So how did I do?

So was it engaging? DId I research it well? I think I made a fair go of it. The amount of research I did to try to find out more about the Moraine increased exponentially from that first day in class to the time that I wrote the review. And I like to think my writing was engaging (my critics tell me so) as I am a person who enjoys writing and writes a lot of the time and I am always trying to improve my style. As for clarity, this is something I am always extremely careful of. If I read it back and it isn't easy to understand then I will rewrite it again and again until I get it right. So I believe that my reviews have fulfilled all the assement criteria.

I found this exercise very helpful; learning as much about my own writing style as possible by earnestly endeavouring to take account of all the suggestions that I got from my reviewers. It's not very often that I get a chance to see what my writing looks like from another person's point of view.

The part I found most difficult was supporting my claims strongly, and I can now see why this is an area of weakness in other reviews that I read. Through my writing I am making claims all the time; and because my opinions stem from my total life experience it is difficult to pin them to one reference that I have read in the past. This unfortunately throws me back into the quasi-reflective stage of judgement; where I am trying to find references to support my opinions, rather than examining all references objectively and then forming opinions. I caught myself doing this a few times; and when this happened I tried to suspend my judgement, take a step back and examine the evidence from the beginning.

I also found it helpful trying out a different tone; as I am used to writing in an academic tone and that is not really appropriate for this type of exercise, if I am to gain readership. So realising that I can in fact change my tone with a little bit of editing has given me more confidence to try a more informal approach in the future.

Too long with a sore back…. Review #2

Furniture design has a long and convoluted history; and at certain points there have been times that designers have stepped back, scratched their heads, and said “why exactly do we do it like that? Why don’t we do it upside down, or inside out, or back to front?”. This leads to all sorts of experimentation, and its been going on since 1970 at least. Just take a look at some of the stuff that was floating around then; Vernor Panton’s “Pantower”, or Joe Columbo’s “Modular” seating arrangement. Its probably been even longer than that though; if you count the first caveman who questioned his assumption that sitting on the ground was the only way to do it.

Lately the preoccupation has returned in force, trumpets blaring, with designs in this thematic group including “Floorscape” and “Tatami Origami”. The one that particularly interests me is Zaha Hadid’s Moraine sofa. It’s the newest example of this search to create different methods of interaction through the breaking down of traditional social barriers. With the Moraine Zaha has jumped on the old bandwagon, exploring how she might change the way in which we socialize and interrelate with a new furniture design.

Geoffery (2006) sums up the phenomenon succinctly: “The previous concentration on personal space and materialism comes in increasing conflict with a growing understanding of the world as a whole, interdependent system”.

With this statement he suggests to me that one of the underlying causes behind the resurgence is the ever-swelling trend of globalization. After all, the activity of sitting has been performed in many different ways within different times and cultures; ranging from Latin Triclinios to Japanese Tatami mats, and as the world becomes a smaller place it makes sense that some of the ways of other cultures would be adopted internationally.

Consciously or unconsciously, designs like this utilise intercultural modes of interaction. Sometimes it is done intentionally, such as in “Tatami Origami”, which quite brazenly flaunts its Japanese inspiration. But not all designers are aware they are doing it. As Rachel Crawford suggests in her article on the impact of globalization: “Students today are naturally influenced by globalization, and this produces a multinational generation”

I suspect this is the case with the Moraine – it began as merely a thought in the back of the designer’s mind, born of all the different cultures she has lived in throughout her life, eventually manifested through this design. If the designer had never been exposed to anything outside of traditional Western seating, would this design have come about?


The Moraine in the context of its larger series, “Z-scape”, is like a puzzle for a giant child. Its is made of multiple interlocking pieces of furniture, designed to disassemble from a 2.5 x 5m rectangular prism. The realised pieces so far include the Moraine Sofa, Glacier Sofa, and Stalagmite and Stalactite tables.

