# Aesthetics vs Power/Frame robustness



## ShockleysWW4Slingbows (Jul 3, 2014)

What do you look for more in a slingshot, power and frame robustness, or beauty?


----------



## S.S. sLinGeR (Oct 17, 2013)

Neither. It's all fun.


----------



## BeMahoney (Jan 26, 2014)

Congratulations!

We´re almost done! - I know that you know that it´s not the answers,

but the questions that matter.

Assuming and anticipating the result of this quest,

the conclusion will be that beauty is the realization of both,

Power inherent in Aesthetics.

An example?:









or this?:









Louis Sullivan, an architect, brought it to the point:

The American architect, Louis Sullivan, Greenough's much younger compatriot, who admired rationalist thinkers like Greenough,

Thoreau, Emerson, Whitman and Melville, coined the phrase in his article The Tall Office Building Artistically Considered in

1896 (some fifty years after Greenough's death), though *Sullivan later attributed the core idea to Marcus Vitruvius Pollio the Roman architect*,

engineer and author who first asserted in his book De architectura that a structure must exhibit the three qualities of *firmitas, utilitas, venustas* -

that is, *it must be solid, useful, beautiful.* Here Sullivan actually said "form ever follows function", but the simpler (and less emphatic)

phrase is the one usually remembered. For Sullivan this was distilled wisdom, an aesthetic credo, the single "rule that shall permit of no exception".

The full quote is thus:

"Whether it be the sweeping eagle in his flight, or the open apple-blossom, the toiling work-horse, the blithe swan, the branching oak,

the winding stream at its base, the drifting clouds, over all the coursing sun, form ever follows function, and this is the law.

Where function does not change, form does not change. The granite rocks, the ever-brooding hills, remain for ages;

the lightning lives, comes into shape, and dies, in a twinkling.
*It is the pervading law of all things organic and inorganic, of all things physical and metaphysical, *

*of all things human and all things superhuman, of all true manifestations of the head, of the heart, *

*of the soul, that the life is recognizable in its expression, that form ever follows function. *

*This is the law.*" ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Form_follows_function )

I know you can feel it now.

In my own words:







,








Probably now you are able to understand what this all is about to some here.

I´m very curious about your next builds.

kind regards,

Be


----------



## treefork (Feb 1, 2010)

I'm a robust frame and power guy myself. Not one much for the sissy artsy under powered girly frames that spilt hairs. Accuracy is way over rated. When I shoot I want it to be a medieval experience. You never know when you may need to lob a rock over a fortress wall. That is why this bad boy is my EDC. But that is just me. I'm goofy like that.

View attachment 68757


----------



## flippinfool (Aug 22, 2014)

I like them gorilla slingshots - ugly but strong as he!!


----------



## Greavous (Sep 29, 2013)

I like too much power! Nothing quite like it when you miss the target, you really miss the **** out of it!

I like too much power! Nothing quite like it when you miss the target, you really miss the heaven out of it!

man, you can use stronger language on TV!


----------



## Imperial (Feb 9, 2011)

have a seat and ill tell you what i prefer


----------



## jazz (May 15, 2012)

I think that we already had a thread of this kind.

With this I do not want to say that this one is unnecessary, on the contrary, every here and there we should renew some issues, at last, many new people join in the menatime so why not have another round of opinions.

What I want to say is that I already have noticed in that thread that there is a trap, a catch that we (humans in general, not us here in the forum only) always get cought into: we assume that we all share the same definition of beauty or other eluseive concepts, when, on the contrary, it is one of those ideas which is elusive and highly dependent on personal opinion, view, experience etc.

For example, if you ask my niece who is 21 what is a beautiful slingshot she will probably say the one with many colours, possibly a flower here or there, curvy lines and the bands "that match", or so.

Some robust 21 youngster might see beauty in the very robustness of a slingshot...

A professional designer might say that a "beautiful" slingshot for him/her might be one that, one, is well done with the choice of right materials for the purpose (outdor, indor etc), two, that is ergonomicaly fitted both for the purpose and to the (type) of person (big/small hand, strong/not so strong,male/female, with arthritis/without arthritis etc.) , three, is produced efficiently, with appropriate cost of money, energy, time and four, well, maybe, that it has some "inherent aestetic" features - whatever it might be.

