Thing Speak
Aleksa Knezic
I entered this course with very naive expectations. I recall, listening to Sophie speak, I was amazed by her knowledge. I truly believed that I’d come of this course a polymath of design philosophy. I believed we’d cover the entire course of design, the history of artefacts, how they evolve with time and exist in social contexts such as gender, and politics to name a few. Looking back on it all now, to say I was only “naive” is rather naive of me now. I didn’t know what to expect from this course at all, and I don’t understand how I thought I’d almost cover entire history of design and the men, women, political, and social movements which pioneered and crafted design as we know it today in one semester. Although I can admit I was terribly wrong, I can also admit I wasn’t disappointed, far from it actually. As I reflect on what I have learnt throughout this semester, I have gained something far superior than knowledge. I gained the insight and tools to look back on the history and design from a critical perspective. To classify and understand, and to constructively and critically form my own opinions on design and artefacts. Skills to last me a life-time which I can utilise on a day to day basis to learn about design and artefacts I encounter in my life at my own pace, and I find this very meaningful. From my own endeavors, I’ve learnt that society is not static, and design is far more than process we utilize to solve problems, but rather a tool we utalise to instill social change. This course covers a wide array of themes and ideas, ranging from the understanding of objects, responding to object, and creating objects. Overall, I have learnt a lot from this course and enjoyed taking it, especially in my first system as I intent for it to inform me well for my coming time studying design. A lot confusing was felt initally when taking this course, but everything tied in well, especially when looking back on the course and reflecting on it.
TAGAGC TGAG AGAA GTCTT TTCGG GAGAA GCCT AAC CTA GGG G G GGGCTCGTAAGGAGATGCC TAAGTTAGGTCAATGACTCGTCG TGGGTCAACACAACTCTCGCCGCAC GCTCGGTTCCTGCGGAAGAGCTATATT CTAAGCTCTGTAAGTGATGAGGGTCATAT TCCGCCCTATTAACAACCAGAGCTGCCTTT GCTATAAAAGACCATTGTAGCTTGGTTGAGG GAGCATTGATCCCGAAGGAGCGACTAGACA TGGCGCGGTGAGGCGACAAACATCGCGCAT GAATAATCCGTTCCGTTAAACCAATGTATTCCA AAAAGCAATTACCTCAAAGGAATTGTGCGATGT AGTTCCCGCATATTATGACGAACTCTGCACCG TATCATAGATAAATTACTTCATCGCGCTACTGTA CGGACCTCGAGAATGGCGTCAGCGCCGCGGT CAGACGAAAACTGAGCGTGCGGTATTGAGATT CAAGAACTAATGTGGTACTTGTCTGTCGGGTG GATCAGCCAAACAGTTGGACGTCCCACTCAC CGGCTCCGCACTTTAGCTATTTACACGGAGA TATCGATTGGAATATCACCTTTGCAAAACGA TAATCATCCTAACCTCTCTGTATCGTCTCA GTGAGATACCTGCTCATACTGAGGATTG GCACATTGTAGAAGAAAGCAGATGCC CATAGCGGTTACGCGGATGAAATTA GTCGGCAGATAGGAGAGAAAGA ACCAGGGTCTAAAGAGTTCC AGCTTGCTTAGCAA
CGACATTAACCAAAGGGCGCAGACGAAAAC CGTGCGGTATTGAGATTTACACAACCGACCT GCCTCGACTTGGACTCTTCCGGATTATGCGGC CTCGCTCCTTCCGTCTCATAGAGATTTACATTTCAC CCCAGCAGCAGGTTCTGAGCGCCTGATCCATGGAA CACGCTGCCCTTGAGTACAGATGCATCCCATCCAGGC CAGCTGAGAGTACGGCGCTGGTACTGTAGCTGCTCGGA ACTCTGTGACGCTCATCTCCCGGTGCAGTGCCTGCTACCG ATAGGGAACGAACAATACGGATGCAACTTTAACTACTCTCGG TAGGCTCTGCGGCCGATACGATTTGTCTCTGGCATCTCGCCAC GCAACATTTGCAAACCGAGCAATCGCCTACCTTTTCGATCATAG AGAAAGCAACGGGTCCCTGCGCACGAATCGATCCGTGTGTTCCA GGATTCTCTGAATAAGTCGGGGTACTAGTCTCGTCCGGGTGTTGC ATTGACATTTTCACGACAAACTTTATTTCCACTACTTGGCTATTGCCTT