Pandora’s Box (Part 1)

CONCEPT

Both these themes evoke a sense of conflict and hence I decided to name my models after historic battles – Siege of Stalingrad, the Invasion of Normandy and Battle of Waterloo.

TECHNIQUE

Use of piercing and wedging to reinforce this idea of discordance and conflict within the models.

Initial MODELS

1-SIEGE OF STALINGRAD

 

Issues to be addressed : Width of SO too similar to Length of D, Presence of D and SD slightly conflicting, overall form too static to display Discordance, 1/3 ratio not potentialised fully.

2-INVASION OF NORMANDY

 

Issues to be addressed: Length of SO and Width of D almost the same, 1/3 ratio not potentialised fully, use of cuboids throughout need to be adjusted to avoid lack of dynamism.

3-BATTLE OF WATERLOO

 

Issues to be addressed: SO too thin and is hidden from some view points apart from the ones shown. Model also seemed very similar when compared with Model 1. Hence I decided to focus on the previous two models for further exploration.

Final Sketch Models

 

1-SIEGE OF STALINGRAD 

Changes :

  • SO is thinned down drastically from its initial width into a long toothpick.
  • SO is also pierced through both the SD and D diagonally to convey emphasised Discordance instead of simply being wedged.
  • 1/3 ration enforced as much as possible without compromising concept

 

2 – INVASION OF NORMANDY

Changes :

  • Height of SO decreased to compensate for its width’s similarity to Length of D
  • SD’s Length is increased while it is thinned and pierced through D
  • SO is wedged into SD with a gap that acts a void instead of being flushed all the way in