Craft, Performance, and Grammars
Recent interest in new digital and computational ways of making has been paralleled by rising interest in traditional making and craft practices. Most efforts to merge digital and craft practices focus on the things produced, with attention to process only to the extent that it informs results. However, the socio-cultural, aesthetic, and creative dimensions of a craft practice are expressed in its performative, temporal aspects as much as in its products. A new computational theory of making offered by making grammars points to new possibilities for the study of temporal performance. In this paper, I use traditional kolam pattern making in India as a case study to probe the potentials of making grammars to represent craft performance, in contrast with the use of shape grammars to represent craft designs. Different generative strategies are revealed in the comparison.
KeywordsShape grammar Making grammar Craft Performance Temporality
- 1.McCullough, M. (1996). Abstracting craft: The practiced digital hand. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- 2.Oxman, N. (2007). Rapid craft. In Proceedings of UbiComp: International Conference on Ubiquitous Computing (pp. 534–538). Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
- 3.Gibson, E. (2016). Arching bamboo events pavilion in Hong Kong showcases digital fabrication. Dezeen. N.p., 22 Nov. 2016. Web. 26 Dec. 2016. Retrieved December 26, 2016, from https://www.dezeen.com/2016/11/22/zcb-bamboo-pavilion-students-chinese-university-of-hong-kong-world-architecture-awards-small-project/.
- 5.Retrieved October 13, 2017, from http://www.safari254.com/sights-people-north-rift/.
- 7.Bläsing, B. E. (2015). Segmentation of dance movement: Effects of expertise, visual familiarity, motor experience and music. Frontiers in Psychology 5. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01500.
- 11.Spriggs, E.H., De La Torre, F., & Hebert, M. (2009). Temporal segmentation and activity classification from first-person sensing. In 2009 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshops, CVPR Workshops 2009 (pp. 17–24). IEEE.Google Scholar
- 13.Dantam, N., & Stilman, M. (2011). The motion grammar: Linguistic perception, planning, and control. In H. Durrant-Whyte, N. Roy, & P. Abbeel (Eds.), Robotics: science and systems VII (pp. 49–56). Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- 14.Bouchard, D., & Badler, N. I. (2015). Segmenting motion capture data using a qualitative analysis. In: Proceedings of the Eighth ACM SIGGRAPH Conference on Motion in Games (pp. 23–30). http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2822013.2822039.
- 15.Kahol, K., Tripathi, P., & Panchanathan, S. (2004). Automated gesture segmentation from dance sequences. In: Proceedings of the Sixth IEEE International Conference on Automatic Face and Gesture Recognition (pp. 883–888). IEEE Conference Publications.Google Scholar
- 16.Retrieved December 26, 2016, from https://www.pinterest.com/pin/532409987168823298/.
- 17.Mall, S. A. (2007). Structure, innovation and agency in pattern construction: The kolam of southern India. In: E. Hallam, T. Ingold (Eds.), Creativity and cultural improvisation (pp. 55–78). Oxford: Berg.Google Scholar
- 21.Dahmen, R. (2004). The home in the world: Women, threshold designs and performative relations in contemporary Tamil Nadu, south India. Cultural Geographies, 11, 7–25.Google Scholar
- 24.Jablan, S. (2001). Mirror curves. In R. Sarhangi, & S. Jablan (Eds.), Bridges: Mathematical connections in art, music, and science (pp. 233–246). Bridges Conference.Google Scholar
- 25.Retrieved December 27, 2017, from http://www.mi.sanu.ac.rs/vismath/mir/mir.htm.
- 26.Klee, P. (1961). Notebooks, Volume 1 The thinking eye. J. Spiller (Ed.), R. Manheim (Trans.) London: Lund Humphries.Google Scholar