




From: P Bailey <pbailey@OPENCOMINC.COM>
Date: 22 Oct 1999 22:49
Subject: Re: Converting Newcomers to origami (was: Re: The Price ofTechnical

Cathy wrote:

> At a recent sci-fi convention here in Montreal, I taught Perry's fire
> Lizard.  It was very successful, the folders were all novices who were
> hooked by the dragon.  People notice the models that reflect their personal
> interests.  One of the participants was a friend of mine who attended
> mainly besause she's a friend of mine.  She found it terribly frustrating,
> and at one point i thought she was close to tears, but stuck with it, then
> thrilled with the results she folded another so that she would remember how
> to do it on her own.  A while later I met her in the hall, she grabbed my
> arm and yelled, " Now look at what you've got me doing!  I'm making a mess
> of all my flyers!"  Sure enough, all the fan club folders were creased and
> battered into odd shapes.  :-)

Does that mean I shouldn't post the dollar bill Enterprise I have worked
out as next month's model of the month???

The Klingon cruiser just looked so lonely!

Perry
--
"Each time he shifted gears he did it as if the Moment of Truth
had arrived in a bullfight"
H. Allen Smith "The Pig in the Barber Shop"

http://www.afgsoft.com/perry/           <--Website w/ diagrams!
Icq 23622644





From: Dorothy Engleman <FoldingCA@WEBTV.NET>
Date: 23 Oct 1999 00:33
Subject: Re: The price of technical virtuosity

Dave Mitchell,

I assume this Penguin by Hideo Komatsu, made from one uncut, square
sheet, is a high complex model.  And yet the overall effect is one of
simplicity and beauty.

http://www.remus.dti.ne.jp/~origamih/tenji/jyousetu/kh_pengin.JPG

Dorothy





From: Dorothy Engleman <FoldingCA@WEBTV.NET>
Date: 23 Oct 1999 02:09
Subject: 1000 Cranes for Littleton H.S. Update

Tonight I received this letter from Dee Lynch.  She'd like me to share
it with you:

"I talked to Glenda Sadler with Columbine High School - she is the
person that is taking care of all the stuff that is being sent to CHS.
She basically told me they cannot use another 1,000 cranes - they have
several strings already...

HOWEVER, she DID want a representative sample of the cranes sent to the
school with a write up on the background and a little bit about the
people who folded the cranes (where they were from, how they heard about
it, etc.)

So what I did was take one crane from each packet that was sent to me -
in the case of groups that sent me cranes, I picked one representative
crane, usually with no one person's name on it, and wrote the name of
the group and where they were from on the wing. There are 39 cranes
altogether (which is kinda cool. 13*3 is 39...)

The REST of the cranes are going to be
strung and distributed one of two ways:
1)They will all go to another Littleton School in the name of the CHS
students or 2) be strung in thirds and one will go to our neighborhood
elementary school, one to the middle school and one to the high school.
Glenda just felt that all the area schools were touched by the events
and since CHS had SO MANY cranes already, they would like to share."

If anyone is able to scan Dee's photos of the cranes that were sent to
Littleton High School and put them on their web site, kindly contact me.
Thank you.

Dorothy





From: Nick Robinson <nick@CHEESYPEAS.DEMON.CO.UK>
Date: 23 Oct 1999 05:20
Subject: Re: A Reply to Ronald Koh

david whitbeck <dmwhitbeck@UCDAVIS.EDU> sez

>>Paul, what is your daffy-nition of 'ugly'. anyway :o)

He looks in a mirror....   (meeeouuu)

all the best,

Nick Robinson

email           nick@cheesypeas.demon.co.uk
homepage        http://www.cheesypeas.demon.co.uk - now featuring soda syphons!
BOS homepage    http://www.rpmrecords.co.uk/bos/





From: Hatori Koshiro <hatori@JADE.DTI.NE.JP>
Date: 23 Oct 1999 10:01
Subject: Re: Kayaragusa, alias "Kan no mado".

I'd like to add little things to David's reply on Kayaragusa.

> I do not know what
> Kayara-gusa means, but "gusa" means fragments of memoranda.

"Kayara" means nothing in itself. The first section of the
encyclopaedia was titled Naniyara-gusa, and "naniyara-kayara"
means "this, that, and the other".

> Whatever the technicalities, the name, "Window of the Coldest Season" does
> not seem to me to be at all inappropriate.

I understand that the name "Window of the Coldest Season" or "Winter
Window" is a modest one. It means "My humble encyclopaedia will be
crumpled and used as packing which stops cold drafts blowing through
winter windows."

 _ _ _ _ _
|         |  Hatori Koshiro (Koshiro is my first name.)
|_._._._._|          hatori@jade.dti.ne.jp
|         |      http://www.jade.dti.ne.jp/~hatori/
|_ _ _ _ _|_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
 If they keep on risking failure, they're still artists. (S.Jobs)





From: collin weber <coljwebwhs@HOTMAIL.COM>
Date: 23 Oct 1999 13:04
Subject: Re: new diagrams for the internet

>From: John Hancock <jwhancock34@YAHOO.COM>
>Reply-To: Origami List <ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
>To: ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU
>Subject: Re: new diagrams for the internet
>Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 17:36:23 -0700
>
>What kind of terrier? I'd love to have a diagram for
>an Airedale.
>
>Later,
>
>John
>
>--- collin weber <coljwebwhs@HOTMAIL.COM> wrote:
> > Is any one interested in some diagrams of animals to
> > put on their websites?
> > So far I have a hummingbird afrog on a lilypad, a
> > terrier, barnswallow, and
> > {deletia}
> > Thanks
> > Collin Weber

I'm not exactly sure what kind of terrier it is.  Would you mind sending me
a picture of one or a link to a sight with pictures of terriers.  I'm fixing
up the diagrams for this one but I'll send them when they are ready.  The
terrier diagrammed is sitting down, but I've created one that is standing
that is not yet diagrammed, I like the sitting one better.

