The Sculptural Form-Making Process of Julio Gonzalez In Architecture by Jun Hao Ong

The Sculptural Form-Making Process of Julio Gonzalez in Architecture

Jun Ong

The Sculptural Form-Making Process of Julio Gonzalez in Architecture A Comparative Study On The Form-Making Process Between The Sculptural Collaboration Of Julio Gonzalez and Pablo Picasso with the Architectural Collaboration of Tonkin Liu and Arup

Jun Ong University of Westminster, London, United Kingdom.

Title : The Sculptural Form-Making Process of Julio Gonzalez in Architecture Name : Jun Ong Tutor : Dr. Victoria Watson Date : 6 January 2014

ABSTRACT This paper explores the Shell Lace technique, a form-finding technique developed by architects, Tonkin Liu and engineering office, Arup for the Rain Bow Gate (2012), Tonkin Liuâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s first folded metal structure located in Burnley, England. It is a single surface structural technique using methods of tailoring informed by the structural strength and curvature of seashells. This technique, having gone through a series of physical modelling using specific mediums and refined with digital manipulations, is compared with the form-finding techniques of Cubist artist, Pablo Picasso and metalsmith, Julio Gonzalez through their sculptural collaboration in 1928. This paper will explore the parallels, differences and breakthroughs between the collaborations of Tonkin Liu and Arup in the practice of architecture with Picasso and Gonzalez in the practice of sculpture. Why was physical model-making important to Tonkin Liu as it is pivotal for Gonzalez to weld iron rods to visualize an idea? This paper ultimately aims to point out the difference between the Rain Bow Gate with another contemporary folded metal structure superficially similar, Arum (2012) by Zaha Hadid Architects, an installation at the 2012 Venice Biennale based on algorithmic material and structural form-finding processes learnt from Frei Ottoâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s tensile structures and also from light-weight shell structures.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to express my gratitude to my thesis supervisor, Dr. Victoria Watson, whose expertise and guidance have helped me stay focused while writing my thesis. A very special thanks also goes to my studio tutors, Mike Tonkin and Anna Liu for being generous in sharing their knowledge and experience as case study for my writing. I would also like to thank my family and colleagues for their utmost support throughout this process.

CONTENTS Abstract 7 Acknowledgements 9 Introduction & Thesis Statement

Picasso – Gonzalez •

The Cubist Painter and The Metalsmith

•

The 1928 Collaboration

•

The Birth of a Metal Sculptor

Tonkin Liu - Arup •

Conceiving: The Shell Lace Technique

•

Making: The Bexhill Shelter Maquette

•

Building: The Rain Bow Gate Pavillion

The Two Metal Folds

Conclusion •

Biography 77 Bibliography 78 List of Figures 80

F ORE W ORD

INTRODUCTION & THESIS STATEMENT The paper begins with an understanding of Picasso’s early sculptures as a Cubist artist and Gonzalez’s metalwork objects as an artisan, preceding their seminal collaboration that started in 1928. Upon working together in Gonzalez’s studio in Rue de Medeah, France, Picasso’s abstract vision was represented and made possible through Gonzalez who was trained as a metal smith in his family’s own metalworking business. This collaboration subsequently gave birth to Gonzalez’s unprecedented method of making sculpture with metal, that unlike with Picasso’s metal assemblage using found objects, he ‘opened up’ sculpture by welding together long thin rods of iron. The contrast between Gonzalez’s work as Picasso’s collaborator and on the other hand, as his own artist and artisan are examined through Gonzalez’s ground-breaking solo works after their collaboration. Gonzalez does not use iron to represent an artistic idea (from a maquette or a sketch) but instead uses the primacy of the material to imagine and visualize immediately the idea. In parallel with Gonzalez’s new method of “drawing in space,” this paper will shift from the practice of sculpture to the practice architecture through the collaboration of Tonkin Liu and Arup in their Shell Lace technique, seen as a sculptural method of form-making in the practice of architecture. The architects consistently seek to represent their investigations using a specific medium (paper, metal, plywood) at its essence with the mastery of a specific technique (tailoring, plasticine, laser-cutting). The Rain Bow Gate, 2011 project is used as a case study to 15

describe Tonkin Liu and Arup’s exploration of the Shell Lace technique through various phases; from analysing seashells, cutting and lacing fabric, making physical models to performing digital stress tests, 1:1 fabricating and assembling. Although there are similarities between the form-finding process of Tonkin Liu and Gonzalez, the paper will also identify the differences occurred between making a scaled metal sculpture and fabricating a life-sized metal structure. After inquiring what motivates Tonkin Liu’s Shell Lace technique, the paper will conclude by pointing out that although there may be superficial resemblance in form and material usage between certain structures, their form-finding processes could be entirely different. In the context of folded metal sheet structures, Zaha Hadid’s Arum, 2012 installation in Venice is used as a comparison to Tonkin Liu’s Rain Bow Gate pavilion.

PICASSO - GONZALEZ

Anti-clockwise from top left: 1

Picasso, Still Life, 1914. Painted wood and upholstery fringe.

Picasso, Glass, Newspaper and Bottle, 1914. Paint on canvas.

Picasso. Bottle and Wine Glass on a Table, 1912. Charcoal, ink, cut and pasted newspaper, and graphite on paper.

THE CUB IST PAINTER AND T H E MET ALSMIT H

THE CUBIST PAINTER AND THE METALSMITH Pablo Picasso and Julio Gonzalez first met in Barcelona when Gonzalez was fifteen. They frequented the café-tavern Els Quatre Gats (The Four Cats), the meeting place for prominent Spanish artists of that time. Picasso was five years younger than Gonzalez but had already developed a strong artistic reputation. Gonzalez on the other hand was an apprentice in his family’s own metalworking business.1 In 1900 and 1904 respectively, Gonzalez and Picasso both moved to Paris and stayed in contact until the death of Gonzalez’s brother, Joan in 1908 caused him a nervous breakdown.2 Picasso continued to carve his name internationally through renowned exhibitions while the distraught Gonzalez was persuaded by Basque sculptor Paco Durrio, also a jeweller, to begin metalworking and making jewels.3 He lived a modest life perfecting his mastery in metalworking.4 Since his Cubist relief assemblages completed before the First World War, Picasso had not made almost any sculpture.5 One of his earliest cubist constructions, Still Life, 1914 (Figure 1), reveals a level of construction not immediately visible at first glance. It is a relief made from recycled, carved wooden pieces and also textile. Like most of Picasso’s cubist collages, Still Life takes its subject from the everyday life, in this case, a café setting. The construction is made from twelve pieces

1. Withers J. (1976). The Artistic Collaboration of Pablo Picasso and Julio Gonzalez. p.107 2. Melikian S. (2002). Exhibition / New York: From figural to abstract: Julio Gonzalez. 3. Ibid. 4. Withers J. (1976). The Artistic Collaboration of Pablo Picasso and Julio Gonzalez. p.107 5. Ibid. T H E CUBI ST PAINT E R AND T HE ME T AL S MIT H

of pine and poplar wood, nailed and glued together to create a table that holds a knife, a piece of bread with sausage slices and a glass. The fabric used suggests a tablecloth that drapes over the table.6 After being published in French poet, Guillaume Appollinaire’s avant-garde publication Les Soirees de Paris in 1913, Picasso’s constructions were criticised as he used materials untrue to their characteristics and subject matter by collaging found materials to make individual elements, each with their own identifiable form, making his works neither paintings nor sculptures. Nevertheless, as art historian, Elizabeth Cowling pointed out, this construction technique allowed Picasso to create open planes which would have been much more difficult if sculpting from a solid mass. It is quite evident that these constructions were results from Picasso’s strong interest in tribal art at that time. In 1912, the same year he made Still Life, he bought a wooden African Grebo mask, a mask composed by a flat plane with elements that project outwards to form a face. The mask almost resembled a sculpted relief.7 There is no evidence of a preparatory sketch for Still Life, although other drawings show Picasso’s ability to think in three dimensions. There is however a painting of the same time, Glass, Newspaper and Bottle in 1914 (Figure 2). It is however uncertain whether the painting preceded the sculpture, but there are some distinct similarities between them. Both contain details of the moulding, glass and knife. In an even earlier painting, Bottle and Wine Glass on a Table, 1912 (Figure 3), the still-objects are outlined without any pretense at three-dimensional form, and visualized from different angles so that head-on and aerial views are seen at the same time. Picasso’s use of collaged newspapers also blurred the lines between “objective reality” 6. Heuman J. (2009). A Technical Study of Picasso’s Construction Still Life 1914. 7. Ibid. 22

THE CUB IST PAINTER AND T H E MET ALSMIT H

Julio Gonzalez, Flor (crisantemo), ca. 18901900. Wrought iron. 10" long.

