Re: [Origami] Recreating Yoshizawa's unpublished models

[Zack Brown]

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] Recreating Yoshizawa's unpublished models

[Lorenzo Lucioni]

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

Re: [Origami] Recreating Yoshizawa's unpublished models

[Xander Arena]

I'm glad I opened my O-list today, this has been an interesting thread.

I've been meaning to share a picture with you all for a few years and this
discussion has motivated me to do so. The picture is of a quickly folded
crane which I placed in a cabinet X-ray unit at a hospital I was
inspecting. This image does indeed show that it would be possible to
reconstruct anybody's models without actually deconstructing them.
http://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m44/xander77arena/Xray%20Origami.jpg

>>Does anyone know if there is any prospect of these works being archived
> >>or even just photographed, let alone displayed in a more public way?
>
> Mrs. Kiyo Yoshizawa actually has been eager to have her husband's work be
> shown in appropriate museum venues in Japan and abroad. One needs to just
> stay informed.
>

Apart from gracious traveling displays, I think it would be really neat if
we one day saw large museums begin to collect these great works (not just
AY stuff) to display them alongside other artistic masters.


Best,


-- 
xda

www.linkedin.com/in/xander
http://www.xanderfolds.com

Re: [Origami] Recreating Yoshizawa's unpublished models (David O'Sullivan)

[saadya]

On Wednesday March 8 David O'Sullivan wrote:

>>Something that I wonder about more is if there are any plans for the
>>works to be publicly displayed in any way?  There is an aura of wonder
>>and mystery around Yoshizawa's oeuvre partly as a consequence of the
>>works being boxed up and only revealed for seconds at a time to a chosen
>>few visitors.
>>
>>Does anyone know if there is any prospect of these works being archived
>>or even just photographed, let alone displayed in a more public way?

David,

To both answer your question and toot my own horn a bit (it's been a
while, I'm allowed):  In 2007 during research for the exhibit I curated at
the Tikotin Museum of Japanese Art in Israel, I stumbled upon the fact
that Felix Tikotin, the 20th century's great collector of Japanese art,
was a key figure in arranging the 1955 show of Yoshizawa's works at the
Stedelijk Museum in Amsterdam—-Yoshizawa's first museum exhibit anywhere
and his first real exposure in Europe. I used that discovery in turn (and
the friendship that subsequently arose between the two men) to appeal to
Mrs. Yoshizawa to loan works for my exhibit, which to my delight she did.
Many of these works had actually been in the Amsterdam show. Probably more
important, Tikotin's grandson, who found out about the family connection
via the above, a few years later arranged a show exclusively of
Yoshizawa's works at the Sieboldhuis JapanMuseum in Leiden, Holland
(2011)-- as a memento of his grandfather's 1955 one. Some 300 works were
shown from all periods in Yoshizawa's creative life.
(https://www.flickr.com/photos/orihouse/sets/72157626681112524/)  I
learned through the newspapers of this upcoming exhibit and got
involved—eventually writing the preface to its catalog and giving a
lecture at the museum on the Legman-Tikotin-Yoshizawa connection such as
I'd pieced it together at the time.  (Gershon Legman was the first person
in the West to correspond with Yoshizawa and had obtained works from him
for a display, originally planned to be held in Paris). Much of my
understanding was conjectural and based on sketchy information from David
Lister, who in turn got it from very cagey letters to him by Legman
himself. But many questions remained and I took them up again circa 2013
with Laura Rozenberg, who at the time had just come back from France where
she'd purchased copies from Legman's widow Judith, of her husband's
correspondence primarily with Argentine designer Ligia Montoya.  This
enquiry sparked Laura's interest and she paid a second visit to Judith in
the south of France, this time collecting Legman's correspondence more
specifically with Yoshizawa. Together we were able to piece together a far
more complete and more accurate picture of how the 1955 show evolved.  It
makes a fascinating story; Laura owns the rights to the information she
purchased and we'll wait till she's ready to tell it.  Meanwhile the EMOZ
origami museum in Zaragoza, Spain also hosted a major show of Yoshizawa's
works,in 2014, based on the Zaragoza folders' own direct, personal history
and connection with AY over the years.  What I'm saying in short (hah!) is
that one does not need to rely on the memories of brief glances of works
that some of the older generation of designers were privileged to have. 
Mrs. Kiyo Yoshizawa actually has been eager to have her husband's work be
shown in appropriate museum venues in Japan and abroad. One needs to just
stay informed.
S

Re: [Origami] Recreating Yoshizawa's unpublished models

[David O'Sullivan]

Agree with the sentiments concerning Yoshizawa's work and that it is 
unnecessary that there be instructions for folding them.