CGTTCGGTGATATCTGCCGCATGACAGGTTACTACGAACTGTCTTTAT CCCAAGATCCATCGCACATGCTAAATCAACCGCAACGGGTTTTCTTCA GCGGATGCCGACGTAAGTCTTATTACTGTCCCTAAGATCTTGTCAAATC TCCAACGCTCCAGTGAGACATCAGCAACGCAGCATCCTGGGGCAGCG CAGATTAATATGGCACTACAAGAACTAATGTGGTACTTGTCTGTCGGGT CAGTCCGGTTCGGGTCTTGATCAGCCAAACAGTTGGACGTCCCACTCAC AAGCACCGGGGTACCCCGGCTCCGCACTTTAGCTATTTACACGGAGAA CAACTAATCGGATGAATATCGATTGGAATATCACCTTTGCAAAACGACGA TCATTGAGGGATGTAATCATCCTAACCTCTCTGTATCGTCTCACGGAAAT CCCGATCGCTTAGTATCTACACCGTAGAGCCGACATTAACCAAAGGGCG TACACACGGTGAGGCGACAAACATCGCGCATCAGATTAATATGGCACTA AATAATCCGTTCCGTTAAACCAATGTATTCCACAGTCCGGTTCGGGTCTT AAAAGCAATTACCTCAAAGGAATTGTGCGATGTAAGCACCGGGGTACCC AAGTTCCCGCATATTATGACGAACTCTGCACCGCAACTAATCGGATGAA CGATATCATAGATAAATTACTTCATCGCGCTACTGTATCATTGAGGGATG CGGAAATCGGACCTCGAGAATGGCGTCAGCGCCGCGGTCCCGTTCC TTCCACACAATGGTCGTTTTGTCAATCAAGGCAGCGCCTGGCACCAT TCGTTGGATTCTGGGGCAATGTGTTAACGATATACACCGTTCCTACA ACGTCATCGTGTTACTCCGAAACGAAGAGTATGACTCGATGTCAGC TCATCTTAAACTACATACGACCCTGGCTATCGTACATTCCGCAAA TAGGAGCCCGAGCATACATATTTGGCAAGCTCTTTGGATGTTTT CTGAAAAGTAGCGGTCTACATCTTCAGGTACATTAGAACTGT CGTCTGTTGCCTAAGACGGATAGGCGGCCGAATAGGTAA CCAATAGGAGTTAATAAACTCTGGTGCCACGAGTACA CCTCTTGGGCTGCGCCTCTTAAGAATTAATACTG GCTCGGAAGAAATTTAACTTAGCCATCCCGC GAGGGTAAATTACACTAACAAGCACAG GAATTACAGGGAAGGAGGTTCG GCCCTCCGGCTGATTGAGA TCTTTGAGTGACCCG AGCTGAAACCGA CCGATCGAG GGGAGTA AATTGA TGAA GAA TCG CTT A G TAT C T A C AC CG C
a p n c
f l e U
king
CTGTG ACGCTCATCTCCCGGT GCAGTGCCTGCTACCGCTAATA GGGAACGAACAATACGGATGCAACTT TAACTACTCTCGGGGGGGTAGGCTCTGC GGCCGATACGATTTGTCTCTGGCATCTCGCC ACGGGCTCGTAAGGAGTCTTCAGCTATAAAAGA CCATTGTAGCTTGGTTGAGGGCGGATGCCGACGT AAGTCTTATTACTGTCCCTAAGCAAACATCGCGCAT CAGATTAATATGGCACTACAAGAACTAATGTGGTACT TGTCTGTCGGGTGAATAATCCGTTCCGTTAAACCAAT GTATTCCACAGTCCGGTTCGGGTCTTGATCAGCCAA ACAGTTGGACGTCCCACTCACAAAAGCAATTACCT CAAAGTCGATTGGAATATCACCTTTGCAAAACGA CGATATCATAGATAAATTACTTCATCGCGCTACT GTATCATTGAGGGATGTAATCATCCTAACCT CTCTGTATCGTCTCACGGAAATCGGACC TCGAGAATGGCGTCAGCGCCGCG GTCCCGTTCCGTGAGATAC CTGCTCATAATA
the S
What is the self? What is the self? When I refer to the self, I refer to my ego. The materiality of of my body can be broken down fundamentally into a genetic sequence. But even then, genetics don’t define a being. We see in epigenetics that the way in which these genes are expressed ultimately determine the self. But I recall when we were tasked in “unpacking ourselves”, Sophie challenged us to unpack something we knew everything about ourselves. And since I’m not a biologist or any other scientist in the regard, I can only speak on what I know. Despite having some vague understanding on science, it is only convincing for myself to approach this task from a metaphysical point of view. I struggled immensely on this task. When I finally did it in the assigned one week we were given, I thought I did an alright job. Looking back on it now. I can’t relate to what I wrote. And as a result, I’ve decided to scrap it. However, I’ve learnt something valuable. Humans are obsessed with classification, we see it everywhere, from politics, history, sociology, gender, sexuality, race, nationality, stereotypes and science. Unpacking artefacts and the world around us is how we draw a simplified understanding from rather complex things. But unpacking ourselves is harmful, because put simply, we are not objects. I refuse to be defined by a collation