Gonzรกlez, Passiflora, ca. 1896-1898. Wrought iron.

T H E CUBI ST PAINT E R AND T HE ME T AL S MIT H

6 Constantin Brancusi, Head of a Woman, 1925. Marble. 11 inch.

THE CUB IST PAINTER AND T H E MET ALSMIT H

and “reality”, between “art” and “life.” 8 From hand forging to autogenous welding Trained in metal works, Julio Gonzalez received his early sculptural training from his father, a sculptor and metalworker, and became a highly skilled foundryman and welder. He was never a sculptor in his early career, but supported himself making decorative metalwork, paintings and jewellery.9 From 1890-1900, he made a series of wrought iron flowers (Figure 4 and 5), forged in his father’s Barcelona blacksmith shop. Hand forging is one of the oldest known metalworking processes of which metal is heated and shaped by hammering to form various lengths, widths and cross-sections, creating wrought iron. In 1918, Gonzalez took a wartime job as a welder at the Renault factory at Boulogne-Bellancourt, France, making tanks. During his stint at the factory, he mastered the oxy-acetylene technique which was widely used since the First World War in the construction of armaments, ships and automobiles. The invention of oxy-acetylene welding in 1900, a process that uses acetylene - a colourless fuel gas, and oxygen to weld and cut metals enabled far higher temperatures and a more concentrated flame compared to traditional blacksmith hammer welding. The development of oxy-acetylene welding depended upon a series of technical breakthroughs: chemist Edmund Davy’s discovery of acetylene in 1833, the industrial production of oxygen, the development of reliable gas bottles, regulators, gauges, pipes, blow torches and cutting attachments, capable of producing temperatures of 3500 degrees Celsius. Bottles of oxygen and acetylene are connected to a blow torch and the blue flame melts mild steel welding rods to create a

8. Heuman J. (2009). A Technical Study of Picasso’s Construction Still Life 1914. 9. Curtis P. (1990). Julio Gonzalez: Fact and Fiction. p.10 T H E CUBI ST PAINT E R AND T HE ME T AL S MIT H

puddle of liquid metal which joins the wrought iron surfaces.10 In Gonzalez’s earlier jewellery career, there is a balance between the adaptation of the ornament to the function of the object and the possibilities of the material used. Many of the methods that he experimented in his jewellery (cutting of metal, superimposition of planes, use of empty space and dialogues between light and shade) became a basis to the adaptation of the oxy-acetylene technique in his repertoire.11 When the war ended, Gonzalez left his job at Renault and returned to painting and sculpture. He then became a studio assistant to the Romanian-born sculptor Constantin Brancusi from 1925 to 1926. The art historian Marilyn McCully assumes that during the stint, Gonzalez made iron armatures for the plasters and burnished bronze casts. By handling Brancusi’s human heads, reduced to virtual abstraction as seen in his Head of a Woman sculpture (Figure 6), a new world of sculpture was revealed to Gonzalez.12 Open-form Sculpture In 1927, while summering at Cannes, Picasso produced a series of drawings depicting a row of colossal monuments forming an “allee” along the fashionable Croisette. While Picasso’s paintings of 1927 and 1928 generally consist of linear rhythms and translucent superpositions, the transformed women in the Cannes charcoal drawings are modelled in a conventional chiaroscuro manner in order to emphasize their improbable anatomy. The French art critic, Christian Zervos relates that Picasso realized that drawings were still very far from sculptural conception and could be “deceptive”, and

10. Constructivism Techniques of Assembly, lecture notes at the Department of History of Art, University of Cambridge. 11. (2004). Julio González in the IVAM Collection: Jewels. 12. Melikian S. (2002). Exhibition / New York: From figural to abstract: Julio Gonzalez. 26

THE CUB IST PAINTER AND T H E MET ALSMIT H

Picasso, Bather, 1927. Charcoal on paper.

Picasso, Metamorphic Bather, 1928. Bronze.

T H E CUBI ST PAINT E R AND T HE ME T AL S MIT H

9 Lipchitz, Woman and Guitar, 1927. Gilded bronze.

THE CUB IST PAINTER AND T H E MET ALSMIT H

that he began making small sculptures intended as studies. The first of these studies was the Metamorphic Bather modelled in plaster, and clearly based on the Cannes drawings. This first sculpture, however, is as “deceptive” as the drawings. Both drawing (Figure 7) and sculpture (Figure 8) convey a sense of massiveness and bold projection, yet they are conceived as reliefs; while they are plastic, they are not fully realized as three-dimensional sculpture. The "creatures" in the Cannes drawings are placed in a confined shadow box, thereby sacrificing any suggestion of depth or multiple views. Similarly, the principal side of the modelled Metamorphic Bather mirrors its opposite side.13 Picasso was then exposed to open-form sculpture through Cubist sculptor, Jacques Lipchitz’s 1927 work, Woman and Guitar (Figure 9) when he visited Lipchitz’s studio. They have both met as part of the artistic community of Montmatre, Paris from 1904 to 1909. Lipchitz had been experimenting on “transparencies” in his sculptures with cutout sheets and strips of wax, and then cast in bronze. Although these new form of sculptures were unpopular amongst collectors, Picasso was nevertheless fascinated by these “transparent objects which can be seen from all sides at once,” as described by Lipchitz. After being inspired by Lipchitz’ transparencies, Picasso did many sketches on open-form sculpture.14 Despite his technical prowess, Gonzalez on the other hand had still not fully committed himself to the art of sculpture.

13. Withers J. (1976). The Artistic Collaboration of Pablo Picasso and Julio Gonzalez.p.107 14. Ibid. p.108 T H E CUBI ST PAINT E R AND T HE ME T AL S MIT H

THE 1928 COLLABORATION In 1928, back in Paris, Picasso was offered a commission which became a golden opportunity for him to execute his new ideas in sculpture. A municipally appointed committee invited Picasso to submit a proposal for a monument to Guillaume Apollinaire, the French poet who was also his close friend. He made a series of drawings composed of simple black lines on white paper and also paper maquettes but he knew that he needed someone who has welding and metalworking skills to execute his open-form sculpture ideas. Gonzalez at that time, also in Paris, have had mastered a new form of welding in the Renault factory and have also been exposed to the concept of “abstraction” through Brancusi’s works but have not made a sculpture yet. Picasso brought his line drawings to Gonzalez of which he agreed to be Picasso’s teacher and even lent Picasso his studio. Utilizing his craftsmanship and newly-found skill and artistry, Gonzalez transposed Picasso’s line drawings into four welded metal sculptures, using iron rods to replicate the drawings’ black lines.15 He carefully measured lengths of iron wire and, using solder for the joints, built the models according to plan between 1928-1929. 16 This initiated a partnership extending for a period of almost four years, producing six constructions. The artistartisan relationship began as Picasso employed and paid Gonzalez for his technical assistance in metalworking techniques and also for his tools to execute these constructions.17

15. Withers J. (1976). The Artistic Collaboration of Pablo Picasso and Julio Gonzalez. p.109 16. Krauss R. (1981). This New Art: To Draw In Space. p.120 17. Withers J. (1976) p.109 30

THE 1 9 2 8 CO L L AB O RATION

Picasso, Drawing for Sculpture, 1928. Ink on paper.

