After a group discussion about the David Usborne collection and our respective thoughts, we came to the realisation that a lot of the objects are physical moulds or can somehow be linked to moulding something.
A mould is an object to make another object. A mould creates a space/void for something else to fill. A mould is a thing itself filled with empty space. A mould is purposeless when empty. A mould is a frame on which something is formed.
Further, our own mentality could be a mould. For example, we see this collection of objects differently if specific objects are named or not. The ambiguity of an unknown object allows a ‘mental mould’ to be formed depending on our view and opinions of the object in question. The idea that a mould is a frame is also interesting. Could we put this theory into the space where the objects will be exhibited? Is an exhibition space a frame for objects, untouchable, intangible and abstract in the eyes of the viewer? Contrastingly, referencing interior designer Ilse Crawford, home and familiarity is stated as a ‘frame for life’.
Going forward from these ideas, I decided to select some objects from the collection which are unnames and ambiguous. This allows the use or concept of an object to be moulded in the viewers’ perception, questioning whether our personal frame of life alters this perception. Not knowing the name or use of the object also leaves physical shape and materials as the only contrasting difference between objects. The collection also has an aesthetic lightness, delicacy and beauty. Due to the materials (glass and metal), there is an inherent fragility juxtaposed with sharpness and harm.
This visual shows my collection with the only descriptors found under each object on the online database.
Comments