Museum of Craft and Design

I recently moved to San Francisco and now that I’m unemployed I have nothing much to do but walk around the city and try to get familiar with each neighborhood. Yesterday I was wandering the Dogpatch and found myself at the Museum of Craft and Design. There were two exhibits: Lines that Tie and Constructed Communication. 

Lines that Tie displayed the work of Carole Beadle and Lia Cook and their students’ work. To be honest I didn’t know that Fiber Art was even a thing, let alone an entire movement. At first I was skeptical and I just pictured an old lady knitting some weird useless objects and calling it sculpture- but upon further observation I realized: fiber art is pretty cool. Similar to tectonics in architecture, it’s a form of constructing and manipulating a material to get an idea across. The act of linking fibers together creates an interconnected system which in the end results in a pattern- a pattern which relays an idea or message. This idea of interconnectivity is something I’m obsessed with ever since reading Marshall Macluhan’s writing. The aggregation of fibers also acts the same way as a pixel (#relevant). Another thing I love- when something analog functions the same way something would digitally. I assume the fabrics had to be thought up or mapped out digitally before hitting the loom. This mapping out and going between digital and analog created a fascinating cross over, from physical to metaphysical. In a similar way this is how architecture works: starting with a sketch or concept model then going to the computer, and refining the physical model accordingly…

Lia Cook, “Two Lovers”

I like this piece because it kind of reminds me of glitch art. The patterning and weaving is extremely calculated to create this effect. Not sure if it’s meant to look like a computer glitch because it was made in 1993. Did they even have computers back then??? (If they did, they Definitely had some glitches).

Lia Cook, “Data Dots Emotional Intensity” & “Su Series”

These weaving also clearly required a ton of detail and planing. I’m wondering how much of this was planned out digitally and if so, how. I like that the different iterations of the Su Series require different techniques…it honestly boggles my mind to picture someone sitting there stitching everything.

LJ Roberts, “We Couldn’t Get In, We Couldn’t Get Out”

I love that something so macabre was knit entirely with neon pink yarn. I also like how the yarn wasn’t cut so there’s bits of it hanging off…it reminds me of Spanish moss or dripping paint. The fun part about this was the fact that the artist used a child’s toy to produce the knitting in a faster manner-so primitive yet intelligent.

Margo Walowiac, “Blue Yellow Blue”

I’m pretty sure this piece is a deconstructed tapestry of some Hindu or Buddhist imagery. Just a guess. 

____________________________

For me, the highlight of Constructed Communication is definitely the work of Ben Venom. Maybe that’s because I love when artists and architects use recycled materials – maybe because there’s something gritty and DIY about the whole series. I see allusions to subcultures and new age spirituality. What’s not cool about that?? Throw in some crystals while you’re at it!

 

Close-up + Personal [hanging out at SCI-Arc]

 

“Close-up examines the impact of digital technologies on the architectural detail and the traditions of tectonic expression associated with it. An often overlooked condition of digital design technologies is the ability to design objects through continuous degrees of magnification. The consequences of this very basic fact are more significant than we may realize. The traditional premise that some architectural ideas only reside at standardized scales of magnification at this point is nostalgic.”– excerpt from the Close-up description

A couple weeks ago I had the chance to catch the exhibit entitled Close-up at SCI-Arc (Short for the Southern California Insitute of Architecture, a small, experimental architecture school in the Arts District of LA). The exhibition was curated by Hernan Diaz Alonso and David Ruy. The exhibit was a chance for a select few offices to give examples of how the digital has changed the art of building details and construction methods. The models were beautiful but only a few reflected a realistic application of these new fabrication techniques on real buildings. The rest was art- it seemed to have no realistic function, but still retained an aesthetic value unique to its fabrication method.

I photographed some of my favorites.

EMOTIVE HOUSE by Minimaforms

EMOTIVE HOUSE by Minimaforms

EMOTIVE HOUSE by Theodore + Steven Spyropoulos EMOTIVE HOUSE by Theodore + Steven Spyropoulos

DISTORTION by Lucy McRae Studio

WALL REVEAL by Young & Ayata

WALL REVEAL by Young & Ayata

WALL REVEAL by Young & Ayata

DUALITY by Xuberance Co Ltd.

DUALITY by Xuberance Co Ltd.

DUALITY by Xuberance Co Ltd.

OUTTAKE FROM 3DS CULINARY- STAIR DETAIL by Oyler Wu Collaborative

OUTTAKE FROM 3DS CULINARY- STAIR DETAIL by Oyler Wu Collaborative

In the past few years, computer modeling and new forms of “craft” have changed how architecture works. It used to be that you had to know how to draw in order to be an architect, but computer modeling and digital drawings have changed that. My year was actually the first to shift completely to virtual drawing/modeling and our curriculum only required one drawing class – not even a drafting class. The process of using a computer with a set of commands to draw as opposed to pen and paper inevitably changes how we design. It can be limiting but it saves time not having to redraw everything by hand. Not only are we shifting to the virtual, but new methods of building like 3D printing and CNC milling, make it easy for us to translate our ideas from the computer to reality, thus bringing up the ongoing discussion in architecture regarding tectonics and craft. Tectonics and the process of bringing an idea from conception to reality has larger ontological implications- it concerns the modeling of material to bring the virtual into reality, from physical into the meta-physical.

The process of drawing and representing perspective also factors into this because of how it impacts our way of understanding reality. Take for example, the early modernists and how they loved to represent things in true axon. Frank Lloyd Wright tried to shift away from this by drawing in perspective, replicating what you would see as a user. These drawings are far more personal to the viewer and tap into a deeper psychological warehouse of memories and emotions. Axonometric drawings are helpful to builders who need true dimensions, but you would never be able to experience that perspective in reality. These two means of representation offer very different sets of information to be taken away by the viewer, and the trends of architecture always flip flop between the objective versus the subjective, form versus function. Right now we’re definitely seeing a trend favoring the subjective and the form over function.

We also got a chance to check out the studios at SCI-Arc. Our friend is working on his final project using magnets to create forms with Ferro fluid and iron chips. Pretty cool. Makes me miss school honestly.