Thanks
Collin

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





From: david whitbeck <dmwhitbeck@UCDAVIS.EDU>
Date: 23 Oct 1999 14:21
Subject: Re: A Reply to Ronald Koh

>david whitbeck <dmwhitbeck@UCDAVIS.EDU> sez
>
>>>Paul, what is your daffy-nition of 'ugly'. anyway :o)
>
>He looks in a mirror....   (meeeouuu)
>
>all the best,
>
>Nick Robinson
>
>email           nick@cheesypeas.demon.co.uk
>homepage        http://www.cheesypeas.demon.co.uk - now featuring soda syphons!
>BOS homepage    http://www.rpmrecords.co.uk/bos/

Hey Nick that was not me!  That was Ronalk Koh!  And I thought I was out of it

David





From: collin weber <coljwebwhs@HOTMAIL.COM>
Date: 23 Oct 1999 15:40
Subject: Re: A Reply to Ronald Koh

>From: david whitbeck <dmwhitbeck@UCDAVIS.EDU>
>Reply-To: Origami List <ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
>To: ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU
>Subject: Re: A Reply to Ronald Koh
>Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 11:24:03 -0700
>
> >david whitbeck <dmwhitbeck@UCDAVIS.EDU> sez
> >
> >>>Paul, what is your daffy-nition of 'ugly'. anyway :o)
> >
> >He looks in a mirror....   (meeeouuu)
> >
> >all the best,
> >
> >Nick Robinson
> >
> >email           nick@cheesypeas.demon.co.uk
> >homepage        http://www.cheesypeas.demon.co.uk - now featuring soda
>syphons!
> >BOS homepage    http://www.rpmrecords.co.uk/bos/
>
>
>Hey Nick that was not me!  That was Ronalk Koh!  And I thought I was out of
>it

>
>David

What is this thing?

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





From: david whitbeck <dmwhitbeck@UCDAVIS.EDU>
Date: 23 Oct 1999 15:57
Subject: Re: A Reply to Ronald Koh

You see how tripped out I am?  I can't even spell Ronald!  I blame the
integrals!  Okay that's lame!  But I'll feel much better as soon as I fold
something from Origami Fantasy.  I'll be feeling much better, really I
will!

David





From: Mike and/or Janet Hamilton <mikeinnj@CONCENTRIC.NET>
Date: 23 Oct 1999 16:31
Subject: Re: i'm headed for japan

> anyway, as the subject line states, i'm taking a trip to japan in
november, and
> am wondering if there are any places to visit, or supplies or books to
buy.
> what would an origami enthusiast like to do in japan?  most likely i won't
get
> too far away from tokyo.  i'll be staying in a town called Kashiwa.

For a list of sources for origami supplies around the world, see:

http://www.concentric.net/~mikeinnj/orisrc.shtml

It is a list of places mentioned be members of this list over the last few
years.

Janet Hamilton





From: Thoki Yenn <thok@THOK.DK>
Date: 23 Oct 1999 16:51
Subject: Sv:      Re: Thoki Yenn's Abstract Form

20. oktober 1999 21:58
Paul Jackson wrote

>Dear Thoki,
>
>A public 'thank you' for taking the trouble to put your beautiful
>piece onto the web site for us all to enjoy.  Do you have any other
>abstracts?

Dear Paul, Thank you for thanking me in public.

I found this thing while hiking in the mountains,
the mountains of paper in the corners of my room.
It was buried In the the layers from 1982 ,

It is an attempt to use the lines dividing
the Tangram Square as creases for
a "paperfolded" something.

Many years later I found out that,
in a book by Akira Yoshizawa,
there is a photo of exactly the same model,
without any diagram or mention of Tangram.

It has a title that I have translated as
Hope or Aspiration.
I have been wondering ever since !!.
Is he also a mindreader?

It could go into the group of abstracts.
http://www.thok.dk/tangram.html

Kind regards from Thoki Yenn





From: Cathy <cathypl@GENERATION.NET>
Date: 23 Oct 1999 17:54
Subject: Re: Converting Newcomers to origami (was: Re: The Price ofTechnical

At 09:37 PM 99-10-22 -0500, you wrote:
>
>Does that mean I shouldn't post the dollar bill Enterprise I have worked
>out as next month's model of the month???
>
>The Klingon cruiser just looked so lonely!
>
>Perry

Are you joking???  :-O

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

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





From: John Hancock <jwhancock34@YAHOO.COM>
Date: 24 Oct 1999 01:44
Subject: Re: new diagrams for the internet

Hi Collin,

   This site has some good pictures of Airedales,
including some good close-up head shots. They are
remarkable dogs.

http://www.worldgate.com/~dognyard/gallery.html

Later,

John

--- collin weber <coljwebwhs@HOTMAIL.COM> wrote:
> I'm not exactly sure what kind of terrier it is.
> Would you mind sending me
> a picture of one or a link to a sight with pictures
> of terriers.  I'm fixing

=====

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com





From: Ronald Koh <ronkoh@SINGNET.COM.SG>
Date: 24 Oct 1999 02:56
Subject: Re: A Reply to David Whitbeck

Hey, David:

You mean you can't remember putting up this posting?! you must have been
studying real, whacko hard! :oP

(Pssst!! David did it)

Ronald (innocent as a new born babe) Koh

david whitbeck wrote:
>
> >david whitbeck <dmwhitbeck@UCDAVIS.EDU> sez
> >
> >>>Paul, what is your daffy-nition of 'ugly'. anyway :o)
> >
> >He looks in a mirror....   (meeeouuu)
> >
> >all the best,
> >
> >Nick Robinson
> >
> >email           nick@cheesypeas.demon.co.uk
> >homepage        http://www.cheesypeas.demon.co.uk - now featuring soda
     syphons!
> >BOS homepage    http://www.rpmrecords.co.uk/bos/
>
> Hey Nick that was not me!  That was Ronald Koh!  And I thought I was out of it
>
> David





From: Paul Jackson <Mpjackson@BTINTERNET.COM>
Date: 24 Oct 1999 08:08
Subject: Origami v Paper Folding (long)

In another of his questions to me on October 18th, Ronald Koh asked me
to differentiate between my use of the terms 'origami' and 'paper
folding'.

I know -- of course -- that loosely translated, 'origami' means 'paper
folding' in the Japanese language.  To me though, the historic use of
the term 'origami' has come to mean an easily recognisable
representation in folded paper of an easily recognisable subject
(elephant, star, etc).  In other words, 'origami' is and always has
been a specifically model making practice.

But there are examples of non-model based paper folding.  I place
these under the umbrella term 'paper folding' (what else!).

