Metaphors of Making

Maja Grakalic / MA DESIGN CRITICAL PRACTICE GOLDSMITHS UNIVERSITY OF LONDON 2011/2012 CERAMIC TOOL SET Maja Grakalic CERAMIC TOOL SET / ABSTRACT The purpose of this project is to “critically confront”1 and examine some of the “most fundamentally held beliefs through which we think and create as designers.” 2 Through revealing and understanding the creative process and metaphor behind the ceramics piece: ‘Eye Patch’ (the object I have chosen from the exhibition ‘The Power of Making’) and using these findings as a critical lens, I have challenged the habits of my own practice as a product designer and “the metaphors we live by” 3 as human beings. The metaphor behind this object revealed that the way we design, produce and engage with materials and objects reflects the way we understand and exist in this world. The research shows that we exist in this world trapped in a destructive “technological understanding of being” 4 where “we deal with things, and even sometimes people, as resources to be used until no longer needed...” 5 1 2 3 4 5 Fairfax, D. and Rosenberg, T., (2011). Metaphors of making, brief. MA Critical Practice: Goldsmiths University of London. unpublished. Fairfax, D. and Rosenberg, T., (2011). Metaphors of making, brief. MA Critical Practice: Goldsmiths University of London. unpublished. Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M., (2003). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Heidegger, M., (1977). The question concerning technology and other essays / Martin Heidegger; translated and with an introduction by William Lovitt. New York: Harper Perennial. Dreyfus, H., (2002). Heidegger Reexamined: Art, Poetry, and Technology, Vol 3; Heidegger on Gaining a Free Relation to Technology. London: Routledge. P. 99. We, as designers, can either contribute to, or challenge this “technological understanding of being”. Inspired by Miller’s words that “It is only when the juxtaposition of a material is odd that we are shocked into awareness…” 6 I have created a Ceramic Tool Set. The idea behind the tools is that they will shatter if used. This provokes thoughts about the fragile relationship between the man and making. Furthermore it reflects the implications that designing, without comprehensive awareness of cause and consequence, can have on our world. Instead of creating another object that serves as a “standing reserve” 7, I have created ‘food for thought’, thus supporting the idea that the change begins in the mind. As Heidegger said “Once we realize … that we receive our technological understanding of being, we have stepped outside the technological understanding of being.” 8 6 7 8 Miller, D., (2011). Power of making: The importance of being skilled. London: V&A Publishing. P. 20. Heidegger, M., (1977). The question concerning technology and other essays / Martin Heidegger; translated and with an introduction by William Lovitt. New York: Harper Perennial. P. xxix Dreyfus, H., (2002). Heidegger Reexamined: Art, Poetry, and Technology, Vol 3; Heidegger on Gaining a Free Relation to Technology. London: Routledge. P. 102. 1 Maja Grakalic CERAMIC TOOL SET / INTRODUCTION My project is contextually framed by Heidegger’s theory of ‘technological understanding of being’ and Dreyfus’s book ‘Being in the world’. Moreover, I am interested in Heidegger’s idea that the most important thing that characterizes us as human beings is our ability to become involved in the world and develop practical skills for ways to act in this world. Finaly I am also interested in Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi's investigations of the mental state known as flow, in which a persons full engrossment in the act of making results in deep enjoyment, creativity, and a total involvement with life. To define my program in more detail, I have stepped outside my usual practice by researching and engaging with a creative process that I am not familiar with. Consequently I have decided to create ‘food for thought’ which describes the powerful relationship between human beings and what we make, through which we both act and create in the world. 