




Date: Fri, 16 Jan 1998 13:27:46 -0400 (AST)
From: Valerie Vann <valerie_vann@compuserve.com>
Subject: Unafolder

I'm sorry but I fail to find the "Unafolder" very funny. I live in
a community where the Unabomber murdered two people, I lived for years
in another community where he crippled others for life, and his
activities terrified people who worked in the sort of offices and
businesses he seemed to target. I mean we had to give the mail
handlers lessons in recognizing suspicious packages, train
secretaries and receptionists not to accept anything if they weren't
100% positive where it came from, and to call the cops at the
slightest doubt even if they felt silly doing it. And the Post
Office regulations now require that anything non-metered over a
certain weight must be handed in at the Post Office, not dropped
in a box which sometimes means a 45 min. wait at the post office.
(I just did that that other day, sending someone an origami book.)

So I can't get past the name to the underlying humor (if there is
some there). I would appreciate it if those of you who may find this
essentially un-origami related message thread entertaining would
clearing mark your message subjects NOR and Unafolder so that they
can be deleted unread.

Thank you,
Valerie Vann





Date: Fri, 16 Jan 1998 13:55:55 -0400 (AST)
From: Dahlia Schwartz <dahlias@bu.edu>
Subject: re:  wet-folding questions

Hi -- crawling out of my lurking space once again,  I have the following
question:

I have tried wet-folding as it is described in several sources, but
haven't been satisfied with the results.  Can anyone share their wisdom
with me as to:

good means to wet the paper (I tend to use a spray-mist-bottle full of
water)?

papers to use (I've tried everything from thin origami paper to canson
parchment paper -- I believe Mr Brill or Mr Montroll suggest brown paper
bag paper--anyone tried this?)

Techniques -- how wet should it be?  Should creases be reinforced or
handled gently?  is respraying as you go needed?  appropriate?  (I'm not
smart or fast enuf to get moderately complex models finished before that
evaporation problem sinks in.)

Are there certain types of models that work best with wet folding (I get
the impression that those that the folder wants to take on a sort of
sculpted 3d look are best).

mea culpa if these questions have been well answered previously.

peace and happiness
-dahlia





Date: Fri, 16 Jan 1998 14:09:01 -0400 (AST)
From: DGS - Kevin Kinney PhD <kkinney@carolinas.org>
Subject: Another wet-folding question

Adding to Dahlia's questions about wet-folding, I've one to add:

When doing a largish piece of paper (say12" or more), what surface do you
fold on/in to contain the paper and water.  I know wet doesn't mean sopping
wet, but still I end up leaving water all over the table-not exactly
endearing myself to my wife...

Any suggestions?

Kevin Kinney
kkinney@carolinas.org

Kevin Kinney
kkinney@carolinas.org





Date: Fri, 16 Jan 1998 14:37:07 -0400 (AST)
From: Robby/Laura/Lisa <morassi@zen.it>
Subject: Re: Just wondering...

Jorma,
At 22.59 15/1/1998 -0400, you wrote:

>There's a silent agreement about disagreeding everything. :)

Not quite true: I disagree about your statement !!
:-)

Roberto
         _\|/_
        ( o o )
=====-oOO-(_)-OOo-========+
Roberto Morassi           |
Via Palestro 11           |  Please DON'T quote my full
51100 PISTOIA             |  message in reply... I KNOW
ITALY                     |  what I have written ! :-)
tel & fax (+)39-573-20436 |
E-mail <morassi@zen.it>   |





Date: Fri, 16 Jan 1998 14:38:20 -0400 (AST)
From: Robby/Laura/Lisa <morassi@zen.it>
Subject: Re: Just wondering...

Joseph,
At 20.08 15/1/1998 -0400, you wrote:

>What are you saying, Don? That we origami-l people can't agree with each
>other? We can't get along? Huh? Is that it?
........
><for the humour-impaired: this was a joke>

What are you saying, Joseph ? That we origami-l people are humour-impaired ?
Huh ? Is that it ? HUUUUHH ?? IS THAT IIIIIIT ???!?? EEEEEHHH ???

:D

Roberto
         _\|/_
        ( o o )
=====-oOO-(_)-OOo-========+
Roberto Morassi           |
Via Palestro 11           |  Please DON'T quote my full
51100 PISTOIA             |  message in reply... I KNOW
ITALY                     |  what I have written ! :-)
tel & fax (+)39-573-20436 |
E-mail <morassi@zen.it>   |





Date: Fri, 16 Jan 1998 14:42:21 -0400 (AST)
From: Rob Moes <robert.moes@snet.net>
Subject: message subjects/Valerie's Unafolder quibble

>I would appreciate it if those of you who may find this
>essentially un-origami related message thread entertaining would
>clearing mark your message subjects NOR and Unafolder so that they
>can be deleted unread.

I think most people are aware that Unafolder posts are side-topics.  Only a
very few of these comments make their way into deliberate discussions.
However there is a bigger picture worth considering.

Only the most rabid list subscriber has the time or the energy to read
every submission.  Moreover it is not worth much effort to discuss
restricting the scope of topics on a list which remains unmoderated.

I believe it is up to everyone to be conscientious about what his or her
post should be entitled.  Some threads take bizarre twists and turns along
the way and should definitely be retitled, so as to reflect actual content.

"Question" and "Just wondering" and "Re: Origami Digest XX" are too vague
and should absolutely NOT be used as titles.  I toss these out immediately.
Be considerate of others with very full mailboxes.

I do see this becoming a bigger problem as list volume increases--the
Unafolder is only a symptom, not the disease.

Rob
robert.moes@snet.net





Date: Fri, 16 Jan 1998 14:53:12 -0400 (AST)
From: Joseph Wu <josephwu@ultranet.ca>
Subject: Re: Just wondering...

Roberto:

>What are you saying, Joseph ? That we origami-l people are humour-impaired ?
>Huh ? Is that it ? HUUUUHH ?? IS THAT IIIIIIT ???!?? EEEEEHHH ???

Just some origami-l people.  >8)

Now THAT should start some flames!

----------------------------------------------------------------
Joseph Wu, Producer, DNA Productions Inc.
t:604.730.0306 x 105     f: 604.732.7331     e: joseph@dna.bc.ca





Date: Fri, 16 Jan 1998 17:13:39 -0400 (AST)
From: Boseditor <Boseditor@aol.com>
Subject: Modular vs multi-piece

Can't resist this one...

I agree with Valerie and Joseph that unit origami and and modular origami are
synonyms.

Modular origami is a special case of multi-piece origami where the pieces are
identical (unlike early Yoshizawa animals) or as Joseph says 'part of a
limited set.' You can always find exceptions that seem to disprove the rule
but there's no doubt that this is the accepted usage.