For example, Jean-Claude Correia creates vast folded paper bas-reliefs
or sculptures based on the occurrence of folds in nature -- the
folding of lava as it creeps across a landscape, the unending folding
and re-folding of the sand dunes across the Sinai desert, the folding
of the earth's crust, the folding of the human body when in motion,
etc.  Recent work by Vincent Floderer depicts fungi, sponges, etc with
remarkable accuracy ...but his pieces are made by first crumpling
paper, then stretching it into its final form by expanding the
crumples in certain places.  He says that his pieces so strongly
resemble natural forms because his folding process mimics the way they
grow. This is deep stuff from both artists, intellectual even, far
removed from trying to design a 'more realistic' dinosaur.  (For those
creators interested primarily in anatomical detail, I strongly
recommend they abandon complex bases and begin crumpling)

Both artists use paper folding as a metaphor, not as a
self-referential technique for making models.  So, I would argue this
places them outside the traditions of origami.  They describe
themselves as 'paper folders', not as 'origami artists'. (Digressing,
I like Florence Temko's statement that origami can be described as art
when we stop asking HOW and start asking WHY)

Myself, I teach 'paper folding' in many Universities here in the UK,
to students of Design.  I don't teach model making origami. I teach
the techniques and philosophy of folding/creasing relevant
(hopefully!) to students of Fashion Design, Product Design, Ceramics,
Architecture, Jewellery, etc.  Not once do we make an origami model,
because to teach an origami model would teach the students nothing
else other than how to make that model.  The paper folding I teach is
open ended, so that the students can quickly adapt it and apply it to
their own creative work in a variety of sheet materials, or whatever.

I have to say that for me, the conundrums and challenges of the wider
picture of 'paper folding' offers more stimulation and challenge than
the practice of self-referential origami model making.  Nevertheless,
despite the limitations of much origami, I HUGELY enjoy it...it's just
that in my mind it's not 'paper folding'.

I hope this has been helpful.

Paul Jackson





From: Nick Robinson <nick@CHEESYPEAS.DEMON.CO.UK>
Date: 24 Oct 1999 10:59
Subject: Re: A Reply to Ronald Koh

david whitbeck <dmwhitbeck@UCDAVIS.EDU> sez

>Hey Nick that was not me!  That was Ronalk Koh!  And I thought I was out of it

Sorry - double-quote!

all the best,

Nick Robinson

email           nick@cheesypeas.demon.co.uk
homepage        http://www.cheesypeas.demon.co.uk - now featuring soda syphons!
BOS homepage    http://www.rpmrecords.co.uk/bos/





From: Mark And Theresa <mark@HOBBITON.FORCE9.NET>
Date: 24 Oct 1999 11:02
Subject: Origami Kite

[ A copy of this message has been posted to the newsgroup ]
[     rec.kites                                           ]

I'm currently working on a functional kite made entirely by folding. The
material is a plastic "iridescent wrap" from Paperchase,UK. Being light
and flimsy it needs a spar of some sort. I decided to try a pleat to
stiffen it and this seems to work on the paper I was using as the
practise piece. The back looks horrendous but being a folder I cannot
bring myself to cut anything off! If this doesn't work there's always
spars cut from nylon bristles...although I have a book which recommends
boron wire (human hair is positively a trre trunk in comparison!)

Watch this space for details!!!!

--
Mark





From: Mark And Theresa <mark@HOBBITON.FORCE9.NET>
Date: 24 Oct 1999 11:02
Subject: A lovely tale!

...and a lousy header!

Yesterday we were at a family party (my cousin-in-law's 21st) were there
were some little kids getting bored (about 14 years too young to
drink!). I made a cat (Kasahara) which I had been taught the previous
week at the Manchester minimeeting (Thanks, Ian!!!). I said I would make
a mouse for it to eat later on if she wanted. Well a few hours later
they were about to go home and she wanted her mouse. Out comes a 7cm
piece of paper and the mouse appeared (Yoshizawa). The little girl
watched enthralled as the mouse unfolded (strange word to use with
respect to origami!). When it was finished and handed over she screamed
with delight and skipped around the room. Makes you glad to be a folder!

--
Mark





From: Robby/Laura <morassi@ZEN.IT>
Date: 24 Oct 1999 12:24
Subject: NO: problems with e-mail

Hi all !

My usual mailbox (morassi@zen.it) is temporarily out of service, and I
cannot receive the origami-L messages nor personal messages. Anyone needing
to contact me please use the following address:

morassi@mclink.it

Thanks.
Roberto





From: collin weber <coljwebwhs@HOTMAIL.COM>
Date: 24 Oct 1999 13:30
Subject: Re: new diagrams for the internet

>From: John Hancock <jwhancock34@YAHOO.COM>
>Reply-To: Origami List <ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
>To: ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU
>Subject: Re: new diagrams for the internet
>Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 22:45:54 -0700
>
>Hi Collin,
>
>    This site has some good pictures of Airedales,
>including some good close-up head shots. They are
>remarkable dogs.
>
>http://www.worldgate.com/~dognyard/gallery.html
>
>Later,
>
>John

Thanks for the link. How about I just send you the diagrams when they are
finished. I should be able to finish them today and send them off today or
tomorrow.  The diagrams are not very clear but you should be able to follow
them.

Thanks
Collin Weber

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





From: david whitbeck <dmwhitbeck@UCDAVIS.EDU>
Date: 24 Oct 1999 14:55
Subject: Re: new diagrams for the internet

Hi Collin, why don't you put your diagrams on a website?  I'm not alone in
wanting to see your work and you know people are going to keep asking for
your diagrams.  If you already have some up on somebody's website could you
give me the URL?  Thanks.

David





From: collin weber <coljwebwhs@HOTMAIL.COM>
Date: 24 Oct 1999 19:05
Subject: Re: new diagrams for the internet

>From: david whitbeck <dmwhitbeck@UCDAVIS.EDU>
>Reply-To: Origami List <ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
>To: ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU
>Subject: Re: new diagrams for the internet
>Date: Sun, 24 Oct 1999 11:57:24 -0700
>
>Hi Collin, why don't you put your diagrams on a website?  I'm not alone in
>wanting to see your work and you know people are going to keep asking for
>your diagrams.  If you already have some up on somebody's website could you
>give me the URL?  Thanks.
>
>
>David

Unfortunately my scanner doesn't work for some reason don't have a digital
camera other wise I would put them on my own website.  I don't yet have
anything on anyone elses site but I would be happy to show them on anyones
sight who will take them.  Or I could just send you some of them if you want
to see them.  Sound good?

Thanks
Collin Weber

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





From: Leigh Halford <Leigh451@AOL.COM>
Date: 24 Oct 1999 19:16
Subject: Origami Adventure game

While surfing about I found a little package that makes text adventures up.
When I was a kid I used to do these firstly on my 16k ZX81 and then my
Speccy. While while on half term I decided to recapture my childhood and made
a Origami text adventure. If anybody wants it email me or if anybody can tell
me how to post a file for downloading I'll do that. Its only 46k zipped

Leigh451@aol.com
htto://hometown.aol.com/origami451/index.html





From: Mike and/or Janet Hamilton <mikeinnj@CONCENTRIC.NET>
Date: 24 Oct 1999 19:39
Subject: Re: Origami Adventure game

Leigh,

The text adventure sounds very interesting.  I'm probably showing my age if
I say I remember the original "Cave" adventures.  I'd love to see an origami
adventure.  Can you email the zipped file?

