




Return-path: <origami-l@nstn.ca>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 1995 15:03:21 -0300
From: Nick Robinson <nick@tritec.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Squirals

>  Rona, I recall, from somewhere, that the squarish spirals are called
>  squirals.

Nah, they live in trees & eat nuts :)

Nick Robinson

            ***** "Origami isn't just for squares!" *****
          www.cs.ubc.ca/spider/jwu/Origami/BOS/nickdata.html





Return-path: <origami-l@nstn.ca>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 1995 15:07:37 -0300
From: jdharris@lust.isem.smu.edu (Jerry D. Harris)
Subject: Re: SOME ADVICE

At 12:58 PM 7/26/95, Londono, Juancarlos (3421) wrote:
>Dear friends:
>I would like some advice about an exhibition I am planning. I want to show
>some origami figures of animals and I don't know whether it's better to make
>the animals on scale, or sized according difficulty. I mean that an elephant
>that's easy to fold can be quite small, but an insect model that is much
>more difficult for me comes out larger than the elephant.
>
>*  In your opinion, does this matter?
>*  Can I show tiny elephants and giant bugs?
>*  Should I try to make all the figures on scale, or all the same size?
>
>I would appreciate any opinions or comments you migh have.

        Generally when I do an exhibition of this sort, I try and make all
the models from identical sizes of paper -- that way, people can witness
how compact a piece of paper can get  in the process of folding complex
models.  Generally, I use 10" square tissue foil or paper.  Obviously,
then, simpler models will be bigger, and more complex models (esp. those
with multiple appendages, like bugs) get smaller.  It's simply a visual
gauge that non-folders can relate to in terms of understanding the
complexity that origami can attain.

Jerry D. Harris
Schuler Museum of Paleontology
Southern Methodist University
jdharris@lust.isem.smu.edu
        (Compuserve:  73132,3372)

---------/O\------*     --->|:|:|>     w___/^^^\--o

Humorous Quote Is Forthcoming...

---------/O\------*     --->|:|:|>     w___/^^^\--o





Return-path: <origami-l@nstn.ca>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 1995 15:08:43 -0300
From: jdharris@lust.isem.smu.edu (Jerry D. Harris)
Subject: Re: RE: ...Bloom County

At 11:43 AM 7/27/95, Rjlang@aol.com wrote:
>It was published in one of the FOCA convention programs (perhaps someone who
>has ready access to their old programs might look up which one); several back
>issues are available from OUSA supplies.

        It was the '88 one.  The funny thing about that model is:  about a
year before I ever saw this, I modified one of the penguins in Harbin's
_Origami 1_ with an Opus-esque schnozz, and gave it to Mr. Breathed at an
autograph session he had for his first two books.  He wasn't overly
thrilled, but he thought it was cute.  He wondered if I could do one with a
bow tie...

Jerry D. Harris
Schuler Museum of Paleontology
Southern Methodist University
jdharris@lust.isem.smu.edu
        (Compuserve:  73132,3372)

---------/O\------*     --->|:|:|>     w___/^^^\--o

Humorous Quote Is Forthcoming...

---------/O\------*     --->|:|:|>     w___/^^^\--o





Return-path: <origami-l@nstn.ca>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 1995 15:20:46 -0300
From: Joseph Wu <jwu@cs.ubc.ca>
Subject: Re: French Origami Books

On Thu, 27 Jul 1995 LEMIEUXJ@aspen.uml.edu wrote:

>   While in Quebec last week, I visited various book stores looking for
> Origami books. My original plan was to purchase a French version of a
> book or two already in my collection.
>
>   My plan changed when I discovered a $79.95 Canadian price tag on
> Jackson's Encyclopedia. ($100 Ca equals approx. $133 US)
> My original copy cost $24.95 US.

Bob, any time you want to trade me US$133 for C$100, just let me know!
Heck, let's raise it a hundred-fold!

(For those of you in the dark, Bob got his figures backward. It's US$100
for about C$137, which makes his French version of Jackson's Encyclopedia
to be about US$58.)

> Kneissler, Irmgard.  "Origami no 2".  Dessain et Tolra, Paris 1989
>    ISBN: 3-473-42561-3.   79 pages.  $28.95 Canadian.

Burn it! Burn it! Burn it!

Joseph Wu      <jwu@cs.ubc.ca> | Witty quote is now back to the
Master's Student               |   drawing board due to squeamish
University of British Columbia |   readers. Any suggestions?
WWW: http://www.cs.ubc.ca/spider/jwu/origami.html (Origami Page)





Return-path: <origami-l@nstn.ca>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 1995 16:16:31 -0300
From: Eric Tend <eric@hpisdaja.ptp.hp.com>
Subject: New Money Folding Book!

Hi all,

I got a nice surprise in the mail yesterday ... a complimentary copy of
OrigamiUSA's new publication, Making More With Money.  It is a wonderful
collection of 38 money fold models (including my Dollar Bug-Eyed Jumping
Frog from 1990).  The models range from simple, low intermediate,
intermediate, high intermediate, to complex and were compiled mostly
from the Annual Collection convention books.  May Leo (the editor) has
put together a fine addition to meet OrigamiUSA's frequent demand for
moneyfold books.  The spiral-bound 95 page book also includes sections on
"Why Fold Money?", "The History Unfolds", "Money Folds In Publication",
and "Origami Basics".

There was no price noted so you will have to inquire from:

OrigamiUSA
15 West 77th Street
Box M1
New York, NY 10024-5192
(212) 769-5635

If you write, send a self-addressed envelope with two first class stamps.

Hope this is the first in a series of money fold collections!

--Eric--

==============================================================================
     ____/__/__/__/__/__/__/ | "Its all in the reflexes"
      __/         __/        |                       -- Jack Burton
_______/__/      __/         |================================================
    __/         __/          | Eric Tend
 ____/__/__/   __/           | eric@hpisdaja.ptp.hp.com





Return-path: <origami-l@nstn.ca>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 1995 17:45:47 -0300
From: Rjlang@aol.com
Subject: Re: French Origami Books

> > Kneissler, Irmgard.  "Origami no 2".  Dessain et Tolra, Paris 1989
> >    ISBN: 3-473-42561-3.   79 pages.  $28.95 Canadian.
>
> Burn it! Burn it! Burn it! [comment by Joseph Wu]

Joseph, is this book also plagiarized? I encountered her book, "Das
Origamibuch," in Germany; it is a blatant rip-off of Honda/Kasahara material.

Robert





Return-path: <origami-l@nstn.ca>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 1995 18:53:34 -0300
From: Joseph Wu <jwu@cs.ubc.ca>
Subject: Re: French Origami Books

On Thu, 27 Jul 1995 Rjlang@aol.com wrote:

> > > Kneissler, Irmgard.  "Origami no 2".  Dessain et Tolra, Paris 1989
> > >    ISBN: 3-473-42561-3.   79 pages.  $28.95 Canadian.
> >
> > Burn it! Burn it! Burn it! [comment by Joseph Wu]
>
> Joseph, is this book also plagiarized? I encountered her book, "Das
> Origamibuch," in Germany; it is a blatant rip-off of Honda/Kasahara material.

