User:Ninavdbroek/Paper/Paper
Paper.
Previous century was about discovering things, while this new century is about making things. That’s a huge different because by making you’ll get a new level of understanding. This hands-on approach challenges you to be more creative as you have to think in solutions and alternatives whenever you have no access to certain particles. Instead of using your eyes and mind making the right choice to satisfy your needs, you’ll have to experience the material itself wherefore it becomes more personal. It’s obvious that this maker culture rises accompanied by many fablabs in city’s all over the world that offer citizens a platform to realize their ideas. Because of new technology we’re able to make things ourselves instead of buying them in stores. This fact will of course influences the economy, as we all know it now. Some people are frightened by this idea but I think this is a natural evolvement. Our contemporary system that amounts from the industrial revolution is based on manufacturing and globalization; making as many objects as possible and spread them all over the world by infrastructure. But times changed and because the Internet provides a super fast platform that contributes to the open source approach and sharing mindset it’s no longer necessary to let things made on the other side of the world. By digital fabrication it’s much more efficient to ‘print’ things locally, besides that, I think it’s in human nature to make things ourselves. It’s scientifically proven that people are more satisfied when they’ve created something themselves; a object gets automatically more value when someone puts it’s personal effort and time in it. The facts of this maker culture and the way it influences different disciplines is well-known to us as digital craft students, but I’m personally more interested in the relation towards the natural world and psychics.
Since science and biology became more accessible to non- scientists, people begin to integrate in this merging field as well. Actually we see the same fabrication movement in living systems; known as synthetic biology. It’s a new field of science we’re designers look at ways to adapt natural organisms and processes to create new products, materials and even artificial life forms. We sometimes forget that we’re already trying to ‘control’ nature for more than 1000 years. For example the modification of our pets; we make decisions that push evolution in a particular way to satisfy human needs and tastes. Now I’m actually against this phenomenon because nature and animals already suffered enough trough human impact. We’ve created a gigantic hole in nature the last decades but now, with the advent of new technology, we have the possibility and maybe the moral duty to fix a part of the damage. And that is probably where my role as designer lies. I think our challenge is to move our attitude upon nature from controlling it towards adapting and cooperate with it. As a maker I'm exploring the way nature is developing and being as efficient as possible. I use this as inspiring study to solve 'problems' and over think our conventional ways of dealing with products. (Bio mimicry) Pushing society towards a more sustainable lifestyle. Digital fabrication is a perfect tool to achieve this evolution but we do need to change our cliché image of technology, which is very mechanical and without any esthetics. Like I mentioned, this idea is of course generated during the industrial revolution where nature was the opposite of machines, but actually, technology has always been mimicking natural processes and is somehow intertwined with it. Like the computer looks at how the brain work or a camera uses the human eye as example. But because of this mechanic look and feel –which Fritz Kahn illustrates very well as you can see- there’s formed a huge gap between human and machine. It’s not easily for us to relate with technology so the question is; how can it feel more natural, soft and organic? Is it achievable to blur these edges? In theory we already did as you can see in synthetic biology; nature is becoming a designers next toolbox. But in esthetics it’s not yet achieved to push technology towards a more sensual direction. This challenge is what drives me and this is what Neri Oxman actually already reached reasonably well.
The vases that Gotlind Weigel created were inspired by the shapes she discovered in nature like the form of a birds wing or a plant that rises from the ground. She mimicked these curves by using a wheel-thrown vessel and turned the material, mostly stoneware and porcelain, into a consumer article or an art piece. The material I experimented with had both the organic characteristics as the mechanical properties. It moves very gradually and slowly while the iron oxide makes the material react on any magnet that appears within near distance. The composition of the material is actually very chemical but therefore I was even more interested. That such synthetic stuff can move so naturally and that the process is ‘semi’ controlled by the designer. Man likes to have fully control over things but maybe the beauty arises when a designer takes a step backwards at a particularly moment, so the object can finish itself. When you start appreciating these imperfections that come along with coincidence, your relationship towards the material completely changes. For me this was a real challenge because I’m an exceptional perfectionist in everything I do.
I still don’t know exactly where my profession as a maker lies but I do have a strong opinion or belief within this maker discipline. I would like to devote myself in solving ‘problems’ related to climate change and contribute to people’s awareness by showing them the beauty of our environment. Intergrade humans in a more efficient and balanced lifestyle trough leaving all parts of an object that aren’t really necessary. The Japanese brand Muji is a very good example of this philosophy. Even though it produces extremely much, the mindset is driven by minimalism. Digital fabrication enables us to work efficient and effective and discourage mass production where thousands of products are thrown away every day. We need to re- design these integrated systems or at least change our way of thinking. The current system detains people from being independent and experimental, it has now eye on an innovative future whatsoever. And that’s a shame because the outcome of combining creative minds with intelligent people is so extremely powerful; the left and right brain lobe are simply brought together. The most important part of crossing technology and biology for me is learning from other species and use this data in all sort of design disciplines. From fashion to architecture, urban planning and product design. Malaysian architect Ken Yeang shows perfectly how you can intergrade nature into a building. He creates an entire ecosystem climate where plants and green space provide ventilation as well as oxygen and shelter.
Back to a more practical scale for me; I think it’s definitely crucial at this moment to blur boundaries as much as possible and questioning ourselves which direction we’d like to go. I’ll continue my research in materials and invest how new technology allows me to upgrade conventional crafts and traditions. Revealing the process so other people get an understanding of this side of the story as well. Using for instance, installation or time-lapse to visualize the procedure of an object. Even though my position within this merging field is still a bit loose -since I can’t even clarify what I’m exactly making-, the significance of the message I’d like to spread is more than clear.