Picasso, Painted Iron Head, 1928. Iron.

T HE 1 9 2 8 C OL L ABORAT ION

12 Picasso, Project for Monument, 1928. Ink on paper.

THE 1 9 2 8 CO L L AB O RATION

Picasso, Drawing for Sculpture, 1928. Ink on paper.

Picasso, Project for Monument, 1928. Construction in wire.

T HE 1 9 2 8 C OL L ABORAT ION

From Mass to Lines The Painted Iron Head was perhaps the first of the iron constructions to be completed, judging by the final study drawing for this piece, dated March 20, 1928 (Figure 10) and its physical manifestation (Figure 11). Picasso continued his sketches for a wire sculpture throughout the spring of 1928. A month later in April, he worked on the idea of a full standing figure with a similar head to the Painted Iron Head. The style of these drawings was precise and geometric and was translated accurately by Gonzalez. As Zervos describes Picasso: “Picasso picks up a piece of iron wire which is lying on ground and sets to twisting it, talking all the while. Without him having anything particular in mind, in a few minutes the iron wire has received the impress of a great sensibility. Gonzalez on the other hand carefully planned, shaped and constructed heavy wires which needed tools, rather than twisting them by hand.” 18 In May 1928, Picasso’s work was interrupted abruptly upon Gonzalez’s mother’s death. Nevertheless he went to Dinard for the summer and continued to develop his idea for Apollinaire’s monument. Throughout July, without access to Gonzalez sculpture studio and equipment, he returned to “biomorphic” and “massive” forms. He drew sculptures reminiscent of his earlier Cannes drawings, only to be more abstract (Figure 12). The description of their volumes and their placement in space is far more convincing than the Cannes drawings. Amidst this series of drawings, he did a final sketch for Construction in August 1928 (Figure 13) which was the culmination of ideas for The Painted Iron Head.19 The Construction consisted of four iron maquettes 18. Withers J. (1976). The Artistic Collaboration of Pablo Picasso and Julio Gonzalez. p.110 19. Ibid. 34

THE 1 9 2 8 CO L L AB O RATION

Picasso, Head, 1930. Bronze after original in iron, 33 1/8" h.

Picasso, Head of a Woman, 1930. Painted iron, 39 3/8" h.

T HE 1 9 2 8 C OL L ABORAT ION

17 Picasso, Woman in the Garden, 1930-1931. Iron, 82 5/8" h.

THE 1 9 2 8 CO L L AB O RATION

made by Gonzalez. As seen in Figure 14, this construction is purely linear in nature except for a small circular head, including two concave dots for eyes. These constructions closely resemble Picasso’s lines in his initial sketch. Throughout the drawings and maquettes, there are divisions of planes, often made up of simple geometric shapes such as a circle or square. These planes are connected together with multiple thin wires, mostly straight with occasional curvilinear elements. The sketches are similar to the biomorphic bathers, but are even more abstracted from a recognizable figure. They depict floating spheres and curved elements suggestive of body parts such as a hipbone. It is prevalent that these wire drawings shows that Picasso’s ideas are beginning to be developed in parallel with the process of welding. In 1929, after the wire constructions, Picasso made Figurine where he begun using scrap iron, specifically iron nails, giving the piece a more spontaneous appearance than the wire sculptures. He manipulates these objects even further than his 1912-1914 cubist constructions. This subsequently led to the two heads, Picasso and Gonzalez’s next project together both in 1930; Head (Figure 15) and Head of a Woman (Figure 16). The two heads depart radically from the tight and defined geometry of their previous wire constructions. As art historian Alan Bowness described,” These two heads appear to complement each other, the one square-cut, regular, and male, the other soft, curvilinear, and female. He still retains his hallmark assemblage construction using real objects to create a “double metamorphosis” effect, giving the sculpture a concrete and tangible reality. In the Head of a Woman, he used such objects as nails for eyes, coil springs for hair, or a colander for a head to draw attention to their formal and tactile qualities.” 20

20. Withers J. (1976). The Artistic Collaboration of Pablo Picasso and Julio Gonzalez. p.111 T HE 1 9 2 8 C OL L ABORAT ION

Two Direct-Metal Processes: Assemblage & Drawing In Space It can be seen here that Picasso now uses the object as a starting point of the sculpture instead of relying on paintings as conceptual devices or precursor as used for his earlier Cubist reliefs and collages of 1912-1914. By giving back the sense of directness and ”primary object quality” to sculpture, these assemblages are set apart from the wire constructions he made together with Gonzalez.21 In this second phase the sculptures were larger and less involved with the careful translation of a two-dimensional blue print into a free standing model. The technique was one of assemblage – the “concatenation” of various parts; all of them scrap iron, some of them found-objects: colanders, shoemakers’ lasts, and industrial springs.22 Two of the sculptures, Construction, 1928 and the larger Woman in the Garden,1931, all executed with Gonzalez, were conceived as proposals for the monument to Appollinaire, to only be denied by the people of the council that didn’t particularly cared for his art. Picasso’s various proposals for the monument were subsequently rejected due to the poor relationship he had with the conservative committee, dragging on negotiations until after the Second World War. According to Zervos, the wire models were intended to be like a skeleton, which would then be enlarged and filled out with metal sheets. This plan was subsequently carried out in the Woman in the Garden (Figure 17) which became the largest of the iron constructions made by Picasso & Gonzalez.23 In the Woman in the Garden construction, Picasso was persistent to the idea of an empty space beneath the statue, creating a floating effect. The whole sculpture is transparent, providing the viewer

21. Withers J. (1976). The Artistic Collaboration of Pablo Picasso and Julio Gonzalez. p.111 22. Krauss R. (1981). This New Art: To Draw In Space. p. 120 23. Withers J. (1976) p.108 38

THE 1 9 2 8 CO L L AB O RATION

with multiple visual interests from various points of view. Zervos remarked that “these perforations of the mass which form innumerable view of the monument creating successive displacement of parts.”24 This is essentially made possible by the technique of assemblage, whereby disparate parts are put together rather than formed from a single mass. This juxtaposition is no longer restricted by a “skin” of bronze or marble. As Gonzalez phrased it;

“It remains for the eye to join together this countless number of points in the infinite.“ 25

At this point, both Picasso and Gonzalez have developed their own direct-metal processes, Picasso being the assemblage of found metal objects and Gonzalez with the manipulation of metal rods and welding them to create almost “transparent” forms. It was clear Gonzalez’s unique skill in direct-metal process and oxy-acetylene welding permitted Picasso’s collage sensibility to erupt beyond his paintings and into the three-dimensional world of metal sculpture.

“For Gonzalez the power of this eruption was, literally, earth-shaking – the beginning of what he called “this new art: to draw in space.” But for Gonzalez, these revelations became the further invention of a new kind of drawing: the sculptural inscription of space.” 26

24. Withers J. (1976). The Artistic Collaboration of Pablo Picasso and Julio Gonzalez. p.112 25. Ibid. 26. Ibid. T HE 1 9 2 8 C OL L ABORAT ION

Gonzalez, Woman Getting Dressed, 1930. Drawing.

Gonzalez, Study for Woman Combing Her Hair, 1931. Drawing.