Robert, thanks for helping me to realize what a terrible thing I've done.
Guilt should never be by association, and I saw her name and assumed the
worst. I've never seen this particular book, so I really don't know if it
is a rip-off like _Das_Origamibuch_.

Joseph Wu      <jwu@cs.ubc.ca> | Witty quote is now back to the
Master's Student               |   drawing board due to squeamish
University of British Columbia |   readers. Any suggestions?
WWW: http://www.cs.ubc.ca/spider/jwu/origami.html (Origami Page)





Return-path: <origami-l@nstn.CA>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 1995 20:38:54 -0300
From: Joseph Wu <jwu@cs.ubc.CA>
Subject: Re: Vocation

On Tue, 25 Jul 1995, Jerry D. Harris wrote:

> > I have never done any wetfolding in my life and, quite frankly, I don't
> >know that I really want to start right now!  :-D  What kind of paper do you
> >use for that - everyone just says use some with sizing - well, I hate looking
> >ignorant (most of the time) and so I always say "Oh that's a good idea..."
>
>         What the hey is "sizing?"  I rarely wet fold; on the few occasions
> when I've actually tried, I've used simple construction paper (it's spongy
> and absorbs water well, without making the paper fall apart or inks run).
> I still prefer tissue foil, although I'd love to get the "bulk" that wet
> folding can provide -- some models, if done with tissue foil, are still too
> limp and flimsy, and don't take any abuse.

As Nick Robinson said, you need a paper with a fair amount of sizing to do
wet folding. Try something like parchment paper, or, if you can find it,
Wyndstone's marble (AKA elephant hide).

Joseph Wu      <jwu@cs.ubc.ca> | Witty quote is now back to the
Master's Student               |   drawing board due to squeamish
University of British Columbia |   readers. Any suggestions?
WWW: http://www.cs.ubc.ca/spider/jwu/origami.html (Origami Page)





Return-path: <origami-l@nstn.ca>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 1995 20:42:50 -0300
From: Joseph Wu <jwu@cs.ubc.ca>
Subject: Re: Origami as art (was rec.arts.origami)

On Wed, 26 Jul 1995, Jae Hyuk Lee wrote:

> Even in bookstores, origami books are shelved among the crafts' books, not
> the art books.

That doesn't make them right, does it? 8)

> For some, origami is merely a fun craft/art, but for others, it's an art (by
> my second definition) and their life.  I have a feeling that I opened a
> floodgate with this.  Let me have it folks!  Rip my thoughts into tiny
> little shreds of paper...errr  electrons!

I didn't mean to sound so abrupt, but I do feel strongly about this. Most
origami is not "craft" since that word implies a skill (artistic or not)
that is used to produce something practical and useful (as well as looking
nice). Most origami does not fall into this category, being
representational figures, or even abstract structures. Hence, I prefer
"art".

Joseph Wu      <jwu@cs.ubc.ca> | Witty quote is now back to the
Master's Student               |   drawing board due to squeamish
University of British Columbia |   readers. Any suggestions?
WWW: http://www.cs.ubc.ca/spider/jwu/origami.html (Origami Page)





Return-path: <origami-l@nstn.ca>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 1995 07:06:57 -0300
From: Bateman "A." "G." <agb@mrc-lmb.cam.ac.uk>
Subject: Tanteidan-BOS convention

Dear All,
         Here are 10 good reasons to visit York for the BOS
Autumn convention Sep 16-17 1995. Ten to twelve members of
the famous origami detectives will be attending. I got this
straight from the horses (Yoshino's) mouth this morning. So
if you want to see some of the worlds best origami come to
York (England). :-)
  Booking form and details of York can be found at

http://sonja.acad.cai.cam.ac.uk/alex/convent.htm

or write to
Penny Groom
2A The Chesnuts
Countesthorpe
Leicester
LE8 3TL
ENGLAND
Tel:- (0116) 277 3870

See you there

Alex Bateman





Return-path: <origami-l@nstn.ca>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 1995 07:11:31 -0300
From: Nick Robinson <nick@tritec.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Re: Origami Insects and their kin

> You think I'd waste my *own* time folding those things? <g>

Do you think anyone else does? <GGG> &:)

Nick Robinson

            ***** "Origami isn't just for squares!" *****
          www.cs.ubc.ca/spider/jwu/Origami/BOS/nickdata.html





Return-path: <origami-l@nstn.ca>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 1995 07:13:01 -0300
From: Nick Robinson <nick@tritec.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: French Origami Books

Jackson's book is in remainder stores over here ofr 6UK pounds - someone is
making a BIG profit!

Nick Robinson

            ***** "Origami isn't just for squares!" *****
          www.cs.ubc.ca/spider/jwu/Origami/BOS/nickdata.html





Return-path: <origami-l@nstn.CA>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 1995 07:14:34 -0300
From: "BOB T. LYNCH" <blynch@du.EDU>
Subject: craft v. art

Joseph Wu wrote (paraphrased so I hope I understood what he really meant) that
craft implies that there is a skill involved that makes something useful. well
I feel that it takes a helluva a lot of skill to fold paper, it takes a skill
to be able to look at a series of diagrams and get a finished product that
even remotely looks like the nice photo in the book (I know some people who
have never mastered that skill, too). BUT, I'm NOT saying that for those reasons
origami is not an art - it is indeed! I think it is every bit and art as drawing
or painting - and those book usually are found in the same section of most
bookstores I visit as the origami books. It takes a lot of skill to paint a
     picture
too, and some of the painting I've seen definitely belong in a "craft" rather
than"art" section!  :-)

I guess in some ways I really don't know what my point is here - can you tell?
It just seems to me that the whole thing doesn't revolve around skill, or
what others percieve it to be - I think art is what you make it. I have seen
some very artful cross stitch (which in some ways is about as mindless a skill
as you can find), yet it is considered a craft also. I would not consider
braiding lanyards as an art - and some of the braiding takes a lot more skill
and time than mosaic work - another "art".

Well, I'm talking incircles now - another art of mine! :-) and it's late.

Good night! Beauty 9and art) lie in the eye of the beholder - I like to see
art.

