Diary of Making: Research Commitments and Early Direction
January 2025
This project began with a practical problem in my sculptural practice: scale. The modular works I have so far created rely on stacking or slotted systems that allow forms to be assembled, disassembled and reconfigured. Existing solutions were limiting both structurally and conceptually. The joins were doing a job, but they were not carrying enough meaning.
Rather than treating this as a technical inconvenience, I chose to make the joint itself the focus of the work.
January marked the beginning of a research-led phase supported by bursary funding. This period was not about producing finished objects, but about establishing direction, identifying gaps in my knowledge and committing to a process that could support sustained development rather than short-term solutions.
Establishing Intent
At the outset, it was important to clarify what this project was not. It was not about copying historical furniture joints, nor about disguising contemporary fixing systems behind nostalgic references. The interest lay in understanding how joinery functioned historically as a system of logic — how it balanced strength, economy, repairability and clarity, and how those principles might be translated into sculptural form using modern materials. This required research, not improvisation.
Mentorship and Professional Grounding
In January, I contacted artist, author and curator Rosalind Davis and booked a mentoring session to begin in February. While the mentoring was not focused on the technical development of the joinery itself, it was an important parallel commitment. The sessions were intended to address my artist statement, clarify how the work is articulated, and support the widening of my professional network. Establishing this support early ensured that as the studio research developed, it would be accompanied by clearer language and stronger external positioning.
As part of this professional grounding, I also attended Rosalind Davis’s online talk Creative Career Strategies. This reinforced the importance of treating research, skills development and articulation as interconnected rather than separate strands.
Entering the Archive
Alongside this, I began research into the online High Wycombe Furniture Archive. My focus was on furniture produced during the 1960s and 1970s — a period that aligns closely with the Brutalist architectural language that underpins my sculptural work.
Early research concentrated on:
G-Plan technical drawings, including Kofod-Larsen designs
Ercol furniture joints and construction systems
E. Gomme catalogues and promotional material
This material provided a first understanding of how joints were designed to be repeatable, economical and structurally legible. At this stage, the research was deliberately exploratory rather than exhaustive, allowing patterns and recurring principles to emerge before decisions were fixed.
From Sketchbook to Digital Thinking
Initial responses to the archive took place in the sketchbook. These drawings were not attempts to design finished solutions, but to understand form, directionality and force. From this process, two potential magnetic joining mechanisms began to take shape.
These early concepts were then developed digitally using Procreate as an extension of the sketchbook. From there, the drawings were taken into Adobe Illustrator, converted into SVG files and prepared for laser cutting. This translation process was critical. Each shift — from hand drawing to digital line, from screen to material — introduced constraints that immediately tested the viability of the ideas.
These laser-cut prototypes were not intended as resolved works. They were tools for thinking, designed to expose weaknesses early and inform the next stage of material testing.
What This Stage Established
January functioned as a commitment phase. It established the scope of the project, clarified its research direction and set up the conditions for meaningful making. Rather than rushing into production, this period allowed questions to surface, particularly around material behaviour, tolerance and scale — that could not be answered through drawing alone.
These questions made it clear that casting would be the next necessary step, where ideas about joinery could be tested against weight, surface, strength and failure.