THE B IRTH O F A METAL S CULP T OR

THE BIRTH OF A METAL SCULPTOR After his seminal collaboration with Picasso, Gonzalez’s first solo abstract construction was Harlequin, 1930, in which he played with shapes and symbols composed of solids and voids constructed with its forms connecting at various angles. González’s intention here and in such sculptures as Woman Combing Her Hair, Maternity, 1934 and Standing Figure, 1935 was to marry the material and its contained space. These works relate to the open-form constructions of Lipchitz, Picasso, Calder, Giacometti and Gargallo, all of whom strove to create sculpture that would appear to float and would incorporate actual or implied motion.27 “A great deal of Gonzalez’s linear work operates within an extremely shallow space. Frequently it appears to have been slipped between two constraining planes. Although this work is generally free-standing and basically threedimensional, the viewer often has difficulty in defining its limits optically. It slips and vacillates; how much depth it has, and whether it inclines towards or away from us, is ambiguous.” 28 In 1931, Gonzalez made the Woman Combing Her Hair sculpture, considered one of his major solo works. It can be seen that the finished work in iron was quite a literal transcription of the pencil 27. Withers J. (2009) Julio Gonzalez: About the Artist. 28. Curtis P. (1990). Julio Gonzalez: Fact and Fiction. p.13 T H E BIRT H OF A ME T AL S C U L PT OR

20 Gonzalez, Woman Combing Her Hair, 1931. Iron, 67 by 21 3/4 by 7 7/8 inches.

THE B IRTH O F A METAL S CULP T OR

sketch (Figure 19) from which it originates. The rounded vertical plane of the drawing that represents the woman’s bowed back and neck is translated clearly in the finished sculpture (Figure 20). Besides that, like in the drawing, the jagged contour of hair falling forward over the face of the woman as she reaches up to comb it also appears in the sculpture.29 Nevertheless, the sculpture and the drawing reveal two levels of legibility. For example, the four rods forming a ‘W’ joined to the neck do not exactly read like the profile in the pencilled drawing. The metal ‘W’ is unintelligible as hair tossed forward over the head compared to a pencilled contour that can be easily filled in by the viewer who tries to picture a body from a network of lines. By perceiving Gonzalez’s sketch on a page, the viewer is able to differentiate the pencilled ‘W’ as materially different from the rest of the page’s white background, segregating solid from void and near from far. However, in the metal translation, the tiny iron angle that attaches itself to the ‘W’ is not seen as continuous limb to the woman’s right arm but instead an illegible part, having delineating itself from the left arm.30 Gonzalez made the sketch in the presence of a life model, enabling him to render the body more literally even though certain changes and condensation was made to create the form, just like he did for Woman Getting Dressed (Figure 18). The point at which abstraction results to complete unintelligibility is the point at which the drawing is translated to metal. The abstraction becomes a process of copying an idea across two mediums, paper and metal. During this ‘copying,’ Gonzalez functions as the copyist whereby he does not only try to replicate his initial sketch but at the same time finds new ways his initial idea could be translated in metal sculpture. The new thing then becomes

29. Krauss R. (1981). This New Art: To Draw In Space. p. 121 30. Ibid. p. 124 T H E BIRT H OF A ME T AL S C U L PT OR

21 Gonzalez, Masque My, 1930. Bronze.

THE B IRTH O F A METAL S CULP T OR

the result of what he delineates from the previous medium.31 Metal sculpture in itself was not new, but Gonzalez’s handling of it was. He has not only successfully opened up sculpture by welding together long thin rods of metal but also mastered other techniques such as cutting, bending and forging metal enabling metal to be malleable and plastic. Like Picasso, Gonzalez has also always been interested in masks, a variation of the relief form which can be used to “re-present.” Like Picasso, Braque and Modigliani, Gonzalez was fascinated by African art more than any Paris school artist’s oeuvre that influenced his analytical deconstruction of the human face. His 1930 piece, Masque My (Figure 21) was an ode to primitive art. With the exception of a thin vertical line indicating the nose, the whole piece was cut, bent and raised from a single flat piece of iron, a technique that he also used on a number of other masks of this period. 32 In an article on Gonzalez, the American Sculptor David Smith relates his own experience as a painting student while working as a welder; “Iron working was labour, while I thought art was oil paint.” “When a man is trained in metalworking and has pursued it as labour with the ideal of art represented by oil painting, it is very difficult to conceive that what has been labour and livelihood is the same means by which art can be made.” It was “Gonzalez’s and Picasso’s work which brought my consciousness to this fact that art could be made out of iron.”33

31. Krauss R. (1981). This New Art: To Draw In Space. p. 121 32. Withers J. (2009) Julio Gonzalez: About the Artist. 33. Krauss R. (1981). This New Art: To Draw In Space. p. 120 T H E BIRT H OF A ME T AL S C U L PT OR

TONKIN LIU - ARUP

CONCEIVING: THE SHELL LACE TECHNIQUE Both Picasso and Gonzalez had different attitudes towards sculpture, before and after their 1928 collaboration. They each had their own methods of form-making that were dependant to their perception towards the human body and their techniques in sculpture-making. Operating in three-dimensions, Gonzalez’s form-making process of using the material (metal) to visualize his subject, and the transcription of ideas across mediums may have similarities to the form-finding process in the practice of architecture. In architecture, planar sketches, drawings and three-dimensional scaled models are used to translate an idea into a spatial built-form. Through their Shell Lace technique, architects Tonkin Liu34 (2002), a practice based in London, subscribes to an almost sculptural process of form-finding, similar to Gonzalez’s “transcription in space,” whereby iterations of physical models using specific materials are made to represent their sketch ideas and also to test their structural performances using a range of materials. Shell Lace is a single surface structural technique inspired by the evolution of seashells and the ancient art of tailoring. It utilizes not only contemporary techniques of making such as computer-aided design and fabrication but also applies an iterative hands-on approach. Informed by biomimetics - the study of structure and function of biological systems as models for the design and engineering of materials and machines, Tonkin Liu have been collaborating with engineers, Arup over three years to further these investigations. They looked at molluscs for an

34. Refer to "Biography" in p. 77 for a short biography of architects Mike Tonkin and Anna Liu CON CEIVIN G: T HE S HE L L L AC E T E C HNIQ U E

22 Tonkin Liu, Structural principles derived from the curvature of seashells.

CO NCEIV ING: THE SHEL L LACE T ECH N I QUE

Anti-clockwise from top left: 23

Cut of dress coat.

Potrait of Michiel Jansz van Miereveldt c.1628, showing the Elizabethan ruff.

An example of a floral lace.

CON CEIVIN G: T HE S HE L L L AC E T E C HNIQ U E

array of highly refined shell forms, which withstood natural forces and structural parameters to offer molluscs protection using the minimum thickness of material. The practice draws inspiration from the structural characteristics of seashells (Figure 21) in which the three-dimensional curvature, corrugation of the surface and distortion of the curving form lock in strength and allow for incredibly thin structures. This notion of translating three-dimensional structural principles of seashells into the “gravity-bound” realm of architecture is tested and crystallized through contemporary fabrication techniques.35 Mastering the Technique: The Art of Tailoring While seashells provided Tonkin Liu with formal and structural references, they needed a method or technique that will allow them to “make” and test these concepts with various mediums. Similar to Gonzalez, Tonkin Liu began their design process with sketches or conceptual diagrams. With a rough idea of the intended form, they then proceed to translating these planar drawings into a series of scaled physical models or maquettes. In the direct-metal process of Gonzalez of which he bends and welds metal rods, he further abstracts the form from his initial sketch to suit the nature of the material used. As a sculptor, he is primarily interested in the visual outcome of his form but due to the characteristics of thin metal rods, he needed to also consider the structural integrity of his construction. Occasionally, pentimenti occurs whereby pieces that may look out of place are further added on to his sculpture for the work’s stability, usually vertical rods attached to lower regions of the body, as seen in Construction.36 Also consisting of metal rods, these additions enable Gonzalez to camouflage them within the overall construction of the sculpture.