Janet Hamilton

----- Original Message -----
From: Leigh Halford <Leigh451@AOL.COM>
To: <ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 1999 7:15 PM
Subject: Origami Adventure game

> While surfing about I found a little package that makes text adventures
up.
> When I was a kid I used to do these firstly on my 16k ZX81 and then my
> Speccy. While while on half term I decided to recapture my childhood and
made
> a Origami text adventure. If anybody wants it email me or if anybody can
tell
> me how to post a file for downloading I'll do that. Its only 46k zipped
>
> Leigh451@aol.com
> htto://hometown.aol.com/origami451/index.html





From: Sarah Wooden <sarah@FREDART.COM>
Date: 25 Oct 1999 00:18
Subject: Origami Sighting

This is the strangest reference to origami that I, personally, have come
across. I was at the official Grant Naylor 'Red Dwarf' web site and
reviewing an old chat room interview with the actor who portrays Kryten. An
interviewer asked him what was the strangest fan gift he had ever received?
He responded, "I had an origami pair of underpants from someone in
Japan...in fact, they were very beautifully made!"

What in the world are 'origami underpants'? I have been folding origami
dolls and clothing accessories for my niece for the past year(just updated
my site tonite) and haven't run across any 'underpants' origami models.

(Has anyone else noticed that one of the lead characters on Red Dwarf is
named Dave Lister? I think of origami every time I watch the show because of
David Lister on this list. The two will be forever linked in my mind now.)





From: Marc Kirschenbaum <marckrsh@PIPELINE.COM>
Date: 25 Oct 1999 00:26
Subject: Re: Origami v Paper Folding (long)

At 01:02 PM 10/24/99 +0100, Paul Jackson <Mpjackson@BTINTERNET.COM> wrote:

>(For those
>creators interested primarily in anatomical detail, I strongly
>recommend they abandon complex bases and begin crumpling)

Speaking as a creator of complex models (note, I did not pick or endorse
this label), I have to admit I employ a lot of crumpling in my creative
process. Many of my models started as crumpling excercizes, so I can ignore
the detail of having neat folding sequences, and focus more on overall
structure and form. After the later has been found, I can then develop my
work into what we more readily recognize as origami. If I do say so myself,
i am rather good at crumpling, and have been tempted to increase my
creative output by going this route. I would hate to diagram such works...





From: DLister891@AOL.COM
Date: 25 Oct 1999 05:57
Subject: Re: Origami v Paper Folding (long)

In his posting on 24th October Paul Jackson raises several very interesting
matters for discussion. Not least interesting is his  concept of "folding"
which he teaches to students of Fashion Design, Product Design, Ceramics,
Architecture, Jewellery. The wider application of folding is one that deeply
interests me.

However, in this posting I want to consider the use of the word "Origami"
outside of Japan. It originated as a Japanese word, but is it correct to use
it for paperfolding outside of Japan? I was recently asked privately whether
it was appropriate to use the word "Origami" for Chinese paperfolding and I
felt obliged to advise that I did not think that this would be at al
appropriate. But then, to take the matter a stage further, is it legitimate
to call Western paperfolding "Origami"?

The word "Origami" has been used in the West for some forty-five years since
Lillian Oppenheimer deliberately adopted "Origami",  partly because she
thought that it was a more attractive word than "paperfolding" and partly
because she found that when she used the word "paperfolding" people thought
merely of papercrafts in general and not the specific kind of paperfolding
which we all recognise now as "Origami". Even in Japan, the use of the word
"origami" for recreational papefolding is no more than about one hundred
years old. It appears to hve been adopted in Japanese schools as a word which
children could use without difficulty. Before that the word "Origami" had
been used as a word for a certificate analogous to the western "diploma" and
later as just one of several words used for ceremonial paperfolding, mainly
the folding of wrappers or "tstutsumi".

Today, I freely use the word "Origami" for informal purposes. It has
unquestionably been absorbed into English and other languages and to try to
revert to "paperfolding" would not only be impossible,  but would be
perverse. However, when I am writing on more serious aspects of paperfolding,
I deliberately use the word "paperfolding" unless the paperfolding is
Japanese. In a Japanese context it is clearly appropriate to call it
"origami". I would never use "origami" for Chinese paperfolding, only in part
because I remember Philip Shen protesting strongly about the general adoption
of a Japanese word for what he considered to be Chinese in origin.

Lillian Oppenheimer started using the word "origami" in the mid 1950s and the
use of it caught on rapidly. By the time the Origami Porfolio Society was
founded in 1965, it seemed normal, and indeed, automatic to use the word
"origami" to the exclusion of "paperfolding". However, even then, I, myself,
had difficulties with the word. I did not consider that all kinds of
paperfolding could be called "origami". In particular, I didn't think that it
applied to pleated paperfolding of the kind used in bellows, accordions,
cameras, umbrellas and lamp shades. Pleated paperfolding (later the subject
of Eric Hawkesworth's book "Pleated Paper Folding", 1975) seemed to be a
separate subject. I would also have excluded zig-zag folding and, had I been
able to see into the future,  the work of such folders as Jean-Claude Correia
and certainly Vincent Floderer. Their work does not conform to what, in the
mid 1960s, I conceptualised a "Origami".

But what was and what is the essence of this restricted concept of
paperfolding properly called "Origami"? Paul Jackson writes that it has come
to mean "an easily recognisable representation in folded paper of an easily
recognisable subject (elephant, star, etc.). In other words "origami" is and
always has been a specifically model making practice."

This get closer to what I was thinking about, but not entirely. For instance,
 many abstract forms come within my concept of "origami", whereas it is
possible to make "models" using those pleated and other folding techniques
which, in the 1960s, I would have excluded. I was thinking more of the innate
structure of the work and not merely of its result as a model.

I am still groping towards an identification of what made "origami" what I
thought "origami" it was. In its essence I am coming to think that two
factors re involved.. The first is the creation of reverse folds. The second
is the further folding of paper that had already been folded, in other words,
the superimposition of creases. These two factors result in the formation of
(too use John Smith's expressive term) "surplus" within the model which can
be then be used for further folding. ) However, my ideas about this and what
essentially makes "mainstream origami" what it is are still evolving..