What interests me is the use of the word unit. This always seems to be used of
Japanese modular origami. I've seen it written as Yunnito. Is this a genuine
Japanese word, an adoptuon from the west or vice versa? Does anyone know?

Dave Mitchell.





Date: Fri, 16 Jan 1998 18:18:40 -0400 (AST)
From: Joseph Wu <josephwu@ultranet.ca>
Subject: Re: Modular vs multi-piece

>What interests me is the use of the word unit. This always seems to be used of
>Japanese modular origami. I've seen it written as Yunnito. Is this a genuine
>Japanese word, an adoptuon from the west or vice versa? Does anyone know?

"Yunito" is a transliteration of the English word "unit" into Japanese
phonemes. It is written in katakana, the set of symbols reserved for
foreign words incorporated into Japanese.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Joseph Wu, Producer, DNA Productions Inc.
t:604.730.0306 x 105     f: 604.732.7331     e: joseph@dna.bc.ca





Date: Fri, 16 Jan 1998 18:26:25 -0400 (AST)
From: Valerie Vann <valerie_vann@compuserve.com>
Subject: Modular vs multi-piece

Tomoko Fuse's Japanese books (I'm close to having a complete
set now, 35?+) use English-derived words in the titles fairly
often, e.g. "Barei..." (something) derived from "variety",
or even the English itself ("Box").

(I enjoy your book "Mathematical Origami"; gave several for
Xmas presents. Check out my web page(s) sometime.)

--valerie
Valerie Vann
valerie_vann@compuserve.com
 Mostly Modular/Geometric Origami Web Pages:
 http://people.delphi.com/vvann/index.html





Date: Fri, 16 Jan 1998 18:38:53 -0400 (AST)
From: skirsch@t-online.de (Sebastian Marius Kirsch)
Subject: Re: Another wet-folding question

On Fri, 16 Jan 1998, DGS - Kevin Kinney PhD wrote:
> When doing a largish piece of paper (say12" or more), what surface do you
> fold on/in to contain the paper and water.  I know wet doesn't mean sopping
> wet, but still I end up leaving water all over the table-not exactly
> endearing myself to my wife...

I work on my plastic cutting mat, which is 20" x 24". This has the
additional advantage that I can cut the paper after I wet it. If your wife
complains that the table gets too wet, you are probably doing something
wrong; my mat gets wetter when I wipe it clean after folding than when I
wet fold on it.

Yours, Sebastian                                       skirsch@t-online.de
                        /or/ sebastian_kirsch@kl.maus.de (no mail > 16KB!)





Date: Fri, 16 Jan 1998 18:42:16 -0400 (AST)
From: skirsch@t-online.de (Sebastian Marius Kirsch)
Subject: re:  wet-folding questions

Hello Dahlia!

On Fri, 16 Jan 1998, Dahlia Schwartz wrote:
> good means to wet the paper (I tend to use a spray-mist-bottle full of
> water)?

I use simply a piece of wet cloth -- works fine for me.

> papers to use (I've tried everything from thin origami paper to canson
> parchment paper -- I believe Mr Brill or Mr Montroll suggest brown paper
> bag paper--anyone tried this?)

I use watercolor papers like Mi-Teintes (manufactured by Canson) or
Tiziano (by Fabriano), and also a thinner kind of watercolor paper that is
called "Ingres" paper. Very thick brown wrapping paper can also fold well.
Many others have recommended elephant hide. This is fine as far as the
folding is concerned -- it will not loose fibers if you wet it too much,
folds very well and is thinner compared to the other kinds of paper. But I
think that the texture of watercolor papers fits better for animals.

> Techniques -- how wet should it be?

The paper should just soak up the water you apply to it; the surface
should not become shiny. If the paper is too wet, you will quickly notice
that it starts loosing fibers at the creases.

> Should creases be reinforced or handled gently?

I try handling them gently, although I'm always tempted to run my
fingernail over every crease. (I folded mostly with foil-backed papers
before I discovered wet-folding, which you can torture the paper in every
possible way, and it will not rip.)

> is respraying as you go needed?  appropriate?

I always re-wet the paper after I have folded the first 10--20 steps.
Later in the folding process, wetting the paper is difficult because you
cannot get the water to the inner layers, and this will result in the
paper spreading unevenly.

> Are there certain types of models that work best with wet folding (I get
> the impression that those that the folder wants to take on a sort of
> sculpted 3d look are best).

In my experience, wet folding works best with animals where you want a lot
of expression. My favourite animals for wet folding are Yoshizawa's
butterfly and Montroll's rhino (from Origami Sculptures). Other people
also use wet folding for insects and other higly complex folds, for which
I prefer foil-backed paper.

Yours, Sebastian                                       skirsch@t-online.de
                        /or/ sebastian_kirsch@kl.maus.de (no mail > 16KB!)





Date: Fri, 16 Jan 1998 18:45:42 -0400 (AST)
From: Jeff Kerwood <jkerwood@usaor.net>
Subject: Re: For your consideration

>From EveryFolder

> ... [The Unafolder]  A folder brave enough ...

Brave enough to speak from behind his/her hidden mask? Brave would be to
say those things as who you are!

Jeff





Date: Fri, 16 Jan 1998 19:32:18 -0400 (AST)
From: Daddy-o D'gou <dwp+@transarc.com>
Subject: Re: For your consideration (UNAFOLDER)

Jeff Kerwood wrote:
> >From EveryFolder
> > ... [The Unafolder]  A folder brave enough ...
> Brave would be to say those things as who you are!

Its just the same person, stirring things up some more.

"On the internet, no one knows you're a dog."

How many different accounts has Jeff himself used to access origami-l?
Since he used his real name on all of them, we don't suspect anything,
but He Could Be EveryFolder!  Not too likely, but there is really no way
to prove it ('proving negatives' isn't very easy. ;-) ).

-D'gou

--
end
<a href="http://www.pgh.net/~dwp">Doug's Fun Page</a>





Date: Fri, 16 Jan 1998 19:37:03 -0400 (AST)
From: Unafolder <Unafolder@aol.com>
Subject: Re: Unafolder

To clarify--

the Unafolder bears no semblance to the Unabomber, save for a name which
resembles that of one Ted Kascinzki.  the play on words was "una" meaning
single, and "folder" you can guess that.  Maybe bachelorfolder would have been
a better name to use, but I'm limited to a 10 character name online.

I don't recall once making reference to any manifesto, making light of
incendiary devices (come on-- I'm an origamist for pete's sake!), or featuring
any reference to the unabomber or his works on my web site.  The tone has been
more of yellow journalism than terrorism, but unfortunately,
"WilliamRandolphHearstFolder" isn't nearly as catchy a name.

And as far as going public e.g. "bravery", the whole point of remaining
anonymous is not to hide my identity so much as to add a little "mystery" and
harmless fun to the list.  Plus, using a real identity to post serious as well
as light posts "in character" would hardly be as effective, and in fact, would
probably result in unfair prejudice and bias towards the serious posts.  By
that I mean that the serious posts as well as the light ones would be filtered
out by people who, because they don't like the message, delete the sender.