35. Tonkin M. and Clark E. (2013). The Evolution of Shell Lace. p.291 36. Curtis P. (1990). Julio Gonzalez: Fact and Fiction. p.14 52

CO NCEIV ING: THE SHEL L LACE T ECH N I QUE

The case is slightly different with Tonkin Liu’s Shell Lace technique as it is a single-surface structure that uses a thin sheet of material. Just like how oxy-acetylene welding enabled Gonzalez to construct his sculptures with metal rods, Tonkin Liu required a technique that will enable them to manipulate a single-surface material into a three-dimensional form that simultaneously incorporates structural qualities. They explored the art of tailoring, a technique that has for centuries taken flat sheets and cut them in particular ways so that they can effectively cover the three-dimensional human body.37 The knowledge and art of cutting and sewing cloth – two principles of constructing clothes from a pattern that were developed in Europe between the twelfth and fourteenth centuries. As merely a mean of concealing the body during the Middle Ages, that standard loose robe of the medieval period constructed from a single piece or two of cloth, was shortened, tightened, cut and then sewn together in attempts to accentuate the human from, especially during the Renaissance period. The “re-constructing” of the human body in fabric required a growing expert skill and labour force, therefore resulting in the “pattern-maker” and the “tailor” joining other craftsmen as significant members of the community.38 Tonkin Liu learnt that there are parallels between the structural principles in clothing construction and in architecture. As an example, the production of the shoulder on a coat (Figure 23) needs to be stiff to hold the fabric arm hanging below. This is achieved by bringing together three cut fabric patterns making a breast panel, back panel and arm that join as they are moulded over the shoulder, creating a form that cannot be made from a single sheet. To avoid local distortions or creases, the tailor uses cuts to pull in curving surfaces and adding darts to fill in

37. Tonkin M. and Clark E. (2013). The Evolution of Shell Lace. p.202 38. Boyer G. (1996). The History of Tailoring: An Overview. CON CEIVIN G: T HE S HE L L L AC E T E C HNIQ U E

gaps in the fabric, enabling the tailor to reduce overall material usage.39 By observing curved seams in clothing, Tonkin Liu realized the need to utilize its intrinsic strength in order to use a much thinner and lighter material. The material is therefore not as critical as the manner clothing seams are curved to give it stiffness. Taking the structural form of the ridges on seashells, undulation is made by joining sheets in a corrugated form along the surface to further strengthen the form. Lace-making is an ancient craft of openwork fabric, with patterns comprising open holes made by machine or by hand (Figure 25). These holes can be formed by removing threads from previously woven fabric or by creating open spaces as the fabric is laced. The lace elements of a garment rarely function to be rigid or take load but to simply hold itself up as seen in the classic Elizabethan ruff (Figure 24). The lace is given a sinusoidal flow of fabric to provide structural depth allowing the lace to project outwards from the wearerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s neck to great effect. Like lace, Shell Lace aims to achieve lightness.40 â&#x20AC;&#x153;Less like a spider spinning and more like a caterpillar eating a leaf, leaving only the veiny threads that keep it rigidâ&#x20AC;?41 Structurally, as long as there are sufficient material near the seam joints where local compression and tension forces translate, unnecessary materials can be removed. The removal of materials does not only reduces self-load but also a strategy Tonkin Liu uses to catch light through the perforations, cast shadows and to visually articulate the curvature of the structure. In forged and welded sculpture, there is little wastage of material. of Unlike traditional media which does not

39. Tonkin M. and Clark E. (2013). The Evolution of Shell Lace. p.202 40. Ibid. p.293 41. Ibid. 54

CO NCEIV ING: THE SHEL L LACE T ECH N I QUE

distribute the amount of material efficiently to the support and other visually important areas, welded metal enables the user to distil only elements that are critical and active to the subject. Using the welding technique, Gonzalez creates a rhythm in his sculpture in areas of sparseness and special interest to accentuate an element of the subject.42

42. Curtis P. (1990). Julio Gonzalez: Fact and Fiction. p.14 CON CEIVIN G: T HE S HE L L L AC E T E C HNIQ U E

MAKING: THE BEXHILL SHELTER MAQUETTE The 2009 Bexhill Shelter beachfront competition was Tonkin Liuâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s opportunity to further develop the Shell Lace technique in an actual context. They wanted to create a vaulted form to provide shelter from the wind and rain with a thin and durable material such as aluminium and perforated with holes to allow views to the sea while taking cover. The twisting, contorted series of arches, curving walls and part spirals were informed from the spaces created inside and outside of shells.43 With the principles and form from seashells identified together with an understanding of the tailoring technique, Tonkin Liu first experimented with malleable and basic mediums like paper and plasticine to explore on how to gain strength from three-dimensional curvature. In tailoring, a mannequin is used as a mould of which the tailor or dressmaker will drape and make darts onto fabric to shape the garment according to the human body. Plasticine, being the â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;mould,â&#x20AC;&#x2122; enabled Tonkin Liu to demonstrate simple structural viability with the notion that if a scaled model made of plasticine does not stand; then it is likely it will be structurally weak in any material at any scale. After tests and iterations have been carried out with plasticine (Figure 26), Tonkin Liu then replicated the desired form in paper as a scaled representation of aluminium. Upon making a bowing arching shell from multiple pieces of overlapping paper, they realized the shell form still wanted to flex as there was no local stiffening. As a result, they added plasticine ribs on the paper model (Figure 27) to stiffen it. They then removed the plasticine and traced the outlines of its surfaces. Once completed,

43. Tonkin M. and Clark E. (2013). The Evolution of Shell Lace. p.294 MAKI N G : T H E BE X HIL L S HE L T E R MAQ U E T T E

Tonkin Liu, Bexhill Shelter Model 01, 2009. Plasticine.

Tonkin Liu, Bexhill Shelter Model 02, 2009. Paper and plasticine.

Tonkin Liu, Bexhill Shelter Model 03, 2009. Paper.

MAK ING: THE BEXHIL L SHELT ER MAQUET T E

Tonkin Liu, Bexhill Shelter Perspective, 2009. Rhinoceros digital model.

Tonkin Liu, Bexhill Shelter Laser-Cutting Plan, 2009. Plywood.

Tonkin Liu, Bexhill Shelter Physical Model. Plywood.

MAKI N G : T H E BE X HIL L S HE L T E R MAQ U E T T E

they remade each of ribbed surfaces in paper (Figure 28) recreating the curving form of the model and repeated the process until the entire surface of the shell form had been recreated as a series of ribs, producing a stiff single surface structure with three-dimensional curvature from flat sheets.44 “They had tailored the shelter.” 45 As there were limits to what plasticine and paper can do, Tonkin Liu moved to digital modelling (Figure 29) for extra precision. Digital modelling using the Rhinoceros software was pivotal as it allowed Tonkin Liu to accurately model and test multiple iterations affected by various parameters or factors not possible through physical models such as the curvature of the arches, the depth of the corrugation and the distortion of the curves of the arch. This does not mean that there is an end to their paper and plasticine exploration, but instead they made digital models in parallel with their physical explorations while being assessed by Arup.46 The architect-engineer collaboration between Tonkin Liu and Arup was pivotal as it allowed Tonkin Liu’s ideas and visions to be structurally tested and validated, akin to the artist-artisan partnership between Picasso and Gonzalez whereby Gonzalez informed Picasso on the techniques of welding and as a trained metal smith, executed most of their collaborative works. In the Tonkin Liu-Arup relationship however, Tonkin Liu remained both the artist and artisan in the partnership, as the architects both conceived the idea and also made the maquettes, on Arup’s advice and expertise, at various phases of the design process.