Dee





Return-path: <origami-l@nstn.ca>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 1995 09:41:21 -0300
From: casida@ere.umontreal.ca (Casida Mark)
Subject: Re: Icosahedron

> >  If the Origami icosahedron model you are referring to is the one built
> >  from 30 units, each unit looking like a pair of triangles, then the
> >  inverse model turns out to be a stellated dodecahedron.
> >
> >  It's not too difficult to fit the last few units into place, as long as
> >  you are careful to prevent the rest of the model from unraveling.  A
> >  little Scotch Tape can help... but be sure to remove the tape when the
> >  model is finished.
> >
> >  John Andrisan
> >  IBMMAIL: USMCDQND   Internet: a004773%lbvm1.profs@mdcgwy.mdc.com
> >
> >
> You may wish to try using paper clips instead of scotch tape. Makes the
> model much easier to fold.

I'm no expert in contructing modulars, but I did have my little adventure
not so long ago putting together my first butterfly ball.  In particular,
I used the sort of not-so-sticky scotch tape sold specifically for
projects where the tape serves only temporarily to hold things in place.
(I guess these things were missed in the discussion about tools :-)

                                      ... Mark

--
*-------------------------------------------------------*
|          Mark E. Casida                               |
|          e-mail: casida@chimcn.umontreal.ca           |





Return-path: <origami-l@nstn.ca>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 1995 10:35:52 -0300
From: casida@ere.umontreal.ca (Casida Mark)
Subject: Re: craft v. art

Hmmmm....

Is origami a craft or an art?  Should origami books be shelved with
craft books or art books?  It seems to me that the craft books are
the ones which teach technique.  For example, I've seen books on
basic sketching and painting techniques classed with the the craft
books.  The art section usually gets filled with more art history
and art appreciation.  Perhaps the "problem" (or advantage) of
origami books is that they teach both technique and art appreciation
at the same time.

                                ... Mark

--
*-------------------------------------------------------*
|          Mark E. Casida                               |
|          e-mail: casida@chimcn.umontreal.ca           |





Return-path: <origami-l@nstn.ca>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 1995 12:19:35 -0300
From: jdharris@lust.isem.smu.edu (Jerry D. Harris)
Subject: Re: craft v. art

>Is origami a craft or an art?  Should origami books be shelved with
>craft books or art books?  It seems to me that the craft books are
>the ones which teach technique.  For example, I've seen books on
>basic sketching and painting techniques classed with the the craft
>books.  The art section usually gets filled with more art history
>and art appreciation.  Perhaps the "problem" (or advantage) of
>origami books is that they teach both technique and art appreciation
>at the same time.

        Well, until someone produces a large, glossy, brightly colored
photographic coffee-table book entitled something like _Origami Models Of
The World_, the books of origami _instructions_ can stay in the craft
section (the verb "craft" implies the creation of something, which is what
origami is all about).  Books of finished models, like books of finished
paintings or sculptures, can be in the art section.

Jerry D. Harris
Schuler Museum of Paleontology
Southern Methodist University
jdharris@lust.isem.smu.edu
        (Compuserve:  73132,3372)

---------/O\------*     --->|:|:|>     w___/^^^\--o

Humorous Quote Is Forthcoming...

---------/O\------*     --->|:|:|>     w___/^^^\--o





Return-path: <origami-l@nstn.ca>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 1995 13:55:02 -0300
From: Grace.Chiu@Cognos.COM (Chiu, Grace)
Subject: RE: Jeanine's Icosahedron

William Anstine <cptcobel@yrkpa.kias.com> wrote:
>During convention, you showed me a unit for an Icosahedron that was sort of
>"inverted" faces... however, it seems as though you almost need to be
>inside the model to assemble the final couple of units..
>
>Any insight?

Gordon Stallings showed me an inside-out icosahedron that he was teaching
at the convention.  It's done using 30 slightly-modified Sonobe pieces*, of
which
you take pairs to create 15 units, that are knitted together in the usual
pocket-tab
fashion to form an icosahedron. Each pair is formed to look somewhat like an
inverted Dutch bonnet. The knitting is fairly simple; you needn't be
"inside".
But, as with most 'hedrons the last unit is ALways a $%^@&! to  put in.
Perhaps this is what you were thinking of?

* I'll try and ASCII it in later, if you like.  Gotta work now...

Grace
 ---
Grace Chiu, Enslavened Manager, Technology Support Services,
Cognos Inc.: Rubberneckers on the Information Super-Dirt Road
Ottawa, ON 1-800-365-3968, ext. 3218.
Grace.Chiu@Cognos.COM or chiug@cognos.com





Return-path: <origami-l@nstn.ca>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 1995 13:59:17 -0300
From: Grace.Chiu@Cognos.COM (Chiu, Grace)
Subject: RE: French Origami Books

I hadn't thought of checking out les librairies (bookstores, en francais)
around
Ottawa-Hull for origami books.  But...

K'CHING!  Bob wrote:
>My plan changed when I discovered a $79.95 Canadian price tag on
>Jackson's Encyclopedia. ($100 Ca equals approx. $133 US)
>My original copy cost $24.95 US.

 Wicked tariffs.  $79.95 doesn't include sales tax, does it, Bob?
Relief is that there's no provincial sales tax (8%) on books
in Ontario. There is PST in Quebec, I think.

Most of the origami books in the Ottawa Public Library are en francais.
I've got Harbin's "Origami 2" out right now.  The Jackson encyclopedia
is listed as "missing"  :-(...

Grace
 ---
Grace Chiu, Enslavened Manager, Technology Support Services,
Cognos Inc.: Rubberneckers on the Information Super-Dirt Road
Ottawa, ON 1-800-365-3968, ext. 3218.
Grace.Chiu@Cognos.COM or chiug@cognos.com





Return-path: <origami-l@nstn.ca>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 1995 13:59:50 -0300
From: Grace.Chiu@Cognos.COM (Chiu, Grace)
Subject: Re: French Origami Books

Looks like Joseph got a hold of this book in the Ottawa Public Library --
cuz that IS the actual condition of the book  %^):
>> Kneissler, Irmgard.  "Origami no 2".  Dessain et Tolra, Paris 1989
>>    ISBN: 3-473-42561-3.   79 pages.  $28.95 Canadian.
>
>Burn it! Burn it! Burn it!