So, I guess i'm left with this option:  popularity.  I'll continue my game of
unmalicious mayhem and frivolity if I get more "pro" messages to my address
within the next "week" or so than "con" messages.  If you vote YES for
Unafolder, you get a spot in the Unafolder Hall of Fame, and free membership
(send a SASE) in the soon-to-be unveiled Unafolder Fan Club.

However, if the nay votes outweigh the pro, the Unafolder will perform a
hideous act of self-tesselation, never before to be seen in the ranks of
Origami -L.

You decide.

Una
(P.s. lighten up, already!)





Date: Fri, 16 Jan 1998 20:05:51 -0400 (AST)
From: Joseph Wu <josephwu@ultranet.ca>
Subject: Re: Unafolder

At 16:37 -0700 1998/1/16, Unafolder wrote:
>the Unafolder bears no semblance to the Unabomber, save for a name which
>resembles that of one Ted Kascinzki.  the play on words was "una" meaning
>single, and "folder" you can guess that.  Maybe bachelorfolder would have been
>a better name to use, but I'm limited to a 10 character name online.

Be that as it may, the similarity in names will always be a problem for some.

>Plus, using a real identity to post serious as well
>as light posts "in character" would hardly be as effective, and in fact, would
>probably result in unfair prejudice and bias towards the serious posts.

Not that you've used your "real identity" to post anything in a while...  8)

>However, if the nay votes outweigh the pro, the Unafolder will perform a
>hideous act of self-tesselation, never before to be seen in the ranks of
>Origami -L.

Oh, don't be so melodramatic. We get enough silliness here that a bit more
isn't going to change things. The fact that it comes from someone
"anonymous" shouldn't make a big difference.

>(P.s. lighten up, already!)

Hey, we reserve the right to take ourselves too seriously! I would say
that's why we need someone to point this out to us from time to time.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Joseph Wu, Producer, DNA Productions Inc.
t:604.730.0306 x 105     f: 604.732.7331     e: joseph@dna.bc.ca





Date: Fri, 16 Jan 1998 20:11:19 -0400 (AST)
From: Daddy-o D'gou <dwp+@transarc.com>
Subject: Re: Modular vs multi-piece

David Mitchell wrote:
> Can't resist this one...
> I agree with Valerie and Joseph that unit origami and and modular origami are
> synonyms.

> Modular origami is a special case of multi-piece origami where the pieces are
> identical (unlike early Yoshizawa animals) or as Joseph says 'part of a
> limited set.' You can always find exceptions that seem to disprove the rule
> but there's no doubt that this is the accepted usage.

I'm not so sure I can go along with that, since all the references to
identical
unit multi-piece origami that I've heard of coming out of Japan as
"unit", not
"modular."

I would assert that what you define as 'modular' above is really unit
origami.
Following up to Valerie's architectural connection, it seems much more
useful
to restrict 'unit' to mean 'identical' unit and 'modular' to mean any
pieces
which fit together to make a larger piece (or even whole)!

There really is no point in citing reference to any source, even the
often
revered Oxford English Dictionary, for what we are really debating here
is not
what 'modular' has meant, or what its history has been, rather, we are
debating
how we want to use it now and into the future.  Like many other fields,
origami has
its jargon: sink, reverse, unwrap, mountain, valley.  Some of the jargon
is easier
than others to pick up, but it is jargon none the less.  Which leads
into my next
point...

There is another aspect to this which bothers me, and that is by denying
'modular'
any meaning other than 'unit,' we are taking away a great succinct word
for talking
about multi-piece origami models whose pieces are not identical (either
in folding
or in final result).  When something is hard or longwinded to discuss,
it tends not
to be discussed.  And to have a word/term/jargon for something does lend
it a
credability, a sanction that it is worthy to be talked about and
discussed.  Given
the recent trends toward the "one square, no cuts" extreme...  I do not
suggest
conspiracy, at least not an active one, but perhaps more of an
indifference.
If I may satire, even of a "Oh, yawn, well, yes, back in the old days
before the
technical folding enlightment, models were often cut, or made from many
pieces,
heads and arms from one piece, legs and tails from another, and wings
from a third.
But we know better, now." (end of satire).

So, I will continue to use 'modular' to mean any model that is made from
more
than one piece of paper, whether identically folded or not, so long as
the pieces
fit together.  An 'unit' to refer only to models made from multiple
identically
folded pieces.

-D'gou

--
end
<a href="http://www.pgh.net/~dwp">Doug's Fun Page</a>





Date: Fri, 16 Jan 1998 20:16:47 -0400 (AST)
From: Kim Best <kim.best@m.cc.utah.edu>
Subject: Re: Just wondering...

DON CONNELL wrote:

> Is there any such thing as an origami topic  that isn't disagreed about?

I certainly hope not!  If there was, it would be very interesting, so why
bring
it up.

--
Kim Best                            ************************************
                                    * I've come to the conclusion that *
Rocky Mountain Cancer Data System   * origami, isn't folding so much,  *
420 Chipeta Way #120                * as it is precision crumpling.    *
Salt Lake City, Utah  84108         ************************************





Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 16:22:40 -0400 (AST)
From: Joseph Wu <josephwu@ultranet.ca>
Subject: Re: Modular vs multi-piece

>I'm not so sure I can go along with that, since all the references to
>identical
>unit multi-piece origami that I've heard of coming out of Japan as "unit", not
>"modular."

So, Doug, will you now be using these terms, too?

bird base => crane base
blintz fold => cushion fold
inside reverse fold => bend inside fold
outside reverse fold => cover fold

I suspect that the Japanese use "unit" in preference to "modular" because
it is so much easier to approximate in Japanese. "Unit" becomes "yunitto",
while "modular" would become "maajyuraa" (since terminal "r" sounds are
impossible for the Japanese to say).

>I would assert that what you define as 'modular' above is really unit origami.
>Following up to Valerie's architectural connection, it seems much more useful
>to restrict 'unit' to mean 'identical' unit and 'modular' to mean any pieces
>which fit together to make a larger piece (or even whole)!

Well, then, by your definition, some of the designs in Fuse's book, "Unit
Origami" are not really "unit" origami after all, but are "modular". There
exist examples there that consist of models built up of several different
types of units.

>what we are really debating here is not
>what 'modular' has meant, or what its history has been, rather, we are
>debating how we want to use it now and into the future.

How true. But the (admittedly small number of) comments so far would
indicate that you are in the minority.

>There is another aspect to this which bothers me, and that is by denying
>'modular' any meaning other than 'unit,' we are taking away a great
>succinct word for talking about multi-piece origami models whose pieces
>are not identical (either in folding or in final result).  When something
>is hard or longwinded to discuss, it tends not to be discussed.

