Definitions by Florian Roithmayr


…suggests that something is not in isolation but with something else, or more precisely, through something else. Maybe also amongst. In any case, it simply cannot be or be done on its own.

by Florian Roithmayr, Wednesday, 29 May, 2019


…a doubting Thomas needing to put the finger onto – or into – something. An artificially isolated entity, taken out of the surrounding chain and flow of signification (sometimes this is called an “object”), might be said to lack authenticity because it has been taken out of the chain and flow of signification (see cast). A possibly mistaken quest (see Original).

by Florian Roithmayr, Wednesday, 29 May, 2019


…has been called the “filling of empty space”, which is wonderfully vague and suggestive of formlessness, were it not for the limit encountered on the edge of the space, which is often called “mould surface”, and which predicates that a cast often also entails a preceding mould, and possibly a model that precedes them both, at which point I am reminded of such complicating criteria as success and likeness (in translations, renditions, authenticity, etc.). It is much less complicated if there is then not so much a single entity (called cast), but really rather more a series of moments, linked, and only sometimes artificially singled-out for the purpose of recognition and evaluation (might also be called verisimilitude [see authenticity]). Instead of this single moment of recognition (which is often also negotiated through the dialectical terms of presence and absence), it might also be possible to conceive of and participate in an ongoing series of deferrals outside recognition (entailing small deaths on my part), which speaks more of thirdness in a Peircean sense.

by Florian Roithmayr, Wednesday, 29 May, 2019


…might initially appear to be the domain of the impossible and the invisible, but might also really be a shift in parameters, like previous shifts in parameters that contributed to adjustments in speed and visibility, nearness and availability.

by Florian Roithmayr, Wednesday, 29 May, 2019


Maybe, like with de-materialisation, now some decades ago, it is possible to keep questioning what really constitutes the ‘im-’ of ‘immateriality’.

For example:
"The break with the traditional opposition of matter and form led not – as many, including some of the artists themselves, thought – to a ‘dematerialization’ of art … but rather to various displacements and rethinking of materiality itself” (Michael Newman)

”I think that I am really just a materialist" (Lawrence Weiner interviewed by B. Buchloh)Am gonna update This is a test and will replace text badly.

by Florian Roithmayr, Sunday, 2 June, 2019


Repetitive strain injury (RSI) refers to severe aches and pain caused by repetitive movements or poor posture at work. ... RSI often affects hands including wrists and fingers, but can also spread to arms, elbows, neck and shoulder.

by Florian Roithmayr, Sunday, 2 June, 2019


Original or Originals (but somehow also replica, copy, edition, version, and so on…)

MOULDING AND CASTING (see cast) are sometimes described as a transfer from a non-permanent material like unfired clay to a more permanent material like plaster or concrete.
It happens on occasions that in this conversion the model, which is sometimes also called the original image or the original form or the original three-dimensional model, gets destroyed and superseded by a single duplicate of this now lost original.

At other times, however, the model is itself also a cast, for example a wax model used in the lost-wax bronze casting process is often cast itself before it is lost. If this is the case, then it is called indirect cast, or inter-model, which is also sometimes known as counter model, although it has been suggested that this implies a negative of the model, which it is not.

Sometimes, the model is also called a master copy, master or simply referred to as the work, and sometimes the material of the master is also the material used for the mould jacket (if it is a flexible mould, or multipart mould), and most likely also the material for the casting.
Sometimes the modelling material can be reused as casting material (as in the sequence clay [model] - plaster [mould] - clay, or slip clay [cast]).

At other times the model is also called prototype, which serves for the production of future moulds, which then implies that the castings made from it are multiple and numerous. Sometimes, the model is also just simply called the original, which also implies that there will be numerous others that are to come afterwards.

In some of these instances, the importance of the model as the master is transferred to a cast, which then becomes the master cast for moulding future models, which might then in turn be moulded to produce an edition of casts. In cases of limited editions, all moulds are said to be destroyed upon completion of the set number of casts to preserve the edition’s integrity (= authenticity).

In other instances, the model is an existing cast, from which a mould is taken, which is then called original cast, or sometimes replica, which one could then also call a copy or reproduction, which in some instances are authorised by an artist or an artist’s estate. In other instances, they are certainly not authorised, which renders the status of the casts precarious.

Sometimes, the model is also called the definitive pattern, and the original model is also called original plaster pattern when it is made in plaster, or clay pattern when it is made in clay, which suggests that it can be used for further mouldings. And sometimes the model has been just called a pattern, without reference to its material, in which case it is unclear if it is intended for moulding at all.