For a hunter "beautiful" slinghsot might have few charactersitics: is strong and fast enought to make a clean kill, to be good for outdoor use, to be easily deployed, to be ergonomicaly well fitted for strong pulls, that is small enough (just like compound bows) that will not get grabbed by branches and bushes, is not shiny and readily visible - I just assume because I am not a hunter.

Then comes me, maybe, who might say that once I liked these, and at some other times I liked those, either women or slingshots, but most of the time I just let them jump into, well, my hands, or. eyes if you want - without me being able to say why.

Smart people, like scientists sometimes, at conferences or seminars that deal with ambiguous or controversal themes, they first agree on the vocabulary and then they discuss things.

I would love if we did the same with the idea of "beauty", related to the slingshots, here in the forum but but I doubt that it would be either possible or realy neccesary, or both.

cheers,

jazz


----------



## Metropolicity (Aug 22, 2013)

jazz said:


> I think that we already had a thread of this kind.
> 
> With this I do not want to say that this one is unnecessary, on the contrary, every here and there we should renew some issues, at last, many new people join in the menatime so why not have another round of opinions.
> 
> ...


I love this answer, essentially, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I hope others can learn from this.


----------



## Quercusuber (Nov 10, 2011)

jazz said:


> I think that we already had a thread of this kind.
> 
> With this I do not want to say that this one is unnecessary, on the contrary, every here and there we should renew some issues, at last, many new people join in the menatime so why not have another round of opinions.
> 
> ...


'nuff said, Jazz!!!!









Cheers ...Q


----------



## BeMahoney (Jan 26, 2014)

jazz said:


> Then comes me, maybe, who might say that once I liked these, and at some other times I liked those, either women or slingshots, but most of the time I just let them jump into, well, my hands, or. eyes if you want - without me being able to say why.
> 
> Smart people, like scientists sometimes, at conferences or seminars that deal with ambiguous or controversal themes, they first agree on the vocabulary and then they discuss things.
> 
> ...


Very nice! - I totally agree.

I made a few attempts to get to that level with

Mr. L. - Knowing his definition of design is

contrary to mine..

But reading your post, this seems pretty boring!-

Please let´s define the terms "women", "hands"

and "being able"  .. that sounds a lot more interesting!

And if the both of us figure that out, it´s at least two.

(other than me and Mr. L. on "design" - that was a one man show..)

BTW: I think I stated my definition of design - Sullivan is my man!



kind regards,

Be


----------



## Imperial (Feb 9, 2011)

in this case- its the tone of smarkiness behind the question by the op.


----------



## Susi (Mar 3, 2013)

It's a moot point really. It's what the individual likes. Some of my SSs, i.e. one made of rebar (the BUM..butt ugly monster), one made out of round steel stock and an erg handle (likewise ugly but a fine shooter), two made from drill handles and scrap steel, two made from recycled HDPE, a few natural forks with ergo handles, a rather rad looking wood sculptured one (the Croissant) and none of them would win even an honorable mention in the monthly contest. In fact if a booby prize was offered I'm double sure one or more of my wonders would at least win that. So, do I care? No. Does anyone care? No. It's whatever floats yer boat at the time you make it. The best craftsmen/women here have made really simple SSs and really gorgeous ones. Does it matter? No. Does anyone care? No. We care about one thing, the liberty to make stuff and do stuff the way we want. Plain and simple and without debate on what's what...unless it's suggestions on how to make something better which an adult mature mind would take willingly and graciously. So there is really no point in debating strenth vs beauty. Unless it's with chicks. I'd take beauty every time and the Chinese gal shooters one fella is posting win my attention. Plenty of SSs here display both properties, try to break a metal or micarta laminate SS. Bring your lunch, it'll take a while. Try to break one of Mr. Silva's wrot iron SSs, they have their own creativeness and beauty and of course strength. Or a Marksman or Barnett or a plywood one or polycarbonate or composite or or...it makes no diff...we shoot what we shoot, when we want to shoot and how we want to shoot depending on the day and how we hold our upper lip maybe.