But how much more difficult is it to say "multi-piece" than "modular".
True, there are 4 more keystrokes, but the number of syllables is the
same...

>So, I will continue to use 'modular' to mean any model that is made from
>more than one piece of paper, whether identically folded or not, so long as
>the pieces fit together.  An 'unit' to refer only to models made from multiple
>identically folded pieces.

And if consensus places the definition otherwise? Wouldn't that just add to
the confusion? Remember a while back when there was one person who had a
rather unusual definition of the terms "crimp" and "pleat"? It was quite
confusing until we could convince that person that there were accepted
definitions for those terms.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Joseph Wu, Producer, DNA Productions Inc.
t:604.730.0306 x 105     f: 604.732.7331     e: joseph@dna.bc.ca





Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 16:55:30 -0400 (AST)
From: Kim Best <kim.best@m.cc.utah.edu>
Subject: Re: Just wondering...

Lisa Hodsdon wrote:
> "If you have the opportunity to acquire cool paper, do it.

What!  Are you implying the paper I have is not cool!!  Why....  I...
Otta.....

--
Kim Best                            ************************************
                                    * I've come to the conclusion that *
Rocky Mountain Cancer Data System   * origami, isn't folding so much,  *
420 Chipeta Way #120                * as it is precision crumpling.    *
Salt Lake City, Utah  84108         ************************************





Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 17:00:04 -0400 (AST)
From: Jeff Kerwood <jkerwood@usaor.net>
Subject: Re: Modular vs multi-piece

>So, I will continue to use 'modular' to mean any model that is made from
more than one piece of paper, whether identically folded or not, so long as
the pieces fit together. An
 'unit' to refer only to models made from multiple identically folded
pieces.
-D'gou
<

What about models with two units, a primary unit and connector units. To
you that is modular?

I kind of like:
1) Composite to mean any model folded from more than one piece of paper.
2) Modular to mean any model created from identical modules (identical
units folded from single or multiple pieces of paper) which are assembled
with connectors. For example Fuse's quilts where a 4 piece star is
assembled into a quilt by hooking them together with connectors.
3) Unit to mean models made from multiple identically folded pieces.

Jeff Kerwood
jkerwood@usaor.net





Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 17:04:00 -0400 (AST)
From: Joyce Owen <joyceowen@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: For your consideration

Lisa said:
>Do you really think we should ...
>..support an individual who's afraid to show his face?
>..support an individual who wreaks (wrecks?) havoc in our tranquil
>community?
>..support an individual who ruins the reputations of upright folders?
>..support an individual who takes carriage rides in New York City?

>Where do I sign up?

Sign me up, too!
Joyce

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com





Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 17:08:54 -0400 (AST)
From: orig@webtv.net (DON CONNELL)
Subject: RE: J Wu's  Re: Just wondering

I took Joseph's mini-tirade to be a joke, and a funny one too!  I
laughed anyway!
       Don





Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 17:12:38 -0400 (AST)
From: morpha <morpha@columbia-pacific.interrain.org>
Subject: Re: Unafolder

I say hurray for the Unafolder.  Please add my name to your rabid fan
club.  I am however, kind of curious about the hideous act of
self-tesselation.

Morpha





Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 17:16:52 -0400 (AST)
From: Valerie Vann <valerie_vann@compuserve.com>
Subject: Re: Modular vs multi-piece

I wasn't attempting to make a new definition of
unit or modular, I was explaining my understanding of
how they seem to be already used and defined.

And "modular" construction in architecture often **does
mean** multiple **identical units**, so the attempt to distiguish
between unit and modular is futile. As somebody said once,
"A difference that makes no difference isn't a difference".

And I can't see that there is any widespread use of "modular"
to mean making a monkey with the head of one sheet and the
body of another (Yoshizawa would probably be shocked that
someone thought he indulges in "modular" monkey folding :-)
This is just multi-sheet model making; the origami books
don't even distinguish it from one sheet model making except
to say you need 2 sheets of paper.

Valerie





Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 17:19:59 -0400 (AST)
From: Valerie Vann <valerie_vann@compuserve.com>
Subject: Re: Unafolder

I didn't ask for or suggest an act of self-tessellation,
or revelation of personal identity, just a simple NOR and/or
Unafold keyword in the Subject line so I know which
messages to trash.

As for incendiary activities and origami, seems to me I
recall some of that at PCOC.

valerie





Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 17:26:09 -0400 (AST)
From: Joyce Owen <joyceowen@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Unafolder (a reflection on creativity)

Joseph Wu said:
<much deleted>
>Hey, we reserve the right to take ourselves too seriously! I would say
>that's why we need someone to point this out to us from time to time.
Now it's my turn:

A reflection on creativity in the art/science of origami.

I've learned much and enjoyed this group since I signed up in July.
Although new and much less talented than most I'd like to voice my
opinion. It's my opinion that good natured frivolity can only enhance
creativity, but stiffness thwarts it.  Even if you think the Unafolder
is frivolous he  is very good for you.  His brief messages are fun and
usually  on topic...at least as much as many of you.

Please allow a little room for mayhem especially by a folder  who talks
about folders or joins in current threads.

Take a moment from your hectic schedules and the pleasure/distraction of
origami to embrace a another creative person with a supreme sense of
humor.

For the good of creativity and artistic expression I will join the
Unafolder Fan Club.  Origami-l  you  need  him!  (even if you don't
think so)

Joyce Owen

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com





Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 17:28:46 -0400 (AST)
From: Nick Robinson <nick@cheesypeas.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: wet-folding questions

Dahlia Schwartz <dahlias@bu.edu> sez

>I believe Mr Brill or Mr Montroll suggest brown paper
>bag paper

I very much doubt it! Check my bit on WF at the BOS web-site....

all the best,

Nick Robinson

email           nick@cheesypeas.demon.co.uk
homepage        http://www.cheesypeas.demon.co.uk - all new look!
BOS homepage    http://www.rpmrecords.co.uk/bos/
RPM homepage    http://www.rpmrecords.co.uk - now with RealAudio clips!





Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 17:36:57 -0400 (AST)
From: Jaelle <jaelle1@swbell.net>
Subject: Re: Unafolder

Unafolder wrote:

> To clarify--
>
> the Unafolder bears no semblance to the Unabomber, save for a name which
> resembles that of one Ted Kascinzki.  the play on words was "una" meaning
> single, and "folder" you can guess that.  Maybe bachelorfolder would have been
> a better name to use, but I'm limited to a 10 character name online.
>

I seldom post to the list anymore but I read all of them. When I first saw the
nameunafolder I was taken aback. But then I thought about it a bit and realized
one thing.

The Unafolder is funny. I believe my friend who I lost to the sick individual
     who
called
himself the Unabomber would have enjoyed the humor and laughed right along with
us. Do not allow anger and grief to take over here.

