Toy Design and Prototyping

For week 4, the focus was on sewing with hand and with the machine. While I was unproficient with the machine, I began to have an understanding regarding how both sewing strategies could be incorporated for project 2. While the sewing machine was very good with making tight stitches that were accurate, there was slight difficulty controlling it where stitches may be slightly done farther than they should be done. Hand sewing was much more slower than the sewing machine by a lot. When the stitches were made for hand sewing, I struggled a lot as the thread would fall of the needle or would stick with it where it would get stuck between the cloth and discontinue my stitch. This can be seen in the stitches I made where I made the running stitch, backward stitch, stem stitch, whipped running stitch, and the herringbone stitch. 

For Week 3, the focus was on Karakuri, a type of paper toy that could transform upon impact as well as different type of mechanisms. I picked an easy paper toy for this week without thinking too much to understand how karakuri works first so that I can work on the difficult ones later where I picked the turtle. This proved to be a good idea as I had to follow up with how to fold and attach pieces together which helped when I created the mechanism of cam, crank, and gear. Below, the photos of the projects can be seen as well as a video of the cam mechanism and turtle toy.

For Project 1, our group researched kites historically and culturally where the range of kites that we discussed about ranged from dragon kites of the BC era to sport kites of the modern era. The research for this can be seen in the slides through the link: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1aSt-wwB4hbvg9ks3GY9KMOM2eB8e_sIX3ubMDPWi9Dk/edit?usp=sharing . The kite that I focused on is the Steiff Roloplan Kite which was known for its technological advancement in aerial photography. This wasn’t significant in the essence of toy playing, but it was important in the sense of technology as new tactics could be used with this militarily and diplomatically. 

The question that I’d like to focus on which was in our presentation is “Has our understanding of play developed throughout time?”. I personally believe that there has been a paradigm shift with play as our modern comprehension of play is much more idealized than what I believe was considered play in the past. For example, when I read Toys as Culture, it talked about Mayan traditions as play, but a classmate also stated that it’s not play as it’s violent. I think that the notion of violence is now not associated with play, but perhaps, in the most primitive state of play of the past, it may be considered play. Of course, there’s no way to confirm as time cannot be manipulated and the past cannot be experienced therefore it cannot be definite that there has been a paradigm shift, but even in modern day, our understanding of play is still adapting to the world around us where we begin to inquire if the object that we interact with such as a computer can be play. In the past when computers didn’t exist, play may not have included that type of “interaction” as “play”.

Part 1: The movie introduced many concepts regarding the concept of play from Cas Holman, an award winning toy maker. One of her concepts is that children should be able to build upon the toys and not play with a stagnant toy. This includes making toys and play educational where they learn how to overcome challenges. In her building block toy, it allowed for self-creativity which is vital definition to Holman’s concept of toy being that it should be imaginative and not be restraint of material. Essentially the definition of play that Holman provides is that play is something natural that allows for exploration of one’s imagination. It is something that allows imagination to build and builds imagination. 

Having read the readings as well as read this text, I’m highly influenced by Toy as Culture in my belief of what play is. I believe that our notion of play has changed like a paradigm shift throughout time. While it’s romanticized as this exploration of one’s imagination or as educational, the privilege of playing is an existential issue having to do with hierarchy, power status, and economic prowess. Of course it is understood that one may not feel that these embark on play in modern day, it is important to realize that play is a privilege for those without struggles. In this sense, I agree that play is imaginary, educational, and not-serious, but I do not agree that play is naturally those concepts. The doctrine we live in the world today blinds our vision of the habits of the past, in which our modern world regards as primitive. Play, in it’s most natural form, is primitive. It is not the evolution of play theory, of hierarchal domestication, nor is it a truly peaceful. We regard cultural play of the past as violence, but from a natural point of view, it is play. Play cannot be one singular term that overlays all of the play in history, but it can be defined as the engagement of oneself with the natural surrounding environment and zeitgeist in a non-serious manner or with playing intent. How one is engaged with play is their style of play, but it would be incorrect to deny cultural play as non-play due to personal belief of play. 

I believe that a board game called “Catan” is my favorite toy as it allows for strategy that can be used by players to win the game. Every time the game is played, there are different dynamics that one must consider in their strategy to play the game. For this game, I have to play with one to five more friends which allows for social interaction as well as consideration for how the game can be won. This game was created in 1995 by Teuber which was initially for the purpose of escapism from reality. The target users are teenagers and it is still in the market, being one of the most sold board games in the world. This toy actually has to do with Toy as Culture reading as playing games is actually a privilege. Moreover, this game also has to do with the Ludic theory as it has to do with play as education. Honestly, I don’t think there’s much connections to the readings in general, but if I have to pick it’d be that it connects with the imagination that is a trait of play. Playing board games often provide restrictions, but it also needs the player to think about the imagery occurring in order to have the game function. Without imagination, the game would seem listless as there’s nothing being thought up.

For the first week of toy design, the focus was on drawing and essentially driving one’s imagination to be more creative in the approach to drawing. Having not drawn for years, this type of exercise was somewhat heartwarming and provided me a sense of reliving youth. From exercises regarding drawing with hands to drawing the alphabet, each exercise focused on how results could be expressed, but also provided freedom to explore certain styles. I consider myself someone naturally inclined to abstraction and thus expressed so in the alphabet design to reconsider how letters could be like. All of the drawings will be attached at the end of the blog. 

I’ve previously had a couple lessons of drawing back in primary and middle school, but the focus of those classes weren’t to create hyperrealistic portraits. They were more geared towards self-expression and developing personal unique style, hence my drawing isn’t photorealistic or near that level. While my drawing experience is limited, I have had a lot of artistic experience in high school where I focused on 3d art forms in particular, but still did 2d art. I consider myself more specialized in creating sculptures where I use plaster and soft clay rather well. If digital drawing is also taken into consideration as drawing, I have done CAD drawings for architecture projects using Rhinoceros and Adobe Illustrator. These are more technical drawings that are more like blueprints, but could still be a “drawing”.

Regarding my comments on the video, my initial impression is that the editing is very artistic in nature which I truly enjoy. As the protagonist is an illustrator, the video style resembles a lot of his own persona which was pleasing to watch. It kind of provides me an interest in learning how to edit film in such a way that reflects one’s identity. Moreover, the angles of the video were appalling as it used lighting in a complementing manner. Of course, my notes on the aesthetics only reflects my personal interest in learning more about film (where I hope to cross-minor in film). Now, reflecting on the content of the video, I really have a lot of the same ideas as Christopher Niemann. When he mentions that he waits for crazy moments to happen for inspiration, I essentially also feel the same way about my art creating process. I’m not a natural artist by nature, but I can develop my work to look like it’s personalized with touch and care after having thought about the portrayal for months. Moreover, when he talks about abstraction being the most important, I also agree with this point as it shows personal touch with one’s work. Rather than reflect the object or imitate an object, I want to show my interpretation of an object. Furthermore, I was fascinated by his imaginative narrative where he uses legos to represent objects and concepts which was truly a creative spark that I may incorporate for my ideas. Lastly, I love how he absorbed the world around him and used it as inspiration to create his magazine covers. Rather than create an interface of VR/AR, he created an interpretation of AR as being the perspective one uses to view the world.