2 Maja Grakalic CERAMIC TOOL SET / Figure 2, 3. [Moooi products by Marcel Wanders] [image online] Available at: http://www.marcelwanders.com/new-pages/product-moooi-2008.html THINKING ABOUT CERAMICS The first part of my project was to choose and analyse one of the material artifacts from the exhibition ‘The Power of Making’. The artifact I found instantly appealing was the ceramic ‘Eye Patch’ (Figure 1). The author of the artifact is Damian O’Sullivan, an English designer whose interest in traditional ceramics, particularly Delft pottery, informed the piece. Delft pottery or Delftware (Figure 2, 3) denotes blue and white tin-glazed pottery made in and around Delft in the Nederland from the 16th century onwards. The eye patch with its blue and white traditional décor painting was made to resemble Delftware. For me, the idea behind the artifact was as appealing as the artifact itself. As the author Damian O’Sullivan says: “A fragile yet strong material, hygienic whilst elegant, in other words all the right paradoxical, sought after qualities. The result, perhaps more poetic than practical, does however reflect the inherent beauty of recovery, and mirrors the healing process of our mending bones. Slightly awkward and very fragile, just like us.” 9 Figure 1. photo by © Adriaan van der Ploeg (2011). [Ceramic Eye Patch by Damien O’Sullivan] [image online] Available at: http://www.damianosullivan.com/ page1/page13/page19/ 9 O’Sullivan, D., (2011). proAesthetics 100% Porcelain [online] Available at: http://www.damianosullivan.com/page1/page13/ [Accessed 10 November 2011]. 3 Maja Grakalic CERAMIC TOOL SET / The initial appeal of the object’s prosthetic function led me to investigate the body/material relationship (Figure 4). This research did not result in any satisfying or meaningful findings, so a deeper analysis of the artifact was required, looking beyond mere function to the core of the object where I hoped to find underlying meaning. I began by investigating the process by which this artifact was produced. I looked at the meaning of the word, cheramic, chemical and physical characteristics of the material, and the process of making it (Figure 5, 6), the cultural, artistic (Figure 7) and mythical significance and also the tradition behind it (Figure 8). As a result, I have discovered Wabi-sabi; the traditional Japanese pottery and Kintsugi; the Japanese art of fixing broken pottery. My findings revealed the poetic meaning which I sought. Figure 4. [Oscar Pistorius] [image online] Available at: http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/sport /garethadavies/100018709/how-does-oscar-pistorius-diminishthe-paralympic-movement-with-his-olympic/ Figure 7. [Grayson Perry: the large ceramic vase Jane Austen In E17] [image online] Available at: http://wordsandfixtures.blogspot.com/2011/07/perry-good.html Figure 8. [SONG HENAN GLAZED YUHUCHUNPING VASE] [image online] Available at: http://www.mfordcreech.com/Early_Chinese_Ceramics_&_Kangxi_Miniatures.htm Figure 5., 6. [Pettery wheel and slip casting] [image online] Available at: http://www.jhpottery.com/tutorial/center.htm 4 Maja Grakalic CERAMIC TOOL SET / Figure 9. [Wabi-Sabi] [image online] Available at: http://glazedoverpottery.tumblr.com/post/5233945795/eclecticwabi-sabi-tea-bowls-by-glazedover-pottery Figure 10. [Kintsugi] [image online] Available at: http://livesimplechicago.files.wordpress.com/2010/09/kintsugi2.jpg ““Wabi-sabi is the most conspicuous and characteristic feature of traditional Japanese beauty and it occupies roughly the same position in the Japanese pantheon of aesthetic values as do the Greek ideals of beauty and perfection in the West.” 10 “If an object or expression can bring about, within us, a sense of serene melancholy and a11spiritual longing, then that object could be said to be wabi-sabi.” “Wabi-sabi nurtures all that is authentic by acknowledging three simple realities: nothing lasts, nothing is 12 finished, and nothing is perfect.”” A good example of this embodiment may be seen in certain styles of Japanese pottery. In the Japanese tea ceremony, the pottery items used are often rustic and simple. As Dreyfus says “The traditional Japanese understanding of what it is to be human (passive, contented, gentle, social, etc.) fits with their understanding of what it is to be a thing (delicate, beautiful, traditional, etc.)” 13 Kintsugi is the Japanese art of celebrating the repair by fixing broken pottery with a lacquer resin sprinkled with powdered gold. It seems to me that both the ceramics ‘Eye Patch’ and Japanese pottery celebrate the same qualities: tradition and the inherent beauty of recovery. 10 Koren, L., (1994). Wabi-Sabi for Artists, Designers, Poets and Philosophers. Stone Bridge Press. 11 Powell, R., R., (2004). Wabi Sabi Simple: Create beauty. Value imperfection. Live deeply. Adams Media. 12 Wikipedia: the free encyclopedia. (2011). Wabi-sabi [online] Available at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wabi-sabi#cite_note-Powell-2 [Accessed 10 Nov 2011]. 13 Dreyfus, H., L., (2002). Heidegger Reexamined: Art, Poetry, and Technology, Vol 3; Heidegger on Gaining a Free Relation to Technology. London: Routledge. P. 99. 