Hi, Kunihiko Kasahara made animals from Sonobe units in "Origami for the Coinnosseur". Although I didn't make these animals (a horse and bird), this book and Kasahara's "Origami Omnibus" were key for me starting modular origami (the other main impetus was Francis Ow's series in "British Origami"). Modular origami has been criticised as "knitting with paper" but perhaps GV does resemble knitting or crochet https://www.reddit.com/r/GoldenVentureFolding/top/?t=all? This might explain why some origami enthusiasts do not like the look of GV: they prefer the clean lines and planes of "purer" origami -- even modular. Another possible reason for being repelled by GV's appearance is the fear of holes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trypophobia? Perhaps GV has the "wrong" kind of texture compared with the texture of other origami, e.g. the scales used some origami fish and dragons? Regards,Tung Kenhttps://www.foldworks.net
PS You might find John Smith's Origami Profiles useful for a broad view of origami and origami-like techniques (https://britishorigami.info/academic/theory/origami-profiles-by-john-smith). On Wednesday, 23 February 2022, 09:01:26 GMT, Laura R <[email protected]> wrote: Thanks, Paul. Your analogy with Lego has helped me understand my problem with GVs more clearly. The GV modules are not being used like, say, Sonobe’s modules to create abstract forms. They are being used for animals or other forms of life. And this is where GV collides with the realm of true origami in which one is supposed to use a single piece of paper. GV does not analyze the mathematical properties of the folds in a sheet of paper, seeking to use the folding geometry in the most efficient and elegant way. Even kusudamas and modular stars have an intrinsic geometry, which is why they are attractive to paperfolders, although some “simple and cute” may be no more than a repetitive assembly of modules with a clever lock, making them a little boring. Laura