Grace
 ---
Grace Chiu, Enslavened Manager, Technology Support Services,
Cognos Inc.: Rubberneckers on the Information Super-Dirt Road
Ottawa, ON 1-800-365-3968, ext. 3218.
Grace.Chiu@Cognos.COM or chiug@cognos.com





Return-path: <origami-l@nstn.ca>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 1995 14:20:24 -0300
From: Emma Craib <EMC94001@UConnVM.UConn.Edu>
Subject: origami germs

Thursday's New York Times (7/27/95) had article in first section, page A4
 in the Tokyo Journal that mentioned a growing tendency for young women
 to be freaked out by germs.  Commercial products that pander to this
 are sporting "sanitary coatings", with origami paper being on the list
 along with telephones and bicycle handles.
 On a different topic, you can print a lizard skin pattern on your paper
 by cracking off a chunck of expanded pellet foam packing ( those monolithic
 shapes that cradle electronic stuff, etc.) and using a piece to print with a
 ink pad. Really!
 Saw a T-rex skeleton... WOW!!!!!!  Thanks Yusri!!!!!!!!  The kids will faint!
  Cheers, Emma





Return-path: <origami-l@nstn.ca>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 1995 15:21:33 -0300
From: wdawes@cs.nmsu.edu ("Iron Will" Dawes)
Subject: Re: craft v. art

  Lexicographically speaking, "craft" is defined as "to make or
manufacture with precision and attention to detail." (Random House)
That sounds like origami to me. However, "origami" is defined as "the
ancient Japanese ART of paperfolding." I suppose it could go either
way. William Faulkner wrote in "As I Lay Dying" that motherhood is a
word which only mothers understand; he claims that the word was
developed by people who were not mothers and who, therefore, could not
understand the feeling associated with it and needed a word to
describe that which they didn't understand. He said that mothers don't
need the word, for they (and only they) TRULY know what motherhood is.
In my opinion, origami is origami. Like motherhood, only a
practitioner of origami (I almost said, "origami artist") knows what
it is. People who have never done it need to think of it as either an
art or a craft. We, as folders, know that it is concomitantly both and
neither. Of course, this is just my opinion (my 2 cents, my 0.0266
Canadian dollars...)
                              -Will
P.S. For the sake of standardization, I think the books should be
under "crafts", with other "papercrafts". This is only so that I don't
have to traverse the entire bookstore to try and find an origami book.
P.P.S. Mark Casida made an excellent point about craft books teaching
technique and art books targeting appreciation.





Return-path: <origami-l@nstn.ca>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 1995 16:00:41 -0300
From: grs@ppco.com (Gordon Stallings)
Subject: RE: Jeanine's Icosahedron

>William Anstine <cptcobel@yrkpa.kias.com> wrote:
>>During convention, you showed me a unit for an Icosahedron that was sort of
>>"inverted" faces... however, it seems as though you almost need to be
>>inside the model to assemble the final couple of units..
>>
>>Any insight?
>Gordon Stallings showed me an inside-out icosahedron that he was teaching
>at the convention.  It's done using 30 slightly-modified Sonobe pieces...

I think I can clarify this a bit.

You can make a 30-piece model which is a true icosahedron with inverted
triangular-pyramid faces.  You start by making a triangular point with
three pieces, and then group five of those around a point.  (Using my
non-standard jargon:  Put three pieces around each straight edge, and five
around each bent edge.)  (Three pieces make a point, but each piece is
involved in two points.  An icosahedron has twenty faces:  3/2 pieces per
face * 20 faces = 30 pieces.)  As you build the figure, you will reach a
stage where you can decide whether it will be "points out" or "points in".
Just make the points go inward and finish putting it together.  The last
connections aren't *that* hard to do!  It's easiest if you crease the
pieces "backwards" so that the interlocks lie on the outside of the model
even though the points are inverted.

Or, you can use 60 pieces, which is what Grace Chiu was remembering.  This
does not make an icosahedron.  Instead, there is a 4-sided point (or
inverted point) for each *edge* of an icosahedron -- two pieces per point.
(2 pieces per point * one point per edge * 30 edges = 60 pieces.)  If you
build the figure points-in, its vertices are not all on the same "level",
so this figure is not an ordinary convex solid or dual.  It is a close
relative to the rhombic triacontahedron, though.  (The 4-sided "hat" is
made by joining two modules around their bent edges.)

I hope to write up a little article for the newsletter that will clarify
the bent-edge, straight-edge, points-out, points-in, flaps-out, flaps-in
issues.

        Gordon Stallings
        Phillips Petroleum Company
        234 PL, Phillips Research Center
        Bartlesville, OK  74004

        (918) 661-3290
        grs@ppco.com





Return-path: <origami-l@nstn.ca>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 1995 16:27:51 -0300
From: chiug@cognos.com (Grace Chiu)
Subject: Re: Jeanine's Icosahedron/re-try

I thought I sent this yesterday, but it didn't look like it got through.
(Apologies if it did & you're reading this again, though):

William Anstine <cptcobel@yrkpa.kias.com> wrote:
>During convention, you showed me a unit for an Icosahedron that was sort of
>"inverted" faces... however, it seems as though you almost need to be
>inside the model to assemble the final couple of units..
>
>Any insight?

Gordon Stallings showed me an inside-out icosahedron that he was teaching
at the convention.  It's done using 30 slightly-modified Sonobe pieces*, of
which
you take pairs to create 15 units, that are knitted together in the usual
pocket-tab
fashion to form an icosahedron. Each pair is formed to look somewhat like an
inverted Dutch bonnet. The knitting is fairly simple; you needn't be "inside".
But, as with most 'hedrons the last unit is ALways a $%^@&! to  put in.
Perhaps this is what you were thinking of?

* I'll try and ASCII it in later, if you like.  Gotta work now...

Grace

---
Grace Chiu, Enslavened Manager, Technology Support Services,
Cognos Inc.: Rubberneckers on the Information Super-Dirt Road
Ottawa, ON 1-800-365-3968, ext. 3218.





Return-path: <origami-l@nstn.ca>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 1995 16:55:39 -0300
From: Joseph Wu <jwu@cs.ubc.ca>
Subject: Re: craft v. art

On Fri, 28 Jul 1995, Iron Will Dawes wrote:

> P.S. For the sake of standardization, I think the books should be
> under "crafts", with other "papercrafts". This is only so that I don't
> have to traverse the entire bookstore to try and find an origami book.

But this doesn't happen. There are origami books out there that are
definitely more art than craft by your definition. Many photos and very few
diagrams. ORU magazine is one of the prime movers in this direction. Also,
while many bookstores put origami in the craft section, some put them in
the art section, and some put them in the children's section. I've seen
stores with origami books in all three sections!

> P.P.S. Mark Casida made an excellent point about craft books teaching
> technique and art books targeting appreciation.

I must disagree with Mark on this. There are many art technique books out
there which are always categorized with the art books, not with the craft
books.

I maintain that crafts are all outgrowths of practical skills. Look at
basket weaving, knitting, etc. Granted, some crafts have gone beyond
practicality, but they all have some roots in some practical skill that
is/was useful in day-to-day life at some point in time. Art, however, has a
different purpose. It is a re-presentation of the world as the artist sees
it. Origami, therefore, is an art. Of course, the products of origami can
be used as elements of crafting, but the folding (and especially the
designing) cannot truly be considered a craft. There simply is no practical
basis to it.