To me the way it was created says an awful lot about where design method is heading. In its creation Zaha scorned traditional 2D renderings, working solely in CAD from the design’s beginning until its end. In the design’s development, a block CAD model was cut into pieces along lines that reflect the moraine patterns of glaciers. This is why it all fits together so nicely, and with such fluidity of surface.

As Rowe (2001) suggests, CAD has trumped traditional sketching; two dimensional sketches are no longer a necessary step along the road to a finished design: “The power and increasing ease of use of digital tools allows all those involved with the design process to create the 3D models directly without sacrificing creativity, resulting in drastic time-savings,” In this respect the Moraine and overall Z-scape deserves applause; as a white lab-coat technological experiment.

Published in the Sydney Morning Herald at the time of its release, Pip Cummings (2005) summed it up as follows: "It's one of the few pieces of furniture whose design is linked to what's happening in contemporary architecture now, with computer-generated shapes and getting away from the conventional box,"

So as an experimental piece the Moraine has great meaning, but it trips over its own cleverness when it comes to actually being a functional piece of furniture. In order to make all the pieces interlock neatly, Zaha admits that she was rather “loose” with the ergonomics. And I, her critic, have a bad back.

Given that I haven’t actually sat on it, I still think it is obvious that you wouldn’t be able to sit the way you would normally sit on a sofa; the angles aren’t quite right. Due to its size (huge) and shape (it can’t really go against a wall) it is difficult for it to find a home in the average household. The most natural places to sit, at either end, face in opposite directions. Imagine trying to talk to the person on the other end? Or watch TV?

These limitations, along with its price, constrain it more or less to large public
spaces. But the Moraine encourages lounging as the best and most comfortable way of sitting in it, and in these public contexts it is unlikely that people will use it to this fullest potential. I think most people would feel too self-conscious to lounge, and would instead ‘perch’ on the edge. The other problem in a public space is that there is less choice of where you can sit; and so the chair that is chosen for a foyer should cater to all the needs of users who are likely to be sitting on it; including older people and yours truly.

Through the destruction of lots of time, materials and sometimes (depending on whether you choose the leather version or not) several cows, Zaha has created a sofa whose main value is the dubious one of being a conversation piece. She has taken the same road as Starcke with his Juicy Salif lemon squeezer, which the designer himself indicates is more aimed at encouraging discussion between “an awkward new bride and mother-in-law standing in the kitchen with nothing to talk about”. Never mind that it is impractical for its function, as the lemon juice corrodes the aluminum and it needs to be rinsed immediately after use.

Cummings (2005) does not agree with me:
"To disregard those pieces because they're not totally comfortable or functional ... is ... a disfavour, because [design] really has to encompass all those shades of creativity, from the self-expressive non-functional to the very functional." Exploring new shapes and materials may have limited applications now, she says, but will trigger new directions in coming decades”

And certainly this seems a fair argument. The phenomenon of synchronicity all but shows that ideas happen when the time is ripe for them; and it seems likely that this ‘ripeness’ is caused by the context of all the ideas that have come before.

But I can’t help but feel a little sad about what Zaha has done. In her brief for the Moraine sofa she has created an artificial parameter, rather than responding to a genuine design need. Unless that need is to create more business for chiropractors. I think solving problems and fulfilling real needs should be the central role of a designer, not performing experiments for our own gratification. Unless our profession is to become totally self-indulgent. And it seems to me that there has been a little too much experimentation of late, at the expense of practicality for sore-backed people like me.

Maybe you think I have missed the point. After all, the Moraine with its bright red colour makes very nice eye candy, and within the context of a gallery attracts a lot of oohs and aahs. But I’m running out of patience for experimental forms. If something is so ill-conceived that it makes only a vague effort at fulfilling the purpose for which it is intended, all its ‘cleverness’ is outshone by that little ache you get in your lower back.