Chuck


----------



## Susi (Mar 3, 2013)

Henry Ford ... "If no one remembers it in 100 years, it wasn't important."


----------



## NaturalFork (Jan 21, 2010)

treefork said:


> I'm a robust frame and power guy myself. Not one much for the sissy artsy under powered girly frames that spilt hairs. Accuracy is way over rated. When I shoot I want it to be a medieval experience. You never know when you may need to lob a rock over a fortress wall. That is why this bad boy is my EDC. But that is just me. I'm goofy like that.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Dude come on. You could cut a card with that thing and you know it.


----------



## ShockleysWW4Slingbows (Jul 3, 2014)

Imperial said:


> have a seat and ill tell you what i prefer


You prefer to look at pretty red paper ribbons sitting on a park bench?

While playing Loves me/Loves me not with that mesmerizingly gorgeous petal shooter?

Perhaps it's time to transfer all this exquisite aesthetic mastery to a new equally deadly trade&#8230;


----------



## benzidrine (Oct 14, 2013)

For me in order of importance:

1. Comfort (and therefore accuracy)

2. Aesthetics

3. Power

Luckily there are slingshot frames that do a good job of all three. While there are some *ahem* other slingshots that only achieve one of these things. These things are often connected on a good frame though, A comfortable slingshot tends to look organic and pleasing and its comfort allows it to be used with strong bands without too much strain.


----------



## Imperial (Feb 9, 2011)

ShockleysWW4Slingbows said:


> You prefer to look at pretty red paper ribbons sitting on a park bench?
> 
> While playing Loves me/Loves me not with that mesmerizingly gorgeous petal shooter?
> 
> Perhaps it's time to transfer all this exquisite aesthetic mastery to a new equally deadly trade&#8230;


easy cupcake, watch it with the suggestive threats.


----------



## Davidka (Jun 8, 2013)

Isn't the power determined mainly by the bands??


----------



## Imperial (Feb 9, 2011)

Davidka said:


> Isn't the power determined mainly by the bands??


we tried telling him that. bands/tubes set up and draw length.


----------



## Davidka (Jun 8, 2013)

Imperial said:


> Davidka said:
> 
> 
> > Isn't the power determined mainly by the bands??
> ...


So what are you saying? I can get power AND beauty? I'll take it!









Now that's a slingshot that I'd like to shoot... Hey Be - can we have more details about it?


----------



## Tentacle Toast (Jan 17, 2013)

LoL, in all the fog, the slings got lost...that is a gem..one of yours, Be?


----------



## ShockleysWW4Slingbows (Jul 3, 2014)

Imperial said:


> Davidka said:
> 
> 
> > Isn't the power determined mainly by the bands??
> ...


You're right! It's all about the bands! The frame has nothing to do with it! How could i have not thought of that?


----------



## Tentacle Toast (Jan 17, 2013)

ShockleysWW4Slingbows said:


> Imperial said:
> 
> 
> > Davidka said:
> ...


Your best design yet!


----------



## BeMahoney (Jan 26, 2014)

That´s "Bliss", my workhorse - a wild love 

I tried to find my own thread, must be from may/june 2014

"No results found for '16th slingshot bliss"

the search is "limited" to 2014-06-18..

I give it up. (after 30 mins..)

I thought I´m able to do a proper search.. won´t start searchbashing - I try to be nice 

can be found at Jörgs.. (I´ll eat my hat if I didn´t post her here.. It´s 250yearold bog-oak..)

thanks for the praise!

kind regards,

Be


----------



## Imperial (Feb 9, 2011)

ShockleysWW4Slingbows said:


> You're right! It's all about the bands! The frame has nothing to do with it! How could i have not thought of that?


theres actually people who only need a pouch and a band/tube to shoot with. you should seriously go to "slingshot school" and take a look at the threads in the sub-forums of "slingshot bands and tubes forum" and some of the set ups people have used in the "competitions forum". I have a homemade "W" of my own, and i know that its all about the bands/tubes, not the frame.