Joseph Wu      <jwu@cs.ubc.ca> | Witty quote is now back to the
Master's Student               |   drawing board due to squeamish
University of British Columbia |   readers. Any suggestions?
WWW: http://www.cs.ubc.ca/spider/jwu/origami.html (Origami Page)





Return-path: <origami-l@nstn.ca>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 1995 16:56:18 -0300
From: Valerie Vann <75070.304@compuserve.com>
Subject: OUSA Annual Report re: Affiliates & Addresses

I recently read the OUSA Annual Report and am concerned about a policy described
in the section on Regional Affiliates (Local origami organization that can
affiliate with OUSA if they have 6 or more OUSA members.)

Affiliation entitles the local group to a variety of things provided by the
parent OUSA organization. Most of these are just dandy (facilitation of exhibits
and visits by origami gurus, etc.)

However, I have a problem with this one:

OUSA will provide the Affiliate Group with a complete OUSA Membership List and a
set of mailing labels.

I object to this on principal: I do not want ANY organization sending out my
address without my explicit permission and have made it a policy recently to
check with charitable organization etc. about their policy on this matter, after
getting a number of annoying phone calls and gobs of junk mail traced back to my
local PBS station. While this does not apply specifically to origami, I know of
cases of other specialy interest groups (collectibles and computing) where
dissemination of members address information resulted in everything from massive
amounts of junk mail to theft.

Finally, it seems TOTALLY unnecessary to me for OUSA to supply my address to
anybody. It would make much more sense to me if it were done the other way
round,
i.e. send all the members the addresses and contact info for the closest
affiliate groups.

But even that seems redundant to me, as the Affiliate groups are listed in every
issue of the OUSA newsletter, and most grown-ups are capable of deciding for
themselves if they have time for another activity and can approach the local
group.

At the very least, OUSA's membership renewal forms should give us a choice of
having our info included in such a program or having OUSA keep it strictly
confidential.

How do others feel about this?

--valerie
Valerie Vann
Compuserve: 75070,304  or Internet:75070.304@compuserve.com
                                OR: valerivann@aol.com





Return-path: <origami-l@nstn.ca>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 1995 16:56:57 -0300
From: Valerie Vann <75070.304@compuserve.com>
Subject: Newsgroup Poll: Nay

I'd prefer not to have a newsgroup for many of the reasons already posted, but
primarily because I don't get newsgroups at work, but can pick up my email both
at work and at home and can file the origami/personal stuff on my home system.

I also have not had pleasant experiences with newsgroups and think that the
extra effort of mail lists may discourage some of the nonsense that makes
newgroups too timeconsuming. As a (possibly) relevant fact: I recently scanned
America On Line's
member interest directory for "origami" and came up with over 250 hits. On
further
investigation of a random sample, MANY of these were joke entries like "aerobic
origami", and I would bet that these same jokesters wouldn't be able to resist
posting nonsense on an origami newsgroup...

On my primary Internet provider, newsgroup browsing incurs a connection time
surcharge, and my secondary provider is a long distance call. Both have clunky
newsreaders.

A final concern: with proliferation of origami interest sites, it becomes too
time consuming to hit all of them regularly. Besides the list, the list
archives, and a crafts forum on Compuserve, there are now a dozen or so Web
Pages. the BBS (if its still in operation; I haven't had time to check lately),
and a prospect of some sort of online
access to OUSA. I think we stand a chance of getting over extended, and of
spending a lot of time fielding inquiries about addresses, htp URLs, etc. when
we'd "rather be folding..."

Just my opinion.
--valerie
Valerie Vann
Compuserve: 75070,304  or Internet:75070.304@compuserve.com
                                OR: valerivann@aol.com





Return-path: <origami-l@nstn.ca>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 1995 17:03:53 -0300
From: ACPQUINN@myriad.middlebury.edu
Subject: Origami: art vs. craft

I'm just going to add my $.02 to this seemingly pointless discussion.  I think
origami is both art and craft.  The process one uses to fold a model could be
called craft, while the finished piece is art (usually).  In any case, I don't
think it's necessary for people who think that origami is an art to be offended
by people calling it a lowly "craft".  Origami is what it is, and when we try
to put labels on it, we only confuse the issue.  Just remember, both art and
craft can be beautiful and impressive in their own ways.
-Alasdair
acpquinn@myriad.middlebury.edu





Return-path: <origami-l@nstn.ca>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 1995 17:31:28 -0300
From: casida@ere.umontreal.ca (Casida Mark)
Subject: Re: craft v. art

> > P.P.S. Mark Casida made an excellent point about craft books teaching
> > technique and art books targeting appreciation.
>
> I must disagree with Mark on this. There are many art technique books out
> there which are always categorized with the art books, not with the craft
> books.
>
> I maintain that crafts are all outgrowths of practical skills. Look at
> basket weaving, knitting, etc. Granted, some crafts have gone beyond
> practicality, but they all have some roots in some practical skill that
> is/was useful in day-to-day life at some point in time. Art, however, has a
> different purpose. It is a re-presentation of the world as the artist sees
> it. Origami, therefore, is an art. Of course, the products of origami can
> be used as elements of crafting, but the folding (and especially the
> designing) cannot truly be considered a craft. There simply is no practical
> basis to it.

Curious!  I can't recall having seen origami books classed under art,
but I can recall having seen books on basic sketching and painting
techniques classed under craft.  So that just means that Joseph and I
have been in different bookstores (although I used to live in Vancouver :-)

This all brings to mind a question from a friend from Mainland China
who is still struggling to improve his English:  He could not deduce
from his Chinese-English dictionary the difference in meaning between
"art" and "craft."  Even worse was that I could not explain the difference
to his satisfaction.  No wonder, we can't agree.

To make it worse, my Webster's defines craft as (among other things)
"... requiring ... artistic skill ... syn see ART" and art as (among other
things) "an occupation requiring knowledge or skill ... syn see ... CRAFT"
It then does go on to specify in more detail :

"syn ART, ... , CRAFT mean the faculty of performing what is devised.  ART
may be used interchangeably with all theother terms but in its most
distinct sense it contrasts with them in implying a personal, unanalyzable
creative power; ...; CRAFT may imply expertness in workmanship or suggest
trickery and guile in attaining one's ends"

So you see, it is all very simple.  Art is mysticism and craft is trickery!

My own point of view is that origami is some sort of participatory art form
where the folding process is as important as the finished result.  Of course,
studies of particular folding styles tend to lead to the development of
helpful rules (e.g. named folds and bases or strategies for designing new
models.)  I call these "craft" and they constitute the most teachable part
of our art form.  But let us never forget that there is always room for
that little extra which transcends the ordinary.