Designs and Discipline References:

History of discipline (Laurence Geofferys): http://www.artconsulting.com/100/eng/sub_2.htm

Tatami Origami: http://www.sydneydesign.com.au/2003/ydya2003.html

Floorscape: http://www.designawards.com.au/ADA/03-04/student/124/124.htm

Joe Columbo Modular: http://www.designboom.com/history/joecolombo_modular.html

Pantower: http://designmatcher.com/nl/gallery_detail.php?designersID=603&queryID=1&galleryID=1898


Zaha Hadid References:

Zaha Interview (Eva Hagburg): http://www.city-magazine.com/pageone/members/archives/2006/02/interview_zaha.php

Zaha profile (Gary Indiana): http://newyorkmetro.com/arts/architecture/profiles/17237/index.html

Zaha biography (Hugh Pearman): http://www.hughpearman.com/2006/17.html

Z-scape: http://www.designboom.com/closeup/zahahadid.html

Moraine profile: http://biladesign.wordpress.com/2006/02/20/hadids-moraine-safa-the-powerhouse-museum/

Z-island: http://www.dexigner.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=5992

Zaha review (Leo Ryan): http://www.kultureflash.net/archive/34/piece.html


Related topics references:

Pip Cummings Review: http://www.smh.com.au/news/Cover-Story/Form-follows-fiction/2005/02/02/1107228738674.html

CAD in design (Jeffery Rowe): http://www.geomagic.com/en/about_us/media/articles/design.php

Phillipe Starcke (Lloyd & Sneldors): http://www.io.tudelft.nl/public/vdm/fda/starck/lloydsnelders.htm

Globalisation on design (Rachel Crawford): http://www.kon.org/urc/crawford.pdf

Synchronicity: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synchronicity

on the Moraine...

Zaha Hadid’s Moraine sofa is yet another example of how furniture design might create different methods of interaction through the breaking down of traditional social barriers. Hadid has experimented with modes of sitting; exploring how she might change the way in which we socialize and interrelate. Although it is an issue of current preoccupation, it actually stems back much further, with examples from as late back as the 1970s, but is once again receiving renewed interest.

“The previous concentration on personal space and materialism comes in increasing conflict with a growing understanding of the world as a whole, interdependent system”.
http://www.artconsulting.com/100/eng/sub_2.htm

Haven’t seen any of this weird furniture before? Follow these links:
http://www.sydneydesign.com.au/2003/ydya2003.html
http://www.designawards.com.au/ADA/03-04/student/124/124.htm
http://www.designboom.com/history/joecolombo_modular.html
http://designmatcher.com/nl/gallery_detail.php?designersID=603&queryID=1&galleryID=1898

Designs like this one reflect globalization, in their aim to reduce cultural specificity. Consciously or unconsciously, they utilise traditional modes of interaction from other countries. This activity of sitting is performed in many different ways within different times and cultures; ranging from Latin Triclinios to Japanese Tatami mats.
It comes as no surprise to me that Hadid has avoided cultural specificity, as she herself comes from an encompassing mix of Iraqi and British backgrounds, and has lived in many places throughout her life.

Want to know more about Zaha? Follow these links:
http://www.city-magazine.com/pageone/members/archives/2006/02/interview_zaha.php
http://newyorkmetro.com/arts/architecture/profiles/17237/index.html
http://www.hughpearman.com/2006/17.html

The Moraine sofa is part of a larger series; one of the interlocking components of “Z-scape”. The pieces of furniture contained in “Z-scape” are designed to disassemble from a 2.5x5m rectangular prism. The realised pieces so far include the Moraine Sofa, Glacier Sofa, and Stalagmite and Stalactite tables.

Confused? Follow this link:
http://www.designboom.com/closeup/zahahadid.html

The means by which the Z-scape series was created says a lot about where design method is heading. In the design’s development, a block CAD model was cut into pieces in a way that is intended to reflect the moraine patterns of glaciers. By creating it in this manner, the shapes are tailored to interlock perfectly with one another, with great fluidity of surface. CAD has trumped traditional sketching; two dimensional sketches were not a necessary step along the road to a finished design. In this respect the Moraine and overall Z-scape has great value in the realm of being a technological experiment.