When the members of the Origami Portfolio Society  came to form themselves
into  the British Origami Society in 1967, it seemed desirable to include a
definition of "origami" in the Constitution. I have to confess to having been
the initial draughtsman.  The basic definition the Society came up with, in
those early days, so long ago, was the following:

"(1)  The Society defines origami as the folding of paper of any regular
shape to from two or three dimensional models of living creatures, inanimate
objects an abstract forms.

"(2)  While the Society holds that Origami in its purest form does not admit
the cutting of paper, the Society does not exclude cutting provided that it
is limited in extent, adds significantly to the value of the model and
provided that the model retains the main characteristics of uncut Origami.

"(3)  The Usual medium of Origami is paper, but the Society recognises that
the techniques of folding may be applied to other materials.

"(4)  The Society recognises techniques of manipulating and cutting paper
other than Origami and seeks to foster the interchange of ideas between the
pursuit of origami and other paper techniques."

Many new members of the Society hve probably read that definition with
mystification and no doubt, with amusement!

Since then, as our appreciation of paper folding has increased, the Council
of the Society has several times considered whether the definition should be
changed. One suggestion was "The art and science of folding paper", or even
"The art and science of  folding." But it was generally thought that the
existing definition really was a workable one and anyway it was a historical
statement which should be preserved.

Looking back on it, I find the British Origami Society definition  of
"Origami" fascinating in many different ways. For instance, it gets round the
eternal question of "to cut or not to cut". It seeks not to be too
restrictive, but without surrendering the essential meaning and integrity of
"mainstream Origami". It recognises that folding is not confined to paper and
it seeks to keep open the door to cross-fertilisation from other paper
techniques, such as paper sculpture.

Paul Jackson has  referred to the work of John-Claude Correia and Vincent
Floderer as falling outside what is properly called "origami". The work of
neither artist was envisaged in 1967, but even so, I think that the BOS
definition is wide enough to comprehend them. I would also point out that
much of Paul Jackson's own work, whether it is in the field of minimalistic
folding or in the creation of exquisite cross-pleated bowls, also falls
outside what I, personally, would consider to be "origami". Indeed, in his
books and in particular in his "Encyclopedia of Origami and Papercraft
Techniques", Paul has taught us that in art all boundaries are artificial and
that we should keep ourselves open to the persuasions of art and creativity,
wherever they are found. Within this field of creativity, paperfolding has
its place as just one technique or style among countless others.

I would differ from Paul, however, when he says at the end of his posting
that Origami is not paperfolding. Origami is certainly paperfolding, but it
is one particular kind of paperfolding which rightly deserves separate
recognition as something in its own right and with its own identity. But
should invariable call it by the Japanese name of "Origami?"

David Lister.

Grimsby, England

Dlister891@AOL.com





From: Paul Jackson <Mpjackson@BTINTERNET.COM>
Date: 25 Oct 1999 08:38
Subject: Re: Origami v Paper Folding

As usual, David Lister in his posting of earlier today has raised many
interesting, well argued issues for contemplation.  I'm a little wary
about going too far down the road of precise definitions relating to
creative practices, because they tend to induce a simplification of
creative intent (as in 'Henri Matisse was a Fauvist'.  True, but he
was much more.).  However, definitions can be useful in identifying
the influences, traditions and contexts within which a creative act
resides, particularly when one is trying to divide one thing from
another as in the current List thread of 'origami' and 'paper
folding'.

With this in mind, I can see now that my statement at the end of my
'Origami v Paper Folding' posting of yesterday is too minimal.  It
read:

>>Nevertheles, despite the limitations of much origami, I HUGELY enjoy
it...it's >>just that in my mind, it's not 'paper folding'.

To which David Lister replied:

> I would differ from Paul, however, when he says at the end of his
posting
> that Origami is not paperfolding. Origami is certainly paperfolding,
but it
> is one particular kind of paperfolding which rightly deserves
separate
> recognition as something in its own right and with its own identity.
But
> should invariable call it by the Japanese name of "Origami?"

Of course, 'origami' IS 'paper folding' in the narrow sense that paper
is being folded.  However, I maintain my differentiation between the
terms, with the definition of origami as being exclusively model
making.

There is also a deeper point here -- at least in my mind -- relating
to the previous thread about beauty and ugliness, which I expounded in
some detail in my posting of 20th October: 'A Reply to Ronald Koh' (if
this thread interests you, you might want to re-read it).  Namely,
that model making necessarily compromises the relationship between the
sequence and the final model, whereas paper folding, free from the
concept of the model, is an uncopromised form of expression.

Thus, whereas David Lister's differentiation between origami and paper
folding is based partly on geography and partly on technique, my
differentiation is based on creative intent.

Unlike David, I am happy for all model making paper folding to be
called 'origami', regardless of it's country of origin or technique,
as this identifies it as coming from within a model making tradition,
and everything else (including some work from Japan) to be called
'paper folding'.  Of course, there are grey areas, such as abstracts
or lampshades (is it a lampshade, or a model of a lampshade?!!)
...which brings me back to my point in the first paragraph about
simplification.

To me, the differentiation between origami and paper folding is a
fascinating topic, and central to an appreciation of the
diversification of the practice since the modern founding of
origami/folding paper an organised movement in the mid 1950's.

But ultimately, I'm not sure where all this navel-gazing is getting
me!!  Perhaps definitions are best left to critics and historians to
decide, not to the artists.  After all, we're the ones who mess up the
definitions in the first place, by producing work previously
unenvisaged! (Tee! Hee!)

Paul Jackson





From: Dave Mitchell <davemitchell@MIZUSHOBAI.FREESERVE.CO.UK>
Date: 25 Oct 1999 09:15
Subject: Publishing Announcement - Building with Butterflies

Just to let everyone who enquired know that supplies of Building with
Butterflies have now reached Fascinating Folds and will be available from
Bren's website www.fascinating-folds.com any moment now.

For those who don't already know Building with Butterflies is an
introduction to macro-modular origami in which simple modular constructions
are combined into larger sculptural forms. The units used - the butterflies
of the title - are all extremely simple though the final results can be as
complex as you wish, since most of the forms are capable of extension in
three-dimensions until either your paper or your patience run out.

There are a few images of sculptures from Building with Butterflies on my
website www.mizushobai.freeserve.co.uk in the Images, Diagrams, Books
section.

Public criticism welcome!

Dave Mitchell





From: "Askinazi, Brett" <brett@HAGERHINGE.COM>
Date: 25 Oct 1999 11:05
Subject: Re: QUESTION FOR MARC K.

