Two Chairs and a Conversation pt 2: “give up.” by Will Taylor (2013)

 Figure 1

(Conversation between Humans + Environment)

Two-Chairs-Visual-Data-Final

Screenshot 2013-11-19 16.52.03

Stool-graph-final

stool2

stool1

twochairsroom1

twochairsroom2

twochairsroom3

twochairsroom5

 

My goal for this project was to examine human interactions within a predetermined space. I chose my dorm room for this environment, because participants would be familiar with the layout, but not the contents of the room. For this experiment, I examined three males and three females interactions with the space. The general demographics were “Educated young adults with a mixed range of diversities.” None of the participants had perviously seen the stool. This experiment  would require them to imagine what the object might look like as they searched.

Before letting participants into the room, I explained the rules of the examination:

1.) You are given an unlimited amount of time to find the two stools hidden in this room.

2.) The stools may be hidden anywhere in the room.

3.) You may give up at any time.

As soon as a participant entered the room, I began a timer and documented all movements within the space. I recorded how long it took for each participant to find one stool and how long it would take for them to give up on finding the second. Additionally, I would quote the subject when they would opt to stop the test. I made a stylistic choice not to paint the stool that was to be hidden in the room. I found that that natural color of MDF allowed the stool to blend with my wooden dresser, on top of which the object would be hidden.

Figure 1 Analysis:

Average time for participants to give up = 4:08.66 (min:sec.ms)

Average time for participants to find the first stool = 2:34.50

Objects most mistaken for stools: Coasters, bed-risers, shoe rack, stool decoy (box under blanket)

Location most visited by participants = Under the bed on the right side (further location-analysis available upon request)

All participants started the experiment on the right side of the room. One of my hypotheses is that they begin on the right side because it is my side of the room. However, I figure this decision might have also been affected by the direction the door opens or the fact that all participants were right handed. Testing in multiple environments would be necessary to pursue this finding.

At first, each participant was apprehensive about searching the room, commenting about how they felt uncomfortable going through my things. I found this interesting, because I explicitly told them they could search anywhere in the room. This got me thinking about the relationship between humans and their possessions. I’ve determined that, to some extent, humans have an intimate relationship with their things. That being said, the participants may have been uncomfortable disrupting this relationship by searching through my (and my room mate’s) belongings.

In this project I found an additional conversation at the end of each test, within participants’ closing statements. I have created a word cloud to illustrate this interaction.

Screenshot 2013-11-19 15.21.21

 

Two Chairs/Conversation Part 2: “State-of-the-Art Virus” by Miranda Jacoby (2013)

IMG_3062 IMG_3150 IMG_3149 IMG_3136 IMG_3125 IMG_3088 IMG_3073 IMG_3099 glitch chair

Two Chairs/Conversation Part 2: “Relativity” by Natalie Moss (2013)

CNC Router,Student Work — nsmoss @ 3:04 am

a IMG_1968

b IMG_1967

c IMG_1965

d IMG_1973

e IMG_1975

f IMG_1978

g IMG_1955

h IMG_1964

“Relativity” is inspired by the idea of a conversation between Albert Einstein and M. C. Escher about relativity. The chairs are constructed from the symbols of Einstein’s equation for special relativity (in the expanded form of E=MxCxC), are assembled in a manner reminiscent of Escher’s tessellations, and are displayed in a way inspired by Escher’s multi-perspective images. (For more detail, see the explanation in Two Chairs and a Conversation Part 1: “Relativity.”) This conversation interests me because it raises questions about what is true: according to both Einstein and Escher, a situation (event(s) + location) can be viewed in very different ways, and yet no one perspective is more valid than any other. I find this extraordinary. An individual’s perception of reality is limited to a single perspective. But all individuals see the world differently. As humans, we have a tendency to believe that our own way of looking at things is best. I think there is enormous potential in the realization that there are other frames of reference… and they may all be just as true as ours.

Thank you so much to Amanda and Zach for not only demonstrating my chairs’ frames of reference, but also for carrying said chairs to location in Gates. And then back again. You are both awesome. Thanks.

Two Chairs and a Conversation pt 2: Forced Partnership by Kaitlin Schaer (2013)

Assignment,CNC Router,Student Work,Technique — Kaitlin Schaer @ 2:14 am

IMG_9163

IMG_9o

IMG_9180

IMG_9184

IMG_9168

IMG_9169

For this iteration of my “two chairs” project, I continued with my concept of a strained relationship between two students working on a project together. I have made several changes however: first, I did away with the small triangular pieces which were originally placed along many of the chairs’ edges. Second, to add interest to the chairs, I used drilling operations to create holes in the chairs through which I wove string, creating webs and curves reminiscent of suspension bridge structures. These references to architecture have lead me to become slightly more specific as to who I envision sitting in these chairs: I now see it as a conversation between two architecture students. Third, and related to this idea that this conversation is between architecture students, I have chosen an installation location that differs from my original plan. The chairs are now placed in the group workspace of Hunt library where many architectural models may be found. I chose to leave my chair unpainted with the bare MDF exposed to reference the architectural prototypes which are often made of similar material.

Two Chairs and a Conversation Part 2: “Imagine Trading Interest Rates as an Orange Juice Company…” by Madeline Finn (2013)

Assignment,CNC Router,Student Work — madelinefinn @ 12:10 am

photo-14

photo-21

photo-27

photo-19

photo-18

Two Chairs and a Conversation Part I: “Et Tu, Brute?” by Rachel Min (2013)

CNC Router — rachelhmin @ 2:25 am

IMG_5450
IMG_5453

IMG_5449

IMG_5493IMG_5494IMG_5496

 

I wanted my conversation to be between Julius Caesar and Brutus. I made one chair with an open circle as the back because I wanted it to symbolize how Julius trusted Brutus. His back was wide open. I wasn’t sure what I wanted to do for Brutus’s chair, but I realized that Brutus himself was the same as Julius. A huge part of the play is the parallelism between Brutus and Caesar, and I wanted to portray that through the same chair. I will be adding people underneath the chair to represent the mob mentality in the play, and I do intend to make that a bit different for Brutus and Caesar.

Two Chairs and a Conversation Part 1: “Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde” by Ralph Kim (2013)

CNC Router,Student Work — ralph @ 10:28 pm

3-500

2-500

1-500

6-500

5-500

4-500

 

This piece is intended to portray the internal dialogue between our conscientious self-restraint and moral self-release. The straitlaced and utilitarian chair represents our conscience — the side of our personality amicable to an orderly society much like Dr. Jekyll. However, my idea is that this chair will be precariously built one such that it will require quite a balancing act on part of the sitter to remain upright. When the sitter fails to remain on the chair, it will immediately spiral into utter chaos. On the other hand, the sinister chair representing the Mr. Hyde of our personality consists of a restraint, built-in dildo, and an anti-religious symbol. The dildo and the symbol were chosen to represent moral turpitude within the context of Victorian society, when the novel was written. The restraint is there just as we constantly oppress our darker urges; yet despite this, this chair is more sturdy than the other. I chose the chemical engineering lab to reflect the setting of the novel, but I am reconsidering the setting to be less specific to the story.

Notes for improvement: make the normal chair more deliberately collapsable. Make weird chair completely stable. Make both chairs about the same size. Make weird chair look more sinister and less like a baby chair. Change groove sizes to fit better. Change setting.

 

« Previous Page
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported License.
(c) 2024 3-D Media Studio I: Hey Robot, Let's Make Something! | powered by WordPress with Barecity