The book and article reviews discussed here are primarily aimed at those that specifically concern themselves with the creation of Escher-like tessellations, or at least have a chapter or of a dedicated series of pages devoted to the subject, rather than that of tessellations as a subject per se. Additionally; I add my own critiques of the Escher–like tessellations produced.

Perhaps surprisingly, there are very few books to be found that concern themselves solely with the design aspect. Indeed, there are only two that are dedicated per se: Creating Escher-Type Tessellations by E.R. Ranucci and J. L. Teeters and Designing and Drawing Tessellations by Robert Fathauer. Other books concerned with Escher art are more generally of tessellations per se, with a chapter dedicated in almost in passing to Escher, such as Designing Tessellations by Jinny Beyer, and Introduction to Tessellations by Dale Seymour and Jill Britton. More frequently encountered are brief instances, of one or two pages, such as The Tessellations File by Chris De Cordova and articles Rolling a Tetrahedron on the Plane to Produce Periodic Patterns of Symmetry P2 and Drawing Dragon Curves as Backbones of Escher Figures by Kodi Husimi. As such, I was in two minds as to whether the latter were worthy of inclusion here. Possibly not, but nonetheless are included for the sake of thoroughness, due to the relative paucity of material on the subject.

As such, the book should be thought to be better medium, in that it allows the subject to be discussed in greater depth, over pages of essentially unlimited extent. In contrast, articles, of generally up to four pages, do not permit such luxuries, the material generally being condensed of necessity. Therefore, more leeway is given to articles in this regard below as regards critique.

To avoid lengthy and repetitive descriptions in the critiques section, I describe the tessellations succinctly in a series of stock phrases, from the worst type to better:

(i) ‘What can one say…’ I reserve this for examples deserving of particular scorn, the implication being that I am left in despair, speechless at a ridiculous example of a tessellation motif that is completely unacceptable in quality and worth.

(ii) ‘A shape with eyes’. This is of a type that I regard as of the lowest possible standard, essentially unworthy. Essentially, all the artist has done is to add an eye to a tile, and made a claim for some kind of ‘creature’. No skill is involved whatsoever. Therefore, when the above text appears, I am being most derogatory to such examples.

(iii) ‘A shape with bird, fish, dog…-like detail’. This is another of a type that I regard as of the lowest possible standard, essentially unworthy. Essentially, all the artist has done is to add appropriate motif detail, such as a bird, with wing, feather detail to a tile that bears no resemblance to the creature it is supposedly portraying. No skill is involved whatsoever. Therefore, when the above text appears, I am being most derogatory to such examples.

(iv) ‘A reasonable tessellation’. A better quality tessellation, in that it actually does at least bear a reasonable resemblance to an identifiable creature, albeit still with room for improvement.

(v) ‘A better tessellation’. The best category here is defined as in examples that have artistic integrity, with an outline that does indeed resemble the motifs it purports to represent, with the elements e.g. head, body, legs being in proportion.

 

Last updated: 25 September 2009