"It's one of the few pieces of furniture whose design is linked to what's happening in contemporary architecture now, with computer-generated shapes and getting away from the conventional box,"
http://www.smh.com.au/news/Cover-Story/Form-follows-fiction/2005/02/02/1107228738674.html

Have no idea what CAD is? Follow this link:
http://www.geomagic.com/en/about_us/media/articles/design.php

Sure, but what does it have to do with this couch? Follow these links:
http://biladesign.wordpress.com/2006/02/20/hadids-moraine-safa-the-powerhouse-museum/
http://www.dexigner.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=5992
http://www.kultureflash.net/archive/34/piece.html

So as an experimental piece the Moraine is perhaps meaningful, but it doesn’t do so well when it comes to being a functional piece of furniture. I say this as viewed from my own Western point of view, which is not unreasonable considering I encountered the piece within the context of Sydney’s Powerhouse Museum.

Due to its size and configuration (it can’t really go against a wall) it would be of no use in the average household. The most natural places to sit, at either end, face in opposite directions. Imagine trying to talk to the person on the other end. Or watch TV.
These limitations, along with its price and size, constrain it more or less to large public spaces. But alas, it fails in this context also: I know very few people who would feel comfortable with lounging provocatively in a public foyer, on a sofa that encourages lounging as the only practical way of sitting on it.

Through the destruction of many labor hours, expensive urethane foams, and several cows, Hadid has created a sofa with the dubious value of being a conversation piece. She has taken the same road as Starcke with his Juicy Salif lemon squeezer, which the designer himself indicates is more aimed at being a conversation piece for ‘an awkward new bride and mother-in-law standing in the kitchen with nothing to talk about”. Never mind that it is totally impractical for its function, as the lemon juice corrodes the aluminium.

Why am I talking about lemon squeezers? Follow this link:
http://www.io.tudelft.nl/public/vdm/fda/starck/lloydsnelders.htm

Not everyone agrees with me:
"To disregard those pieces because they're not totally comfortable or functional ... is ... a disfavour, because [design] really has to encompass all those shades of creativity, from the self-expressive non-functional to the very functional." Exploring new shapes and materials may have limited applications now, she says, but will trigger new directions in coming decades”
http://www.smh.com.au/news/Cover-Story/Form-follows-fiction/2005/02/02/1107228738674.html

But that’s just fine, because I don’t agree with them either. In her brief for the Moraine sofa Hadid has created an artificial parameter, rather than responding to a genuine design need. Solving problems and fulfilling real needs should be the central role of a designer, not performing experiments for our own gratification. Unless our profession is to become totally self-indulgent.

Maybe you too think I have missed the point. After all, the Moraine with its bright red colour makes very nice eye candy, and within the context of a gallery attracts a lot of oohs and aahs. But unfortunately I’m a very practical person, and I’ve got no more space for experimental forms. If something is so ill-conceived that it can’t properly fulfil the application for which it is designed, I don’t care how clever it is. The designer has strayed too far from the path.

Not such a dummy...

http://voice.aiga.org/content.cfm?ContentAlias=%5Fgetfullarticle&aid=1539510

Biersdorfer, in her blog about the frequently experienced frustration relating to instruction manuals, writes Descriptively (Attoe) about how society has responded to this by embracing the friendly world of user guides.

Attoe: http://www.jstor.org/view/01492993/qp050005/05a00090/0 (nb. restricted access site)

Biersdorfer differs in her tone from Tyas, in that as a journalist she has more experience in writing for a wide-ranging audience. Her tone is friendly and easy-going, and she is confident in her use of analogies that we can all relate to, such as describing manuals as “doorstops that have all the visual excitement of a real-estate contract”. She also empathizes with the “harried reader”, providing a more personal tone to the blog.

