In regards to your thumbnails, I think the more interesting set were the earlier ones before they started being 'actual heads' or 'actual animals'. You have to imagine that Harper is an architect, as opposed to it being a city derived from his existing drawings - it's a subtle distinction, but an important one, because the former will encourage design, while the latter will encourage a kind 'city in fancy dress' approach.
I wasn't sure about your travelogue's emphasis on hunting, as this seems an odd fit with Harper's obvious reverence and fascination for the natural world. You've established that the architect of the city is 'forgotten', but I'd suggest that maybe you need to consider that Harper is very much alive and has made this city in his own image. I suggest this, because you're producing a single render, not a story, so if you were to include the hunting aspect somehow as part of that still, it will look as if you've misunderstood your collaborator? Does that make sense? I did do some research to see if Harper was an avid hunter - hence your concept, but I couldn't find any supporting evidence. If I'm wrong on this, then I stand corrected!
I'd like to see you dig in a bit more to Harper's design philosophy:
"He contrasted his nature-oriented artwork with the realism of John James Audubon, drawing influence from Cubism, Minimalism, Einsteinian physics and countless other developments in Modern art and science. His style distilled and simplified complex organisms and natural subjects, yet they are often arranged in a complex fashion..."
In other words, I want you to think and see like Harper and walk in his shoes. You should take some visual reference of animals and then 'Harper' them - so instead of seeking to derive designs from existing Harper designs, seek to evolve some new work using Harper's system.
In terms of thinking about actual sorts of buildings, maybe you should think about Harper's favourite animals - which I think were birds. Maybe the capital city of Harperville would reflect this hierarchy, and maybe the individual buildings would too? For example, while Harper preferred birds as a genre of shape, did he have a favourite bird, and if so, if Harper could design a city after his own interests, would that favourite bird be the inspiration for the most important building in the city?
Short version - I'd like to see you inhabit Harper's ideas even more, avoid just converting existing Harper drawings into buildings (try and get into the principle of his designing) and look to Harper's own interests as a guide to planning and devising your city and its individual elements.
OGR 05/11/2016
ReplyDeleteHi Douy,
In regards to your thumbnails, I think the more interesting set were the earlier ones before they started being 'actual heads' or 'actual animals'. You have to imagine that Harper is an architect, as opposed to it being a city derived from his existing drawings - it's a subtle distinction, but an important one, because the former will encourage design, while the latter will encourage a kind 'city in fancy dress' approach.
I wasn't sure about your travelogue's emphasis on hunting, as this seems an odd fit with Harper's obvious reverence and fascination for the natural world. You've established that the architect of the city is 'forgotten', but I'd suggest that maybe you need to consider that Harper is very much alive and has made this city in his own image. I suggest this, because you're producing a single render, not a story, so if you were to include the hunting aspect somehow as part of that still, it will look as if you've misunderstood your collaborator? Does that make sense? I did do some research to see if Harper was an avid hunter - hence your concept, but I couldn't find any supporting evidence. If I'm wrong on this, then I stand corrected!
I'd like to see you dig in a bit more to Harper's design philosophy:
"He contrasted his nature-oriented artwork with the realism of John James Audubon, drawing influence from Cubism, Minimalism, Einsteinian physics and countless other developments in Modern art and science. His style distilled and simplified complex organisms and natural subjects, yet they are often arranged in a complex fashion..."
In other words, I want you to think and see like Harper and walk in his shoes. You should take some visual reference of animals and then 'Harper' them - so instead of seeking to derive designs from existing Harper designs, seek to evolve some new work using Harper's system.
In terms of thinking about actual sorts of buildings, maybe you should think about Harper's favourite animals - which I think were birds. Maybe the capital city of Harperville would reflect this hierarchy, and maybe the individual buildings would too? For example, while Harper preferred birds as a genre of shape, did he have a favourite bird, and if so, if Harper could design a city after his own interests, would that favourite bird be the inspiration for the most important building in the city?
Short version - I'd like to see you inhabit Harper's ideas even more, avoid just converting existing Harper drawings into buildings (try and get into the principle of his designing) and look to Harper's own interests as a guide to planning and devising your city and its individual elements.