                                ... Mark

--
*-------------------------------------------------------*
|          Mark E. Casida                               |
|          e-mail: casida@chimcn.umontreal.ca           |





Return-path: <origami-l@nstn.ca>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 1995 17:36:27 -0300
From: casida@ere.umontreal.ca (Casida Mark)
Subject: Re: Origami: art vs. craft

>
> I'm just going to add my $.02 to this seemingly pointless discussion.  I think
> origami is both art and craft.  The process one uses to fold a model could be
> called craft, while the finished piece is art (usually).  In any case, I don't
> think it's necessary for people who think that origami is an art to be
     offended
> by people calling it a lowly "craft".  Origami is what it is, and when we try
> to put labels on it, we only confuse the issue.  Just remember, both art and
> craft can be beautiful and impressive in their own ways.
> -Alasdair
> acpquinn@myriad.middlebury.edu

Amen.
        ... Mark

--
*-------------------------------------------------------*
|          Mark E. Casida                               |
|          e-mail: casida@chimcn.umontreal.ca           |





Return-path: <origami-l@nstn.ca>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 1995 18:19:02 -0300
From: David Vaules <dvaules@BBN.COM>
Subject: Re:  Origami: art vs. craft

Heck, I'll chime in too...
I look at it as "craft is a part of art" as opposed to 2 distinct things.
Those of us who are just plodding through, laboriously doing each fold
in the book are a little more crafty :^), but as you gain confidence and
start to shape and change the models, are definitely doing art, while
not abandoning craft.  Similar to music, where there is interpretive
components, (e.g. reading music, proper technique, etc, the "craft") and
creative components (the "feel", going with the conductor, the "art").
There are plenty of crafts that have a LARGE art component to them
(Shaker furniture, my Mom's Christmas cards & holloween costumes) for us
to quibble over whether Origami is art.  Except for the fact that it
is fun, and fill the minutes I should be programming... ;^)
(Now whether programming is an art or a craft, I'll leave to offline email...)





Return-path: <origami-l@nstn.ca>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 1995 18:25:17 -0300
From: Sheldon Ackerman <ackerman@dorsai.dorsai.org>
Subject: Re: craft v. art

>
> I maintain that crafts are all outgrowths of practical skills. Look at
> basket weaving, knitting, etc. Granted, some crafts have gone beyond
> practicality, but they all have some roots in some practical skill that
> is/was useful in day-to-day life at some point in time. Art, however, has a
> different purpose. It is a re-presentation of the world as the artist sees
> it. Origami, therefore, is an art. Of course, the products of origami can
> be used as elements of crafting, but the folding (and especially the
> designing) cannot truly be considered a craft. There simply is no practical
> basis to it.
>
> Joseph Wu      <jwu@cs.ubc.ca> | Witty quote is now back to the

When I look for Origami book at local bookstores, I know that I will always
find them under Arts & Crafts.

--
Sheldon Ackerman
ackerman@dorsai.dorsai.org
sheldon.ackerman@nycps.nycenet.edu





Return-path: <origami-l@nstn.ca>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 1995 18:34:39 -0300
From: Sheldon Ackerman <ackerman@dorsai.dorsai.org>
Subject: Re: Newsgroup Poll: Nay

>
> On my primary Internet provider, newsgroup browsing incurs a connection time
> surcharge, and my secondary provider is a long distance call. Both have clunky
> newsreaders.
>
> A final concern: with proliferation of origami interest sites, it becomes too
> time consuming to hit all of them regularly. Besides the list, the list
> archives, and a crafts forum on Compuserve, there are now a dozen or so Web
> Pages. the BBS (if its still in operation; I haven't had time to check
     lately),
> and a prospect of some sort of online
> access to OUSA. I think we stand a chance of getting over extended, and of
> spending a lot of time fielding inquiries about addresses, htp URLs, etc. when
> we'd "rather be folding..."
>
> Just my opinion.
> --valerie

As I've mentioned earlier, I do prefer the newsgroups. I don not have to pay
extra for anything. I guess I was lucky enough to find a pretty inexpensive
internet provider.
Now, although I prefer the Newsgroups they are still not as dependable as
email. Newsgroups are dependent on a server other than your provider. Quite
often threads are broken with missing messages. Email seems to be quite more
secure in that sense. So unless we can have a newsgroupl that will duplicate
what makes it to the list I'd have to vote for EMAIL.

--
Sheldon Ackerman
ackerman@dorsai.dorsai.org
sheldon.ackerman@nycps.nycenet.edu





Return-path: <origami-l@nstn.ca>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 1995 19:46:29 -0300
From: Douglas Zander <dzander@solaria.sol.net>
Subject: filtering email (non-origami)

 Hi all,

   Someone posted, I believe it was <gerwitz> sorry if I'm wrong, that s/he
   cannot deal with all the traffic from email.  I was recently checking a
   command on UNIX called 'filter'  this may be the answer to some people's
   problems.  'filter' will look at all your incomming email and apply a set
   of rules that you write to decide what to do with that particular piece
   of email.  (Please note that I have not tried out this program personally,
   I was looking at it for reasons for my ezines I publish.)  According to
   the man pages, a user can filter their email to send all email from a
   certain location to a specific mailbox.  This might help those of you
   whom are overwhelmed with the origami-list email.  You could send all the
   email from the origami-list into a specific mailbox (without digesting)
   and then prowse it at your own leasure.  You may reply to individual
   pieces of email without the fuss of editing an entire digest.  Also, you
   are able to mark a specific topic as one you do not wish to read (just
   like a newsgroup :-) and you are able to "kill" email coming from
   specific people (just like a "kill" file :-)   Hope this helps.
--
 Douglas Zander          | editor of GAMES Player's Zine (GPZ)
 dzander@solaria.sol.net | an ezine for subscribers of GAMES Magazine (tm)





Return-path: <origami-l@nstn.ca>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 1995 21:17:46 -0300
From: logician!sophie!pat@uunet.uu.net (Pat Zura)
Subject: Re: Newsgroup Poll: Nay

I would also vote against a newsgroup as I do not have direct internet
access.  I do everything via email as my "server" is just a friend
who has set up a remote mailbox for me.

Pat





Return-path: <origami-l@nstn.ca>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 1995 21:22:14 -0300
From: logician!sophie!pat@uunet.uu.net (Pat Zura)
Subject: 3-Dimensional Dolls?

Hi There

Does anyone know of any doll folds that are not the traditional flat
Japanese kind?  My mother collects dolls and would like an example of an
origami doll in 3 dimensions if one exists.

Thankyou,

Pat  <pat@sophie.logician.com>





Return-path: <origami-l@nstn.ca>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 1995 04:25:29 -0300
From: "BOB T. LYNCH" <blynch@du.edu>
Subject: Re: craft v. art

I disagree Joseph that there is no practicallity (sp?) to origami. I RARELY
fold anything that I don't plan to use in some form or another - whether that
use is to get the little kids in front of me on the bus to quit fussing, make
someone smile, sell it, give it to my kids to play with it, store it away for
the Chraistmas tree, whatever - there is always SOME use I can put origami
pieces to. I see folding as using a brush - you can't paint without the craft
of mixing pigments, texturing the paint on the canvas (preparing the canvas -
or what have you.

