪𝔢𝔡𝔦𝔲𝔪𝔰 𝔞𝔫𝔡 𝔦𝔫𝔱𝔢𝔯𝔢𝔰𝔱𝔢𝔡 𝔦𝔫 𝔭𝔲𝔯𝔰𝔲𝔦𝔫𝔤 𝔤𝔩𝔞𝔰𝔰 𝔟𝔩𝔬𝔴𝔦𝔫𝔤 𝔞𝔰 𝔞 𝔭𝔯𝔬𝔣𝔢𝔰𝔰𝔦𝔬𝔫. 𝔗𝔥𝔦𝔰 𝔭𝔞𝔤𝔢 𝔴𝔦𝔩𝔩 𝔰𝔢𝔯𝔳𝔢 𝔱𝔥𝔢 𝔭𝔲𝔯𝔭𝔬𝔰𝔢 𝔬𝔣 𝔯𝔢𝔠𝔬𝔯𝔡𝔦𝔫𝔤 𝔞𝔫𝔡 𝔡𝔬𝔠𝔲𝔪𝔢𝔫𝔱𝔦𝔫𝔤 𝔪𝔶 𝔭𝔯𝔬𝔠𝔢𝔰𝔰 𝔞𝔫𝔡 𝔱𝔥𝔦𝔫𝔨𝔦𝔫𝔤 𝔣𝔬𝔯 “𝔘𝔫𝔯𝔞𝔳𝔢𝔩 𝔱𝔥𝔢 ℭ𝔬𝔡𝔢”.
The Sympathy of Things- Ruskin and the Ecology of design- Lars Spuybroek
In Spuybroek’s writing his discusses his ideas through the lens of an architect by define the design/ ontology of “things”. He reinstates his opinions on matter by relating to the modern/ contemporary practices of computing by summarizing in his words as “Gothic”. He uses the term “Gothic” to compare the historical reference of digital and physical spaces (art). Spuybroek defines “Gothic” as “being so fundamentally relational, all the way up so to speak – and for it being at root entirely digital in character.”He emphasizes his points in the chapter titled “The Matter of Ornaments” by understanding the role that “Gothic” has played inn our perception of today object especially with the influence of technology. He continues by talking about the purpose, function, and “abstract materialism” to get to the underline concepts of how this is embodied in experience, interaction, and comprehension. Even though he gets in to some heavy controversial topic my favorite theme come in the chapter “Abstract Sympathy” after he conveys the clashing of modern aesthetics to “Gothic” by personifying the reader as a emotionally complex character analyzing the objects in the world in a conceptual meaningful way. Final Spuyroek ask the question” how we define/ contain material ascetics, considering the entanglement of other inspiration?” He concludes/ answers the question by expressing anchoring method, “in which past, present and future all seem coextensive throughout”. Perhaps this is obvious, but observing history in a way that includes the present and future times allows some to make prediction that inn some ways transcend the language/ material understanding of culture. Personally I think Spuybroek collaborated with other philosophers to build an original point of how to explain/ interpret the changing turn we are currently living in.
In this class exercise we conducted an experiment hoping to test and explore the boundaries of translating different mediums across the 2-D, 3-D, 4-D plane. We attempted doing this by using the Rhino and Grasshopper interface to destructed a image with symbols and patters. Then we proceeded to use the filtered image on the plotter to create a 2-D drawing.
The plotter receives the data through Rhino once the display is bake, and begins drawing out the design with a specialized pen attachment.
Once the plotter finished the drawing my group and I mounted it on to a foam board surface, then took a white flexible cloth material and stretched it over and around the draw/ board. After stapling down the cloth so it was strung tight we started outline the drawing with hot glue guns.
In the final result we unattached the piece of cloth from the board that had been hot glue on and observed it’s unique physical qualities, pointing on the details of intruding and extruding spaces. We all discussed the experimental/ conceptual process of this project by using new mediums to deconstruct and reconstruct data/images to uncover a new product.
Personal Thoughts: I really enjoyed this experiment because it involved so many new and exciting methods of treating art as well as a train of thought that you can see evolve through every translation. I especially appreciated Marantha presentation, demonstration, and ideas relating to figuring out new ways of treating data specifically considering it affect or relation to nature and the environment.
On Weaving “The Fundamental Constructions”- Annie Albers
In the third chapter, “The Fundamental Constructions”, Albers offer a very literal and in depth understanding of weaving as a practice in relation to the medium of fibers as a whole. I was very intrigued to read about her language explaining the different techniques and methods that are applied to the skill. And building off of that thought how she broke down the different elements of weaving to understand it on a tangible level by defining the specific terminology. In a lot of ways this created a mental image in my head of the actual actions and materials interacting with one another producing a demonstration of a weaving. Lastly she meticulously describe the sensations of the different threads and tension while relating the historical and cultural understanding of fibers as a functional craft.