of adjectives or my past actions, and that’s exactly why I struggled to do this task. I can’t classify myself, and I hate to do so, as I don’t know what am I capable of doing or being. But with that being said, I do have an identity, but that identity is fluid. It changes everyday with the things I learn, the people I meet, and the moments I endear here on planet Earth. It was nice to look back on this task to see how I view myself has changed. I could have simply submitted my mind—map, but it would have been an injustice to what I have learnt over the course of this semester. But maybe, this is it. Some choose to define themselves, I don’t, and that’s how I unpack myself.
Although I talk about this initial section of ThingSpeak “changing my perspective”, I still have that subtle bias, and I can see it everytime I unpack sometime or classify it. These processes are more or less subjective at most times. But I suppose the way in which we unpack and classify objects is a reflection on how we personally see the world and society through our own eyes. I’ve learnt that the objects around us are a reflection of our society, history, and technology. I’ve come to the realisation that society is not static, but rather very complex and dynamic—it can be unpacked almost like a product. Design isn’t simply a process we utilise to solve tangible problems, but rather, a tool we utilise to change the very fabric of society, and instil social change. Some call it social engineering, but I call it adaptation. Society isn’t a product of design and the built environment, rather, the artefacts and the way we utilise them adapt and change with society. To unpack objects and the meaning behind them, and to embed their meaning into society. Whether it be political, economical, materiality, symbolical, and so forth, what initially seemed difficult became simplified from unpacking an object, and rather eye opening too. It was challenging for me and still is to see artefacts through a lens of criticality.
Reflection One
The initial part of ThingSpeak trilogy revolved around the themes of Understanding objects. Sofie attributes this part of ThingSpeak as the “intellectual understanding of objects”, the head. Before ThingSpeak I too had an understanding of objects, however a very reductive understanding. This predisposed bias of mine definitely stemmed from my engineering background, and intern this established perspective of mine interfered with how I understood objects and the role of objects in society—not that this understanding I had was wrong, but it was rather one dimensional. I would look at objects as products of human ingenuity. Solutions to problems. I merely saw objects how a programmer would look at code, instructions to facilitate the fulfilment of an implied task, where human body was the hardware made to operate this code. From the first week of ThingSpeak we learnt about unpacking objects, and embedding objects into a social narrative. This process of unpacking really challenged my perspective and understanding on artefacts and their design. I learnt to imagine objects in their uniquely humanised contextual form. How we define objects, how objects define themselves, and how the environment, and society defines them. As unpacking objects helps us draw knowledge and understanding from rather complex things.
