Re: [Origami] Origami Masterpieces
I guess you've already considered and discarded the idea that 'Origami Masterpieces' is a poor translation of the title 'Origami Dokuhon: 2', which was published the same year at virtually the same number of pages? On Sun, Jul 10, 2022 at 11:55 AM David Kirkland via Origami < origami@lists.digitalorigami.com> wrote: > This book was published in 1998 by Heian International Publications > Incorporated. It was supposedly about a few of Akira Yoshizawa’s > challenging works written by him in English with 96 pages. The cover of > this book is not visible anywhere online. It seems that retailers never > have a copy available. Where can I go to see the cover of “Origami > Masterpieces” with ISBN 0893468444? It isn’t even mentioned in David > Lister’s List about Yoshizawa’s books. For the past two decades of > searching, it has been an Origami Mystery. What do you know? Thanks! > > > Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone > <https://overview.mail.yahoo.com/?.src=iOS> > -- Zack Brown
Re: [Origami] Recreating Yoshizawa's unpublished models
I think the primary goal is to allow Yoshizawa's life work to fall to dust. There are plenty of excellent reasons to do that. For one reason, it ensures that no one will ever be able to fold those models. It's important to guard against that. It's also very important that only 6/1000ths of his creative output be preserved. Otherwise, we might be in danger of more of his creative work being available. Also it's important for people like Joseph Wu to be able to feel very proud about standing in opposition to anyone ever deciphering those models. Otherwise there would be the chance he couldn't feel proud of that. There are many other reasons never to let Yoshizawa's work see the light of day. Those are just a few of the most important. Be well, Zack On Sun, Jan 12, 2020 at 9:53 PM Lorenzo Lucioni wrote: > Hi all, Hi Robert, > > three years ago we shortly debated about Yoshizawa works and his thousands > of models which were carefully preserved, boxed and hidden, by him. > I'm wondering if something changed, since 2017. Does anyone know something > about this topic? > > Best, > Lorenzo > > > On Tue, 7 Mar 2017 at 17:10, Robert J. Lang > wrote: > > > Various good points made by Peter, Zack, and Diana. Let me add just a few > > comments. > > > > Zack asks, “Would he really so carefully preserve them, and then desire > to > > keep them utterly unseen and unappreciated after his death, until they > > rotted away?” I think the answer is clearly “no”, because he took great > > care to fold his artwork from archival papers, and packed them carefully; > > his intention was more likely that they would be appreciated, displayed, > > and cared for and that they would NOT rot away. And no one I know of > > suggests “the idea that he regarded these carefully preserved works as > > things to be thrown away in the trash.” That’s a straw man argument. > Rather > > than intending that they be thrown away, he intended that they be > preserved > > forever in their original condition. And having seen the quality of his > > artwork today that he’d folded 30 or more years ago, he’s likely to get > his > > wish. > > > > But his desire that his body of work be preserved and displayed is not > the > > same as desiring that others could fold approximations of them. In the > > world of painting, an artist may want his or her artwork preserved and > > displayed, but not want paint-by-number versions of them made available. > > > > We don’t know, and can’t possibly know, why Yoshizawa refrained from > > diagramming his most impressive works. It could be, as Zack suggests, > that > > he wanted to keep some secrets (and I think that motivation probably > played > > something of a role). It could also be that he felt that even with > > instructions, no one could fold those works as well as he could, and he > > didn’t want to see poor folded versions of his children. > > > > Yoshizawa left his body of work to be managed by his widow, Mrs. Kiyo > > Yoshizawa. Really, all that we know for sure about his wishes was that he > > delegated to *her* how his legacy and artwork was to be handled. And I > can > > say from my limited experience via participating in the book “Akira > > Yoshizawa: Japan’s Greatest Origami Master” ( > > https://www.origamiusa.org/catalog/products/akira-yoshizawa ) she takes > a > > very active and firm role in determining what may or may not be done with > > respect to his artwork. > > > > My participation was writing a foreword; in the foreword I described the > > process of reverse-engineering his Cicada from a CP and step folds that > he > > sent to Gershon Legman back in the early 1960s, which were provided to me > > by Laura Rozenberg, from the collection of her origami museum in Uruguay. > > Reading between the lines of translated missives discussing the foreword > > and my requests to her to show additional imagery, Mrs. Y did not seem > > thrilled with the notion and vetoed some of the imagery I wanted to show, > > but she didn’t outright kibosh the whole article. > > > > So, I rather doubt that she’d support x-raying and re-diagramming, but > the > > appropriate avenue to pursue that would be to ask her, and then abide by > > her wishes. > > > > Robert > > > > > > > > > > -- > Lorenzo Lucioni > Wildenbruchstr. 47 > 40545 Duesseldorf - DE > > +49.1525.9768654 > lorenzo.luci...@gmail.com > -- Zack Brown
Re: [Origami] Old Yoshizawa books
