For me the Lego brick analogy is close but doesn’t quite express why I’m not a fan of the GV technique.
Lego is perhaps more like Max Hulme’s pixel units. Max once explained to me that taking on new subjects led him to design new connector units (rather like Lego’s ever expanding range of specialised bricks). The GV technique doesn’t (for me) allow the designer to bring new approaches to a subject in the way that other origami does. You just keep slotting the units together and can position them where you like, so the actual structure of the unit doesn’t really define the form you are building. It defines the surface. However - with the exception of a small number of artistic examples - the surface looks the same whatever you’re making. Most of all, GV doesn’t allow me to do the thing I most love about origami - finding new ways to manipulate the paper to express an idea. It doesn’t require me to develop my technique to be more sensitive or to explore what is possible with just my hands and some paper. It would be good to hear from GV fans what they love about it. I do feel GV is held to be inferior by most origamists and we rarely hear a word spoken in its defence. Lee > On 23 Feb 2022, at 17:00, [email protected] wrote: > > Re: finding an explanation for not liking golden ventures
