Glue, Wetfolding, Tissue Foil and Purism

Post by **Daydreamer** » May 13th, 2006, 8:44 pm

I don't think that Ondrej addressed his question specifically to you, Marx, to expose you in some way. You don't have to take everything said in here as a personal offence directed to you...
It was just a question which in my opinion fits into this topic very well.

Marx · Post by **Marx** » May 13th, 2006, 9:52 pm

And again, I didn't take it as if it was. But I did assess that it could be used as such. I'm not paranoid. I know no one hates me. Please stop assuming that I take offense at every disagreement.

Alexandre · Post by **Alexandre** » May 14th, 2006, 10:34 am

Please finish your PRIVATE discussion by private messages
privmsg.php?mode=post
This topic is about "Glue, Wetfolding, Tissue Foil and Purism".
malachi I deleted your last message that was off-topic and ridiculous.

Post by **origami_8** » May 14th, 2006, 11:18 am

I don´t see any private discussion going on here. What was it that malachi wrote being that offensive that you deleted it?
In this Forum everyone is allowed to say his opinion as long as no Forum Rules are broken, as a Moderator you should know that Alexandre.

Alexandre · Post by **Alexandre** » May 14th, 2006, 11:29 am

Everyone is allowed to tell his opinion but if it is dumb/ridiculous/rude/offtopic at the same time, no.
But childish flamewars by private messages are fine.

wolf · Post by **wolf** » May 14th, 2006, 2:56 pm

What Malachi said was not rude. And last time I checked, ridiculous and offtopic doesn't qualify for post deletion.

What they're discussing is fairly interesting and hasn't crossed the boundary into a flamewar; neither does it look like it's headed in that direction. So why not just let the discussion go on?

Post by **saj** » May 14th, 2006, 3:48 pm

Oh dear, what happened here? Temporarily locking the thread.

Edit: unlocked.

Post by **origami_8** » May 14th, 2006, 5:47 pm

wolf wrote:last time I checked, ridiculous and offtopic doesn't qualify for post deletion.

That´s right.

But please, let´s stop the discussion here and come back to the topic.

Marx · Post by **Marx** » May 16th, 2006, 2:58 am

Thanks for the backup? For one, I really appreciate that even if some people disagree with each other, that it isn't becoming childish and stupid. But to get us back on topic.

How about this. If we're having such a difficult time deciding on any portion of purism in origami (which it seems we are), then let's start from the beginning. What would you define as the purpose for folding in a purist manner? And when looking at those reasons, what applications to they have?

esato · Post by **esato** » May 16th, 2006, 3:45 am

I think purism is a very personal subject. It's like a credit card: it is yours alone and you can't transfer it to somebody else.

There also is no official world-wide origami regulator AFAIK, as there is a footbal association (FIFA), or basketball federation (FIBA). So I guess no one is absolutely right and no one is absolutely wrong. No one has authority to do that.

Having said that, IMHO purism is just a set of limitatins we impose to ourselves in order to make things more challenging, fun, impressive and to make ourselves happier when we achieve our goals. Purism can also help us to define standards like using square paper and making no cuts, which makes the art more accessible to everyone. Almost anyone can cut a square, but not everyone can make a decagon, or a 7:3 rectangle.

Just my 2 cents.

Ondrej.Cibulka · Post by **Ondrej.Cibulka** » May 16th, 2006, 4:44 pm

Daydreamer wrote:I don't think that Ondrej addressed his question specifically to you, Marx, to expose you in some way.

I am sorry but it is (mission) impossible to endeavour to expose anyone cos posts in this thread is so long for my english, so I did not read it...

Rdude · Post by **Rdude** » June 3rd, 2006, 12:14 am

I think wet folding is acceptable, as it still involves just the use of paper, the water itself evaporates, leaving you with what you started with, only in a slightly more durable and realistic shape. Glue on the other hand, i think should only be used if you've just folded a really complex model, and a tiny part of it begins to tear. this situation merits the aplication of glue to the tear to keep it from getting worse. I don't use scizzors at all, except in making a perfect square. When you use scizzors it ceases to be origami and becomes kirigami.

But it really doesn't matter what you call it. We are using paper to make art, and whether we want to call it origami, kirigami or BAKING PIZZA

, the most important fact is that we end up with a beautiful piece of art. Modulars take a lot of work, i know this as i have made several that require many hours of construction. whether they should really be considered origami (which in part they should, because you have to fold all of the units) or not is immaterial. Art is art no matter what you call it.

wow that was long winded. i'll be quiet now.

thedeadsmellbad · Post by **thedeadsmellbad** » June 3rd, 2006, 12:17 pm

It may be drastic, but If my model tears, I destroy it

Rdude · Post by **Rdude** » June 4th, 2006, 2:31 am

I respect that.

EricGjerde · Post by **EricGjerde** » September 21st, 2006, 3:01 pm

This is a very funny discussion. Many of you make very valid points on things, but there seems to be way too much effort to classify and validate/invalidate things based on random variables.

Ultimately, people do what makes them happy in their art. I don't make any extra cuts in my work, not because I have any issue with cutting (I like cutting paper too) but because it internally feels "not right". Not wrong, just not how I want to do it; I think it has something to do with challenging the artificial limitations and constraints I am setting on myself by not just cutting in places where I want something to happen.

If other people cut, use glue, wrap things in foil, cover them with paint, that's absolutely their own prerogative, and it has nothing to do with me. If it makes them happy, then all the better. However, I (and every one else) will view their work through our own perspectives and likes/dislikes, and that's unavoidable.

I do find it strange when people hold some absolute purist viewpoints, mostly because I wonder where they came up with these strict rules. I have my own internal "purist" attitudes towards my own work, but since I am only folding my own creations I don't really have issues with things sticking or not sticking, or making legs stay a certain way... if I did, and the only way to make them stay was to use glue, then by all means I would do it- I'm not going to let hours and hours of hard work trying to obtain an envisioned piece get derailed by using a few drops of glue, tape, or whatever is required.

Perhaps the point of this insanely long rambling post (sorry, no coffee yet this AM) is that it's perfectly OK to have your own wacky standards, just don't get upset when someone else thinks you are completely wrong. I like my own wacky standards, but they just come from how I view things, so it's not like I read them in some sort of origami Bible somewhere. I take issue with people upholding standards that they picked up from elsewhere, and there are quite a few of those types out there; but in the end it's all just paper, isn't it?

Make what you like, if something bothers you don't do it, but be tolerant of others who might think differently.

-Eric Gjerde

PS: my personal purist issue is with representational origami (I don't fold it, ever)- which I reckon puts me at odds with 99% of the folders out there :)