Our analysis and documentation set of the bicycle is driven towards an exposure of all pieces in an assembly and a willful suspension of hierarchy. Taking that prerogative gives the parts: an autonomy, and an equal magnitude in their capacity to effect the bike as a whole. The bike as a functionally minimal species does not contain excess per se, but it could be argued that at specific moments in time there are parts not performing. Recognizing the active parts at time intervals gives us a constantly changing conception of the whole, and potentially new dialogues between previously separated parts, but most importantly the machine defined as part. It is from this platform that we are able to introduce a set of initiatives that deal with extracting a new species set of possible forms and structures from the familiar and approachable bicycle. A pathology is introduced as a lens for investigation and criteria of resistance; phantom limb disorder introduces loss and memory as two main conceptual components to approach analysis and mutations. Firstly translated into our material practice on parts; mirroring, an operation that is capable of evoking, depending on the location of your operation line, reductive or additive behavior but more importantly, if done correctly, the resulting object contains a memory of the previous object that has been operated on. To perform mutations on the bike as a whole and then retroactively design the hierarchy of the bike to accommodate that change would lead us only to design new bikes, and parts would remain as static accommodations for the assembly at large. The part need be empowered to change itself radically so that its platonic performance could be shattered and then a new radically unfamiliar object could begin as a reference for larger unknown assemblies.
Filed under: Bike Catalog, Pathology, Phase 1
pdonbeck
erikemartinez
guillermobernal
scottdavidsegal
slyviah