This reading has lead me to consider and ponder on the rich and influential practice of weaving including other fiber techniques like textile, fashion, garments, and crocheting. I’m interested in learning more of the history of fibers and how it can be applied to my own understand of my practice and conceptual ideas. I would want to implement the history of fibers in its functional/ practical uses and how we has humans have developed/ integrated that into our lifestyle. For example how we wear clothes or how it can be viewed as an extension or representation of our personality and character.
In this week’s class we were introduce to the art of weaving by our guest was Mary Smull. She explained the different process, techniques, and elements to create a weaving by firstly starting with a brief historical overview of how the machinery of a loom has evolved. Then we reviewed the language and terminology that was discussed in the reading to clarify how it can be applied in the physical. She proceed by teach us “weave drafting” which is a visual way to plan out different pattern sequences through a system of raisers and sinkers. This further elaborated on the complex devices and uses of a loom. The loom is made of a different “shuttles” that move up and down that are controlled by individual pedals that correlate to the specify shuttle number. This allows what is being woven through the “weft” by the “warp” intertwining through the threads that are taught to the loom. The weaver then seats on the “horse” and starts pushing the “boat”, which contains the spun thread, through the warp as you left the shuttles. Then to tighten the thread you pull back the “comb”, which applies pressure to the weaving to create an evenly taught fabric.
For homework we were assigned to weave an inch on the loom. I tried two different processes; the first one being a very simple 1,3,5,7 across and then 2,4,6,8 back which create a sorta checker patterned motif. The second pattern I used a 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8 sequence which create a zig zag pattern. I struggled a little bit with memorizing the different patterns and create a tight enough strung to the thread on the loom. I would want to continue exploring more things that can be accomplished on the loom because I really enjoyed doing the whole process of weaving from winding the thread around the boat spoil to being bare foot while playing the pedals. I would love to experiment more with these idea like we were in rhino to discover how this could be come more part of my practice.
The Nature and Art of workmanship- David Pye
In Pye’s writing he discusses the fundamentals of what it means to be a “craftsmen” and what craft based work entails. He proposes his points by comparing it to industrial or manufactured based design production. This is a topic that I think about a lot in my daily practice as well as a conversation that is talked about throughout the art community in general. It’s not that I feel so strongly about either side but I think I have gained a certain respect for both disciplines as I have experienced the complexities of both. In most way I find it interesting to approach project with a health dosage of both; the detailed care of hands on decision making and the precision of technical based design. I apply this philosophy to something like working in stained glass and combining that with the machinery of the digital fabrication lab. I know in a general sense this conversation might seem broad but to analyze it through a temporal, finical, and production base stand point elaborates on the value that both practice can be harnessed to the fullest. I find it intriguing to think about the specific examples that Pye brings up about the set of skills acquired by a craftsmen and how that established that a modern sense of labour and tool/ material understanding. Later into the writing he mentions the importance of craft based aesthetics especially considering the future ad how we are moving int a direction where we are becoming reliant on technology and machinery to do the work for us. Obviously this argument can go both ways but this make me strongly contemplate the relationship humans have to such advance machinery without the recognition of the natural resources used in creating such equipment. Lastly Pye theorizes how this could evolve our relationship and mindset to learning a crafts based process and what ways that could be used to cultivate a more efficient way of wanting to produce goods in away that doesn’t rely so heavily on the machine.
“What is Cybernetics?” From the Human use of Humans- Norbert Wiener
Through Wiener’s understanding of machinery through a humanistic lens he opposes Pye’s immediate philosophy about craft as a human relationship of material, skill, and tools by stating that “humanizing both the machine itself and the economy of which it was part, and thus remediating the problems wrought by the mechanization of labor.” Basically articulating that he believes that there is a sort of craft to using technology based machinery as a tool to better humans understand of themselves and the world. I have read this reading once before but after reading it again I have taken a whole new perspective on the matter. One of his most prominent points that I appreciated is his attention to see these machines as products of human discover served for human to continue exploration. He emphasizes this point by relating it to humans need for evolutionary activity which serve our greatest understand of “making”. He also seems to find a way to inform/ suggest that metaphorically humans and computers think alike in the way were programmed in receiving input and output data. Furthermore he pushes this idea by fabricating in exercise in which humans didn’t exist in the example of computing, leading him to the idea of survival and how our innate desire is to understand and reproduce. In existential fashion Wiener alters our perception of ourselves to better understand the offspring of machinery we have produced ad what way that manifest our behavior and language surrounding the powers of such mechanisms.