Biersdorfer: http://www.amazon.com/gp/pdp/profile/A2BP11E7RCE9JT/103-3684101-3320665

Additionally her thoughts on the subject are given greater authority by that fact that she states her position and prejudices (Poyner) throughout the article, with phrases such as “I write about computers and technology for a large part of my income”, and “I was heavily biased towards the missing manual series”. She has perhaps unconsciously also taken a leaf from Baker’s book, adding a zing to her writing through the animation of the object “the Dummies brand screams for attention on the store shelf with its loud, proud, yellow-and-black cover.” This does in fact relate to my own experience of the Dummies books, and probably that of many other people, and so lends her writing clarity through a neat and entertaining description.

Poyner: http://www.aiga.org/content.cfm?contentalias=lookingcloser2#poynor
Baker: http://www.jstor.org/view/07479360/ap050027/05a00100/0 (nb. restricted access site)

Her central claim in Toulmin’s model is that “many people have ditched the official documentation and turned to a friendlier alternative” In other words, the externally sourced user-manual is growing in popularity. For this she gives the evidence that Wiley Publishing now boasts 125 million books, and there is proliferation amongst a plethora of other publishers as well. She links these two ideas with the simple warrant “its safe to say that somebody out there finds the Dummies pretty darn smart”. As such her argument has great coherence within itself.

Toulmin: http://changingminds.org/disciplines/argument/making_argument/toulmin.htm

In terms of reflection, I would argue that Biersdorfer is more advanced than Tyas, at stage 4 of 5 the King & Kitchener’s reflective judgment mode. I base this on phrases such as “A lot of thought went into that design, particularly because most of the books in the series are printed in economical monochrome.” With this sentence Biersdorfer could be construed as choosing evidence that fits her established belief; choosing to see the choice of monochrome as a good financial decision. Were she not a friend of the Dummies, she could interpret the choice of monochrome as a poor decision; limiting the ability of writers to visually draw attention to important sections of the book. This is as likely an interpretation, particularly considering she has already said how colour “screams” to the reader and draws their attention.

Equally though, she uses elements of stage 5 of quasi-reflective judgment; justifying her beliefs in a way that is appropriate to the context in which she is writing. She does this by naming texts she has read (eg. “Adobe Photoshop Elements”) in the course of forming her opinion. This serves as an informal way of referencing which is in keeping with the casual nature of a blog.

King & Kitchener: http://www.umich.edu/~refjudg/index.html

Long winded farms....

http://www.designobserver.com/archives/014344.html

In his blog “farms”, a discussion on the aesthetic beauty of wind farms, Micheal Tyas appears to have become hopelessly marooned in King & Kitchener’s first stage of reflective judgment, where he doesn’t feel the need to back up his claims; if he believes it then it must be true!

King & Kitchener: http://www.umich.edu/~refjudg/index.html

Within the model of Toulmin’s argument analysis, his article reads as a series of one claim after another, with previous claims being used to back up those that come after them, building an unstable house of cards in a way that is quite embarrassing to watch.

My favorite passage of this sort would be “In nature there is no distinction between function and ornamentation. The opposite of wholeness is not ornamentation but fragmentation. Ugliness is the perception of fragmentation. Alienation is a form of fragmentation. Form follows function actually is an ecological principle.” Any one of these statements is open to conjecture, but he ploughs ahead as though each is a golden truth unto itself.

Toulmin: http://changingminds.org/disciplines/argument/making_argument/toulmin.htm

He at times veers into the second stage of reflective judgment (King & Kitchener), trying to gain some authority on his claims from outside sources. His critique is punctuated at random with arbitrary authoritive statements such as “Beauty is in the eye of the beholder”, and “Form follows function”. These may or may not relate tenuously to his argument. As such his criticism in some respects aims for a Prescriptive (Attoe) style; appealing to well-known doctrines for authority. But mostly he relies on what appears to be personal thoughts and opinions alone.

Attoe: http://www.jstor.org/view/01492993/qp050005/05a00090/0 (nb. restricted access site)

Twice in the article he appears to have included what is almost a reference, but I am skeptical of their origins. The phrase “But the wind farm looks like a modernist sculpture!” is put in quotation marks. But the convenience of the statement for the author’s argument suggests to me that it is in fact a rhetorical question, masquerading as a reference. He does this later in the article by putting a whole section in italics, but the style of this section is so similar to his previous writing that I suspect it stems also from his keyboard.