Off topic, but my favorites are 'Inochi Yutaka na Origami', 'Sosaku Origami', 'Origami Tokuhon 2', and 'Origami: Akira Yoshizawa Exhibition Catalogue'. I wish the estate would allow his remaining 50,000 models to be x-rayed, so that creative folders could come up with elegant folding sequences for all of them, and we could experience his legacy for thousands of mind-blowing years to come. Especially that Cerberos and all those insects...darn it! Be well, Zack On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 12:24 AM Faye E Goldman wrote: > Check Dennis Walker's origami database. There are a bunch of cover photo's > there. > > > https://oriwiki.com/searchresultsPubs.php?Term1=yoshizawaon > > Faye > > From Lorenzo: > Dear origamists, > does anyone know where can I find a (even partial) list, or some cover > pictures, of old Yoshizawa japanese books, such as the one below? > https://drive.google.com/open?id=1ygQyd1lBugdmosYj0GRd99H6LzDnimDr > > If you own some, could you please send me cover picture(s) (in private, of > course, not to bother the list)? lorenzo.luci...@gmail.com > > Many thanks in advance, > Lorenzo > > > -- Zack Brown
Re: [Origami] Recreating Yoshizawa's unpublished models
> When I first met Yoshizawa at his house in the early 1980s, he pulled dozens > and dozens of models from boxes, one at a time, and only let me see them for > a few seconds each. When I asked if he could leave them out longer, he said > that he didn’t want me to figure out how to fold them. I doubt that I could > have. The question is whether today we have a right to unfold (even if by > X-ray) the designs of someone who may not have wanted us to do so. Just > because Yoshizawa published instructions to some of his models doesn’t mean > he would have wanted to publish instructions to all of them. It’s akin to > publishing a manuscript or musical score that a writer or composer might not > have wanted to see the light of day, which is why some of those drafts ended > up in the fireplace. I don’t think there’s an obvious answer to this > question, but it’s worth pondering. > > Best, > > Peter Engel > I agree that it's worth pondering whether Yoshizawa would have approved, and I would argue that he most definitely would have. I'm sure that many of his models did end up in the fireplace. In those cases, he made a choice to destroy them because he didn't want them to live on after him. It's also possible that he may have left a few models lying around the house, that he also was unsatisfied with. Maybe we shouldn't try to analyze those either. But the models we're talking about are the ones that he took very great pains to preserve in such a way that they would last as long as possible. He created them with great care, and wrapped them up and put them in boxes because he wanted them to survive. There can be no other reason. And just as we might want to avoid creating diagrams for models he wished to keep private, we should also avoid allowing the life work of a great artist to perish, when it was something he clearly wished to see preserved. And not just in boxes until they fell apart from decay. What possible reason could any artist have to desire that, having taken such care in the preservation of their works? It's easy to understand why Yoshizawa might not have wanted you to figure out how to fold his models while he was alive. He'd had experiences with people creating models similar to his -- or possibly taken directly from his designs -- and then failing to give him the credit, and he resented that. He wanted the credit for his labors to be reserved to himself alone. And while he must have known that he couldn't possibly diagram all 50,000 models in the time he had left to live, it's likewise easy to understand that he would have wanted to retain the ability to select which of those models he would choose to diagram, given that he couldn't get to them all. So it's easy to understand why he would keep them private while he lived. But now that he's dead, I would find it unfathomable that he would wish his life's work, which he took such pains to preserve, to simply wink out of existence as age or fire ultimately claims these unique and fragile works. Would he really so carefully preserve them, and then desire to keep them utterly unseen and unappreciated after his death, until they rotted away? That doesn't sound realistic at all. Clearly he would still wish to receive credit for each and every model that he created. And I think that as a community, we should ensure that he receives that. But the idea that he regarded these carefully preserved works as things to be thrown away in the trash, makes no sense at all to me. I don't know how it could make sense to anyone. We should X-ray and analyze each of these models, and we should take steps to ensure that Yoshizawa is given full and complete credit for each and every one of them. Be well, Zack -- Zack Brown
[Origami] Recreating Yoshizawa's unpublished models
Given that scientists can use x-rays and other techniques to fathom things like the antikythera device from a mashed up hunk of ocean debris, couldn't similar techniques be used to deconstruct Yoshizawa's unpublished models? It seems as though step 1 would be to x-ray each model, and identify the actual crease pattern and layered topology of the model. That should be fairly easy. Step 2 would be to figure out a linear set of folding instructions that would produce the model in question. This is essentially impossible because we can never know what Yoshizawa really did. But over a period of years, it's likely that members of the origami community could develop increasingly refined guesses that seem to better and better match Yoshizawa's design and instruction style. Would it be great to have 50,000 Yoshizawa models diagrammed, instead of just a few hundred? And since there is literally no other way to eventually diagram these models, why not do it? If cost is a factor, crowdfund it. I'd donate! Be well, Zack -- Zack Brown