Unafolder.... who ever you are .... continue the laughter!. There is to much
stifled in
life today. I, for one think we need to the smiles you spread.

My vote is YES! Keep the name and stay anonymous. I do not want to know your
     true
identity. I LIKE the mystery and giggles. It brightens my days.

Gail





Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 17:45:06 -0400 (AST)
From: skirsch@t-online.de (Sebastian Marius Kirsch)
Subject: Re: Unafolder

On Fri, 16 Jan 1998, Joseph Wu wrote:
> Not that you've used your "real identity" to post anything in a while...  8)

Has he? I'm just wondering ...

No, indeed not. If my guess is right, the last posting under his "real
identity" is from 11/08/1997. But he is a very active member of the list
nonetheless.

Yours, Sebastian (who also prefers other kinds of humour.)
                                                       skirsch@t-online.de
                        /or/ sebastian_kirsch@kl.maus.de (no mail > 16KB!)





Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 17:50:32 -0400 (AST)
From: Jeff Kerwood <jkerwood@usaor.net>
Subject: The Twist

I am looking for diagrams for the following models. Any help would be
appreciated.

120 degree twist origami & 90 degree twist origami by Shuzo Fujimoto.
Pictures of these are in Paul Jackson's 'The Encyclopedia of Origami and
Papercraft Techniques", ISBN 1561380636, pages 122 and 123.

The two *twist* books of his that I have found:

Seizo soru origami asobi no shotai (Creating: Invitation to
       Playing with Origami) by Shuzo Fujimoto, the Asahi Culture
       Center, 1982.
       Out of print & hard to find

"Twist Origami" (no other info)

Are these models in either of these books? If not do you know where I can
find them?
Does anyone know if Shuzo Fujimoto can still be reached at this address and
if he may or may not have copies of the(?) book? Would a letter to him in
English be appropriate?

                             23-4 Jung     Sasayama Cho
                              Taki-Gun       Hyogo-Ken
                                669-23            Japan.

Thanks, Jeff Kerwood
jkerwood@usaor.net





Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 17:55:34 -0400 (AST)
From: Kim Best <kim.best@m.cc.utah.edu>
Subject: Re: Just wondering...

>
>
> How about: "If you have the opportunity to acquire cool paper, do it."
>
> I don't think you'll get much debate on that one.

Are you implying the paper I do have is not cool!!!  Why... I... Otta.....

Seriously though...

When I was in San Francisco for PCOC.  In the mall across from
the Japanese bookstore, was a stationary store, owned by the same
people.  In this store was reams and reams of some of the most
gorgeous paper I have ever seen.  I just couldn't contain myself.
I was like a kid in a candy store.  I had the poor store
attendant in a sweat, putting together my purchases. "I want one
of these, and one of these, and no... wait one of these
instead...  No on second thought give me one of each!"

Later when I met David Lister, for the first time, I told him of
my experience.  I then told him I could make some great models
with the paper.  He disagreed.  He had seen the paper too, and he
felt the paper was too beautiful, and he would never want to fold
it for fear of ruining the paper.

But beyond that.  Not all cool paper is suitable for origami.
Some is too fragile.  Some won't hold a crease.  Some is to
brittle.  But even here there is probably no agreement.  I'm sure
there is not a piece of paper on this planet that someone can't
fold into something.

But than you might disagree...

--
Kim Best                            ************************************
                                    * I've come to the conclusion that *
Rocky Mountain Cancer Data System   * origami, isn't folding so much,  *
420 Chipeta Way #120                * as it is precision crumpling.    *
Salt Lake City, Utah  84108         ************************************





Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 17:59:58 -0400 (AST)
From: Kim Best <kim.best@m.cc.utah.edu>
Subject: Re: Modular Classification

Joseph Wu wrote:

> is a complete box. Folding another masu with slightly different proportions
> and then putting it on top as a lid does not make it a modular model. The
> modularity of a model depends on the fact that its componet pieces are not
> recognisable as a completed piece in and of themselves, but must be
> assembled to make a finished piece. (There are, of course, exceptions to
> this rule, such as the pig-pinwheel in the Biddles' "Essential Origami".)
>

I'm still not sure I understand the distinction here.

Is the closed box not modular because the unit is it self a
recognizable object?  A masu.  If so consider this.  Suppose you
took a second masu box and turned it 90 degrees and inserted it
in the first, forming a 'V' shape.  Now take a third and form an
'N'.  Then a fourth forming a 'W'. Going on this way, you would
create a long zigzagging chain.  In fact if you vary the
direction of each piece as you add it, you could create any
number of curves, including a fractal dragon curve.  You could
also form tee's and branch off and create just about any design
you wanted.  Would these finished objects not be modular, just
because thier starting units are a masu box?  That doesn't seem
right.

Is it because the finished object is easily visualized by looking
at the two masu boxes.  But if that is so, it would mean whether
or not a design was modular or not depended on your own skill
level or ability to visualize.  If you gave a beginner 6 sonobe
units, it might take him a while to figure out how to construct a
cube.  But if you gave the same 6 units to a expert, she could no
doubt visualize the pieces forming the cube in her mind.

Is it because there are only two units?  If you take the "Double-
pocket Equilateral triangle" unit on page 126 of Fuse's "Unit
Origami" and modify it a bit, you can use two such units to
construct a tetrahedron (A three sided pyramid).  I just can't
believe this tetrahedron is not modular.

There seems to be an implication here that there must be some
kind of transformation.  The finished model is more than the some
of its parts.  The units are one thing, the finished model is
something entirely new.

I have two objections to this line of reasoning:

1) It's to subjective. If you look at it in the right way a
closed box is very different from an open box.  A single masu box
can be used for measuring, or displaying items in a market.  But
if you take a second masu and use it as a lid, you have a device
for protecting items from the environment.  Or a container for
hiding items to be given as a gift.  I have no problem seeing a
single masu, and a lidded box as two different things.

2) I just don't like semantic distinctions as parts of
definitions.  A complex design made from simple units is an
attribute of most modular origami, not a defining characteristic.
Definitions should be much simpler.

It reminds me of my sixth grade teacher.  She insisted that the
math book must be wrong, when it included 'two' as a prime
number.  This was inconsistent she insisted, because 'two' is
even, and all the rest are odd.  Somehow in her mind there was a
semantic difference between evenness and divisibility by two.

--
Kim Best                            ************************************
                                    * I've come to the conclusion that *
Rocky Mountain Cancer Data System   * origami, isn't folding so much,  *
420 Chipeta Way #120                * as it is precision crumpling.    *
Salt Lake City, Utah  84108         ************************************





Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 18:03:33 -0400 (AST)
From: Kim Best <kim.best@m.cc.utah.edu>
Subject: Re: Unafolder

Unafolder wrote:

> To clarify--
>
> the Unafolder bears no semblance to the Unabomber, save for a name which
> resembles that of one Ted Kascinzki. ......

