Aftermath Of The Olympics

IMG_9875When the day it was announced that London will be hosting the 2012 Olympics, everything seemed so exciting and it appeared that the capital would be creating a new attraction for the world to see soon after the games were over. Furthermore, it was set to regenerate the East End of London.

Today was my first time to visiting the site and it was not how I would it expect it to be. The main purpose was to explore the ArcelorMittal Orbit and to understand the space around the grounds. Even before arriving at the sculpture, the area was half developed. I was also surprised by how empty Pudding Mill Lane station was especially since it is the main station to get access the park.

Constructions and deconstructions were being done as soon as you exit the station. Once at the park, the space was empty, completely opposite of the atmosphere that was in 2012. It seems most people were attracted to the shopping centre, Westfields. Although this shows what type of society we are, visiting a shopping centre as though it is an grand place, Westfields is probably more exciting than the Olympic Park. It is disappointing to see Stratford at this moment, as we seem to forget what and who was here before all this. The old shopping centre is a reflection of what Stratford once was. Mostly used by the locals of a multicultural working class background, the centre still has shoppers everyday. You can see a difference in social classes. Stratford has probably never seen people dress up to shop.

But going back to the Olympic Park, the admission fee to go up the sculpture was at an expensive cost even with a student discount that the group had to persist for. From the ground, I did not see a point of going up the Orbit. The purpose is to observe the landscape or cityscape across Stratford and the rest of London, but the reality is, is that there would be nothing spectacular to see, as the area is empty and uncompleted. If you compare this to other London attractions, such as the London Eye, you can see why the space is significant to attract visitors.

The aquatics centre had greater life because it is actually has a purpose, which is the problem. The Olympic stadium is due to be reopened and be the home of West Ham football club. So perhaps after then, the park will be brought to everyone’s attention.And perhaps in 4 or 5 years, all the attractions might become popular to Londoners and tourists.


No Author. (n.d). ARCELORMITTAL ORBIT. Available: Last accessed 23rd Feb 2016.

Wilkinson, T. (2014). Olympic afterlife: the real legacy of the London Games for Stratford. Available: Last accessed 23rd Feb 2016.




Architectural Ceramics

In my own work, I want to produce ceramics that is based on architecture. The idea came from the fact that I had a previous idea to print images of different architecture on white ware and create a set.

Having done more research on architectural ceramics, I found more intriguing ways to produce my work. There are two main ways to go and these are abstract illustrations and/or 3D outcomes. It would be interesting to find out if I can make something so abstract but still usable.

The Stanley Kubrick Archive

lolita-heart-shaped-sungl-010The London College of Communication is fortunate to have an archive of the film maker Stanley Kubrick. It includes drafts and completed scripts, location photographs, set plans, polaroids, costumes and much more.

The archive shows a great insight in the way he works and the various materials he uses to bring his ideas to life.

The 1960’s film Lolita was already a favourite of mine and I was very excited to see Kubrick’s work based on this film. There were small photographs of Sue Lyon in character that were so intriguing, as there were many images that I had not seen before.

The office at the LCC archive department even resembles Kubricks, 2001: A Space Odyssey 1968.




Archive Hub. (2008). Stanley Kubrick Archive. Available: Last accessed 9th Feb 2016.

Image. (1962).  Loltia.  Available:

UAL. (n.d). The Stanley Kubrick Archive. Available: Last accessed 9th Feb 2016.


Objects of Desire / Collecting & Curating

All of us are collectors of something. Even if it is not a conscious habit. In Susan Pearce’s The Urge To Collect, she attempts to define what a collection is based on the view of the owner. She includes different views of collecting or collections because everyone has their own approach.

Durost suggested that ‘a collection is basically determined by the nature of the value assigned to the objects, or ideas possessed. If the predominant value of an object or idea for the person possessing it is intrinsic, i.e., if it is valued primarily for use, or purpose, or aesthetically pleasing quality, or other value inherent in the object or accruing to it by whatever circumstances of custom, training, or habit, it is not a collection. If the predominant value is representative or representational, i.e., if said object or idea is valued chiefly for the relation it bears to some other object or idea, or objects, or ideas, such as being one of a series, part of a whole, a specimen of a class, then it is the subject of a collection.’  (Durost 1932 p10)

The utilitarian value becomes less relevant as its beauty overtakes. Pearce includes another simple approach by Alsop. He believes that ‘to collect is to gather objects to a particular category the collector happens to fancy… and a collection is what has been gathered’. This statement I strongly agree with, as it is the collectors mentality, a long with the physical objects, that define a collection. But do all the collections have to be completely identical?

When there is a link within all the objects, there is no reason for the elements to appear the exact same unless the collector has an ‘obsession’ with this idea.

Belk’s calls it to be a ‘…possession and disposition of an interrelated set of differentiated objects (material things, ideas, beings or experiences) that contribute to and derive extraordinary meaning from the entity… that this set is perceived to constitute.’ (Belk et al. 1990 p8)

Possession and collecting have a significant difference. Aristrides describes a collection as ‘an obsession organized’. (Aristides 1988 p330) Therefore, collecting involves an order system and perhaps a completion.

Collecting, accumulating, and hoarding has a very fine line but there is a difference. Hoarding is more of a ‘paranoia’ , as hoarders generally only hold on to materials to save it just in case it is wanted in the future. But due to the nature of hoarding, it can lead to a horrible excess.  Nevertheless, it all depends on the owner and their emotional attachment.

As said at the beginning, collections can be an unconscious practice until there is a realization and perhaps that could be the start of a collection, when someone decides it to be.


Alsop, J. (1982). The Rare Art Tradition: A History of Collecting and Its Linked Phenomena, New York: Harper 8c Row.

Aristides, N. (1988) ‘Calm and uncollected’, American Scholar 57(3): 327-36.

Belk, R. Wallendorf, M., Sherry, J. Holbrook, M (1990). ‘Collecting in a consumer culture’, Highways and Buyways: 3-95, Provo Utah: Association for Consumer Research.

Dursot, W. (1932) Children’s Collecting Activity Related to Social Factors, New York: Bureau of pUblications, Teachers’ College, Columbia University.

Pearce, S. (1992). The Urge to Collect. In: Pearce, S Interpreting Objects and Collections. London: Routledge. p157-159.