Catherie Ingrham is to the line what Deluze is to the fold. I see so many similarities in their respective manifestos that I can start to interchange the two meta-terms, "fold" and "line". I call them meta-terms because the are simultaneously analogies, metaphots and literal descriptors. The most significant difference seems to be that Deluze was primarly a philosopher who has, lately, seen his thery applied directly to architecture. Ingrham is an architect who has designed this theory much as a retrospective. In many ways she links the "line" (because if this words prevelance in everday language it is necessary for me to put it in quotes whenever I mean her meta-term rather than a figure of speeach) retroactively to high modernists. She paraphrases their intentions, aesthetically and experientialy, on many levels. Contemporary architects who have embraced the "fold," do so actively.
Back to the line, we find way of way of thinking and operting that is linked very direclty to the literal, graphic descriptor. We could, of course, make many lists of concepts that fall "in line" with the concept of "line." Some of the most important, to me, seem to be lines as modes of thinking and operating.
Also important to me is the potential of the line as raw digital artifact. One step up from the pixel, ie, wireframe. In this weeks final animation I have revisited wirefram as section and traces of previous sections.
- ▼ February (9)