Tyas claims that wind farms are perceived either as beautiful or ugly depending on how we see their relation to the environment. Those who find them beautiful find them so because of the way that they help the environment, those that perceive them as ugly find them so because their aesthetic clashes with natural forms. The evidence he provides for this is that people often experience a feeling of ‘being grounded and centered’ when they are alone with nature. Unfortunately he lacks any kind of an external warrant (Toulmin) to link these two concepts. Perhaps it is true that most people feel a harmony with nature, but this does not necessarily mean that this unconsciously affects all their aesthetic judgments.

With his tone, Tyas has appealed to what Poyner calls the “public intellectual”. He does so in a manner that ignores all the suggestions of various authors (eg. Baker/Poyner) that a less formal style may be necessary if design criticism is to become a widely read area. To me he appears to have pegged things a little too high; adopting a tone that is intellectually intimidating, and would probably diminish his readership severely. I think he is limited, as Attoe suggests “by his own conception of the role of the critic”. By thinking that he needs to make his criticism sound as academic as possible, he has all but removed the possibility that the everyday blog-flicking viewer will actually read it.

Poyner: http://www.aiga.org/content.cfm?contentalias=lookingcloser2#poynor
Baker: http://www.jstor.org/view/07479360/ap050027/05a00100/0 (nb. restricted access site)

I partially forgive him for his ill-constructed critique at the point of his last sentence. Only now does he bring in his own answer to the question he has actually asked, indicating his position on the matter in a way that allows the audience to see any prejudices he may carry (Poyner). So while he has argued in a verbose and ill-supported manner, at least he has argued for both sides equally.

no review for you...

I'm officially protesting the lack of art reviews on everyone elses blogs.

Here I am trying to procrastinate from writing my blog review in a way that I could vaguely justify to myself, but there is nothing else to read yet. See how desparate I have become?

Ah well, nothing to be done.
Time to bite the bullet.....

in response to my comments...

Perhaps the most astute comment I received was that of Mauricio, who thought that I "would go to public spaces/museums etc. but only if it were for a specific reason or if invited". I believe this was very insightful; because the indicators he had such as my pleasure in photography, and growing concern for the environment suggest that I am a person who would be interested in these things. Marianne for example, thought that I would in fact be active in visiting libraries/rallies/museums, and I believe this was a reasonable assertion to make.

However, I think Mauricio picked up particularly on the comment that I don’t have time to read the news; and made the connection in that I never find the time to visit galleries/museums etc. either. Coming from Mauricio’s own taste regime that he likes to visit galleries, but only finds time to go about twice a year, I believe he empathizes with my position. This is why he was able to make such an informed comment.

Another answer, from Ben, is that I would probably call the NRMA rather than look under the car’s bonnet to try to figure out what was wrong. If I had a car, this would be spot on. I imagine Ben's comment was influenced by the very fact that I didn’t answer this question; the lack of a response could be viewed as an indication that I have very little interest in the area, especially as it is clear by my long answers that I quite like responding to questions.

The slightly chiding/humorous tone of the comment I think stems from Ben’s own taste regime, in that he is a person who is very interested in cars and bikes; and this combined with his discipline of Industrial Design means he probably has a fairly good idea of what is going on inside a vehicle.

Ben and Mauricio both picked up on my social nature; Ben saying I would only watch sport if it was social and Mauricio that I would only go to a gallery if invited. I believe they decided this after reading the post where I say I would rather meet friends over dinner; as this indicates I am a person who would rather have a discussion over dinner than go to a bar where I might not be able to hear my friends over the music. Also perhaps the fact that I indicated I get most of my news from other people, and don’t watch television: which is in many cases considered an anti-social behavior.