Dee





Return-path: <origami-l@nstn.ca>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 1995 09:17:23 -0300
From: logician!sophie!pat@uunet.uu.net (Pat Zura)
Subject: Re: craft v. art

I do not believe you can separate craft from art.  We seem to endow
"Art" (with a capital A) with some vaguely undefined quality related,
perhaps, to 'inspiration' or some other lofty virtue.  With a few modern
exceptions (Jackson Pollock comes to mind) all Art has a hefty dose
of 'craft' incorporated, only we now call it technique.  Rembrandt
did not arbitrarily start applying paint to canvas to produce his
     'masterpieces.'
One does not pick up a piece of paper and serendipitously fold a sea
urchin.  The skill of the artist in crafting his work is directly related
to the quality of the finished product.

What I suspect this thread is about is some folders object to being
shelved along with decoupage, paper tole, macrame, granny squares,
and the like.  (Just how "useful" _is_ decoupage?)

Well, that's my 2 cents worth,

Pat





Return-path: <origami-l@nstn.ca>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 1995 11:17:58 -0300
From: Kellie Elizabeth Cass <KELLIECASS@delphi.com>
Subject: missing messages

   I somehow got unsubscribed to this list (I have no idea why I
sure as heck didn't ask to be) and missed a whole week's
messages and went into real withdrawal.
   I just wondered if there is any way to get the messages I
missed for the past week?
   Thankyou for any help you have! And thanks for being such a
super listserve. Boy did I miss this!

.                                                          Kellie

`[1;36;42mRainbow V 1.17.0 for Delphi - Registered





Return-path: <origami-l@nstn.ca>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 1995 11:24:42 -0300
From: Joseph Wu <jwu@cs.ubc.ca>
Subject: Re: craft v. art

On Sat, 29 Jul 1995, BOB T. LYNCH wrote:

> I disagree Joseph that there is no practicallity (sp?) to origami. I RARELY
> fold anything that I don't plan to use in some form or another - whether that
> use is to get the little kids in front of me on the bus to quit fussing, make
> someone smile, sell it, give it to my kids to play with it, store it away for
> the Chraistmas tree, whatever - there is always SOME use I can put origami
> pieces to. I see folding as using a brush - you can't paint without the craft
> of mixing pigments, texturing the paint on the canvas (preparing the canvas -
> or what have you.

Dee, you misunderstand me. I mean that there no functional practicality to
origami, as compared to something like basket weaving. A basket is a
functional object, even if we seldom use baskets today. Origami, on the
other hand, is more akin to drawing or painting, two skills normally
considered "artistic" rather than "crafty". Its roots are in a skill that
was developed purely for expression/pleasure, not in a skill that was
developed for a functional, practical, daily use.

Joseph Wu      <jwu@cs.ubc.ca> | Witty quote is now back to the
Master's Student               |   drawing board due to squeamish
University of British Columbia |   readers. Any suggestions?
WWW: http://www.cs.ubc.ca/spider/jwu/origami.html (Origami Page)





Return-path: <origami-l@nstn.ca>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 1995 12:44:26 -0300
From: Valerie Vann <75070.304@compuserve.com>
Subject: 3-Dimensional Dolls

While I believe these are all fairly advanced models,
and not specifically dolls (hey has anybody tried
an origami Barbie? ;-) -

there are a number of 3D people models, though for
most of these someone else may have to help out with
a source of diagrams:

A Statue of Liberty (not sure of creator, but I think
Michael Shall & someone else made one 4 ft tall once

A baby in a baby carriage

Lang's musicians: piano player, violinist, bass player
(or is it a cellist?)

(sorry I'm sort of "winging" this from memory at the
office)

The Last Waltz dancers

There's a neat witch and wizard (not difficult) in
Ansells Fantasy/Mytical creatures book

A super 3D clown head/mask in the Biddles second book;
I've thought about connocting a body from time to time.

And though not origami, try to get a hold of Eric Kenneway's
Origami book: there's a color photo of a Japanese doll made
entirely from paper (the kimono is the beautiful cloth-like
handmade kind), including the elaborate Geisha hairdo - Any
doll lover will absolutely die when they see this..

--valerie
Compuserve: Valerie Vann 75070,304
Internet: 75070.304@compuserve.com
Internet: valerivann@aol.com

<< A rose is a rose is a rose is a Kawasaki rose>>





Return-path: <origami-l@nstn.ca>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 1995 12:46:11 -0300
From: Valerie Vann <75070.304@compuserve.com>
Subject: Re: craft v. art

 <<I maintain that crafts are all outgrowths of practical skills. Look at basket
weaving, knitting, etc.... Art, however, has a different purpose. It is a
re-presentation of the world as the artist sees
it. .. There simply is no practical basis to it.>>

As I understand it, many of the original Japanese and Chinese paper folding
objects did arise from practical needs (and I include here religious &
ceremonial objects, some of which were/are substitutes for the more expensive -
hence "impractical" real thing - ): tato & wrappers for medicines, the classic
boxes, umbrellas, kusudama come to mind.

  <<What I suspect this thread is about is some folders object to being shelved
along with decoupage, paper tole, macrame, granny squares, and the like.>>

I think this is very much on the mark. As I mentioned to Tom Hull in an exchange
about a "craft" popular in the 1940-50's that is, technique-wise, and in some
cases, result-wise- identical to certain tessellation/twistfolds:

It used to be common to classify ethnic & particularly  those arts/crafts mainly
practiced by women (basketweaving, quilting, embroidery and other textile arts,
macrame, Navaho weaving, etc) as CRAFTS, and stuff like oil painting and bronze
sculpture as ART.

But this distinction has been blown, in part because many of these "craft" items
command the kind of prices and are employed in the same manner (eg corporate
art) as the so-called "fine arts", have "big names", are taught and
philosophized about at major universities and "art/design" schools, and are
recognized as displaying the same order of creativity as the more traditional
fine arts. Many of these objects have no "practical" use. For instance, most
Navajo weaving is now regarded in the same light as abstract painting and
displayed as a wall hanging or tapestry.

And even in the early 1900's California's Native American basket makers were
making baskets to sell as beautiful objects requiring a high degree of design
creativity and technical skill but with no "practical use", eg exquisite
minatures incorporating beads and feathers.

Finally, while I don't personally distiguish between art and craft - having
dabbled in several dozen of each with varying degrees of creativity and
technical skill - I tend to think of a book as a CRAFT BOOK if it proposes to
show someone how to produce a virtually exact duplicate of something someone
else has "created", and assumes that if  the person using the book doesn't
already have the skills or technique required to product the object, the book
will supply that too. In this respect most origami books are craft books or
"sets of plans" and explanations of technique.

Much of this distinction is the same as the reasons why you can copywrite both
your origami model, i.e. the physical "paper sculpture", and your diagrams for
the model, but you cannot copywrite the IDEA or PROCESS of duplicating the
model.