The classification is significant in understanding as it forms a contextualised identity of an object. This contrast in context defines what the object is, and what it is not. But to say that might imply I’ve not learnt much. The world isn’t black or white. An object can be many things to may different people, and many different contexts--this is where the power of narrative comes into fruition. It all comes down to individualised narratives. I learnt this especially went writing my essay for the Yugo 45. My father and I had very different upbringings, and as a result, we would classify and unpack the car into different categories and meanings. This perspective is what shapes objects. The way we classify objects intern is a reflection of our society. Is history a function of understanding the place of things? When we talk about the “place of things” we talk about it in the context of design and artefacts in society. Where did these objects exist in society and how did they evolve with human history? How did objects facilitate human history? Did they play of these artefacts in their current point in history define history at that certain point in time? It’s no so much a yes or no question, society isn’t static, it’s dynamic, and the same can be said about history. When we understand the place of things in the context of society and individualised narratives, it does constitute a very vague idea of history. Certain objects throughout history have revolutionised human life. TNT, the AK-47, then car, the internet, to name a few. Where society places these objects and finds meaning in them, they intern becoming intrinsic to our own personalised narratives and histories. Object narratives are integral in how we understand objects. An object without a narrative is obsolete. A narrative defines what an object is or was in history. It defines what it meant or means to specific individuals. The beauty of narrative is that each is unique and meaningful. The narrative is told through the lens and understanding of the individual's interaction with said object. It defines that object in the eyes of the individual, and allows for contrast between individuals. Narratives humanised objects. Narrative gives purpose to rather static things. Storytelling has always been an integral part of human history. It is how we contextualise out world. Story telling fulfils important social functions. Narratives offer comprehension and understanding of objects from a unique perspective which is not our own. I explored this idea when I was writing my essay about the Yugo 45. I looked at my brief personal history of this car from my narrative, and my fathers own personal narrative. This allowed my to understand my father and see him in a new light, and it further allowed me to look at this Car from a unique perspective I wouldn’t have otherwise appreciated if it wasn’t for my dad’s narrative.
AK-47
1947 X
Insulin
1929
X
Ford
1908
X
X
Steam Power
100BC
X
Radio
1893
X
1904
Glass Porcelain Mirror False Teeth
X
700BC
Silk
Bicycle
1493
Tracor
Object
1880 X X
1430 X X
1784 X
1230
3630BC X X X X X
700BC X X X X X
X X X X
X X
X X
X
1200BC
X X
X
X X
X X
X
X
X X X X X
X X X X X
X X X X
X
X X
X X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
Other
Spirituality
Security
Aesthetic
Intellectual
Enchacement
X
Exchange
X
Power
Stutus
Communication
Emotional
Tram
Sustenance
Codex BiFocals Vodka Gigas
Object Narratives X
X
X
X
X X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Ford
1908
Steam Power
100BC
X
Radio
1893
X
X
Tracor
Insulin
Bicycle
1493 X
AK-47
False Teeth
700BC X
Silk
Glass Porcelain Mirror Codex BiFocals Vodka Gigas
Tram
1784 X X
1430
1230
1947 X
1904
X
X
X
X X
X
X
Brave New World
X
X
3630BC X X X
700BC X X X
1200BC X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Science
Medicine
Warface
Politics
Trade
Arts
Food
Records
Narrative
Religion
Architecture
1880 Technology
Object
Object Narratives X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
South Amer.
X
Middle East
Angelo
X
Central Asia
Germanic
South Africa
Slavic X
North Amer.
X
X
South Asia
1430
1784
Central Africa
X
Mediterr.
1880
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
False Teeth
X
X
X
X
Silk
3630BC
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
700BC
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
1200BC
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Bicycle
1493
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
AK-47
1947
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Insulin
1929
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Ford
1908
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Steam Power
100BC
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
1893
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
1904
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Glass Porcelain Mirror
700BC
Radio
1230
Tracor
Codex BiFocals Vodka Gigas
Tram
Object
North Africa
Object Narratives
X
X
X
X
Australian Class Classification & Ideas of Taste Upper Class Cause: large causes, political parties. Eclectic taste in cinema, books, and magazines. Hand made furniture with expensive materials, mahogany, oak, leather, silver, glassware, unique and one of a kind. Sport: horse racing, golf, gambling, watching games live. Educated. Designer fashion, jewelery. High end expensive cars, and lots of them. Entertainment may include vactions, dinners out in town, gambling. Expensive alcohol and food.
Emerging Upper Class
Causes: poltical charieties, NGOs. Eceletric taste in cinema, books, and magazines. Designer mass-manufactored furniture with expensive materials, leathers, oak. Sport: social events with friends. AFL, soccer, olympics, tennis. High end fashion, aware and educated about ethical fashion sorces. Nice restaurents meals, on a few days of the week. Jewelery. European and American car brands, might own two. Drive to work, can afford parking in the city. Enterainment may include vactions, dinners out in town, cinema, live sport events.