Postscripts on the Societies of Control- Gilles Deleuze
Deleuze found a way to describe the institutional foundation to corporations and their intricacies in society and the public eye. Rooting it a bigger picture of how we as individuals can see our relevance to three categories; Historical, Logic, and Program. The different elements that construct the industrial world we live in seem to dictate our interactions ad experiences. In a lot of examples this information became confusing at times especially within the political and economic realms, but one concrete thing I gained was Deleuze’s ideas was how us as human can see ourselves i relation to our environment to establish sustainable practices in a society that relies heavily on the use of exploited media. This almost seemed like a way for him to include us in how we have shifted the view of conducting our selves in a controlled programmed/ electronic space.
In this week’s workshop our visiting artist, Laura Devedorf, introduced us to a programmed used for mapping weaving patterns for the TC2 (Jacard) Loom that she programmed herself. She walked through the different capabilities on the site and how to organize/ create a weaving structure with the components and other complex systems. I really enjoyed having conversations and asking questions to Laura due to her extensive knowledge in weaving as well as knowing the ins and outs of the program she coded. Our class assignment was to create two 3×3 (180 weave and 240 weft) in patch that are going to be woven onto the TC2 loom; one is going to be a one layer weft and the other be a two layer weft. Also each patched needs to have 12-15 tabby on each side so it stays tight and easy to cut individual patch off the large weaving.
For my two homework assignments I simply just played around in the program hoping to come up with something visually appealing and would make interesting textures on the loom. The one on the right I used Laura’s sample file by plugging in my own designs and commands attempting to make a pattern motif. The one on the right I used the image tool and plugged in a small pixelated jpeg. image of a gothic hallway.
When we all arrived in class Laura took our files and oriented them in a fashion so it could fit across the length of the TC2 loom. We all ventured into the room the contains the loom ,uploaded the file, and got it up ad running. We all took turns throwing the boat through the weft and the stepping on the pedal to move the frames to their next command to pull back the shuttle. I found it very compelling to watch and hear the machine in action, one quality that I found very interesting was how the loom used vacuum/ air suction to left the frames, so every time you stepped on the pedal the vacuum would suck air from a tube that is connected to the loom to a separate closet. I was also intrigued when one of the black weaving strings broke and how we all had to work together to fix it by find the severed string ad reconnecting it in a knot so it wont infer later on. For the two layer patch we wove three different strings; blue, white, and conductive thread, hoping to create a long system of connectivity so we can use it in another project.
In this week’s workshop our class was assigned to dissect and view some code from open source projects that we found interesting. Once we found a project that related to our practice or involved something we would wanted to find out more about we analyzed the pieces of code that correlated to the specify commands. I found some projects that related to electronic moving mechanisms and controlled programed LED lighting.
For our work shop Vic and Alan taught us how to read and write some simple code so we can program our arduinos to do different task. We also learned how to build connections by applying solder infused with flux to the heated solder tip fusing the wires to inputs and outputs. Then by typing simple demands in the encoding program we were able to make the led lights shine different colors, repeat synchronized functions or patterns, create connectivity to other class mates ardunio’s, and establish conductive touch sensory to our woven patches.
As our final workshop of the semester before we shift gears into proposing and focusing on our personal projects I found this experience and skills extremely helpful, inspiring, and amusing. I realized myself contemplating a lot of the elements we worked with and how they are constructed in a way to function in a larger system. Similarly to the term “looking into a black box” that Ryan referred to in relation to creating a comparison to the scale and purpose of such intricately complex machinery. I still can’t full grasp such things but weirdly reflecting on it I still find it peaking my interesting due to these unknown aspects that I hope to unpack. Furthermore I can definitely see myself utilizing these techniques in my final especially researching more on the projects that I found for homework.
Week 8 (Reflection/ Research question)
Okay so where do I even start…
Obviously there is a lot to say about this class and what we have been exposed to up to this point and how we might harness or reflect on the knowledge and skills we have been taught. Let me start by saying that I have truly enjoyed everything about this class, all the time, effort, and expenses that have been poured into this course by all the amazing professors and guest artist. What I think I have gained most from this class so far is the mindset of exploring, experimenting, and innovation that has been applied into ever single class, assignment, and workshop. So now moving into my own personal research and direction I want to take that mindset with me as guiding factor. I’m hoping to retain a healthy dosage of curiosity and flexibility throughout the rest of the course to accommodate my practice as well as move into a mysteriously exciting territory.