But.... more on Gormley

This is not to say that Gormley has failed. The fact that I drew a different interpretation from his artwork says to me that he has succeeded. For one of the much-touted purposes of art is to cause a reaction in the viewer, and make them feel something based on their own experience. My judgement (or feel free to call it a misjudgement) of the artist’s intentions makes the work only more versatile, in that it is proven to mean different things to different people.

Gormley desires audience reaction, as a main function of his art. As he says in “Learning to think: Sculpture as Physical Intelligence”

“I'm always saying that the stillness of sculpture should be like a seed or a bomb, that there should be a fullness about it that allows it to implant itself within our consciousness and some way be the reason for an explosion of new sensation or feeling of aliveness.”

http://www.antonygormley.com/

As such I see my reaction and interpretation as positive affirmation of the artwork’s success.

Unlike other installations within the Biennale, such as Adrian Paci’s work “Noise of Light”, I found Gormley’s work more intriguing in that it didn’t put everything on a plate for you. Viewing “Noise of Light” I made instant correlations to its meaning; correlations that turned out to be exactly what the artist had intended. I moved on to the next artwork quickly. I know the pitfall; I have done it myself in my own art practice. Gormley’s work in contrast provides many interpretations, and this only makes it stronger.

My main criticism of “field” is that it relies on grandiose scale to make a statement. This is similar to Gormley’s Work “Angel of the North”, the so called ‘most viewed sculpture in the world’. Rearing out of the ground at Gateshead in the UK, you couldn’t miss it. Where the Angel relies on scale for impact, Field relies on quantity. It takes up fully half of the Pier 2/3 Gallery, the whole upper floor. So yes, we will remember it, but it seems to me to be lacking in delicacy? I am not the only one of this view, it is something that has preoccupied other critics of the artwork.

“The press guff says Zones of Contact is "about the spaces in which people live in and move between, the spatial dimensions of cities, settlements, territories, the land and home", but really it's about size.”

http://www.smh.com.au/news/entertainment/bigger-than-christmas/2006/06/01/1148956427053.html

http://www.seriousart.org/gormley_interview.html

The large scale of the piece seems overly flashy, dwarfing the skill and intention that has gone into creating the artwork, by usurping it with a simple “wow” factor that could probably be achieved by any large piece. A similar criticism seemed to prevail amongst Sydney Biennale organizers, as they toiled endlessly to place each of the 35,000 figures…

On Gormley and his field...

http://www.bos2006.com/

Walking into the upper gallery space at pier 2/3 in Walsh Bay, one can be excused for thinking of terracotta warriors. After casting the eyes first over a panorama of Asian faces, and then to an equally large panorama of small pinched terracotta models with which they share the space, this was the first of the thoughts that arose in my mind.

On closer scrutiny of the images and sculptures, another interpretation followed fast on the heels of the first. Within the context of the 2006 Biennale, “Zone of Contact”, it seemed likely that the entire installation was a comment on the place of individuality in China. Each sculpture was made by a Chinese villager, and each villager documented in photographic form. The photographs, cropping each Asian face off above the eyes, draw attention to the character of that person. But such personal character is juxtaposed against their clay figure, which is but one of many in the ‘field’ of clay figures that covers the other half of the upper gallery.

Like the grass of a ‘field’, the figures lose their identity and become one of many. The field of figures also raises questions on the value of each one, are these representations of humans each as without value as a blade of grass? This question is of particular concern to China, the country that boasts the largest population within our global environment. Here more than anywhere the question of individuality is a crucial one, not helped by the typical comment of Westerners in the company of unknown Asians “I can’t tell who is who”.

Like the Terracotta warriors, the clay figures retain individual characteristics. The shape is different according to their maker, but they retain a united form in that of them has the same eyes.

