Today I went to Cohen and Cohen to get some inspiration. I think it worked. We'll see. So I've altered my task even further, surprise, surprise. Now that I've determined that the stair becomes a sensory experience I will deny that experience to users. Since the detail (or stair in this case) is a thing without context, then it will be an absurd thing to behold. Knowing this, I could either try to give the stair context or I could point out its distinct lack of context. I believe I would like to undertake the latter.



Let's relate this back to the beginning... to Mr. David Reed. His art, if you will remember, contains moving, flowing brush strokes that indicate the presence of the artist. "The movement is what is important. It reveals the gesture of the human body."

His early art consists of bold individual strokes that interrupt the passive gaze and painstakingly draw the viewer's stare across his canvas as each stroke unfolds the tale of its own creation.







Here's where I sit as of tonight, then... each brushstroke in Reed's work represents the presence of the human through its motion. Likewise, a staircase represents the human through motion. Reed's work is a synthesis of expression through the layering of motion and then the muting of those layers into a single image. My stair, likewise could be the same. What if I were to design my sta[re] as though it were a Reed painting... how would I do that?

By identifying first that each set of stairs is the equivalant of one of Reed's "brushstrokes," and by layering those stairs into a single artifact just as Reed layers his strokes into a single image.

If I can find a way to build multiple instances of staircases at once and then smoothe that into a single artifact I believe I will have created a synthetic stare inspired by the work of David Reed.
Comments?