Comparative Analysis of Two Brooches

At first glance these two pieces appear to be vastly different, and so they are in many ways, but they do share similarities. Brooch A at first appears to be irregular and free form while brooch B is obviously very regular and symmetrical. Upon closer inspection it becomes obvious that Brooch A has a parallel symmetry to it, its shape and design are mirrored along the vertical and horizontal axes. The same is true of Brooch B.


One of the most notable differences between these two pieces is that Brooch B is only presented from a front view, while Brooch A is shown from the front and the back. The back of Brooch B and the mechanism allowing the piece to be worn are not presented and we must assume that they are meant to be hidden, and secondary to the design of the piece. What is not seen could perhaps be interpreted as being intentionally secret but in the case of Brooch B, I do not feel that this is the case. The three dimensionality of Brooch B, the way that the petal forms of the flower-like shape in white metal at the front of the piece sits away from the domed disk of yellow metal beneath make me think that it is the body and depth of the piece that are paramount to the aesthetic of this design. The contrast in colour between the two metals used heightens the felling of volume and space within the piece. The open, bell-like ends of the six petal shapes of Brooch B further emphasise the volumetric nature, and bloom-like delicacy of this piece. Brooch A, by comparison is quite flat in terms of its shape, it does not have significant physical depth or volume to it. This piece is made up of an intricately designed and constructed back plate and a brightly coloured and patterned front plate. The bright orange colour of the front plate and bold black and yellow figure upon this surface are immediately eye-catching and intriguing, the true surprise comes when the piece is turned over and the foliage design in dark grey metal, highlighted by two of the elements of the design picked out in yellow metal, on the back is revealed. Brooch A contrasts with Brooch B most obviously in what this secret design on the back of Brooch A means for the psychology of the piece. In Brooch B everything is revealed or neglected, the design is open and completely obvious, in Brooch A the front shows one design and the back known only to the designer and the wearer shows another one, one very much like a secret garden.

Comparative Analysis

Comparing Two Pendants: Chamber Heart Locket by Thomas Mann and Phoenix Pendant by Tom Ferreror

Chamber Heart Locket

1.shape - heart shaped, rough

2. Industrial look, constructed/deconstructed – large undisguised hinge draws attention to the mechanical nature of this pendant, it has workable moveable parts

3. surface - stamped, simple sun burst shape, matt finish

4. universal inspiration – the heart appears as an element of design around the world

5. piston-shaped bale, plays with idea of heavy industry,  idea of mechanical movement , mechanisms, machines, I think that this bale allows the heart to be flipped over, hiding the clasp which allows one to open up the heart or keep it closed

6. concept – love, the heart, locking ones heart, secrets of the heart

 Phoenix Pendant

1. shape – external frame perfectly round, wedge-shaped cut-out piece, small , intensely coloured faceted stone attached to inside of top part of frame, so that stone stands out into cut out area of the piece

2. Fine, decorative, feminine, delicacy

3. surface - roll pressed pattern, intricate, finely finished, clean

4. middle eastern/ Arabian inspiration (phoenix story)

5. double jump-ring bale, only side-ways movement on up and down the chain

6. concept – the phoenix myth, rising from the ashes of destruction, determination, purification, hope, rebirth

Both

1.       use of white and yellow metals, draws attention to the different parts of each design – emphasising the industrial feel of Mann’s piece and drawing attention to the stone and cutaway part of Ferreror’s pendant

2.       hung on factory-made chain, not manufactured by hand

Analysis of Design - practice 1

1. Linda Threadgill Earrings

These hollow constructed earrings are made of yellow metal. They hang on the ears with shepherd hooks. These hooks are also made of yellow metal. Each earring is made up of three identical parts joined together at the top outer edges of the three around a central point. Each of these pieces is in the shape of a round facet-cut gemstone. The thin strips of metal which are soldered together to create each piece, make a delicate tracery of the outline of each face of a faceted stone, and each has depth and three-dimensionality.

From the example of another pair of earrings by the same designer shown on a model, I assume that these earrings are fairly large, measuring approximately 40 x 40mm. They would have visual impact from some distance.

The repeated pattern of the elements (small triangles and so on) which make up the gemstone shape of each, seen in this skeletal form, and repeated again through the three parts of each earring completely lose the gemstone association and form something more organic in feeling. The earrings have the appearance of flowers, or a plant or coral like structure, perhaps at a cellular level. The size, colour and design of the pieces give them a rich baroque feeling, while they have a very post modern concept behind them. They echo the shape of enormous brilliant-cut diamonds of massive value and yet they are merely a lyrical scaffolding made out of brass.

2. Bird of Paradise drop earrings

These earrings are cast in white metal and have shepherds hooks in yellow metal attached at the back. The earrings are fairly moderate in size but quite substantially thick, measuring 20mm long x 13mm wide and 9mm deep.

Each earring is made up of three cup-shaped elements, giving the pieces the form of an abstracted bird's wing. The three cupped elements of each piece are joined at the bottom of each so that they are stacked and nested one within the next, and they fan out away from each other slightly at the top. The inside of the forms is matt and appears to have picked up the texture of the wax model from the investment or other casting substance used. The outside of the forms is buffed and polished to a high shine.

The repeated cup-like form within each of this identical pair of earrings creates the impression of a fanned feather-like form and gives the pieces a feeling of lightness and delicacy. The use of two different coloured metals separates the form from its finding and gives the wing-form a refreshing separateness from its hook as though it might fly away.