It does not do to use it with forms whose origin is intimately bound up with a specific material simply because no technical difficulties stand in the way.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
Form must have a content, and that content must be linked with nature.
We refuse to recognize problems of form, but only problems of building. Form is not the aim of our work, but only the result. Form, by itself, does not exist. Form as an aim is formalism; and that we reject.
I see that idea that we need a new form as something critical. I mean, we do need to invent and not be benchmarking all the time. That's important to me.
It is conceivable that what is unified form to the author or composer may of necessity be formless to his audience.
You cannot disconnect the form from the material - the material informs the form.
Unless we understand a certain material - metal or resin and plastic - understanding the processes that turn it from ore, for example - we can never develop and define form that's appropriate.
Do not seek for information of which you cannot make use.
You shouldn't use anything as the sole source for anything, in my view.
I do not oppose form, but only form as a goal.
In my work, I have never had any use for anything that I have known in advance.
No opposing quotes found.