Why would you want to diagram something like that?  I'm not saying such a
model is undesirable but, the opposite.  Unique models are very desirable.
Getting back to the art thread, I consider such pieces art.  Many artists
use paper as a medium.  Creating a sculpture out of paper shouldn't be any
different than clay or any other medium.

Now back to my point, most artists don't create blue-prints (other than
preliminary sketches and photos) to re-create their art.  I was really a bit
disappointed when Mr. LaFosse put out a video on how to re-create his frog.
I knew that Michael could make another, but I always considered it a one of
kind piece.

Also I am not saying that re-creation in any way de-values the original.
Just go to any art museum across the country (during the week on a workday)
and you will see more than one art-student sketching/painting a masterwork.

I'm directing this question at Marc Kirschenbaum;  What is your outlook on
this Marc?  I took your below statement to mean that it would be a tedious
task to prepare diagrams for a sculptured model, rather than hating to
diagram it for the sake of it being a one of kind piece.  You produce
diagrams of very re-creatable origami, but do you also create things that
you don't intend to be re-created?

-----Original Message-----
From: Marc Kirschenbaum [mailto:marckrsh@PIPELINE.COM]
 If I do say so myself, I am rather good at crumpling, and have been tempted
to increase my
creative output by going this route. I would hate to diagram such works...





From: Marianne Levin <mariannele@HOTMAIL.COM>
Date: 25 Oct 1999 12:07
Subject: kusudama lotus

I want to do the kusudama lotus at this adress. All peases ar finisd
but I do not understand how to get them together. Do I use glue or .......?
http://library.advanced.org/27152/towns/oriville/studio/studio.htm

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





From: Carrie Marcey <carrola@DELLNET.COM>
Date: 25 Oct 1999 14:21
Subject: UN-SUBSCRIBE

PLEASE TAKE ME OFF OF THE ORIGAMI MAILING LIST.





From: Robby/Laura <morassi@ZEN.IT>
Date: 25 Oct 1999 14:24
Subject: NO: mailbox back on service

Hi all,

please disregard my previous message. My mailbox <morassi@zen.it> is on
service again, and the origami-L messages are being received regularly.

Roberto





From: Gerard Blais <gblais@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Date: 25 Oct 1999 14:24
Subject: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Origami-Montr=E9al_-_next_meeting?=

The next meeting of Origami-Montreal will be held:

======================================================================
     Sunday, October 31, from 1 PM to 4 PM,
     at 6848 Christophe-Colomb, Montreal.
======================================================================

On the menu:
    - Discussions: local events, international events, new books,
      interesting news, etc.
    - Suggestions of books for the club library.
    - British Origami Society membership - update.
    - Folding workshop:
          "Halloween", presented by Hideko.
    - Preparation for the christmas tree at the museum of fine-arts.
    - Free folding, discussion, etc.

Origami material (i.e. paper) will be provided for those who need it.

See you Sunday!  Be there or be "square"! :-)

Grard

+-----+ Origami-Montral
|     | Phone & fax: (450) 448-2530 (Hideko Sinto)
|     | email: origami@francomedia.qc.ca (Hideko Sinto)
+-----+ web: http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Den/8802





From: Matthias Gutfeldt <tanjit@BBOXBBS.CH>
Date: 25 Oct 1999 14:44
Subject: Ronald Koh on the web

If you ever wanted to know just what kind of sticky-out-bits Ronald Koh
creates, this is the perfect time to find out:

My homepage, which can be reached through http://beam.to/origami, now
has a section by and about Ronald Koh. There are images of his
creations, and text to accompany them. Don't be shocked if some bits
stick out of unfamiliar places!

Albert Sng from Singapore has also prepared a very nice (and larger)
site about Ronald Koh's origami, complete with images, an interview, and
diagrams for download. His site can be reached at
http://www.geocities.com/EnchantedForest/Palace/3457/index.htm.

Matthias Gutfeldt
http://beam.to/origami





From: Leigh Halford <Leigh451@AOL.COM>
Date: 25 Oct 1999 15:37
Subject: Origame

Thanks for all the interest in the text adventure. It is now posted on
http://hometown.aol.com/origami451/index.html
Oh and thanks for all the people who gave me tips on posting. My old clanky
486 made it difficult from the software I was running but my new toy...Fast
oh baby yes...makes it easy. The game itself is more of a puzzle. Once you
know the key it is a doddle. Most of the clues help to solve it, but some are
a little cryptic.
If there are enough good vibes I will do some more. There is a password if
you complete the first! Remember though it is my first attempt and therefore
caca!
Leigh





From: "Brannon, Dennis" <Dennis.Brannon@COMPAQ.COM>
Date: 25 Oct 1999 16:59
Subject: LOG meeting notice Tuesday Oct 26, 7-9pm. [Littleton, MA USA]

The Littleton Origami Group (LOG) [Littleton, MA USA]
will be meeting the last Tuesday of the month at the Littleton
library in the "Small Meeting" room downstairs next to the elevator.

This month's meeting will focus on group activities for the Concord Library,
and the usual folding, learning, and fun.  Joyce Saler will report on her
recent trip to Japan.

When: Tuesday,  Oct 26, 1999, 7:00 - 9:00pm.
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 light.
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 is free parking to the left and rear of the building.





From: Sam Kendig <neuro_mancer42@YAHOO.COM>
Date: 25 Oct 1999 19:50
Subject: Re: Origami Adventure Game

Can't say that shows much... I remember Colossal Cave, and I'm only 16.
I played it on an old Osborne (which I've been meaning to take out of
the closet one of these days, refurbish it with a new EZ80... watch old
computers fly with about 4x the speed they were meant to have). Anyway,
an origami text adventure sounds great, I'll dash over to grab it ASAP.

Sam
Neuro_Mancer42@yahoo.com

>Date:    Sun, 24 Oct 1999 19:39:36 -0400
>From:    Mike and/or Janet Hamilton <mikeinnj@CONCENTRIC.NET>
>Subject: Re: Origami Adventure game
>
>Leigh,
>
>The text adventure sounds very interesting.  I'm probably showing my
>age if
>I say I remember the original "Cave" adventures.  I'd love to see an
>origami
>adventure.  Can you email the zipped file?
>
>Janet Hamilton
>

=====

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com





From: Michael Janssen-Gibson <mig@ISD.CANBERRA.EDU.AU>
Date: 25 Oct 1999 20:16
Subject: Re: Origame

I am having trouble getting this thing started - the program asks if I
have the "caps lock" button on , I respond, and it tells me it can't find
file in line 10 of module.

