monthly folding challenge: August 2011

[dinogami]

Uh, you guys realize, I hope, that all of the problems here are strictly semantic and because people don't agree about the definition of "angel." This is why there are definitions of things to begin with, and why there are different words for different things: to obviate the exact problems that have arisen here...

[JumPurge]

There are dictionary definitions, however, the definition of angel given here excludes so much in fields of theology, history, and art. Especially when only the word "angel" was given. Example: A humanoid figure with a pair of wings. This excludes a seraph, a head (only the head, artistically it can be given a body) with six red wings. Then humanoid excludes Ophanims, the wheels of fire. Generous excludes fallen/rebelious angels such as Lucifer. It's all a matter of what did the OP mean by "Angel"?

[dinogami]

There are dictionary definitions, however, the definition of angel given here excludes so much in fields of theology, history, and art.

Exactly--this is why definitions are important! Definitions are set in order to include only certain things and include only others; if people ignore the definition, then what's the point of having words at all? That is, if words hinder, rather than facilitate, communication, then why bother? Far easier to use a word with the definition it has been given, and use other words for things outside the scope of the definition of the first word. (Not to say that some words and their definitions don't evolve over time, because they obviously do, but in the interim, best to avoid confusion.)

It's all a matter of what did the OP mean by "Angel"?

Also correct. The OP clearly had an idea in mind (likely "winged humans," not all of which are angels...and, as has been pointed out, not all angels are winged humans), but presumed that everyone used the same definition of "angel," which has proven not to be the case!

[JumPurge]

But like I said, the definition of angel given is exclusive and does not take into account the many other celestial beings that pretty much fit the same words that would other wise describe them both. It's all special pleading just because they are associated with one religion, which isn't the only one to use the figures of angels. Also, some definitions are wrong. People misuse words or misunderstand their meanings. I personally see this happen on a daily basis.

You're not in Ob's head, Dino. I'm only trying to be inclusive in this matter.

Words lose meaning if they are meant to mean whatever a person wants them to mean. They also lose meaning if everybody goes mad and decides to ignore and deny history of their origins.

[Argonaut]

I think we should just use the definition I submitted from the oxford english dictionary.

[FlareglooM]

Just create something that you think is defined as an angel. If it in the end isn't approved by the judge of this month, so what, you at least created something instead of discussing about it the whole month....

Just my two cents.

[JumPurge]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angel
http://www.feedback.nildram.co.uk/richa ... angels.htm

I think you'll find much of this useful.

[Argonaut]

"This section improperly uses one or more religious texts as primary sources without referring to secondary sources that critically analyze them. Please help improve this article by adding references to reliable secondary sources."

I just copied and pasted that from the wikipedia website where it talked about how angels pertain to other religions. The other website didn't show any credentials.
However....
I will give you the benefit of the doubt. Fold whatever you want, but keep in mind that if the judge doesn't think what you folded is an angel, it probably won't win. I agree with FlareGloom: there should be more folding and less arguing on this post.

[JumPurge]

Well when they pertain to other religions, I think it would be safe to assume with all the tribal warfar, trade, etc. going on at the time.

That's actually what I was hoping for, a judge to come in and say what's what. x-x

[Razzmatazz]

http://buddhawannabe.files.wordpress.co ... /angel.jpg

I love this game. I am thinking about doing this. I'll fail no doubt but I like trying. Just sharing it with others because I know I won't finish it.

[firstfold]

The entire assembly including the base is one sheet of paper - blue on one side and white on the opposite side.

[Gerardo]

The entire assembly including the base is one sheet of paper - blue on one side and white on the opposite side.

WOA!

[JumPurge]

It looks reminisent of Giang Dinh. Tell me, was it inspired by the grieving angel statue? That's what I think of, that's for sure

[firstfold]

I believe that the source of many "Grieving Angles" is the "Angle of Grief" often refered to as the "Weeping Angle" (not to be confused with the Dr. Who costume). This theme appears in many statues and even Tatoos so it's hard to tell weher the "original" was made. Actually my inspiration was a garden statue called "The Tears of Heaven" but this is probably derived from the "Angel of Grief". My title and coice of color was "Blue Angel" meaning She's got the Blues! You might be blue also if you try to fold a six feet by six inch sheet of paper into an angel!

[tanvuong85]

hello all and thank for all comment ^^
I have just update my angela for more wing and more detail
8 wings angela:



i will update more pic later ^^"