Sometimes the model is not destroyed in the moulding process, and is instead re-worked afterwards, which will allow subsequent mouldings of the altered model, which would then produce different casts which are then called versions, which leads to significant proliferation. The same applies to inter-models.

The desire to produce either a single, unique, and authentic piece, or multiple, various and numbered proliferations, often creates uncertainty: it is said that the distinction between an original (or originals in the plural when they are all authorised) and a reproduction (which is sometimes not authorised) is confusing when a number of originals are cast from the same mould: it is often difficult to foresee how many results will spring from one source and how to differentiate between source and results. It is difficult to foresee the fidelity of all the results within this extended network of originals.

by Florian Roithmayr, Sunday, 23 June, 2019


In the Special Collection of UCL in London, partly housed at the Grant Museum of Zoology, is kept an incomplete set of foraminifera plaster models. These marine microorganisms are an extensive order of rhizopods, consisting of a chambered shell of calcium carbonate. Many of them have various openings or holes in their shell through which pseudopodia extend, giving them their name: foramen, which can be translated as ‘hole bearer’.

In the nineteenth century, leading scientists disseminated sets of foraminifera models reproduced in plaster to promote the study of Palaeontology. Alcide D’Orbigny (1802- 1857), for example, based at the Museum National d’Histoire Naturelle in Paris, sculpted over 100 different specimens of these microfossils in limestone, and then moulded and cast them in plaster. They were distributed in fasciculi comprising 25 models each, accompanied by printed illustrations.

It is possible to consider these plaster works as teaching aids. For this is what they once were, before they were taken out of circulation:

I start to wonder what it is they aid, what and how they assist? What do they teach? What do they demonstrate? Of course they simplify, reduce and abstract as much as they present and make concrete. They are part of the set of things that come into being and are circulated to make non-comprehension bearable (like calling something “Big Bang”). They are shaped by their sculptural properties of scale and material transformation. They were formed in an age that needed classification. But also formed by a will to instruct; Multiplied and dispersed by the ambition to exchange and disseminate knowledge; But also formed by faith in visionary thoughts, faith in the capacity to disseminate and also by a drive and absolute necessity to disseminate, to process and then retrieve information, perceptions, and knowledge.

by Florian Roithmayr, Sunday, 23 June, 2019



Even though there is often no distinction made between monotypes and monoprints, it is also sometimes said that there is a difference in the procedures of the two kinds of prints:

the word MONOPRINT is sometimes used to refer to a unique image that is created from any number of different and separate plates, or an accumulation of layered printing matrices (woodblocks, lithoplates, stones, and so on…)., and that may also use the same printing elements (for example already employed editioning blocks), but are ultimately unique and distinct in terms of any single one, or combination of, the following aspects: printing colours; the order / layering of printings; the number of blocks used; post-printing hand-painting of the impressions.

MONOTYPE, on the other hand, is said to be a uniquely drawn print that can use any flat surface, such as a magnesium plate, a copper plate, or a sheet of plexiglass. The image is applied to the surface with any number of techniques and materials, after which an impression is pulled and the monotype is considered completed, or another plate or hand-painting is added to the image, which makes the possibilities endless.

There is, however, a complication in either PRINTS and TYPES, as the prefix MONO is said to be slightly misleading:
As there is often enough ink left on the plate, a second impression might be pulled, which is often called “ghost” or “ghost print”, which are kinds of image-ghosts. These ghosts are often considered inferior in terms of their quality, although their inferiority might sometimes also be precisely the desired material and/or visual advantage. Whether a ghost is desirable or not in this instance depends on intention.

by Florian Roithmayr, Sunday, 23 June, 2019


Your mention of dog makes me also think of shadow.

by Florian Roithmayr, Sunday, 23 June, 2019


A reproduction often entails a shift in materiality (an upgrade or a downgrade), which is sometimes nearer to a translation (when the original material is taken care of and stays intact) or a transformation (when the original material does not stay intact). Along with materiality, scale, and sometime depth, play an important part.

by Florian Roithmayr, Sunday, 23 June, 2019


aura (according to Benjamin):

- casing (might also be called 'etui' or in some instances 'futeral');

- a breath, or more specifically, breathing when contemplating a mountain range;

-an eye opener;

by Florian Roithmayr, Monday, 1 July, 2019

Florian Roithmayr (florianroithmayr)
Rank: Author
Last seen: 7 months ago
< back to writing tests