----------



## Stretch (Jan 8, 2012)

It's a question of mood. Some days it's about joining in with nature and all it's beauty. On those days, it's a stone with a hand carved natural. Some days it's about precision, and the grain on that isn't quite as nice but the Zen is just as strong. Some days it's about destruction, and that's a star ship with some big heavy bands. A different kind of beauty (and therapy) altogether. Very interesting discussion...


----------



## slinger16 (Nov 3, 2013)

ShockleysWW4Slingbows said:


> Imperial said:
> 
> 
> > Davidka said:
> ...


Highly interested in this piece. Attach a flashlight so I can go night time hunting


----------



## flipgun (Nov 14, 2012)

I like makin' pretty stuff.


----------



## BeMahoney (Jan 26, 2014)

flipgun said:


> I like makin' pretty stuff.




That´s pretty - I like pretty stuff too 

kind regards, Flipgun!

Be


----------



## flipgun (Nov 14, 2012)

:wave:


----------



## Susi (Mar 3, 2013)

Let Shocking discover his method of making products from nut/bolt bins at the local hardware store and complete lack of salesmanship won't sell. Meanwhile look at all of 'em sold by other vendors. Truth is in the numbers.

Now, here's an example of what I said above, we shoot what we shoot.

What's "my" order of importance? Yes it differs from a poster above and that's fine, what works for him makes him happy. What works for me makes me happy. What's the point of dickering about it? Because I like anchovy pizzas and someone else doesn't isn't important. It's important we're happy with our pizzas.

1. Strength of design so I don't make myself a cleft chin or worse..

2. Accuracy so I can hit stuff.

3. Aesthetics

Does that matter? No. Only to me. I know collectors sometimes never shoot a work of art, so what? It's up to them to do with their property what they want to do, how and when.

You don't sell stuff by insisting yours is the best even if it is. You sell stuff by creating happy customers...the rest handles itself. To sell a product or service you need three things. 1. Quality, 2. price vs value, 3. customer service. If a product or service lacks one or more of these attributes, it's a dead duck. Shocking's method is to bust in a door and "here I am with the bestest" attitude which will sell him nothing. I made my living on sales all my life, I know what works. Look at Bill Hays and others...great quality, great price vs value, great customer service. A tinkertoy nut and bolt SS selling for what Shocking wants is absurd...meaning price vs value isn't there, one of the three essential ingredients for success.

A crook took compromising photos of a Texas oil man's filandering to blackmail him. He entered the millionair's office with a thin briefcase housing three photos of him having a lusty affair. He said, Mr. Oilman, here are some photos I took of you. The first one with your secretary will cost you $20,000. This second one with your board of trustee's wife will cost you $30,000 and the last one with your mother in law will cost you $50,000. The oil man answered, "Oh my! Those are really clear good phtos! I'll take one of the first one, three of the second one and five of the third!" See? Quality, price vs value, customer service. Delivered.

If Master Shocking had just posted his "invention" and not tried to even sell it nor put a platinum price tag on it, all would have been fine. We'd have actually complimented him on putting a strong SS together for a few dollars worth of scrounged parts and drilling a few holes. BTW, can you imagine the wicked arm/hand/wrist slap on that bow in his icon picture? Ouch!

Chuck


----------



## flipgun (Nov 14, 2012)

Well expressed. But what gets up my nose is his insistence that my liking "anchovy pizza" is not just wrong, but stupid.


----------



## ShockleysWW4Slingbows (Jul 3, 2014)

Susi said:


> Henry Ford ... "If no one remembers it in 100 years, it wasn't important."


Nothing humans do is important except destroying the planet.


----------



## Tentacle Toast (Jan 17, 2013)

ShockleysWW4Slingbows said:


> Susi said:
> 
> 
> > Henry Ford ... "If no one remembers it in 100 years, it wasn't important."
> ...


Well that'll be remembered, so it must be pretty important. And since it's a group effort, I'd say we're ALL pretty important then..


----------



## ShockleysWW4Slingbows (Jul 3, 2014)

Tentacle Toast said:


> ShockleysWW4Slingbows said:
> 
> 
> > Susi said:
> ...


Even if that was true, such destruction would not be a good thing to be remembered for. In reality, however we're only 1 among millions of species, which will never even know we existed at all after we're gone.