Only after my initial thoughts did I pause to read the Biennale handbook. Gormley’s own intent in producing the work varies wildly from my personal interpretation. He with the background of having worked upon variations of this installation for 15 years sees it as part of a larger whole, whereas I am seeing only this one asepct of it. When considered in the context of all the different countries this project has run in, the message conveyed shifts away from China and to a more global whole. It becomes one of unity, and
“makes you take account of the fact that you are a maker of the world”. - Gormley

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Field_(sculpture)

www.antonygormley.com

Making people's lives easier

I've just realised after reading everyone elses blogs that I probably should have numbered the questions, to make things a bit easier. So here, for your gratification, are the questions that I HAVE NOT answered in my posts about myself. So please... fire away

3. What sort of car would you like to drive? How often would you get under the bonnet?

6.Which of the following would you visit or attend at least twice a year: art galleries, museums, public lectures, public libraries, political meetings, demonstrations or rallies?

8. What is your favourite sport or game to play? What is your favourite sport or game to watch?

on friends...

My favourite way to meet with my friends is at one another’s houses. Perhaps this is because I am at heart a homebody, and appreciate the comforts of being in this sort of space. My favourite way to see people is over dinner and a bottle of wine, either at someone’s house or at a restaurant.

on Australia and the environment...

I come from Australia, by way of Scotland/Ireland nine generations ago. That said though, I think I could happily live in another country for a while… in fact, shortly I will be doing so. But I like to think I will always want to return to Australia. For all its faults its a pretty fantastic place to live.
I think that the government should probably be spending more funding on the environment; but this quite likely comes from a less-than-desirable educated viewpoint. Like I said, I don’t really keep up with the news. I have had the problems that the environment will face in the near future sharply drawn to my attention by the studies I have been doing, and this is why I think it is an area of concern that deserves every bit of attention it can get.

on films and news...

Films I have seen in the last year for the first time are ‘A History of Violence”, “Jean de Florette”, “A Very Long Engagement” and “The Chronicles of Narnia”, and I preferred them in that order. Of these I saw A History of Violence and Narnia at the cinema, and the other ones I rented out from Video Ezy. Jean de Florette was chosen by my parents, but it turned out to be really excellent; if a little slow. I really didn’t enjoy Narnia very much though, but I think it is probably better as a movie for kids…
I get most of my news from other people. Or from the ‘free mx’ Not good…. I know I should really take more interest in the news but I am always so busy. Even when I’m not supposed to be doing anything I’ll still have set myself some sort of task, and its so hard to find time for something like the news that you have to do every day.

on cameras and travel...

I don’t own a camera. I use my parents old one called an ‘elph’, which was very good for its time. But I really wish I had my own because I think having a film camera means I don’t take as many pictures as I would if I had a digital camera. And when you’re only going to be somewhere once in your life it seems foolish to avoid taking photos for the sake of economy. I am probably buying one in the next month or so… to remedy this problem. I take pictures of things on my travels; beautiful scenery and special moments that will help me mark the occasion.
I feel like I would like to travel everywhere, but there is not enough time to see everything. One day I would love to travel from Bejiing to St Petersburg, and then continue down to Cairo. But I worry that I won’t be brave enough as some of those countries have a reputation for being more dangerous than what I am used to…. So far I have only traveled to so-called ‘civilised’ countries…..America, the UK and Europe. Still, I’m sure I’ll find out one day.

on music and instruments...

I play the piano, the saxophone, and I sing. But I do none of these things frequently. Although I have been learning these various instruments for up to 10 years (in the case of the piano) I have only ever done one music exam. When I do something for a leisure activity, it seems stupid to be having it cause my more stress, which is why I skipped the exams!
In terms of what I listen to, I most prefer that all encompassing category that they call ‘alternative’. My favourite bands are The Eels, Gomez, Radiohead, VAST and Muse. But I like so many other types of music too, especially old favourites like the Beatles. The only music I don’t really like is R&B/rap/hip-hop type stuff. But even that isn’t entirely true, there are bands or songs amongst those categories that I still like.

on television....

My favourite television series in the last 2 years was Carnivale, and I say that because it is the show I have been genuinely hooked on for a very long time. Normally I watch less than an hour of general television a week, I prefer to rent out a film of my choice.

Initial Post

Testing....testing......123