Established Middle Class Causes: Community. Blockbuster movies, and Netflix. Book from Dymocks, OK, Women’s Weekly, and other gossip magazines. IKEA furniture. AFL, soccer, and other sports. Sports gambling. Present in childrens events as entertainment. Fashion and clothing from H&M, Uniqlo, Zara, and other fast fashion sourses. Take away food, moderately priced restaurants on special occations. Eat at home. Other forms of entertainment may revolve around family events such as Christmas, New Years. Bars, Clubs, and other forms of entertainment. Asian manufactors cars, Toyota, Kia, etc. May one two vehicles. Likely catch the train into the city due to expensive parking costs.
Lower Class
Causes: Community. Netflix and other forms of blockbuster cinema. OK, Women’s Weekly, and other gossip magazines. IKEA furniture. AFL, soccer, and other sports. Sports gambling. Present in childrens events as entertainment. Fashion and clothing from KMart, Target, Big W. Take away food, moderately priced restaurants on special occations. Eat at home. Other forms of entertainment may revolve around family events such as Christmas, New Years. Bars, Clubs, and other forms of entertainment. Asian manufactors cars, Toyota, Kia, etc. Second hand cars. Bus and train as other forms of transport. Likely catch the train into the city due to expensive parking costs.
Flex Hammock Grey and White Chiffon WASARA
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Mollusca Paper Folding
X
The Phantom Corsair
X
Z—Car
X
Chair
Organic
Contrast
Transient
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Issey Miyakeair
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Rei KAWAKUBO
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Iris Van Herpen Fashion iPhone Leonardo Dining Table Nike Air Max Temppeliaukio Church
X
X
X
Symbolism
Symmetry
Complexity is Unplanned
Allusion to the Natural Form
Transparency
Precision
Aesthetics
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
When tasked to design a concept of a scultpture to be exhibited in Federation squaure. I was initally taken back. As I learnt from the Podcast which featured the “Throne of Guns”, symbolism is a very powerful design attribute. What is Melbourne? To me, Melbourne is city which pioneers in the pregressive and liberal arts. Melbourne is hub for buisness, qwerky architecture, innovation and technology, and diversity. As an individual who is not from Melbourne who now calls this city home, I wanted to represent Melbourne's vast diversity in this sculpture—this was a very difficult concept, as I wanted to be inclusive and represent everyone in this sculpture. However, Melbourne is so diverse that the only one thing we all really have in common is that we all call Melbourne home. I started to think about unique ways in which this idea of diversity could be symbolised in a sculpture, whilst being mindful to include everyone. This leads me to my concept of a sculpture which can symbolise Melbourne's unique diversity. My idea was a sculpture of an "individual" who personifies the average citizen of Melbourne. This could be achieved by 3D modelling the faces and bodies of a sample of people living all around Melbourne. An AI could then superimpose each model over one other until an "average" is constructed. This "Individual of Melbourne" represents much more than just one individual--but rather all individuals from all walks of life who call this city home, however, it still manages to symbolise this in a familiar form which we are all accustomed to. By representing all the genders, ethnicities, body proportions and other physical attributes, the final individual will look very ambiguous but not to the extent where each person cannot see themselves in it—small parts of this “individual” will resonate with everyone, and everyone will feel included. This sculture future plays homage to Melbourne’s leading roll in Australian technological innovation. I can imagine this sculture being provocative, there is no denying it. Artifical intellgence is the future, a for such a progressive city like Melbourne, it should be embrassed. This form type of data science and predictive modelling has been is being used in the present day to harm society. From the Soical Credit System employed in China which spies over it’s citizens, to an AI model which has been developed by researchers which is capable of telling the sexual orientation of male individuals based off an image of their face. This type of technology has been argued by many a wolf in sheeps clothing. But technology is only a tool, and it is up to the people to determine how this tool will be utalised. And when we look at history and morals, Melbourne stands for what is right.