44. Tonkin M. and Clark E. (2013). The Evolution of Shell Lace. p.294 45. Ibid. p.295 46. Ibid. p.296 60

MAK ING: THE BEXHIL L SHELT ER MAQUET T E

Arup was critical in realizing Tonkin Liu’s design process from conception to fabrication through the engineers’ analytical modelling software and calculations. Arup was able to generate graphic stress diagrams and identify problematic areas to allow Tonkin Liu to refine and optimize the geometry of their model. This initiated an iterative process between the architects and the engineers, leading to certain fabrication and jointing development. When the architects were satisfied with the final iteration, they identified areas of the model that are not structurally required through a force-mapping software. They wanted to replicate a lace by creating a pattern of perforations on the refined surface to not only make the overall structure lighter but also to allow transparency and light through the structure.47 Digital Planarity Although digital modelling allows one to manipulate forms three-dimensionally, the viewer can only see views of the model in a virtual space. The computer display screen becomes a barrier to having tactile interactions with the virtual model.48 Gonzalez’s works are much unlike Picasso’s sculptures which are seen as pictorial and can be read at one sitting. His work, being an open sculpture, pulls the viewer around itself, forcing unpredictable relationships at every angle. Gonzalez purposely made sculpture with a front and back as they were both equally as important for the viewer.49 The planarity of viewing a threedimensional digital model thus renders the need for Tonkin Liu to remake a physical version of the refined digital model, allowing them to have a more hands-on understanding of its overall form and how viewers will perceive it.

47. Tonkin M. and Clark E. (2013). The Evolution of Shell Lace. p.296 48. Liu A. and Tonkin M. (2014, December 6). Personal Interview. 49. Curtis P. (1990). Julio Gonzalez: Fact and Fiction. p.13 MAKI N G : T H E BE X HIL L S HE L T E R MAQ U E T T E

Therefore, after cycles of digital modelling, the architects decided to build a final model prototype of the shelter by laser-cutting 0.8mm micro-plywood (Figure 30) as a stiffer material than paper to replicate aluminium. Similar to garment making and tailoring, the tailor first draws patterns on muslin, a lower quality fabric to test the “draft” garment on the body before using actual fabric to execute the final garment. The “muslin” in the context of Tonkin Liu is the microplywood board containing unrolled outlines of each surface of the digital model to be cut precisely with a laser-cutting machine. These pieces were then glued together, successfully forming a fluid, yet rigid and light Shell Lace structure (Figure 31). Although this project was never built at a 1:1 scale, it became a seminal exploration of the Shell Lace technique for Tonkin Liu.50 The Bexhill Shelter became a precedent to their next competition project for a bridge in Lisbon in 2009. Although both projects had different functions, Tonkin Liu wanted to use the Shell Lace technique as an architectural language that could take up various typologies. They saw each ridge of the Bexhill Shelter as a “bridge.” By taking the two adjacent surfaces of a ridge and closing their remaining edges with a third surface, a Shell Lace torsion beam is essentially created. A torsion beam is a structure designed to resist bending and twisting, yet still being lightweight. Each component in the beam is fairly flexible but when glued together becomes as stiff as if it was completely solid. The engineers confirmed through analysing the digital model of the bridge that it could span up to 40 metres with 8mm thick steel plates.51

50. Tonkin M. and Clark E. (2013). The Evolution of Shell Lace. p.296 51. Ibid. 62

MAK ING: THE BEXHIL L SHELT ER MAQUET T E

BUILDING: THE RAIN BOW GATE PAVILLION Although most of Tonkin Liuâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Shell Lace competition projects were unbuilt, they served as pivotal experiments to develop an arsenal of Shell Lace typologies. In 2011, they finally won a design competition for a pavilion, the Rain Bow Gate, in Burnley, Lancashire, which was a golden opportunity to construct a large-scale and permanent Shell Lace structure. Burnley became an ideal location to develop a metal Shell Lace structure due to its industrial heritage in advanced metalworking industry including laser and water jet cutting. The Rain Bow Gate was essentially an amalgamation of Tonkin Liu's early exercises and experiments, such as the Bexhill Shelter. On a plaster cast of the scaled site in Burnley, they started playing with potential forms using colored chenille stems (Figure 33). This technique of assemblage, as used by Picasso in his direct-metal sculptures like the Head, enabled Tonkin Liu to quickly and intuitively bend and twist found objects to describe their sketch ideas three-dimensionally. When these stems take up an interesting form, they, albeit messy, use transparent adhesive tape to bind them together. The intentional usage of chenille stems in a range of rainbow colours also metaphorically represents their conceptual diagram (Figure 32) of combining the effects of transparency in raindrops and the arching form of a bow, forming the Rain Bow Gate. Like in Bexhill Shelter, Tonkin Liu then moved on to making a series of plasticine models to study the scale and relationship to the site and also to establish a structural typology, whether it is a vault, beam BUI LDIN G : T HE RAIN BOW G AT E PAV IL L ION

Tonkin Liu, Concept Diagram for Rain Bow Gate, 2011.

Tonkin Liu, Bexhill Shelter Model 02, 2011. Colored chenille stems.

B UIL D ING: THE RAIN BO W G AT E PAVI LLION

34 Tonkin Liu, Design Process for Rain Bow Gate, 2011.

BUI LDIN G : T HE RAIN BOW G AT E PAV IL L ION

or column typology. When a rough form with its structural ribs and footing positions identified, a digital model is built to further develop the curved, corrugated and distorted geometries that strengthen the single surface structure. This initiates a phase in their design process which the physical model 'dissappears' into the virtual realm where it is refined by Arup's structural analysis software. Arup then advises on how structural efficiency can be optimised to minimize the plate thickness. In areas of low stress, the overall weight of the structure can be reduced by perforating the plates, hence removing materials. Although each of these plates are 'welded' virtually in the digital model, the architects had to decompose each of these plates from individual surfaces into twodimensional lines back on to a planar surface, just like drawing flat pattern pieces on fabric in tailoring. In this case, Tonkin Liu 'unrolls' the digital model to be used as a guide for the laser-cutting machine which then cuts these patterns on a thin flat sheet material, here being a reflective silver colored card to replicate the effect of stainless steel. Once cut and joined (with glue), the thin plates resumes its three-dimensional form. The physical and tactile model also enables Tonkin Liu to feel how light the structure is and perceive it at various angles on the plaster cast site. As the Rain Bow Gate was Tonkin Liuâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s first 1:1 scaled structure and their first exploration to metal fabrication, many other large-scaled parameters arised such as formworks, logistics and assembly, that were not encountered in their earlier Shell Lace projects. The structure, fabricated from shot-blasted 3mm thick stainless steel (Figure 35), was welded in several parts off-site while being supported on plywood formers due to its size. The largest pieces ranged from 12 to 15 meters long. The sculpture was not completely strong until the different components were fully joined together. Although Tonkin Liu and Gonzalez may share the same form-making process when making smaller-scaled maquettes, whereby Gonzalez was both the idea-conceiver and maker while on the 66

B UIL D ING: THE RAIN BO W G AT E PAVI LLION

Tonkin Liu, Rain Bow Gate: Using plywood formers as support.