Some of the themes I have I been thinking about during our discussions and class work revolves around the abstract ideas of computing/ digital language in comparison to the traditional crafts like hand weaving. I know that this is a vague stepping off point but I have found myself feeling this way about the course as a whole due to the rooted question about the relationship of the artist/ viewer to the material/ practice. Similarly to the machinery that use the power of electronic or technology based language to accomplish traditional hand craft techniques. Following this train of thought I have considered how contrasting different pieces of machinery/ art in setting that alter the purpose or relation that the viewer might have with it, but find a way to connect or communicate these multiple environments. Really feeding off of the physical idea of a distinct “input” and “output” motif that can be almost interchangeable and produce a diverse range of responses. The one I think is very reminiscent to this concept and is very intertwined with my own personal practice is “nature”; as a responsive footprint, a material, and future blueprint. Nature can seem very alien to something like a digital fabrication lab but understanding the natural materials that makeup those products and how they have developed from earth’s resources. I’m still trying to get at something deeper that is not so connected to this idea of nature and technology but something more along the lines of expresses the essence between the two as a visual dialogue. This seems very relatable to how I feel about unpacking the actual data in elaborate formulas but in a way of dissecting the history of nature that is embedded into it’s physical traits, like the age of tree based of the number of rings in trunk. This goes much further the closer you might look in the way that we can perceive living actions as algorithm system, again for example like how thousands of ants perform tasks for a larger purpose or how a spider designs geometrically based woven web.
Now I want to realize or establish how our human perception might respond to a scenario in which we are forced to analyze the communicative confrontation between the artificial (man made object to serve the purpose of creating something for a human being used by a human (human offspring)) and nature (what we derive from and what we are an offspring of (evolution)). This meta experience should first and foremost allow the audience (human factor) to feel somewhat apart of the conversation as if they were’t there then there would be no awareness. At the same time allow the fluidity between human, machine, and nature become blurred as the line between art comes into focus. As art goes I want there to being distinctive elements that separate it into the practical and not in the hypothetical because this should create a large context tow would it genuinely feels like to move through the world on a daily bases.
This makes me consider the material world and how the process of creating art with such material…
After giving some thought to the ideas I was theorizing about I want to state the tangible things I hope to accomplish in my final project. Firstly, I would love the opportunity to weave again on the Jacquard (TC2) loom. I was totally entranced by the activity of the machine as well as the bodily motions of throwing the boat, pressing the pedal, and pulling back the shuttle repeatedly; I found it to be a very playful and physical activity. And not to mention all the helpful advice, knowledge, and fun that Laura brought to our class. Out of all the workshops I think Laura’s was my favorite class, I can also see the TC2 becoming very much part of my practice, especially because it’s a very rare opportunity to use it due to its expense and technical advances, so I would feel ashamed in myself if I didn’t take advantage of it. I have thought about some of the in-depth conversations that I had with Laura about the machine, her practice, and how you can push the limits of what can be accomplished with the TC2 and weaving as a whole. Relating this philosophy to my earlier ideas about “nature’s algorithmic process” specifically the example of how spiders weave a web, I would want to discover some ways of harness the complex weaving structure like the 2, 3, or 4 layer weft. I also know if you wanted to accomplish a wide spectrum of color you would need to uses multiple boats, but I would want to try using different threads, like when we demonstrated the conductive thread, or use hand made thread, rainbow, or sparkle thread. Hopefully there could be a way of continuing a sorta “input-ouput” thing like the conductive thread in combination with the Arduino, that created a stream of energy or connectivity.
Secondly, I’m pretty stuck on the fact that I will be using the CNC machine is some aspect of my project. I never had the opportunity to use the CNC during my intro to Dfab course because it was cut short due to covid and that was the main reason I took the class. So with that said I would want to find a way to sculpt the material on the machine in a meaningful and purposeful fashion. Similarly going back to my thought on creating an artificial input- natural output or vice versa I thought it would be an interesting material comparison to use a plank of wood and CNC out branches or roots to speak on the juxtaposition. Father down this train of thought I want to find a way to relate or communicate the artificial (technology) and natural world in a materialistic and process based design. Seemly attempting to offer an anthropologic perspective between these two components (artificial and nature) in a way to assist the audience to question something deeper about their interactive influence, settings environment, and physical realm.
Week 9 (Question/ research)
After the conversation about my research question this week I have condescend my ideas down to more of a subject to clarify and study. It still relates to the essence of natural phenomenons but I want to take a more ritualistic approach to the research, comprehension, and art making of the topic; rainbows. I’m interested scientifically in how a rainbow is made and how those spiritual qualities can be harnessed. The driving factor of my research will be built on the principle of how such a uniquely natural display of color could be created artificial or how artificial rainbow light could be reestablished into nature. Thorough the tools and resources that I have acquired during this course I’m hoping to gain a in-depth understand of these wildly beautiful events as well as produce a work that reflects the obsessive passion I have towards them. My general research question as of right now is: “How could the elements of the meteorological phenomenon of a rainbow be analyzed through the lens of human technology, craft, and design to ultimately convey the powers of mother nature and evolution itself?”
“A rainbow is a meteorological phenomenon that is caused by reflection, refraction and dispersion of light in water droplets resulting in a spectrum of light appearing in the sky.”
Harness the Rainbow
Week 10 (Exercise)
Week 11 (Inspiration/Excercise)
Week 12 (Proposal/Excercise/Inspiration)
Get new content delivered directly to your inbox.