Please help me with any advice

/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
Michael Janssen-Gibson                 e-mail: mig@isd.canberra.edu.au
Applied Science
ISD, Library                   phone/voice mail: +61 6 (06)  201 5665
University of Canberra
PO Box 1 Belconnen, ACT 2616





From: Kenny1414@AOL.COM
Date: 25 Oct 1999 20:31
Subject: Re: kusudama lotus

In a message dated 10/25/1999 12:07:41 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
mariannele@HOTMAIL.COM writes:

> I want to do the kusudama lotus at this adress. All peases ar finisd
>  but I do not understand how to get them together. Do I use glue or .......?
>  http://library.advanced.org/27152/towns/oriville/studio/studio.htm

Yes, I believe you are supposed to glue the six lotuses (loti?) together.

Aloha,
Kenneth Kawamura





From: "Tommy Allen jr." <t__allen@GO.COM>
Date: 25 Oct 1999 21:13
Subject: Friend

Hello Everyone!
     I'm a male boy 15 years old live in Centre Pennsylvania and i am very
     talented w/origami.  I catch onto folds and diagrams quikly but I like
     folds that are easy and self explanatory.  Well I just joined Origami -1,
     and I am looking for some nice frie
 ds to talk to about Origami.  Anyone out there?
                          Tommy

http://www.go.com

________________________________________________________ ____
Get your Free GO Network Email address at http://mail.go.com





From: "James M. Sakoda" <James_Sakoda@BROWN.EDU>
Date: 25 Oct 1999 22:40
Subject: Re: Origami v Paper Folding

>To me, the differentiation between origami and paper folding is a
>fascinating topic, and central to an appreciation of the
>diversification of the practice since the modern founding of
>origami/folding paper an organised movement in the mid 1950's.
>
>But ultimately, I'm not sure where all this navel-gazing is getting
>me!!  Perhaps definitions are best left to critics and historians to
>decide, not to the artists.  After all, we're the ones who mess up the
>definitions in the first place, by producing work previously
>unenvisaged! (Tee! Hee!)
>
>Paul Jackson
Paul, you are on the right track..  We do not have the right to limit the
meaning of the words origami or paperfolding.  The following definition of
origami in the Ameridcan Heritage Dictionary of the English Language gives
a fairly broad meaning of origami, which most of us can live with.  Origami
may have originated in Japan, but that does not mean that we can limit it
to origami by Japanese.  It may have begun as the depiction of familiar
objects, but has been used more recently for abstract designs.  Why don't
we leave the broad definition to the dictionary and use qualifying words
such as Japanese origami or paperfolding or concrete or abstract origami or
paperfolding when they are appropriate.

     Origami. 1.   The art or process , originationg in Japan of folding
paper into flower, bird or other shapes.  2. A decorative object made in
this way.





From: Giovanni M S Greco <GGreco@SOFT.COM.BR>
Date: 25 Oct 1999 23:30
Subject: Estou viajando !

I will be out of the office starting  25/10/99 and will not return until
30/11/99.

Estarei fora  servio at o dia 30/10. Responderei sua mensagem quando
retornar.

Para assuntos urgentes, favor contactar o Fernando Magalhes
(fmagalhaes@soft.com.br)

Obrigado.





From: Marc Kirschenbaum <marckrsh@PIPELINE.COM>
Date: 26 Oct 1999 00:34
Subject: Re: QUESTION FOR MARC K.

At 10:18 AM 10/25/99 -0500,"Askinazi, Brett" <brett@HAGERHINGE.COM> wrote:
>Why would you want to diagram something like that?  I'm not saying such a
>model is undesirable but, the opposite.  Unique models are very desirable.
>Getting back to the art thread, I consider such pieces art.  Many artists
>use paper as a medium.  Creating a sculpture out of paper shouldn't be any
>different than clay or any other medium.

The above was in response to my off the cuff remark about finding it silly
to diagram my crumpled works. You did manage to open up some deep
questions. To be clear, these crumpled works are merely prototypes anyway,
and while they might have some artistic value to some, they are merely a
path to my vision.

As I was thinking of art in general, many works that require extensive
planning have some sort of duplication method built in or at least
available as an option. Then you have improvised works, which is where
crumpling fits into. I guess the rational behind such excursions is you are
doing away with as much technique as possible, so you can focus on a more
purely emotional element. There is not much that would be notatable anyway.

At the other end of the spectrum, heavily planned works are notatable, and
often are diagrammed, as an investment for the effort that went into
devising them. I sould note that my early works were not diagrammed, mainly
because I was unaware of the notation at the time. I did a lot of unique
works, and I regret not remembering some of them. Also important is that I
can learn from my older diagrams in ways a completed work would not tell me.

>
>Now back to my point, most artists don't create blue-prints (other than
>preliminary sketches and photos) to re-create their art.  I was really a bit
>disappointed when Mr. LaFosse put out a video on how to re-create his frog.
>I knew that Michael could make another, but I always considered it a one of
>kind piece.

I can understand your feelings to the above. I have to admit I did not see
the video, so I am unaware as how he presented the model. I would imagine
when LaFosse folds one of his pieces, each effort is an individual
expression of a given model. As with most artists, what he created
yesterday willbe different when folded years later. Hopefully his model was
presented with the intent that the folder can give his/her interpetation of
the model.

To throw this question back to the list, I am curious as to what drives
people to diagram.  Few peopl seem to like the process, so there must be
something more to it. This also goes to people who diagram other peoples
works as well (which I do myself occasionally).

Marc





From: Carly Issitt <moonunit39@HOTMAIL.COM>
Date: 26 Oct 1999 01:05
Subject: rose

Does anyone have a suggestion for a really good rose design that can hold
some sort of stem?

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





From: Matthias Gutfeldt <tanjit@BBOXBBS.CH>
Date: 26 Oct 1999 01:41
Subject: Albert Sng's webpage

Hi folks,

I goofed and gave a slightly incorrect address for the homepage where Albert
Sng hosts Ronald Koh's material. You should surf over to
http://www.geocities.com/EnchantedForest/Palace/3457/ronald.htm and not
/index.htm.
My apologies.

Matthias





From: Matthias Gutfeldt <tanjit@BBOXBBS.CH>
Date: 26 Oct 1999 02:02
Subject: Re: QUESTION FOR MARC K.