Tonkin Liu, Rain Bow Gate: Transporting the Welded Components. BUI LDIN G : T HE RAIN BOW G AT E PAV IL L ION

other hand, Tonkin Liu had to work with a metal fabricator due to the scale of the structure. The earlier maquettes allowed them to validate their doubts and uncertainties before moving on to 1:1 fabrication. Almost mirroring Gonzalez's and Picasso's collaboration, whereby Picasso had to convey his ideas via planar drawings to Gonzalez so that he could construct in metal, Tonkin Liu had to produce drawings for the fabricator to laser-cut the large flat sheet plates before being welded by a team of welders. After being transported to site in welded parts (Figure 36) and assembled on three footings, the steel pavillion is tested in-situ one last time for its structural integrity, taking account wind loads and other environmental factors. As it stands, the steel Rain Bow Gate can also be seen as a form of maquette that serves as a large-scaled study model to Tonkin Liu's subsequent Shell Lace products. Kit of Parts Tonkin Liu continues to develop their studies in Shell Lace to different structural typologies, creating hybrids for specific tasks, developing jointing details to aid assembly and the exploration of methods for more efficient cutting and building process through repetition, customization and tessellation. â&#x20AC;&#x153;The evolving Shell Lace process has established a technique that is more than a sum of its parts. It is a holistic and flexible approach that allows a great deal of architectural expression, as well as responsiveness to site, structural and environmental demands. Each project is a species, evolved to pursue a particular series of investigations. In each case, the Shell Lace family tree can expand and develop further.â&#x20AC;? 52

52. Tonkin M. and Clark E. (2013). The Evolution of Shell Lace. p.307 68

B UIL D ING: THE RAIN BO W G AT E PAVI LLION

37 Tonkin Liu, Evolution of Shell Lace structural typologies, Diagram. BUI LDIN G : T HE RAIN BOW G AT E PAV IL L ION

CONCLUSION

Tonkin Liu, Rain Bow Gate, 2009.

Zaha Hadid Architects, Arum in Venice Biennale, 2012.

THE TW O METAL FO L D S

THE TWO METAL FOLDS The Rain Bow Gate (Figure 38) was formed through a sculptural form-making process of which an abstracted idea is translated and manipulated with a specific material using its inherent properties. Put together with another contemporary folded metal structure superficially similar, Arum, 2012 (Figure 39) by Zaha Hadid Architects, a comparison can be made on their very different form-making processes. Arum, an installation at the Venice Biennale, was based on algorithmic material and structural form-finding processes learnt from Frei Ottoâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s tensile structures and also from light-weight shell structures. Figure 40 shows four stages of form-making for Arum, starting with low-polygon generation, subdivision of polygon for a smoother surface, triangulation of mesh points to create smaller panels and the decomposition of panels as guide for laser-cutting. As each panel is not flat, Robofold, a robot is used to precisely fold each panel according to the digital model, before being assembled in-situ.53 "The craft of folding paper with your hands, the technology of folding metal with robots." 54 It is clear that Arum's form was derived with a different trajectory from the Rain Bow Gate, with the former relying heavily on parametric modelling and robotics while the latter subscribes to a more sculptural method in form-making. Gonzalez shifted from making decorative objects to clean open-form metal sculptures through 53. Autumn Review: Arum Installation and Exhibition by Zaha Hadid Architects at Venice Architecture Biennale. Retrieved from: http://www.zaha-hadid.com 54. (2014) Robofold. Retrieved from: www.robofold.com T HE T W O ME T AL F OL D S

Zaha Hadid Architects, Arum: Form-Making Process, 2012. Digital Model.

Robofold, Arum: Folding Metal Sheets Using the Robofold Machine, 2012.

THE TW O METAL FO L D S

abstraction. He abstracted his ideas through drawings that condensed the human body to simple strokes before making a metal sculpture. This method of making sculpture can be seen in Tonkin Liu's form-making process for the Rain Bow Gate whereby the maquettes are abstracted to the barest and thinnest form, therefore relying on the most efficent form for the most optimum structural strength. The sculptural process of form-making is a process that is intuitive yet pragmatic. The process oscillates back and forth, using various mediums to represent an idea, planar or three-dimensional. To an extent, this "thinking with hands" method occurs in Tonkin Liu's form-making process but often coupled with mathematical reasonings, a trait that do not necessarily occur in Gonzalez's sculptures. There is a limit to how much the built form can be adapted from natural structures (e.g. seashells) but unlike with Gonzalez, the human form is Nature, and his intention as a sculptor is to abstract human forms in metal. Gonzalez became a metal sculptor as a result of his learning of abstraction from Picasso and paired with his inherent skill in welding and metalsmithing. The notion of abstraction with a mastery of a specific technique becomes an integral component in sculpture-making. Looking at a seashell in an abstracted manner allowed Tonkin Liu to extract its structural curvature into lines and then to manifest these lines into a single-surface structure through the Shell Lace technique. The scale of sculptures Gonzalez worked on is significantly smaller than the built form. Therefore, Gonzalez's sculptural process of form-making departs from practice of architecture at fabrication. It goes beyond a pair of skilled hands, requiring a cohesive collaboration with various individuals of different expertise, forming a team. Perhaps there is always a Sculptor within an Architect, but never an Architect within a Sculptor. T HE T W O ME T AL F OL D S

BIOGRAPHY Mike Tonkin graduated in Architecture at the Royal College of Art, London, before qualifying as an architect in 1989, after studying at Leeds Polytechnic School of Architecture and Bath Technical College. Mike has taught and lectured at numerous schools of architecture in England and the Far East, and he currently teaching at the University of Bath & the University of Westminster. He lectures on a number of subjects including world vernacular architecture, using the experience and photographs taken from his extensive travels. At the University of Westminster, together with his partner Anna Liu, he runs a Masters studio where they explore and develop the Shell Lace technique. Anna LiuÂ is an Architect with over 15 years of experience in architecture, art, and landscape. She graduated in Architecture at Columbia University. Anna has worked for practices in China, Japan, the USA and the UK. Having previously worked for Arup Associates in Hong Kong and in London, she set up Tonkin Liu with Mike Tonkin in 2002. Together they taught at the Architectural Association School of Architecture for four years, exploring studies of patterns in nature and in human nature.

BIBLIOGRAPHY 1. Heuman J. (2009). A Technical Study of Picassoâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Construction Still Life 1914. Tateâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Online Research Journal. Retrieved from http://www.tate. org.uk/research/publications/tate-papers/technical-study-picassosconstruction-still-life-1914 2. Hamilton G. (1970). The Alfred Stieglitz Collection. Metropolitan Museum Journal, Volume 3, pp.371-392. 3. Julio Gonzalez. Guggenheim: Collection Online. Retrieved from http:// www.guggenheim.org/new-york/collections/collection-online/artists/ bios/1089 4. Melikian S. (2002). Exhibition / New York: From figural to abstract: Julio Gonzalez. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes. com/2002/06/01/style/01iht-melik_ed3_.html?pagewanted=print 5. (2008). Focus: Picasso Sculpture. Retrieved from http://www.moma. org/collection/browse_results.php?object_id=80899 6. Krauss R. (1981). This New Art: To Draw In Space. The Originality of the Avant-Garde and Other Modernist Myths. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press 7. Curtis P. (1990). Julio Gonzalez: Fact and Fiction. Julio Gonzalez: Sculptures & Drawings. London: Whitechapel Art Gallery. 8. (2002). Press Release. Julio Gonzalez: Exhibition Organized by Dickinson. Retrieved from http://prod-images.exhibit-e.com/www_ simondickinson_com/74eb5909.pdf 78

9. Withers J. (2009) Julio Gonzalez: About the Artist. Retrieved from http://www.moma.org/collection/artist.php?artist_id=2231 10. Aparicio C. (1988). Julio Gonzalez: Femme assise I (Seated Woman I). Retrieved from http://www.museoreinasofia.es/en/collection/artwork/ femme-assise-i-seated-woman-i 11. Withers J. (1976). The Artistic Collaboration of Pablo Picasso and Julio Gonzalez. Art Journal Vol. 35, No. , pp. 107-114. New York: College Art Association. 12. Boyer G. (1996). The History of Tailoring: An Overview. Retrieved from http://www.lnstar.com/mall/literature/tailor4.htm 13. Tonkin M. and Clark E. (2013). The Evolution of Shell Lace. Prototyping Architecture. Retrieved from : http://www.tonkinliu.co.uk/ practice/publications/ 14. Tonkin M. and Liu A. (1999). Asking, Looking, Playing, Making. European Union: Black Dog Publishing 15. Birch A. (2011). Shi Ling Bridge: Technical: Steel Structures. Building Design Magazine. 16. Constructivism Techniques of Assembly, lecture notes at the Department of History of Art, University of Cambridge. Retrieved from: http://www.hoart.cam.ac.uk/undergraduates/curriculum/partI/ paper2makingofart/constructivism-techniques-of-assembly-completelecture-notes/view 17. (2014) Robofold. Retrieved from: www.robofold.com 18. Liu A. and Tonkin M. (2014, December 6). Personal Interview. 19. Autumn Review: Arum Installation and Exhibition by Zaha Hadid Architects at Venice Architecture Biennale. Retrieved from: http://www. zaha-hadid.com 79