5 Maja Grakalic CERAMIC TOOL SET / Figure 12. [Styrofoam cups] [image online] Available at: http://nowastewednesdays.wordpress.com/2011/02/21/the-foam-poison/ Figure 11. [Japanese Tea Ceremony] [image online] Available at: http://kitchentalks.com/cooking/japanese-tea-ceremony/ These findings have led me to think about the profound differences in the ways in which western and eastern civilizations understand the ideas of being human and of being an object. As Dreyfus says: “A Styrofoam cup is a perfect example. When we want a hot or cold drink it does its job, and when we are through with it we throw it away. How different this understanding of an object is from what we can suppose to be the everyday Japanese understanding of a delicate teacup. The teacup does not preserve temperature as well as its plastic replacement, and it has to be washed and protected, but it is preserved from generation to generation for its beauty and its social meaning. It is hard to picture a tea ceremony around a Styrofoam cup.”14 A Styrofoam cup as a ‘standing-reserve’ has been reduced to disposability. Therefore we don’t re-use, mend or repair things any more; we buy them and throw them away. Consequently we lose the skills needed to fix things. These two cups and the way we produce and engage with them are apt metaphors for our two different ways of living. The ceramics cup reflects “bringing-forth” 15, a poetic way of living, where man is aware that he is a ‘co-responsible’ for his part of the world and nature instead of imposing his will to the world, he waits patiently for the world to reveal itself to him. The styrofoam cup on the other hand represents the “challenging-forth” 16 way of living, where man ruthlessly imposes his will on the world and nature, thus creating the capitalistic, technological/productivist system, where he “challenges things forth into disposable standing-reserves” 17 Waddington quotes Michael Zimmerman’s explanation of ‘challenging forth’ way of living through a simple example: “To be capable of transforming a forest into packaging for cheeseburgers, man must see the forest not as a display of the miracle of life, but as raw material, pure and simple”. 18 19 15 16 17 18 19 14 Dreyfus, H., L., (2002). Heidegger Reexamined: Art, Poetry, and Technology, Vol 3; Heidegger on Gaining a Free Relation to Technology. London: Routledge. P. 99. Heidegger, M., (1977). The question concerning technology and other essays / Martin Heidegger; translated and with an introduction by William Lovitt. New York: Harper Perennial. P. 11. Heidegger, M., (1977). The question concerning technology and other essays / Martin Heidegger; translated and with an introduction by William Lovitt. New York: Harper Perennial. P. 24. Waddington, I., D., (2005). A Field Guide to Heidegger: Understanding ‘The Question Concerning Technology’. Stanford University. P. 569. Waddington, I., D., (2005). A Field Guide to Heidegger: Understanding ‘The Question Concerning Technology’. Stanford University. P. 569. Zimmerman, M. (1977). Heidegger: The Man and the Thinker: Beyond Humanism: Heidegger’s understanding of technology, Listening. P. 79. 6 Maja Grakalic CERAMIC TOOL SET / THE MAKING The practical part of the research was to engage with the material. Since ‘Eye Patch’ is made of ceramic, it was only natural to buy a big chunk of clay and to start playing with it! I was really excited about the interaction with the raw clay, because it reminded me of the days when I was an active craftsman. Not the kind of creator I have been for the last couple of years, sitting behind a computer, disconnected from real materials, but the kind who gets his hands dirty and can feel and understand the material. Through interaction with the clay I have thought of two levels of connectionv that I am pursuing through my practice. 7 Maja Grakalic CERAMIC TOOL SET / The first connection is the ‘Flow’. Mihály Csíkszentmiháyi explains it as “… the mental state of operation in which a person in an activity is fully immersed in a feeling of energized focus, full involvement, and success in the process of the activity.” 20 Further more he explains “A flow state can be entered while performing any activity, although it is most likely to occur when one is wholeheartedly performing a task or activity for intrinsic purposes.” 21 Dreyfus states that the flow is more likely to occur if one is very skilled. “Take Boston Celtics basketball player Larry Bird’s description of the experience of the complex purposive act of passing the ball in the midst of the game: “(A lot of the) things on the court are just reaction to the situation … I don’t think about some of the things I’m trying to do … A lot of times, I’ve passed the basketball and not realized I’ve passed it until a moment or so later.” 