> I don't recall once making reference to any manifesto, .....

Nice try Una, but I'm not buying it.  The fact is you picked the handle
Unafolderbecause its simularity to Unabomber gives a nice edgy quality to you
     own
brand
of humor.  If there was no Unabomber there would be no Unafolder.

>  The tone has been
> more of yellow journalism than terrorism, but unfortunately,
> "WilliamRandolphHearstFolder" isn't nearly as catchy a name.
>

Okay.  How about a name consistant with someone who collects pictures offamous
origami figures and distorts them for the purposes of  humiliating them
in some form of tabloid journalism.   Paperatzi?

> If you vote YES for
> Unafolder, you get a spot in the Unafolder Hall of Fame, and free membership
> (send a SASE) in the soon-to-be unveiled Unafolder Fan Club.
>

I don't suppose we get a address for that SASE.  I didn't think so.

> However, if the nay votes outweigh the pro, the Unafolder will perform a
> hideous act of self-tesselation, never before to be seen in the ranks of
> Origami -L.
>
> You decide.

What wimp!  A real satirist doesn't let public opinion influence his
work.contoversy is his staple.  The deciding factor is whether people talk about
him at all. As long as there is an uproar, take it for the ride it is.  As soon
     as

we start ignoring you...   Get lost!

--
Kim Best                            ************************************
                                    * I've come to the conclusion that *
Rocky Mountain Cancer Data System   * origami, isn't folding so much,  *
420 Chipeta Way #120                * as it is precision crumpling.    *
Salt Lake City, Utah  84108         ************************************





Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 18:13:33 -0400 (AST)
From: Nick Robinson <nick@cheesypeas.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Just wondering...

Kim Best <kim.best@m.cc.utah.edu> sez

>> Is there any such thing as an origami topic  that isn't disagreed about?
>
>I certainly hope not!  If there was, it would be very interesting,

No it wouldn't it would be *really boring* ;)

all the best,

Nick Robinson

email           nick@cheesypeas.demon.co.uk
homepage        http://www.cheesypeas.demon.co.uk - all new look!
BOS homepage    http://www.rpmrecords.co.uk/bos/
RPM homepage    http://www.rpmrecords.co.uk - now with RealAudio clips!





Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 18:15:56 -0400 (AST)
From: Cathy <cathypl@generation.net>
Subject: everyfolder

At 11:46 AM 98-01-16 -0400, you wrote:

 This folder's insight provides guidance and direction for
>the origami-l community.  Such daring deserves our honor.   Join together
>with me in our support of the Great Unafolder.
>
>
>EveryFolder
>

Count me in!

                              Cathy
******^^^^^*****^^^^^*****

Cathy Palmer-Lister
Ste. Julie, Quebec
Canada
cathypl@generation.net





Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 18:18:43 -0400 (AST)
From: Cathy <cathypl@generation.net>
Subject: RE: Name this base?

Thanks!  I'll pass that on to Dominique.

                                            CAthy

At 01:24 PM 98-01-16 -0400, you wrote:
>>>>>Also most of the "X-Wing" models are from a frog base.
>>>
>>>Could you please repond this for me:
>>>Are there other X-Wing models that use another base?
>
>Yes.  Asgar Malik and Larry Hart have an X-wing model that is folded from a
>bird base. I've not heard from them in a while, but they are supposed to be
>working on their book of Star Trek and Star Wars models.
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------
>Joseph Wu, Producer, DNA Productions Inc.
>t:604.730.0306 x 105     f: 604.732.7331     e: joseph@dna.bc.ca
>
>
>
******^^^^^*****^^^^^*****

Cathy Palmer-Lister
Ste. Julie, Quebec
Canada
cathypl@generation.net





Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 18:22:42 -0400 (AST)
From: Julius Kusserow <juku@studi.mathematik.hu-berlin.de>
Subject: Re: Re: difficulty ratings of models

Thanks Bruce and Carlos for answer, but they are unfortunatly as I
expected.

Julius





Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 18:25:58 -0400 (AST)
From: Carlos Alberto Furuti <furuti@ahand.unicamp.br>
Subject: Neil Elias's Noah's Ark

Hi folks,

Regarding Elias's one-piece Noah's Ark I mentioned last week:
- the initial step is called Rhoads base (by Samuel Randlett). It's
  a 2x1, double-bird, six-point base
- the six points turn into a bird, Noah, an elephant, a giraffe,
  another animal, and an ark's end
A many-layered wrap followed by a sink is required, so paper must
be fairly flexible. The model is flat and althogh the ark itself
is symmetric (double-faced), the animals are not.

BOS booklet #34 includes the base, #35 has the ark. As mentioned, they
are unedited facsimiles from Elias's very sketchy notebooks.

        Sincerely,
        Carlos
               furuti@ahand.unicamp.br www.ahand.unicamp.br/~furuti





Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 18:29:22 -0400 (AST)
From: Cathy <cathypl@generation.net>
Subject: base for x-wing

>X-Sender: draken@mail.odyssee.net (Unverified)
>Date: Sun, 18 Jan 1998 21:05:24 -0500
>To: Cathy <cathypl@generation.net>
>From: draken@odyssee.net (Dominique Durocher)
>Subject: RE: Name this base?
>Content-Length: 1022
>
>
>Hi!
>

>
>>>Yes.  Asgar Malik and Larry Hart have an X-wing model that is folded from a
>>>bird base. I've not heard from them in a while, but they are supposed to be
>>>working on their book of Star Trek and Star Wars models.
>
>This sounds interesting. Sounds like this may have potential for some of the
>modifications I did to the X-Wing pattern I know. Might they be interested
>in including anything from Babylon 5? (assuming they can be reached)
>
>Thanks
>
>Dom
>Dominique Durocher      | Lair of the Drake
>   draken@odyssee.net   |   http://www.odyssee.net/~draken/index.html
>SF Model Builder's Assn | SF Model Builder's Association
>                        |   http://www.newfrontier.on.ca
>  Making something idiot-proof just breeds better idiots.
>

******^^^^^*****^^^^^*****

Cathy Palmer-Lister
Ste. Julie, Quebec
Canada
cathypl@generation.net





Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 18:35:13 -0400 (AST)
From: "Martin L. Demaine" <mldemain@daisy.uwaterloo.ca>
Subject: Fun

Helena,

It has been fun playing with puzzles. Tonight I hope to look at yours more
closely, but very exciting already.

I am disappointed that you may be leaving the area at the end of this term.
I should try and do a tesselation meeting before you go, but it would
probably be more informal. Just a group meeting to do work together.
I could still arrage invited talks.

Erik is so busy travelling this year.
Have to go....

But here is the reason for this note.
This is a good source for references in Recreational Math.