Part two of the ThingSpeak trilogy revolved around how we respond to objects emotionally. I like to say this part of ThingSpeak “evolved” from part one. In part one we looked at objects with a rather mechanical point of view. At times it often felt like an arithmetic. The way we unpacked objects and classified them, was defined by a scaffold web governed by what seemed like a protocol. However, when entering this part of ThingSpeak, it was rather abstract. I recall being lost in a deep sense of confusion and anxiety when I was asked to justify why I found certain objects beautiful. From the TED talks we watched, it was all made clear to me. Beauty and aesthetics are more than just the superficial form an object takes, but rather, deep embedded meaning and sometimes just a natural human physiological response. We embed meaning into objects through symbolism. We learnt that symbolism can be intuitive, through the carvings of Venus or patterns used in Islamic architecture. Symbolism can also be communicated much more subtly, often it is the subtle forms of symbolise which “pack the most meaning”. Of course this isn’t true, but rather comes down to perspective. When studying the Throne of Guns, it was from unpacking the artefact through the podcast where I discovered attributes about the throne which differentiates it from any other modern art piece. The Throne was made of guns used to kill and maim in conflicts across the world and especially in Africa. The Throne juxtaposed a very sick taste of irony with reality. It symbolised power, and the cost of power, pain and suffering. It is from these multiple forms of symbolism where we embed meaning into objects. I learnt that sacred objects are a reflection of the dynamic differences and similarities between societies and cultures. They serve society a multitude of purpose, ceremonial objects such as the crown and sept of the Queen, and religious and spiritual purposes, like the cross. Sacred objects have a great deal of symbolism embedded into them, it’s what gives them meaning. They being sacred as our views towards what they represent transcend into what we consider sacred. However, aesthetics also plays a vital role in sacred objects. It’s what gives these objects that emotional response. When we look at the Devil, a character which transcends cultures and societies, when his image was contrived in the Codex Gigas, his imagine packed a powerful emotional response of fear and anguish. When we look at islamic art and architecture, and see how symmetrical and geometric is used in aesthetics to communicate harmony, this illicitness and emotional responses. When we look at the works of Baroque architecture and the churches designed under that period of time, take Borromini’s work, the harmony and use of geometric to represent the Holy trinity. This is the power of aesthetics in sacred objects, it brings life and power to static objects embedded with symbolism.
Throughout this exercise and the onset of week 7, I questioned why I found certain things beautiful, and I also questioned why I didn’t see others in the same light. I realised that my eye was drawn to a wide array of aesthetic principles. First and form most, there is a very fine balance and order which must be considered when looking at aesthetics. Too much of anything can ruin an object's beauty. The secondary qualities which I found beautiful were: uniqueness, humans are naturally drawn to unique things as we predicate our understanding on the world on the basis that we feel different and unique. We see ourselves in unique and imreblical things. Contrast, contrast when used well can highlight and amplify certain attributes. Contrast provides drama and conflict, a primitive human urge. Nature and the entrenched truths hidden behind design. Symmetry. Ex Machina. Transparency and democracy, the art of revealing. Rhythm and repetition, illusion to the natural form, biodegradability. Transients. Biophilia. Complexity which is unplanned. And last but not least, precision. As I find it difficult to validate and express my emotions this section of ThingSpeak was very challenging to me, and still even after this course has been completed, I still struggle. But I guess that’s what beauty is. Beauty to me is something which we can define in words, we are not poets, we are designers. We discover beauty in objects and they’re embedded symbolism and make beautiful objects. We embedded symbolism in objects, we embedded our soles into objects. It took me a while to come to this realisation, it wasn’t until the final part of the ThingSpeak trialogue overlapped where everything tied into and I began to see the writing on the wall.
Camera laying down.I left a small area of metal on the canister to indicate which canister was to be dialed.
When making the camera, I initially wanted to construct the box too. I wanted to do this as I desired to create a box which was dimensioned perflectly. I also wanted to cut the hole for the frame and aluminum perfectly, before constructing the box. Cutting these holes on a match-box prove challenging.
I used a pair of tweezers to turn the dials of the camera. A very “hillybilly engineering” way of dialing the camera, however, I found them large enough to not be lost on my photography journey.
Relative size of the camera in the hand. I initially wanted to craft my own shutter for the camera from two sliding pieces of card with a matching inform hole. I came to find the use of a flap as a shutter more comfortable.
Perfectionism, and learning from Mistakes. The irony on why I have no photos. When making this camera, I researched appatures and their use in photography. I found that small appatures were perfect for landscape photography, my intended use for the camera. In my pursuit of perfection, I found that the hole using a very fine diabetic needle would create a perfectly sized appature. In the process of colouring the aluminium with the texter, the hole I made had closed in on itself. Initially, we coloured the aluminium before sticking it on the camera to hold it against the light to make sure the hole didn’t close on itself. When the ink dried on the metal and I had stuck it on the camera. I noticed the had looked patchy as it dried on the metal. As I wanted was so obsessed with this idea of perfection, I decided to apply a second coat of ink over the patchy metal, and doing so, this is where I believed the ink had created a seal over the hole. All the images I had taken turned out to be nothing but black. Which, in a way, sort of reflected deeply on me. This idea of perfection in turn provided me nothing but darkness. The places I went, the moments spared to get these shots of beautiful landscape, felt like they were all in vain at the time of development. However, it was not all in vain, the opposite rather. I learned a valuble lesson. I struggle with this idea of uniformity and perfection on a day to day basis, as much as I’d like to say this experience “changed me”, it didn’t. However, it did inspire me to take a different approach when crafting my book.
