We were asked to review three objects, examining the context of consumption as well as the concept of production. WE were also asked to review it with regards to our own personal 'manifesto'-this included why we chose the object, what we thought of it and how we'd change it if we made it.
I chose three objects with different purposes and from different eras.
Object 1: Ritual wine cup
First was the ritual wine cup from the Zhao Dynasty, dated between 1050-1000BC
It was situated next to another cup, from the same place, and with the same purpose, but over 2000 years later. It fascinated me what had changed and what didn't, and it allowed me to draw certain conclusions
I focused on the metal cup on the left. I decided it was ceremonial, was self supported and group innovated-a design developed communally over thousands of years. The second cup hadn't changed much in thousands of years, so it was probably used by a very self sufficient, isolated community with few, if any, external influences.
I decided that my manifesto would be about health and safety-i wouldn't design something that was hazardous to use if in any way by an untrained person, and the pointed edges and corners would be smoothed. to a rounded edge. I would also put handles on both sides to make it easier to use-one handle means less control and it would spill easily.
Tensions between my manifesto and the three 'Zones': Whilst i don't want to make the design unsafe, and would want to add an extra handle, the people in the community could be very attached to the design in terms of spiritual/cultural significance and their connection between the physical shape of the object and its importance in their society. As much as i would make changes to make it more effective and more safe, this would conflict with the needs of the user.
Object 2: Celestial Vault
A sculpture called the 'celestial vault', 2000
http://collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O76174/ornament-with-stand-celestial-vault/
Ornamental-represents and square earth and round heaven.
Aside from being stunningly beautiful, it has has cultural significance-representing a belief held by an entire group of people. This item was chosen for this reason. My manifesto in this case would be about animal rights ethics-i disagree with the practise of killing things that are not directly used for food, and i would not be happy to use cultured pearls or mother of pearl, so i myself would have used an alternative embellishment.
Examining tensions: I would not force my opinions on mother of pearl usage on the design of this object as i can appreciate its beauty, and perhaps the significance of certain materials to the designer.
http://arthistory.about.com/od/special_exhibitions/l/bl_spasianlaq_rev.htm
Mother of pearl is very prevalent in Asian design, and it was cultivated en mass for this purpose. Used from 1600-1050 B.C.it is a very old tradition, and i can see why the designer incorporated this technique in his piece.
The artist Chen, Pei-ze http://yiidesign.com/en/artists.php is a stone sculture expert adn a jade specialist.
Artifact 3- The Well Head
http://collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O117735/well-head-well-head/
Material: Carved Marble
Place of origin: Venice
This would have been made by trained sculptures in conjunction with plumbers. It was made for a Jacopo Tintoretto for private ornamental purposes, and during a period of drought (1948) he shipped in 20 boat loads of fresh water. As a designer i wouldn't have been able to have an effect on what he did with it once it was made unfortunately, although if i was the engineer he consulted to shop the water in, i would have refused the job.
There are definate tensions between this piece and my manifesto, but as a designer you cannot decide what anyone does with your object once it is theirs (besides copying it). It would have been handmade, and i would have liked to have known where the marble came from as human rights and working conditions would affect my decision on where i'd source materials from.
No comments:
Post a Comment