AUTHOR(S): Singmaster, David

TITLE:     Sources in Recreational Mathematics

PLACE OF PUBLICATION:  London
PUBLISHER: South Bank University
EDITION:

Marty

--
Martin Demaine            \\ "The greatest invention of the nineteenth
Dept. of Computer Science  \\  century was the invention of the method of
University of Waterloo      \\  invention" -Alfred North Whitehead (1861-1947)
Waterloo, ON Canada N2L 3G1  \\





Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 18:38:12 -0400 (AST)
From: DGS - Kevin Kinney PhD <kkinney@carolinas.org>
Subject: Going to U.K.!

Hi all!

        Well, the Day job is resulting in me going to Bristol, U.K. in a
couple months.  The meeting I have to attend is April 1-4, and
unfortunately, I don't think I'll be extending the trip beyond that.  But
before the plans become definite, are there any origami-related things in
the area that I'd have to kick myself if I missed them?

        Any paper/bookstores in Bristol that I should know about?

        At the very least, I'm going to pick up a bunch of A4 paper, so I
don't have to cut my own!

Kevin
kkinney@carolinas.org

Kevin Kinney
kkinney@carolinas.org





Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 18:41:51 -0400 (AST)
From: MSPARKS@pinkertons.com (MATTHEW SPARKS 05-025)
Subject: RE: Just wondering...

Kim you said:
If there was, it would be very interesting, so why
bring it up.
 I think you meant wouldn't

I think the we could all agree that sometimes folding paper or
materials with similar but sometimes different properties is fun
or sometimes challenging but on occasion relaxing, not to rule
out that it sometimes being tedious and vexing it still can have
a reasonably nice connotation. Mostly.

Matthew Makaala Sparks                          Desk (818) 380-8712
Senior Technical Support Specialist             Fax  (818) 380-8677
Pinkerton Security & Investigation Services
15910 Ventura Blvd.; Suite 900
Encino, CA  91436                               Ham Radio KE6GVI
  email = MSparks@Pinkertons.com
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Say "Plugh"...                                 "XYZZY"





Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 18:45:55 -0400 (AST)
From: DORIGAMI <DORIGAMI@aol.com>
Subject: Re:  Accessing list of members

PLEASE tell me exactly what to write for list of members.  What do I use for
subject.  I tried what you said and it didnt work.  Thanks. Dorigami





Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 18:48:22 -0400 (AST)
From: "Green, Robert R" <GreenR@scmb.co.za>
Subject: RE: wet-folding questions

I am relatively new to wet folding, but a friend of mine asked me to
fold a Michael LaFosse bat for her and after several bad dry folds I
tried a wet fold model.   The result was a stunning bat as this is one
model that certainly does need to be folded wet.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dahlia Schwartz [SMTP:dahlias@bu.edu]
> Sent: Friday, January 16, 1998 7:56 PM
> To:   Multiple recipients of list
> Subject:      re:  wet-folding questions
>
> Hi -- crawling out of my lurking space once again,  I have the
> following
> question:
>
> I have tried wet-folding as it is described in several sources, but
> haven't been satisfied with the results.  Can anyone share their
> wisdom
> with me as to:
>
> good means to wet the paper (I tend to use a spray-mist-bottle full of
> water)?
>
> papers to use (I've tried everything from thin origami paper to canson
> parchment paper -- I believe Mr Brill or Mr Montroll suggest brown
> paper
> bag paper--anyone tried this?)
>
> Techniques -- how wet should it be?  Should creases be reinforced or
> handled gently?  is respraying as you go needed?  appropriate?  (I'm
> not
> smart or fast enuf to get moderately complex models finished before
> that
> evaporation problem sinks in.)
>
> Are there certain types of models that work best with wet folding (I
> get
> the impression that those that the folder wants to take on a sort of
> sculpted 3d look are best).
>
> mea culpa if these questions have been well answered previously.
>
> peace and happiness
> -dahlia





Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 19:01:35 -0400 (AST)
From: Rjlang@aol.com
Subject: Re:  Re: difficulty ratings of models

Carlos Furuti wrote:

> Note to programmers: did you know that the sea urchin
> in Montroll/Lang's "O.Sea Life" has triple-nested loops?

Glad to see that programming constructs work in origami diagrams. So for my
next book, I'll put try and catch() blocks in the instructions, e.g.:

try {
   Carefully reverse-fold the thick group of layers as one flap.
}
catch( edges_misaligned ) {
   Adjust the layers of the edges till they're all aligned.
}
catch( flap_not_flat ) {
   Press the flap under a stack of books for a few minutes.
}
catch( paper_ripped ) {
   abort() and start over with a new piece of paper.
}

etc., etc., etc. I'm sure this will catch on like wildfire!

Robert





Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 19:05:14 -0400 (AST)
From: Rjlang@aol.com
Subject: Re:  Re: Modular vs multi-piece

Doug wrote:

> So, I will continue to use 'modular' to mean any model that is made
> from more than one piece of paper, whether identically folded or
> not, so long as the pieces fit together.  An 'unit' to refer only
> to models made from multiple identically folded pieces.

Many people use the term "modular" origami when the pieces are identical and
"composite" origami when they are dissimilar (e.g., two-piece Honda animals
or twenty-piece dino skeletons). I favor them myself.

Robert





Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 19:08:01 -0400 (AST)
From: "Terrence M. Rioux" <trioux@whoi.edu>
Subject: wet-folding suggestion

          Dahlia, try getting a copy of Michael LaFosse's video
          'Happy Good Luck Bats and Horseshoe Crab.'  I had never done
          any wet folding before, and I was able to produce, after a
          little practice, some creditable bats and crabs with the
          help of the video.  Michael's videos are very clear, easy to
          follow, and he explains the underlying principles of wet
          folding (you don't drench the paper... use just enough
          water to to get the consistency of leather... and you can
          remist as needed as you go.)

          If the 'bu.edu' in your address stands for 'Boston
          University,' you're in luck.  Just hop on the red line of
          the 'T' and get off at Porter square (one stop beyond
          Hahvahd) and pop unto Sasusga Japanese bookstore across the
          street.  They also have a store in Brookline, at the
          Brookline Hills stop of the Riverside branch of the Green
          Line.   They've got a good selection of books, videos, and
          some paper.  You can also order the videos from the usual
          origami suppliers OUSA's Source, Fascinating Folds website,
          Kim's Crane, Sasuga's website, and directly from Michael's
          Origamido website.  I don't have their web addresses handy,
          but you should easily be able to search using one of the
          standard internet search engines, or find it at Joseph Wu's
          site.

          Sasusga often hosts origami workshops at their store, and
          you can ask when Michael will next teach a session.  He
          lives over in Haverhill, so he is a presenter there some
          times.