22 When you know your tool, it becomes a part of you and it leads you through the activity. You don’t think any more and you are ready to be drawn into the situation and to react to it. Whilst Csíkszentmiháyi and Dreyfus think that one can only regularly achieve a state of flow by being really skillful, Charny thinks “…all makers participate in the unique human experience that comes from being completely engrossed in creative activity. Being in ‘the zone’ is felt by a four-year-old as much as by seasoned master.”23 Whether or not it is true that being skilled helps to induce a state of flow, the most important thing is the joy that we feel while we are in it. As young bass player Ryan Cross states: ”Connected to the instrument is being connected to myself. I feel I am a better person because I play it.” 24 20 21 22 23 24 Csíkszentmiháyi, M., (1988). Optimal experience: psychological studies of flow in consciousness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Csíkszentmiháyi, M., (1988). Optimal experience: psychological studies of flow in consciousness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Dreyfus, H., L., (1991). Being-in-the-world: commentary on Heidegger’s being in time, division I. Massachusetts: Massachusetts Institute of Technology. P. 93. Charny, D., (2011). Power of making: The importance of being skilled. London: V&A Publishing. P. 7. Being in the world, 2010. [Film] Directed by Tao Ruspoli. USA: Mangusta & LAFCO pictures Figure 16. [LarryBird] [image online] Available at: http://www.y101fm.com/index.php/features/y101-tops/220-bestof-the-best-top-10-nba-playoff-stars.html Figure 17. [Ryan Cross] Being in the world, 2010. [Film] Directed by Tao Ruspoli. USA: Mangusta & LAFCO pictures 8 Maja Grakalic CERAMIC TOOL SET / Figure 19. [Factory] [image online] Available at: http://www.designhomes.com/images/factory-6.jpg The second connection is the connection between the maker, the material and the making itself and how it affects the world around us. This connection is important for me as a designer since I am ‘co-responsible’ for producing things in the world and by consequence the world itself. To explain ‘co-responsibility’ between the designers, the making, the material and the object he is designing, we must look at Heidegger’s reinterpretation of Aristotle’s theory of 4 causes. “He suggests that the ancient craftsmanship involves the four Aristotelian causes: material, formal, final, and efficient. Intuitively, one might think that the efficient cause of a given craftitem (the craftsman) was the most significant of the four. However, although the craftsman has an important role in uniting the four causes by considering each of them carefully, each of the four causes is equally ‘co-responsible’ for the particular craftitem that is produced. Heidegger comments, “the four ways of being responsible bring something into appearance. They let it come forth into presenting”. 25 Appropriately enough, Heidegger names this process ‘bringing forth’. And this poetic ‘bringing forth’ way of making and living is what the Japanese ceremonial teacup mentioned in the previous passage represents. To be aware, as a designer, of this ‘co-responsibility’ one must be actively engaged in the making. One must know and respect materials and tools and work together with them. As Heidegger said “Holding a hammer properly enables one to use the hammer and to accomplish what one has to do with the hammer. But this is other than bending the hammer to one's own will. The hammer will do best what one wills if one conforms one's use to the intrinsic design of the hammer, heft, shape, etc.” 26 27 You can discover the essence of the hammer and the hammering just by using it and through use gain the skill, otherwise it will never reveal itself to you and you will never understand its purpose. Today’s designers tend to hide behind the computers, neglecting other skills. Consequently they observe objects, materials and the world through the monitor as mere appearance, a “spectacle” 28, disconnected from the feeling of ‘co-responsibility’. Figure 20. Being in the world, 2010. [Film] Directed by Tao Ruspoli. USA: Mangusta & LAFCO pictures 26 Heidegger, 25 Waddington, I., D., (2005). A Field Guide to Heidegger: Understanding ‘The Question Concerning Technology’. Stanford University. P. 568. M., (1962). Being and time. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. B., (2008). The Question Concerning Technology guide. Fordham University unpublished. 