>===== Original Message From Origami List <ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU> =====
>At 10:18 AM 10/25/99 -0500,"Askinazi, Brett" <brett@HAGERHINGE.COM> wrote:
>>Now back to my point, most artists don't create blue-prints (other than
>>preliminary sketches and photos) to re-create their art.  I was really a bit
>>disappointed when Mr. LaFosse put out a video on how to re-create his frog.
>>I knew that Michael could make another, but I always considered it a one of
>>kind piece.
Everybody can reproduce a poem, because the very technique in which it is
usually presented (namely, using letters) is a blue-print for its
reproduction. Does that take away from the value or quality of the poem? I
don't think so! I could copy 'Der Erlknig' a hundred times, and it would
still be a great poem (and me a great fool!). The art in 'reproducing' a poem
would be how I can present it orally, and give it meaning.

And everybody can reproduce sheet music (NO! Let's not talk about taboos
again, OK?), and people actually get praised for it. I think the reason for
this is that to be able to reproduce the music, you have to be technically and
artistically skilled. Composing the music is art, reproducing (and, more
importantly, interpreting) the music is a completely different art in itself!

And the same is true for some origami models. I wouldn't say that reproducing
the traditional crane is art, because it's neither complex nor allows for much
artistic interpretation. But some models out there really do require both
technical skills and an artist's eyes and hands, to interpret in a meaningful
way without just copying exactly what the creator put down in the diagrams.

So if someone doesn't provide diagrams for his models, this doesn't change
anything about the value of the model. He simply keeps the blue-prints to
himself, and the model won't be reproduced by others until someone reverse-
engineers it.

>To throw this question back to the list, I am curious as to what drives
>people to diagram.  Few peopl seem to like the process, so there must be
>something more to it. This also goes to people who diagram other peoples
>works as well (which I do myself occasionally).
For me, it's simple: It makes the model more real. Until I have diagrammed it,
the model is not fixed in its form, but still a bit volatile. Once I've
diagrammed it, I have defined just exactly how the model should be folded. Or
rather, how I feel at this moment that it should be folded.

And I can snail-mail and email my diagrams all over the world, hand them out
at classes, put them on my homepage. Diagrams are more 'portable' than the
finished model, and so my model is much faster distributed than if I had to
show everybody in person- although that's fun, too!

Matthias





From: david whitbeck <dmwhitbeck@UCDAVIS.EDU>
Date: 26 Oct 1999 02:13
Subject: Re: QUESTION FOR MARC K.

The same could be asked to you Marc: why do you diagram?

David





From: Maarten van Gelder <VGELDER@KVI.nl>
Date: 26 Oct 1999 03:09
Subject: Re: Origame

Leigh Halford wrote:
>
> Thanks for all the interest in the text adventure. It is now posted on
> http://hometown.aol.com/origami451/index.html

It is also in the archives now. See 'Programs ...'.

--
Maarten van Gelder    KVI - Groningen, Netherlands    vgelder@kvi.nl





From: DLister891@AOL.COM
Date: 26 Oct 1999 04:26
Subject: Re: Origami v Paper Folding

Paul Jackson wrote: "I'm not sure where all this navel gazing is getting me."

and James Sakoda wrote:

"Why don't we leave the broad definition to the dictionary and use qualifying
words such as Japanese origami or paperfolding or concrete or abstract
origami or paperfolding when they are appropriate."

Why not indeed? (Except that I get a little irked by the invariable
parrot-like repetition by dictionaries attributing the origin of paperfolding
to the Japanese!) I don't really disagree with anything that James Sakoda and
Paul Jackson have written: it's really only a matter of the facet  of
paperfolding that one is looking at or the emphasis that one places upon its
various aspects.

However, at the heart of my previous posting there was a serious question:
What exactly is it that distinguishes what I sometimes termed "mainstream
Origami"  from other kinds of paperfolding, or, indeed, from other
papercrafts. We all know what we mean by "ordinary" origami, but it is not so
easy to pinpoint what makes it what it is. Obviously it has something to do
with the way geometry is used and also with the kind of folding processes
employed. I have made one or two suggestions, but I have come to no
conclusion. Perhaps this is something which may interest the mathematicians.

I agree that we should not get too involved in navel gazing. But "navel
gazing" is another expression for "thinking" and it does no harm to think
about things occasionally. It can sharpen our perceptions and led us to new
applications and, perhaps, to new creativity.

David Lister.

Grimsby, England.

DLister891@AOL.com





From: Allan findlay <a_findlay@EXCHANGE.CREATIONS.CO.UK>
Date: 26 Oct 1999 04:41
Subject: Re: Friend

>and I am looking for some nice friends to talk
>to about Origami.  Anyone out there?

Thats what this list is all about!

--------------------------
        Allan           (a_findlay@exchange.creations.co.uk)

-----Original Message-----
From: Tommy Allen jr. [mailto:t__allen@GO.COM]
Sent: 26 October 1999 02:00
To: ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU
Subject: Friend

Hello Everyone!
     I'm a male boy 15 years old live in Centre Pennsylvania and i am very
talented w/origami.  I catch onto folds and diagrams quikly but I like folds
that are easy and self explanatory.  Well I just joined Origami -1, and I am
looking for some nice friends to talk to about Origami.  Anyone out there?
                          Tommy

http://www.go.com

________________________________________________________ ____
Get your Free GO Network Email address at http://mail.go.com





From: Nick Robinson <nick@CHEESYPEAS.DEMON.CO.UK>
Date: 26 Oct 1999 05:10
Subject: Re: Publishing Announcement - Building with Butterflies

Dave Mitchell <davemitchell@MIZUSHOBAI.FREESERVE.CO.UK> sez

>For those who don't already know Building with Butterflies

..... you should by a copy! It's a *superb* collection of simple modular
items, ideal for folders of all ages.

all the best,

Nick Robinson

email           nick@cheesypeas.demon.co.uk
homepage        http://www.cheesypeas.demon.co.uk - now featuring soda syphons!
BOS homepage    http://www.rpmrecords.co.uk/bos/





From: Paul Jackson <Mpjackson@BTINTERNET.COM>
Date: 26 Oct 1999 05:54
Subject: Re: Origami v Paper Folding

David Lister wrote earlier today:

> I agree that we should not get too involved in navel gazing. But
"navel
> gazing" is another expression for "thinking" and it does no harm to
think
> about things occasionally. It can sharpen our perceptions and led us
to
> new applications and, perhaps, to new creativity.

Absolutely right.  It's the 'navel gazing' -- I'm sure -- which in
combination with a healthy tendency towards creative anarchy, has led
to 'new applications' in all arts/crafts/whatever.  There can never be
enough of it!

Paul Jackson