           I've used Canson paper with good results.  It comes
          in large rectangular sheets, so you have to cut it into
          squares.  Last October I made a 'bat-mobile' which is now
          hanging up outside the children's room of the Woods Hole
          Public Library (I took a mobile-making workshop at last
          year's OUSA convention in NYC).  Since I work at an
          oceanographic research institution, the horseshoe crabs
          (very realistic!) make good gifts for the scientists.

          Michael also has several other more advanced wet folding
          videos (sea turtle, koi, squirrel), but I haven't worked my
          way up to them yet.  (still working my way through Tomoko
          Fuse's books I splurged on at the convention).

          Cheers,

          Terry Rioux
          Cape Cod lurker





Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 19:10:53 -0400 (AST)
From: David Tait <tait@earthlink.net>
Subject: Tyvek

Someone had asked about purchasing a smaller amount of Tyvek. I believe
it comes in smaller widths and lengths at home improvement stores if you
don't want the 10' x 40' roll. ;-)

tt





Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 19:13:59 -0400 (AST)
From: Ralph &/ Donna <Czere@cris.com>
Subject: NO did I get dropped?

Been Lurking long time now and I have missed my daily "fix" of origami news.
Did all the usual stuff SET MAIL ACK    and still have heard nothing since
Sunday the 18th.  I thought maybe we were moving to DNA or MIT server, but
surely someone would have said something--Is it just me?    Donna





Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 19:16:37 -0400 (AST)
From: "Sonia Wu (NC)" <swu@virtu.sar.usf.edu>
Subject: Re: Wet-Folding and Sumo Wrestlers

I'm very much a novice wet-folder, but can recommend Michael LaFosse's
video "Happy Good-Luck Bats and Horseshoe Crabs" as a great introduction
to the technique.  I watched the tape all the way through, first.  Then
did my first batch using brown grocery bag paper (they came out fine).
Did my second batch using dark brown watercolor paper (came out better,
and I got to see what Mr. LaFosse meant by the paper getting to a
point of feeling leathery--very nifty).  Plus, these are great models.
The horseshoe crab is especially beautiful.

About a week ago, there was a request for a sumo wrestler diagram.  There
is a wonderful one on page 73 in Akira Yoshizawa's Origami Museum 2:
Seasons and Annual Events (which is actually in Japanese, "Origami
Hakubutsushi 2: Kisetsu to Gyoji").  I just got the book yesterday from
Sasuga Japanese Bookstore in Cambridge Mass, so sorry I was not able to
pass along the info earlier.  After a trial run with kami, I wet-folded
the model from an 11-inch square of watercolor paper and was very pleased
with the result; the softer folds in heavy paper give a roundness and
sense of solidity to the model that seem very appropriate to the subject.

Sonia Wu
(Florida)





Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 19:19:30 -0400 (AST)
From: "Sonia Wu (NC)" <swu@virtu.sar.usf.edu>
Subject: Re: ChAOS Meetings?

Does anyone know when ChAOS (Chicago Area Origami Society) meets?  Are
they open to having visitors at their meetings?

Sonia Wu
(Florida)





Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 19:23:22 -0400 (AST)
From: John Sutter <sutterj@earthlink.net>
Subject: origami with wedding gift

Greetings fellow folders,

Is there a book printed in English that describes how to fold traditional
Japanese butterflies for the bride
and groom that are attatched to wedding gifts?  I've seen photos of these
origami models in Kenneway's book,
Complete Origami and a book about Japanese paper arts, but no diagrams or
directions.  I made up one myself
that resembles the ones I'd seen, but I'd still like to find out more about
origami/noshi models made to go
with gifts.

Ria





Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 19:27:25 -0400 (AST)
From: "Sonia Wu (NC)" <swu@virtu.sar.usf.edu>
Subject: Re: Kasahara's Books and Japanese Translation

Why is it so hard to find books by Kunihiko Kasahara?  I read once
that he's written over 100.  So far I've come across about 6--Creative
Origami, Origami Made Easy, Magic of Origami, Origami for the
Connoisseur (impossible to find), Joy of Origami, and Viva Origami #5
which seems a bit more like polygon assembly in a non-modular fashion
(which is fine, just not what I expected).

Also, is there any sort of guide to the meaning of characters relevant to
origami directions?  I've had Momotani's Origami Amusement Park for over a
year and finally asked for a translation on comparative paper sizes from
one of our students from Japan.  Finally, the ferris wheel may become a
reality.  Speaking of which, has anyone out there folded this model?  Any
tips?

Sonia Wu
(Florida)





Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 19:29:39 -0400 (AST)
From: John & Hope <hopen2@megsinet.net>
Subject: e-mails

I  haven't received any e-mails for about two day's.  pls place me back
on as I truly miss them.  Thanks!!!!   Hope in Illinois
hopen2@megsinet.net





Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 19:33:08 -0400 (AST)
From: Philip woo <philwoo@erols.com>
Subject: Hey,What Happened?

Hmmm... Have I been bumped from this list? I havent recieved anything
for a few days. If I have been bumped, please re-subscribe me.

                                               Philip Woo





Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 19:35:27 -0400 (AST)
From: ktomlinson@platinum.com
Subject: Littleton, MA, USA Origami Meeting on 27 January 1998

Hi,

The Conference Room (1st floor) of the Reuben Hoar Library has been
scheduled from 7:00 - 9:00 PM for this month's Origami Meeting.
Bring those new holiday books, paper, or anything else you'd like to share.
Hope to see new and familiar faces!

Kristine
ktomlinson@platinum.com

When: Tuesday, 27 January 1998, 7:00 - 9:00.
Where: Reuben Hoar Public Library, Shattuck Street, Littleton, MA
Telephone: (978) 486-4046.
Directions:  Get to the junction of routes 2A/110, 119 and 495.  This
intersection is in the center of town at the only traffic lights.
There's a Mobile station and Bob's Solid Oak nearby.

1. Coming from 2A East take a left at the lights onto King Street (110/2A
West) toward Ayer, MA.  Coming from 119
    West take a right at the lights onto King Street toward Ayer, MA.

2. You'll pass Bob's Solid Oak and a Shell station on the right, then a
cemetery.  At 2 tenths of a mile from the light is
    a right hand fork -- this is one entrance to Shattuck Street.

If you miss it, continue on 110/2A for 5 tenths of a mile.  The other
entrance to Shattuck Street is on the right opposite
Badger Funeral home. The sign says Town Offices.

There's parking to the left and rear of the building.





Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 19:37:20 -0400 (AST)
From: "James M. Sakoda" <James_Sakoda@brown.edu>
Subject: Re:NoMail for three days

I would like a direct email message from soneone who has received this
message.  If I am alone in not receiving messages through Origami-l, I
should probably take some action such as unsubscribing and subscribing over
again.  "James M. Sakoda" <James_Sakoda@brown.edu>





Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 19:39:13 -0400 (AST)
From: EMA DIANE <EMADIANE@aol.com>
Subject: review list

review subscriber list - origami-l
