My Favorite Works: Samuel Randlett’s Flapping Bird

by Marcus

 

In the last installment of this series, I talked about Satoshi Kamiya’s Cicada Nymph, a complex and intricate insect model. This model is very different. Samuel Randlett’s Flapping Bird is one of those truly timeless works that you can’t help but fall in love with. For a completely different reason than the Cicada Nymph, it’s almost impossible to improve. In a minimum of folds, it accomplishes a simple and effective bird shape with a clean, foolproof flapping mechanism. There are a number of flapping birds in the world of origami, but this one tops them all in terms of elegance and sheer, simple beauty. Let’s take a closer look at the model and learn to really appreciate the whole thing.

 

This model, as far as I am aware, dates back to 1974, when it was published in Toshie Takahama’s book Creative Life with Creative Origami. (Old origami books have funny titles sometimes.) It would continue to show up in books and origami journals over the years; Gilad’s Origami Page lists eight separate publications with the model in it, mostly introductory books. As a point of interest, an identical design (unattributed and described as the “Flapping Phoenix”) can be found in Kunihiko Kasahara’s text Origami Omnibus. Whether he derived it independently or copied the design is up for debate, but whichever is true further reveals the simplicity and the instant attractiveness of the model.

 

Randlett’s design begins with a familiar shape, a Waterbomb Base. Yet something is a bit out of the ordinary, as the distribution of the flaps is uneven—three on one side and one on the other.

 

Randlett bears down on the isolated flap at once: in a few steps, it is narrowed in half, two of the flaps on the side become wings, and the final one becomes the tail. 

 

 

Meanwhile, a pair of reverse folds turns the sharp point into a recognizable head (a common maneuver in origami birds). Pulling on the tail activates the main mechanism of the design, moving some of the layers in the wings and creating the recognizable flapping motion.

 

 

The design has continued to inspire over the years, leaving behind a legacy of numerous related action models. A particularly interesting place we find the design is in Robert Lang’s Origami in Action, where he calls it his favorite of all origami flapping birds. Lang has designed a number of variations on this model, from the Flapping Eagle (a proportionally varied version) to the Flapping Lovebirds (two Randlett birds flapping together) to a bunch of completely different action models that use a similar mechanism. I leave it as a challenge for the reader to identify the mechanism in question.

 

 

But that’s just the boring technical stuff. The real treat comes from comparing this model to the other, more famous origami flapping bird. You know exactly which one I’m talking about:

 

 

Those of you who’ve read Origami and Orientalism will know I’m not a huge fan of this model: in short, it’s an Orientalist mockery of the Japanese crane, a poor substitute that trades a rich cultural and symbolic history for a bit of cheap entertainment. It played a direct role in the infantilization of origami in the Western world, an issue the art is still struggling with today. But even if we set the politics aside, there’s one other reason I don’t like that other flapping bird. It’s just not a very good model! I feel that an explanation is in order, so here we go:

 

For starters, Randlett’s Flapping Bird is a significantly more beginner-friendly model. As someone who’s been proficient at folding for many years, it can be difficult to view things from a beginner’s perspective (as is true in so many disciplines). This model, however, is one I’ve taught to multiple people, and I think it makes an effective first model. There are no petal folds, for instance, since it isn’t derived from the Bird Base. The petal fold is notoriously difficult to learn, and many people trying to make a crane or a flapping bird for the first time have struggled with it. A bit of clever design on Randlett’s part has removed it from the design entirely. There are two squash folds that form the wings, but these are significantly easier to pull off than petal folds.

 

There’s also the fact that the mechanism is just nicer. In the orientalist Flapping Bird (not the “traditional” flapping bird—it is a mockery of tradition and I refuse to call it such), the edges are wrapped around each other multiple times, resulting in more tension and a stiffer flapping action.

 

 

By contrast, Randlett’s design minimizes the layers, which makes the flapping mechanism a lot easier to operate (and more exposed, which makes it easier to understand and therefore adapt for other models). As a fun side effect, it also makes the wings curl slightly as they flap. This gives the flapping action more dimensions and makes it more closely resemble a real bird’s wings.

 

 

On the topic of naturalism, the shape of Randlett’s bird is also significantly more realistic. I feel like this could easily be passed off as a hummingbird, especially given how fast one can flap the wings. The common Flapping Bird feels flat and lifeless, and that’s kind of to be expected given its origins as a poor derivative of an already abstract model. Randlett’s model, even if it is a geometric one, has a personality to it. It has a well-balanced and origamistic shape, and it just feels nicer. Maybe it’s the asymmetry between the front and back. Maybe it’s the direction of specific angles. I don’t really know, because I’m not a design student, but there’s something there that very few models, especially as simple as this one, can replicate.

 

With the Cicada Nymph, I had a whole bunch of very detailed arguments for exactly why it was so good. I can’t describe why I like Randlett’s Flapping Bird as precisely. If you want to understand it yourself, I can only say one thing: go and fold it! Unlike the Cicada Nymph, I think basically everybody will be able to pull this one off. It’s so much fun, and you’ll never think about making that other flapping bird ever again. Randlett rebuilds the entire model from the ground up and creates a much more artistic and elegant version. His version of the Flapping Bird deserves a place in origami history, or a place on your display shelf, or—best of all—in your own two hands, flapping away contentedly.

 

 

Sources

 

Gilad’s Origami Page, “Flapping bird.” https://www.giladorigami.com/origami-database/Flapping+bird+Samuel%2BL.%2BRandlett.

 

Kasahara, Kunihiko. “Origami Omnibus.” Japan Publications, 1988.

 

Lang, Robert. “Origami in Action.” St. Martin’s Griffin, New York, NY, 1997.