28 Deboard, G., (1983). Society of spectacle. London: Rebel Press 27 Babich, 9 Maja Grakalic CERAMIC TOOL SET / THE PROGRAM My program is to use what I have explored through research and exploration of the material and creative processes in order to question the habits of my practice and represent it through a new metaphor. To this end, I’ve opted to create an object that will challenge the mind: CERAMIC TOOL SET The project With regards to the hammer and to the ceramics ‘Eye Patch’, a ceramic hammer was brought into existence. A joyful process of making resulted in two more tools; ceramics pliers and a wrench. I have made each artifact without using a mould, just by shaping the material, as one would do so with a sculpture. I used colours and a painted pattern resembling Delftware. Figure 21. Ceramic Hammer also known as Heidegger 10 Maja Grakalic CERAMIC TOOL SET / 11 Maja Grakalic CERAMIC TOOL SET / 12 Maja Grakalic CERAMIC TOOL SET / 13 Maja Grakalic CERAMIC TOOL SET / 14 Maja Grakalic CERAMIC TOOL SET / 15 Maja Grakalic CERAMIC TOOL SET / The context of use What does a man do with such an object? The context of use in my projects is always challenging to find! Perhaps it is as challenging as finding the context of use in the non-working toaster, made by the designer Thomas Thwaites who instead of designing another commercial working toaster, decided to reveal the system behind the mass production, to ask some questions and lay out criticisms. Today the toaster he made is not a working one, but as it is currently exhibited at the Science Museum in London, it witnesses his quest for truth. Perhaps ‘Ceramic Tool Set’ will be lucky and find a place, somewhere in the corner of a gallery, revealing to the public all of its metaphors and hopefully contributing to general awareness more than an object in a supermarket shelf waiting to be bought and then thrown away. 16 Maja Grakalic CERAMIC TOOL SET / CONCLUSION The ‘Ceramic Tool Set’ is a metaphor for the general loss of skills amongst people who throw things away rather than fix them. Thus an object, which was once a tool, is now a decoration. Furthermore it is a metaphor for the loss of ‘co-responsibility’ and the destructive way of living in which we, as a society, impose our will on the world. A hammer is forced to be something that it is not, thus robbed of its purpose. It is also a metaphor of me, working for a corporation, sitting behind the computer, losing the joy of making and feeling like I am failing to contribute. Last, and perhaps most importantly, it is a metaphor for both the fragile relationship between the man and the making and between the man and the world. As Damien O’Sullivan says, “The result, perhaps more poetic than practical, slightly awkward and very fragile, just like us, they cry out ‘handle with care!’” 29 29 O’Sullivan, D., (2011). proAesthetics 100% Porcelain [online] Available at: http://www.damianosullivan.com/page1/page13/ [Accessed 10 November 2011]. 17 Maja Grakalic CERAMIC TOOL SET / REFERENCES 1) Fairfax, D. and Rosenberg, T., (2011). Metaphors of making, brief. London: Goldsmiths University of London. 2) Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M., (2003). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 3) Heidegger, M., (1977). The question concerning technology and other essays / Martin Heidegger; translated and with an introduction by William Lovitt.. New York: Harper Perennial. 4) Heidegger, M., (1962). Being and time. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. 5) Dreyfus, H., L.., (2002). Heidegger Reexamined: Art, Poetry, and Technology, Vol 3; Heidegger on Gaining a Free Relation to Technology. London: Routledge. 6) Dreyfus, H., L.., (1991). Being-in-the-world: commentary on Heidegger’s being in time, division I. Massachusetts: Massachusetts Institute of Technology. 7) Miller, D., (2011). Power of making: The importance of being skilled London: V&A Publishing 8) O’Sullivan, D., (2011). proAesthetics 100% Porcelain [online] Available at: http://www.damianosullivan.com/page1/page13/ [Accessed 10 November 2011]. 9) Koren, L., (1994). Wabi-Sabi for Artists, Designers, Poets and Philosophers. Stone Bridge Press. 10) Powell, R., R., (2004). Wabi Sabi Simple: Create beauty. Value imperfection. Live deeply. Adams Media. 11) Wikipedia: the free encyclopedia. (2011). Wabi-sabi [online] Available at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wabi-sabi#cite_note-Powell-2 [Accessed 10 November 2011]. 12) Waddington, I., D., (2005). A Field Guide to Heidegger: Understanding ‘The Question Concerning Technology’. Stanford University. 13) Zimmerman, M. (1977). Heidegger: The Man and the Thinker: Beyond Humanism: Heidegger’s understanding of technology, Listening. 14) Csíkszentmiháyi, M., (1988). Optimal experience: psychological studies of flow in consciousness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 15) Being in the world, 2010. [Film] Directed by Tao Ruspoli. USA: Mangusta & LAFCO pictures 16) Deboard, G., (1983). Society of spectacle. London: Rebel Press 18