Good analysis Paul; I would agree. I enjoy the GV models I have seen - they can get very elaborate! - but I have absolutely no interest in making them. I truly love the satisfying results from folding a square or two that creates a single stunning model. Mary Ellen
On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 6:22 PM Paul Vincent <[email protected]> wrote: > I wouldn’t say I dislike the technique, as such, but I have an idea why I > have no interest in it. It occurs to me that each unit is directly > analogous to a Lego brick, and in the same way that Lego bricks can be used > to build just about any form that you can imagine, by simply interlocking > them together, exactly the same is true of g.v. modules. That is, although > each module is a folded origami figure, the finished creation (and the > process of assembling it) is more akin to “doing” Lego than “doing” > origami. This is not to denigrate the art of creation in either case, just > a sense that the appeal of g.v. may be closer to that of Lego than of other > branches of origami. > > Regards, > Paul > > On Tue, 22 Feb 2022 at 21:52, Laura R <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I don’t like the golden venture technique and their results but I don’t >> know why. Has anyone tried a rationale for this kind of feeling? If it’s a >> feeling, is it a prejudice? >> >> Each unit is an origami, they interlock to create modular shapes… so why >> is that I don’t accept it? >> >> Other modulars have the beauty of geometry created from adding modules. >> GV proponents would say that many kusudamas are just nice decorated balls, >> and the best origami artists put time and thought on making new ones all >> the time, and people don’t object kusudamas as not being true origami >> models. >> >> So what’s the problem with the GV technique? >> >> >> Laura > > -- > -- > - - - - - - - - - - > Paul Vincent > Email: [email protected] > Twitter Name: @prvincent > - - - - - - - - - - >
