This week the readings were these:
Bruce Metcalf, "The Hand at the Heart of Craft" from American Craft, Aug./Sept. 00, Vol. 60,
No. 4 (New York: American Craft Council, 2000) 54-61, 66
Stephen Kieran and James Timberlake, "1.2 The Hand and the Machine" and
"4.0 Processes We Do Not See," Refabricating Architecture (New York: McGraw Hill, 2004) 4-7, 68-101
David Pye, "The Workmanship of Risk and the Workmanship of Certainty"
The Nature of Art and Workmanship, Chapters 1,2, and 4 (London: Studio Vista, 1968) 5-10, 13-24
but I only intend to write about the first one as the two others failed to hold my attention as I was reviewing them.
As a kind of background for Bruce Metcalf, I feel I need to let you know that this excerpt was taken from a speech he made to a group of goldsmiths at a big conference where I assume he received an award. So he is presumably a jeweler. He decided on this occupation while he was trying college for the last time and took a jewelry class on a whim. But basically he outlines the need for craft and handworks and the difference between the two of them. His first paragraph says it pretty well.
It's tough to figure out what "craft" really is. Some argue that the core of craft lies in utility -- that craft is distinguished by usefulness. But that efficient definition has the unfortunate effect of insisting that many kinds of objects, from silver centerpieces to comtemporary sculpture in clay and glass, are not craft, As an alternative, one could propose that craft is identified by the traditional mediums of metal, clay, fiber, wood, glass, except that plastics, found objects and dozens of other materials have been used to make craft objects. So this definition is incomplete, too. Nonetheless, there remains one absolutely necessary component of any craft object - - it must be made substantially by hand.
Like I said before, he says it pretty well. But just because he's eloquent doesn't mean that he's right. Now I'm not the agreeable sort, and I'm not going to agree with him. Because, I think he contradicts himself. Not directly, but mainly in the implications that makes later when he starts to get past the miraculous inter-workings of the hands. He starts to talk on page 56 of an awakening and the apprenticeship that follows. He says
The excitement of awakening to one's gifts is no more than an introduction, the first chapter to a long book. All students of craft undergo years of training. There's so much to learn, So many skills to perfect. It turns out that becoming skillful actually changers the brain. . . All crafts demand exceptional motor control, from the rapid dexterity required by glassblowing to the subtle coordination required in weaving. Bodily intelligence can thus be seen as a biological and cognitive foundation to all craft practice.
So, here's where I make my qualm. I think digital modeling can be craft, And not according to a new description, but in accordance with the one he just gave. First I'll start by saying that in the school of architecture they introduce you to a program called rhino, and rhino is fairly useful for making boxes and things with minimal curvature, but to make things that really are organic you have to use plug-ins. Specifically one called T-splines, alot of people use it. Zaha and HOK are the two that occur to me the quickest. But the first time I used it, something just clicked, and I was overwhelmed by the fact that I had found my niche. But even though I was naturally talented I still had to work on it. The software isn't easy to operate. There is alot of view adjustment, and alot of new people just end up looking off into space because they can't control what they are doing, that become like a digital coordination. Past that, there is alot of fine tuning that goes on, The processes are repeated and you say in your mind, " ok, self, to do this action, and to get this result, you have to run through these processes." And you do them, and the more you do them the less you think about it and more quickly and precisely you can do all of this. You can essentially get to a place Metcalf refers to as a flow-state. Where you are 100% engaged and are making very complex actions and judgments which look to be as easy as breathing. So in accordance with his description I think you can see where digital modeling becomes craft. Also I wanted to give an example, Assassin's Creed 1 & 2. Here's a video link
http://www.gametrailers.com/video/x06-onstage-assassins-creed/13511
but you can start to see where the designing of each individual brick and iron grating, each stone and stick starts to affect the game and impact how you move around. They are doing a third one which means they will be building Rome during the Renaissance brick by brick. INSANE!!! But I feel that this is digital craft. They even craft the movements and reactions of the people in certain instances.
What this means for architecture is that we can progress forward into the digital world as long as we maintain a standard of good work. When doing something requires little or no effort that is when we have abandoned craft.
No comments:
Post a Comment