Book Completed Cover. The envelope is a little larger than the cover. This is a flaw I expected as I worked with limited leather off-cuts, but I don’t mind it.
The book opened. I used similar lace to the lace I sewed on the front as the book mark. I liked this laced. It tied together a very 70s vibe to the theme of the book.
Sizing the book before I cut off the longer pieces of thred and sewed on the lace.
Fitting the envelope of the book into the leather jacket. I used ordinary pinter paper at first, but it did not provide the resistence needed to stay in the book. I later modified it with card.
The inside of the leather jacket after it was sown. I wanted to use a real leather to make the jacket. The jacket is made from 3 inch wide off-cuts of genuine leather. A larger piece of leather would have been prefered for the jacket. But I could not afford to purchase a larger piece. I also didn’t want to use pleather as I wanted to experience working with time-accurate materials.
Stitching of the leather Jacket. I stitched the leather by hand. I did utalise a punch to create the holes. However, the leather was very quick to close on the holes. And it proved difficult to thread the leather. I regret not using plyers to thread the jacket, as my fingers were left with multiple blisters after sewing the jacket. But the pain experienced from crafting the jacket made me cherish it.
Front of the jacket. The pieces of leather don’t align properly on the jacket. I enjoy this flaw, as it gives the book a “home-made” character.
Sizing the book mark before sewing it to the headband. For the headband of the envelope. I utalised two offcuts of the leather.
The book closed on itself. I enjoy show the book looks. I was sizing it up before cutting the excess thread from the envelope. I enjoy the way this book looks. The book has a natural 70s character. It’s small (A5) and feels perfect to be a travel journal or something along those lines.
The book on my desk. In my head I imaged it as a perfect object. I imaged the leather strips to align perfectly. I imaged the stitching to mimic that of a sewing machine. I imaged the evelope to fit perfectly. From the craftingt the book, I found these visions of the final product I expected could not be replicated with the tools I used, and the skillset I had. But overall, I I love the final product. I love the imperfections and roughness. I’m proud that I made it.
The third and final part of ThingSpeak revolved around the theme of making object. We went from imagining objects, and their roles in society and narratives, to creating them. The first object we created was the pin-hole camera. Making this camera required a great deal of precision, so I intended to try and do it all by the book. Before going into the class I read information regarding the pinhole camera and I decided I wanted to focus on landscape photography. As a result, I purchased very fine needles to create a very small aperture for the camera which is great for wide shots. When we talk about the camera in the context of making objects, it is vague. We made the camera itself but we were also tasked with making the images too. This process of making in the images felt much more tedious and demanding than the making of the camera. It was hard to let go of this idea of infinitality and “digital immortality”. I’m accustomed to using a digital camera. The only obstacle I face is time and storage space, otherwise, I’m free to get as many shots as I want. But now as I mention it, “free” isn’t the right word. I often find myself caught in a loop, taking photo after photo until it reaches a state of perfection. This reflects how I make objects too. The pin-hole camera taught me to capture the moment. This is something I found very useful when making my book. To just let go and allow for the course of nature to take its place. I often find myself buying books and journals which I never end up using. It seems rather wasteful, but it pains me tranishing such beautiful objects with my tragic excuse of handwriting. I am undeniably a perfectionist, I know I said I wouldn’t allow myself to be labeled, but in the rare circumstance, I suspect this adjective service it purpose. When I work with the media I am accustomed to today, a great deal of planning or meticulous thought is rarely required as I always have the “undo button” to fall back on. It have creative freedom. When I came into this “making objects” of ThingSpeak, I really wanted to challenge myself, especially with the book binding project. I set forth to research the materials and techniques used to bind books in the primitive times before technology. I wanted to challenge myself in not being so precise. I imagined the object before I set out to construct it. I didn’t have a plan, but rather a vision. I employed techniques I researched off the web to realise this vision. I learnt a great deal on just how physically demanding and painstaking it was to only sew the leather jacket of the book. Looking at the final product, I see flaws everywhere but I love it. I can’t tell if it’s just a bias because I now have an insight and understanding of the amount of effort and patience it required to reach this end product, or rather, if it was because