----------



## flipgun (Nov 14, 2012)

Boy! Please! We can't destroy the planet. We can destroy the environment to the point that our species and all of the other die. But so what? It has happened about 6 time already. 65 million years ago, something killed danged near everything and that worked out okay. So :neener: on destroy the planet scarecrow.

Is there *Anything* that you are not dumber than a sack of hammers about?

(Birch pi$$es me off!)


----------



## Tentacle Toast (Jan 17, 2013)

ShockleysWW4Slingbows said:


> Tentacle Toast said:
> 
> 
> > ShockleysWW4Slingbows said:
> ...


If we're all gone, no one would remember, so it wouldn't even matter...


----------



## ShockleysWW4Slingbows (Jul 3, 2014)

flipgun said:


> Boy! Please! We can't destroy the planet. We can destroy the environment to the point that our species and all of the other die. But so what? It has happened about 6 time already. 65 million years ago, something killed danged near everything and that worked out okay. So :neener: on destroy the planet scarecrow.
> 
> Is there *Anything* that you are not dumber than a sack of hammers about?
> 
> (Birch pi$$es me off!)


Actually humans are the most destructive single species in the history of the planet. I don't think you even understand the moral depravity of your statement. You're talking lightly about humans wiping out 100s of 1000s of species, yet I'm sure you wouldn't be too happy about someone doing the same to your family, which is a small % of only 1 species. They could use similar rationalizations "well, people die all the time" etc.

In fact, even genocide is only a small % of only 1 species, yet I'm sure you don't take it as lightly as you do wiping out half the planet's wild species in the last 40 years.
http://edition.cnn.com/2014/09/30/business/wild-life-decline-wwf/


----------



## Tentacle Toast (Jan 17, 2013)

ShockleysWW4Slingbows said:


> flipgun said:
> 
> 
> > Boy! Please! We can't destroy the planet. We can destroy the environment to the point that our species and all of the other die. But so what? It has happened about 6 time already. 65 million years ago, something killed danged near everything and that worked out okay. So :neener: on destroy the planet scarecrow. Is there *Anything* that you are not dumber than a sack of hammers about? (Birch pi$$es me off!)
> ...


What difference would it make? No one would be around to get all moral about it ..besides, we're all going to die, what difference does it make if it's one at a time or all At once? Plus it's better if the other species died too; we wouldn't be around to take care of them anymore.


----------



## flipgun (Nov 14, 2012)

Are you not understanding that this is a cyclical event in the life of the earth? We are the first species that has the capability to get the he11 out of here before it happens to us. Morality is subjective. We are apparently the first species capable of noting the universe and commenting on it. It seems to me that we are the current end product of an evolutionary scheme to take life out of this egg that we are in and birth us into a larger matrix. Born, Live, Grow, Seed, Expand, Die. Rinse and repeat. It is not complicated.


----------



## benzidrine (Oct 14, 2013)

ShockleysWW4Slingbows said:


> Susi said:
> 
> 
> > Henry Ford ... "If no one remembers it in 100 years, it wasn't important."
> ...


You are ignoring that we are the source of all meaning. Beyond us there is no meaning because there is no sentience or awareness. The planet has no ability to care whether we destroy it or not.

Everything we do is important to us and nothing we do is important to anything else because meaning is our concept that we created and exists only in our heads.


----------



## ShockleysWW4Slingbows (Jul 3, 2014)

Tentacle Toast said:


> ShockleysWW4Slingbows said:
> 
> 
> > flipgun said:
> ...


The same difference it makes as to whether your whole family is wiped out tmrw morning or not.

Multiplied by billions.


----------



## ShockleysWW4Slingbows (Jul 3, 2014)

benzidrine said:


> ShockleysWW4Slingbows said:
> 
> 
> > Susi said:
> ...


You think other species have no sentience? You're insane. And wrong.

Also, most of what humans do is arbitrary and objectively has no meaning. We pretend it does because we want to gain personal value through that meaning--due to our unconscious fear of death/insignificance.


----------



## Charles (Aug 26, 2010)

This thread, as other similar ones, has degenerated into personal abuse. So I am shutting it down.

Cheers ..... Charles


----------