Something that I wonder about more is if there are any plans for the 
works to be publicly displayed in any way?  There is an aura of wonder 
and mystery around Yoshizawa's oeuvre partly as a consequence of the 
works being boxed up and only revealed for seconds at a time to a chosen 
few visitors.


Does anyone know if there is any prospect of these works being archived 
or even just photographed, let alone displayed in a more public way?


David

Re: [Origami] Recreating Yoshizawa's unpublished models

[Joseph Wu]

> On Mar 6, 2017, at 12:38, Zack Brown  wrote:
> 
> 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.

First, thanks to Robert for some sound advice. 

Second, as someone who also visited with the Yoshizawas a number of times, and 
as a professional artist, and as a loud mouthed schnook who has sounded off on 
origami art before, Zack are you mad?

Seriously, the art is the art. If it is cared for, it will last a long, long 
time. The art itself is the legacy. It was made lovingly by the artist, 
hopefully to his satisfaction, and is being maintained for future generations 
to enjoy. There's no basis, other than the origami community's own biases, for 
requiring instructions to exist to perpetuate the legacy of an artist or his 
art. As I used to say, does the lack of paint-by-numbers kits reduce Van Gogh's 
legacy? Do we bemoan the fact that there aren't step-by-step instructions to 
recreate Guernica? Must there be a YouTube video teaching us how to paint the 
Mona Lisa?

I get it. You want to fold these models, and others do, too. And so you 
proposed this plan. Fine. But don't you dare pretend that this is about 
anything but that desire. Don't presume to speak for someone you don't know. 
What you find unfathomable and unrealistic speaks only to your own thoughts. We 
are not all the same. 

--
Joseph Wu, Origami Artist (via iPhone)
e: josep...@origami.as
w: http://www.origami.as
flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/josephwuorigami/
facebook: http://www.facebook.com/joseph.wu.origami

Re: [Origami] Recreating Yoshizawa's unpublished models

[Robert J. Lang]

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

Re: [Origami] Recreating Yoshizawa's unpublished models

[Diana Lee via Origami]

Hi O-Listers,
I think we can solve this issue by asking his wife and/or surviving children.  
If Yoshizawa wanted his models preserved in a museum, in the form of diagrams 
in a book, or in the form of photographs of intact models, he would have 
mentioned this to his surviving family.  
He must have loved and cherished his origami creations and may not want them 
dissected, picked apart, and splayed out for the world to see.  Just because we 
can x-ray the models or reverse engineer them from appearance doesn't mean we 
should.  This is especially true if he has given indication that he doesn't 
want his models to be shared.  
I don't know Yoshizawa personally and I have never had the honor of meeting him 
but it seems to me that he's not a hermit living in the hills.  He is well 
aware of what cameras are.  He has met many origami enthusiasts.  I believe 
that if he wanted to share the folding sequences of his origami model, he would 
have had ample opportunity to do so either by himself or with the help of 
collaborators.  The fact that he has not revealed the folding sequences 
suggests to me that he didn't want to.  Maybe we should honor that.
Let's put it this way: when you die, are you going to donate your body to 
science and medicine so they can cut you apart and learn more about the human 
body?  It'll really advance the field and you'll be doing a great service to 
humanity.  So, would you donate your body to be dissected?  Do you have the 
right to donate someone else's body to be dissected?
Diana  --    
http://www.origami-resource-center.com/   http://make-origami.com 
--

Re: [Origami] Recreating Yoshizawa's unpublished models

[Zack Brown]

> 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

Re: [Origami] Recreating Yoshizawa's unpublished models

[Anna]

2017-03-05 23:10 GMT+01:00 Zack Brown :
>
> 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?

The first question here is, is it worth it? Are the models interesting
enough that a wider audience would like to fold them?
The second question is, why so complicated? There are people like me in
this community who basically have this x-ray view without needing special
equipment to decipher a model. In the end it comes down to experience and 3
dimensional thinking. If I see an Origami model, I've got a pretty good
idea how to fold it and I know I'm not alone, but here we come back to
question one, is it worthwhile?

Nice Greetings

Anna from Vienna, Austria

Re: [Origami] Recreating Yoshizawa's unpublished models

[Laura R]

> 
> 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

You’d first need to convince Ms. Yoshizawa that this is a great idea. 
Laura

[Origami] Recreating Yoshizawa's unpublished models

[Zack Brown]

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