Craft and design come hand in hand. Design is the process of imagining objects, and craft is the process of realising them. Our minds seem often unbound, when we envision objects we have visions which represent them in a particular way we desire which reflects a form of perfection, however, when we make objects, this doesn’t occur in the controlled environment which is out head. It occurs in the real world, and like the real world, things are prone to go off course. Craft inspires design. It also hinders design by setting forth limitations. Craft isn’t something which is spontaneous, it is something which is planned through design. When crafting items we embedded apart of our personality into them, our own unique signature is left behind. Design and craft exist hand in hand as a unique balance of order and chaos. We think through making by planning. Making is a process which requires strict obedience and patience. It occurs over time and requires a great deal of hindsight. We also think through making creatively by imaging objects. When I made my book, I sort little guidance. I knew what I wanted to achieve from the materials I had, I had some sort of idea or vision of what I imagined the book to look like. Through this imagination I thought about the processes and order of them which I needed to follow to understand the realisation of the book. When we watched the documentary on the printing press, I learnt that a great deal of thought is required in knowing your limitations. What is possible, and what can be achieved with current technologies. I learnt that when we make we think about redesign, we understand what is real, and what is otherwise imagination, what can and can’t be achieved. We think about the object being used, who is it for, and what purpose will this object fulfil in this person’s life?
Reflection Three
Throughout all these experiences, I’ve learnt that the act of making requires time and patience. Like a fine art, it can’t be something you rushed. It also requires some deal of meticulous planning, but also a great deal of creative inspiration. Finding uniqueness and opportunities in flaws to explore new concepts and ideas. When we made things by hand, it felt personalised. The act of making is an individual process which is comparable to meditation. It is where we as designers can truly communicate meaning through design. The act of making also requires an open mind, it requires you to be accepting and reasonable. The respect the course that some things take, and not give up. I learnt a great deal of tenacity when crafting these objects. I learnt to just keep going and not giving up and restarting. I learnt to find beauty in flaws and to appreciate uniqueness. The box which I made by hand, although it is something which I wish I could do better, it’s also something I love dearly. In this world of mass fabrication, objects often lose their soul, as quality control and perfection is common.
The two artefacts I chose to concentrate on were to computer and veil. Initially I chose them as a juxtaposition as I wanted to cover two extreme ends of the timeline. The veil dated back to primitive civilisation, and the computer is more or less the most synonymous human artifact when looking at the triumph of human technology and ingenuity. Upon reading the article, it came to my senses that both artefacts share very common similarities. The first I drew were between the veil and augmented reality filters commonly associated with snapchat or instagram. Furthermore, upon discovering this similarity, I re-read the section regarding the veil, but with the context of social media instead of the common fashion and cultural accessory we have become accustomed to. I discovered that social media as we know it today is a veil. Contrary to what some may believe--typically to the established concept older folk like my parents have--social media doesn’t reveal all in someone's life, but rather, mystifies key elements of peoples lives. This may be a reflection on society and how we pick and chose to show what we want to the world. Comparing the vail to social media, the two go hand in hand. It’s a rather interesting notion.
Differentiation in Design I enjoyed this reading as it was very imformative. I enjoyed learning about how gender influenced design, especially in 15th to 19th century. I found the section regarding the use of materials in design interesting, especially to symbolise wealth and power as a status. Design and It’s Archetypes. I found this reading difficult. I struggled to understand some of the concepts initally. After re-reading when the course has been completed to write this response, I understand a lot of the concepts much more clearly. I enjoy the section regarding the Anamorphism of objects, especially the Beetle. I enjoyed discovering why I and so many others regard this design as being “cute”, knowing the face of the car mimics that of a baby. Although it doesn’t indiciate if this choice was intentional, knowing the Beetle was designed to be areodynamic, or to at least “appear” that way. The section regarding the Tizio was interesting. What interested me was the “personally” assosiated with it’s design. It was designed for the “professional”. It serves more as a statement piece than an functional objects. Something which would sit on the desk of an archtect or CEO.
Readings
Objects of Affection