FINAL IDEA

‘Cubical wooden structures, incorporated with our unique stamp.’

After great consideration and experimentations, our collative idea has come to a conclusion of producing identical structures that are fashioned by our unique ways of working. In other words, we will aim to create two large scaled cubical structures out of wood. This would be a starting point of our collaborative approach of combination and alliance. Our sculptur-al outcomes will be produced outdoors as well as being displayed in the open as ‘public art’. Consequently, throughout the exam we will be work-ing together as well as individually. After the identical structures are pro-duced, we will then start to work individually with our structures, marking them with our unique styles. In other words, we will be creating a contrast

between the two structures.

The outcome will showcase the contrast between an urban/mechanical/ and futuristic cube to the much more harmonious/organic and natural

cube.

Discussing ideas further, we believe that the idea of a cubical structure may be to simplistic. Therefore, we decided to experiment further with the mock-up structures. Coming to a conclusion we finally decided to stick with the cubical structures, yet joining them together to create a connec-tion with the crossing of the wood. Above is the final sketch of the out-

come that will be produced on the exam day:

- Materials –(plaster, wood, wool, string, spray paint, nails, sand)

- The idea of ‘unrefined’ growing into something ‘refined’

- Cubed shape, creates a boundary between what is artificial and what is organic

- The transition between linear to circular

- The transition in colour gradient, represents the change in the atmosphere

- References (time – past/future)

- The initial representation of a tunnel – look through the piece

- Organic machinery – robotic transition from one end to another.

- Scale – 1:2, double the size of the human figure.

- Combination and layering of string demonstrate the linear motion in life

evaluationThroughout the project, the idea of creating something that was architecturally influenced was a key aspect within the exam process. I was deeply influenced by the interaction within a space, in other words I observed the room, which had a great impact within my life at Havering. Alternatively, this was the art room and it played a vital part in the way I thought throughout the whole of my exam process.

The idea of transforming a space so that it changed the way people move and interact, lead me to the fascination of tunnels. I believe that tunnels drive people in a certain way, leading them in a specific direction. Therefore using sketch up as a medium, I planed out many ways of creating pathways through the art room. However, due to the lack of space and my over ambitiousness, the idea of creating a tunnel was scrapped at an early stage. On the other hand this turned out to be a positive, as I then began to look at my previous work – ‘black hole’.

At this stage the idea of combination and alliances guided me in the direction of re-using and re-interpreting. My medium of using black tape still interested me, however I wasn’t sure whether it was the colour of the tape or the fact that it was a type of adhesive that still kept me coming back for more. At this stage, I was thinking about the process of ‘preserving’, creating a tank that would act as an outer layer for the inner goods. However, I felt that the tape adhesive was to complex to use at this stage, as the surface area was too small and it would be time consuming. Therefore I decided to use Clingfilm as a material, due to its large surface areas and its transparent quality, which worked perfectly as a tank.

As the process dragged on, it felt as if I was running around in circles, almost as if I had cut short of ideas. Therefore I reinterpreted the theme of ‘combination and alliances’, and it only made sense that I should create an alliance with another student and combine our ideas. As a result, Emma and I decided to collaborate and join forces. The fact that Emma and I had such different ways of think-ing, aloud us to positively bounce of ideas. Our contrast within our work was evidently exposed throughout the whole process, whether this being the way we documented our work, or the way we produced our own experiments then fused them together. Particularly since Emma had more of an engineering / scientific approach to the work. Whereas, I had more of a structural ap-proach to the way we created and explored our ideas. In addition to the ways we worked, I believe the process really broadened my way of thinking in a new way, as well as working within a team. I felt I really challenged and pushed the process in which I worked, using new mediums such as creating mini videos to document.

During the examination, the whole idea of working outdoors was fully dependent on the weather. Thankfully it wasn’t raining on the day. Therefore we managed to go ahead with our ‘outdoor/public art installation’. More importantly, Emma and I were fully prepared as we pre-prepared all the materials that we was going to need and had a brief plan of how we were going to structure the day. As the project was quite technical, in regards to using woods and drills, I believe we delegated the job equally. We both managed to build the whole frame and fix it all together, ass well as ‘decorating’ the structure. As a result, we were ahead of our schedule, and managed to form the basis of our sculpture within a day. Despite this, on the second day of our examination, we decided to rethink and not plan the day.

Alternatively we felt that the first day was very organized and structured, with us accomplishing what we had planed for. However, we then felt we should allow the structure to flow and ‘make up its own route’. Therefore the second day was heavily improvised and experimental. The entire process was documented with images demonstrating our paths and decisions. Naturally we began to deconstruct the main structure and began to pull it away from the center, branching it out in various directions to see what works and what doesn’t.

The successes within the overall project were the process of documenting using videos as a new medium. The collaboration be-tween Emma and I: as I believe it was very successful and the idea of joining forces made our project unique as well as original. Finally, the outcome we produced was distinct and ambitious and I believe we achieved what we were aiming for and much more.

However, there were improvements that could have been made to the final outcome. The use of materials could have been thought through in much detail. For example we were aiming to use rotten/-aged wood to show character to our structure. How-ever we weren’t able to source the aged wood. The placement of the structure could have been explored further, making it more of a public art piece. In addition to the materialistic aspect of the work, I also felt that there could have been an improvement in making the design much more complex and unique.

Overall I feel the project has been developed well from the early stages of the process, keeping in mind the aspect of movement through a space and the theme of combination and alliances. The final outcome is largely scaled and has a sense of direction, com-bining the distinctive qualities of Emma and I. Although the outcome works generally well as a ‘public art sculpture’, there are many improvements that I believe could have been taken and alternative designs, which could have been considered in depth. I feel the approach I have take; working and fusing ideas in a collaborative attempt has allowed me to challenge myself in this project as well as exploring alternative ways in working.