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Picasso, Still Life, 1914. Painted wood and upholstery fringe. <http://www.tate.org.uk/research/publications/tate-papers/technicalstudy-picassos-construction-still-life-1914> Figure 2: Picasso, Glass, Newspaper and Bottle, 1914. Paint on canvas. <http://www.tate.org.uk/research/publications/tate-papers/technicalstudy-picassos-construction-still-life-1914> Figure 3: Picasso. Bottle and Wine Glass on a Table, 1912. Charcoal, ink, cut and pasted newspaper, and graphite on paper. <http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/works-of-art/49.70.33> Figure 4: Julio Gonzalez, Flor (crisantemo), ca. 1890-1900. Wrought iron. 10" long. <http://www.nus.edu.sg/museum/alchemy.html> Figure 5: Gonzรกlez, Passiflora, ca. 1896-1898. Wrought iron. <http://www.museoreinasofia.es/en/exhibitions/francisco-durrio-juliogonzalez-orfebreria-cambio-siglo-colecciones-mncars> Figure 6: Constantin Brancusi, Head of a Woman, 1925.Marble. 11 inch. < http://artsy.net/artwork/constantin-brancusi-head-of-a-woman> Figure 7: Picasso, Bather, 1927. Charcoal on paper. Withers J. (1976). The Artistic Collaboration of Pablo Picasso and Julio Gonzalez. Figure 8: Picasso, Metamorphic Bather, 1928. Bronze. Withers J. (1976). The Artistic Collaboration of Pablo Picasso and Julio Gonzalez. Figure 9: Lipchitz, Woman and Guitar, gilded bronze, 1927. Withers J. (1976). The Artistic Collaboration of Pablo Picasso and Julio Gonzalez. Figure 10: Picasso, Drawing for Sculpture, 1928. Ink on paper. Withers J. (1976). The Artistic Collaboration of Pablo Picasso and Julio 80

Gonzalez. Figure 11: Picasso, Painted Iron Head, 1928. Iron. Withers J. (1976). The Artistic Collaboration of Pablo Picasso and Julio Gonzalez. Figure 12: Picasso, Project for Monument, 1928. Ink on paper. Withers J. (1976). The Artistic Collaboration of Pablo Picasso and Julio Gonzalez. Figure 13: Picasso, Drawing for Sculpture, 1928. Ink on paper. Withers J. (1976). The Artistic Collaboration of Pablo Picasso and Julio Gonzalez. Figure 14: Picasso, Project for Monument, 1928. Construction in wire. Withers J. (1976). The Artistic Collaboration of Pablo Picasso and Julio Gonzalez. Figure 15: Picasso, Head, 1930. Bronze after original in iron, 33 1/8" h. Withers J. (1976). The Artistic Collaboration of Pablo Picasso and Julio Gonzalez. Figure 16: Picasso, Head of a Woman, 1930. Painted iron, 39 3/8" h. <http://theredlist.fr/wiki-2-351-861-1411-1428-1429-1434-viewcubism-1-profile-picasso-pablo-2.html> Figure 17: Picasso, Woman in the Garden, iron, 1930-1931. 82 5/8" h. <http://www.thecityreview.com/matpic.html> Figure 18: Gonzalez, Woman Getting Dressed, 1930. Drawing. Krauss R. (1981). This New Art: To Draw In Space. The Originality of the Avant-Garde and Other Modernist Myths. Figure 19: Gonzalez, Study for Woman Combing Her Hair, 1931. Drawing. Krauss R. (1981). This New Art: To Draw In Space. The Originality of the Avant-Garde and Other Modernist Myths. Figure 20: Gonzalez, Woman Combing Her Hair, 1931. Iron, 67 by 21 3/4 by 7 7/8 inches. <http://www.moma.org/collection/artist.php?artist_id=2231> Figure 21: Gonzalez, Masque â&#x20AC;&#x153;My.â&#x20AC;? Bronze, 1930. <http://www.sfmoma.org/explore/collection/artwork/131> 81

Figure 22: Tonkin Liu, Structural principles derived from the curvature of seashells.Diagram. <http://www.tonkinliu.co.uk/> Figure 23: Cut of dress coat. Drawing. <http://www.costumes.org/history/100pages/18thpatterns.htm> Figure 24: Portrait of Michiel Jansz van Miereveldt c.1628. Painting. <http://www.artforgers.com/tag.cfm?id=Michiel_Jansz._van_ Mierevelt> Figure 25: An example of a floral lace. Photograph. < ht t p : / / 2 . b p. b l o g s p o t . c o m / _ a 1 H 7 i Z J 3 L Nc / T U b 6 F i j s t G I / AAAAAAAAHdg/Z6jarxXLBHc/s1600/honiton+lace+pippy+%2526+ bryony+design+2.jpg> Figure 26: Tonkin Liu, Bexhill Shelter Model 01, plasticine. Photograph. <http://www.tonkinliu.co.uk/> Figure 27: Tonkin Liu, Bexhill Shelter Model 02, paper and plasticine. Photograph. <http://www.tonkinliu.co.uk/> Figure 28: Tonkin Liu, Bexhill Shelter Model 03, paper. Photograph. <http://www.tonkinliu.co.uk/> Figure 29: Tonkin Liu, Bexhill Shelter Perspective, Rhino digital model. drawing. <http://www.tonkinliu.co.uk/> Figure 30: Tonkin Liu, Bexhill Shelter Laser-Cutting Plan, plywood. Photograph. <http://www.tonkinliu.co.uk/> Figure 31: Tonkin Liu, Bexhill Shelter Physical Model. Plywood. Photograph. <http://www.tonkinliu.co.uk/> Figure 32: Tonkin Liu, Concept Diagram for Rain Bow Gate, 2011. Diagram. <http://www.tonkinliu.co.uk/> Figure 33: Tonkin Liu, Bexhill Shelter Model 02, 2011. Colored chenille stems. <http://www.tonkinliu.co.uk/> 82

Figure 34: Tonkin Liu, Design Process for Rain Bow Gate, 2011. Photographs & Diagrams. The Archives of Tonkin Liu Architects. FIgure 35: Tonkin Liu, Rain Bow Gate: Using plywood formers as support. The Archives of Tonkin Liu Architects. Photograph. Figure 36: Tonkin Liu, Rain Bow Gate: Transporting the Welded Components. Photograph. The Archives of Tonkin Liu Architects. Figure 37: Tonkin Liu, Evolution of Shell Lace structural typologies, Diagram. <http://www.tonkinliu.co.uk/> Figure 38: Tonkin Liu, Rain Bow Gate, 2009. Photograph. <http://www.tonkinliu.co.uk/> Figure 39: Zaha Hadid Architects, Arum in Venice Biennale, 2012. <http://www.zaha-hadid.com/2012/10/04/autumn-review-aruminstallation-and-exhibition-by-zaha-hadid-architects-at-venicearchitecture-biennale/> Figure 40: Zaha Hadid Architects, Arum: Form-Making Process, 2012. Digital Model. <http://www.zaha-hadid.com/2012/10/04/autumn-review-aruminstallation-and-exhibition-by-zaha-hadid-architects-at-venicearchitecture-biennale/> Figure 41: Robofold, Arum: Folding Metal Sheets Using the Robofold Machine, 2012. <http://www.robofold.com/>