To show something that is understood multiple ways inquires why, how, and other ambiguous questions. The pragmatic work of that of Richard Tuttle dives into a foreign type of medium, type of emancipation from accepted truths (at least at the time they were made). Reflected in every one of his pieces are words or theories, many things surrounding the part to become the whole. Why he creates is for the creator to decide as well as how, what he creates is the viewer’s task. Thinking on all different levels gives different answers.

Your first thought is never your greatest answer. Your first thought through modification is a better and surest way to greatness. Not until you know all optionswhen you know all the options, deciphering the best one is difficult and aggravating because of its wealth of answers. Even so, invigorating is the feeling I get towards triumphance within the boundaries in emotion I am set in during the transformation process.

One would have never known how beautiful a cadmium red was unless they knew of maroon, a type of red. If the subtle maroon did not exist, how would we know that cadmium red was richer and sharper in color? Better than what? How would one know of the saturation of a lighter value versus a darker value saturated blue? Apparently what one sees is not always what one perceives.

My work is starting to resemble what I perceive from other artists, especially in what I read. I never was too fond of thinking directly from text, perhaps due to my inherit ability to stick with something. The tools I am using in design have deepened although I am starting to find expansion among them. My lateral thinking in my last project was due to exercises I constructed outside of class, in particular games with dice that made one think about the unnoticed. I am looking for things that are more visually demanding than mathematically. I am trying to find beauty not in the immediate form: its color, shape, or pleasure, but in its glue, outlining, encasing, entrapment, or its eye. I want to find something new, something undiscovered even when I discover it. So to say, I want to find something so ambiguous and encapsulating that I do not care what it is until I study it and find that I will never be able to perceive it the same way as others. Only one connection, that is all I want and that connection is the valued perspective of beauty. I want to find beauty where no one else was able to find before.

A person can look at an apple on one side and another person can look at an apple on the other. Even though they recognize its an apple, they both perceive it differently. One of them might recognize it because of its color, the other because of its shape. Other people might depend on its smell, feel, angle of view, and even it environment it is placed within. Clarity is the cusp of believability and understanding. Ambiguity is usable as long as the thing is well to perceive and can be transferred into a net of answers, one in particular occurring to both the artist and the viewer.

Capability? Capability of mind, body, spirit. How far can one expand availability and the ability to use that capability? Erring expands mind but the capability to use the knowledge varies due to what? Is relationships between objects our key to understanding and with that understanding, capability? Maybe by perceiving things people find a hole or a rope that connects to the mind, body, and spirit. From there, people connect memory, action, and feeling in order to attain a certain capableness.

Time is money and in a world that focuses on efficiency I find myself in trouble. I believe that when this time factor is removed from an art piece or any writings, music, game etcetera the things are more intense, beautiful, tedious, and well put. My main goal is to put this factor aside and discard time while recognizing that I must have an assignment done. Almost as if I was in a meditative state.

I find myself more engaging in both conversation and writing due to the perseverance of thought and question. Thinking has developed on a whole, this is where I derive the questions, and I constantly question things, not necessarily always receiving an answer.

I work in a pacing manner. I plan, I do, and I create. In between those steps are error, reproduction, reevaluating, decision making, repetition, and more error. Error allows me to figure out things, once I err I am able to aesthetically and symbolically create a piece that fits the assignments.

“Imbalances in nature are corrected by automatic reaction, and the more extreme the imbalance, the more powerful will be the reaction.” (Fieser and Powers, 182) Nature’s purity is corroded by human hand. This world is so fast paced that people lose the value in natural reactions such as metamorphosis, erupting volcanos, even the creation of a plant. These things are expressed through art not because of their reactions but because of their beauty. It needs to be understood that nature is a slower paced visual, the quicker reactions are due to our own slowness. In particular, we cannot see the change of a butterfly because it is hidden. Confucius believed humans were, by nature, good, and that they naturally tended toward the good even if they are not aware of it. However, the new-born human was described to be like a blank block of wood, an eerily similar metaphor in both content and form to Locke’s tabula rasa theory, or blank slate metaphor, which contends that human nature is purely malleable, and no one is born good or bad. We develop our own physical strength according to our own needs. Our own needs do not enter this forbidden transformation because we do not need it. Is it hard to know that what we do not need does not affect our existence if lost, especially if we already feel for the object?

I believe that once you know something, you cherish it, you hold it not wanting to let go because you specifically found it with your eyes, your brain, and your perception. Knowing is all. Figuring things out by ones self gives a sense of self preservation and pride. The tools gained are then put to better use in the future.

Simplicity is clarity and is found as soon as we walk away from things on this earth. If we know all than we know the simple in complex ways. A contradiction in thought can be overbearing and later be distorted in its own context. Tuttle expressed simplicity, keeping things out of this world. His pieces expressed the quick reactions in human nature not the reactions of nature. His designated pieces were that of economical and material means. He created art for the purpose of the material and togetherness between that of the material and its binding. The quick reactions expressed are his own that he took into making the pieces. As clear as the pieces were they still bound to a certain relationship between ambiguity and their selves.