Anyway, when I'm cooking up a design of my own, I think of myself as an origami
artist; when I'm slogging my way through one of Robert Lang's critters, trying
my darndest to keep the skinny points perfect, I think of myself as a
craftsperson... at least until its done and I start thinking "this rabbit would
look really great as a Lop" and start changing the ears  :-)

--valerie
Compuserve: Valerie Vann 75070,304
Internet: 75070.304@compuserve.com
Internet: valerivann@aol.com

<< A rose is a rose is a rose is a Kawasaki rose>>





Return-path: <origami-l@nstn.ca>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 1995 12:47:29 -0300
From: Valerie Vann <75070.304@compuserve.com>
Subject: RE: French Origami Books

>>
Most of the origami books in the Ottawa Public Library are en francais.
I've got Harbin's "Origami 2" out right now.  The Jackson encyclopedia
is listed as "missing"  :-(...
>>

Shhsh! If its worth $80 US & $133 CA, No Wonder "its Missing"!
Does the Canadian government have something against readers/book lovers?
:-)

Sounds to me like the same counterproductive approach to taxes as when the US
decided to tax the heck out of luxury boats, and instantly destroyed the economy
of
half dozen of the country's few remaining shipbuilding communities...

--valerie
Compuserve: Valerie Vann 75070,304
Internet: 75070.304@compuserve.com
Internet: valerivann@aol.com





Return-path: <origami-l@nstn.ca>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 1995 14:05:40 -0300
From: CM2018@aol.com
Subject: Re: Internet Origami Home page

HI!  You are probably wondering why i haven't e-mailed for a while.  I was in
Summer Cam for a week.  I just got back today.  And also... how come when I
asked for origami web sites nobody answered?





Return-path: <origami-l@nstn.ca>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 1995 14:42:29 -0300
From: Nick Robinson <nick@tritec.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Tanteidan - the best??

Alex wrote;

> if you want to see some of the worlds best origami come to York

Whilst wholeheartedly agreeing that York is a must for any folder with time/cash
their work immensely, but have still feel that the spirit of their work comes a
poor second best to their technical wizardry. There are too many folders IMHO(!)
who look for complexity first and life/feel/aesthetic second. This can lead to a
somewhat "macho" approach to assessing origami. There's no reason why the two
can't be combined....

Yours in the spirit of debate,

Nick Robinson

            ***** "Origami isn't just for squares!" *****
          www.cs.ubc.ca/spider/jwu/Origami/BOS/nickdata.html





Return-path: <origami-l@nstn.ca>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 1995 17:21:47 -0300
From: gjones@yeti.polarnet.fnsb.ak.us (gj)
Subject: lurker's opinion

Hi all,

I'd like to add my 2 cents to some of the topics but maybe I should make it
only 1 cent since you guys are way over my head in skills (I'm learning a
lot by lurking).

On the debate of art vs craft,  what I do is craft (I'm just following
directions) but what most of ya'll do is art (you create it).

On the newsgroup idea, I like it.  One thing that I think a lot of people
are forgettting is that the start of a newsgroup does not mean the end of
this listserve.  I doubt that most of you realize how intimidating some of
your discussions are to someone who has problems with some intermediate
folds.  I would like to see a newsgroup  where the topics where more geared
to a beginner/intermediate level -- I think that the listserve should be
keep for the advanced people (like most of you).  You could even use the
newsgroup as a filter.  As you notice that someone is getting very
advanced, someone could invite them to join the listserve.  That would
allow an advanced group and a lower level group -- I'm assuming that some
of you would also check the newsgroup and help answer the questions.

I belong to another newsgroup, alt.support.depression,  it takes some work
from the members but we keep the noise to a very low level.  Anyone that
tries to spam, advert, etc.  has his/her postmaster notified, after about 6
months of this some of the worse posters have gotten the idea that things
like that to a.s.d. will cause the sender problems.

As far as flame wars go,  the group as a unit has agreed not to flame each
other [the vast majority of the group are fighting clinical depression,
infighting could cause someone to go suicidal :-(]  and we are considered
flame free by most.  So if you want a group that is flame free it is
possible and well worth it.

OK  back to lurking and learning

good luck -- gj





Return-path: <origami-l@nstn.ca>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 1995 21:58:43 -0300
From: Joseph Wu <jwu@cs.ubc.ca>
Subject: Re: Tanteidan - the best??

On Sat, 29 Jul 1995, Nick Robinson wrote:

> to spare, rating the tanteidan as the "best" is a rather personal view! I
     admire
> their work immensely, but have still feel that the spirit of their work comes
     a
> poor second best to their technical wizardry. There are too many folders
     IMHO(!)
> who look for complexity first and life/feel/aesthetic second. This can lead
     to a
> somewhat "macho" approach to assessing origami. There's no reason why the two
> can't be combined....

Check out ORU magazine, and you'll see that the Tanteidan have a rather
good sense of the aesthetic.

Joseph Wu      <jwu@cs.ubc.ca> | Witty quote is now back to the
Master's Student               |   drawing board due to squeamish
University of British Columbia |   readers. Any suggestions?
WWW: http://www.cs.ubc.ca/spider/jwu/origami.html (Origami Page)





Return-path: <origami-l@nstn.ca>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 1995 02:02:17 -0300
From: "BOB T. LYNCH" <blynch@du.edu>
Subject: Re: craft v. art

Functional, eh? Well, Joseph I guess you and I do a lot of very different
     origami.
Most everything I do is for a function (like giving my kids something to do)
I do try to do some for pure folding though - so I can see where you are
coming from. And I guess since your definition of craft and art are defined
as a craft coming from function as opposed to art coming from expression or
pleasure I can see your point.

Thanks to you all for the interesting discussion! This is what I got onto the
list for!! :-)

(I guess that means I am happy with the status quo, if we're "voting" on
news group stuff.)

Dee





Return-path: <origami-l@nstn.ca>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 1995 07:45:14 -0300
From: Bateman "A." "G." <agb@mrc-lmb.cam.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Vocation

>
>
>I'm a recent college gradutate (Emory University in Atlanta) with plans to
>attend Med School in the fall of '96.
>
>ps - I'll be in school at the Washington University School of Medicine
>starting the summer of 96, and I'd love to hear from folders in the St.
>Louis area.  Also, I'll be at the University of St. Andrews in Scotland
>from September '95 to June '96.  Any info about joining B.O.S.  or other
>societies in the area would be greatly appreciated.
>
>
>-Thanks!
>
>Bimal
>
>Hi Bimal,
          I've just been going through tidying up my mailbox and I found
the above message. Did you find out any information about the B.O.S?
When are you arriving in the U.K? The convention is in September which
should be really good. For membership forms send a mail to

Penny@demon.sector.co.uk

If that doesn't work I can send you  the details.
Bye for now.

Alex Bateman
