Tuesday, December 19, 2006

it's not comfy, but it looks sweet.

"Furniture is no longer aesthetics' stepchild,"

quite an interesting quote. justin and adam may find particular interest in this article. e may find interst as well, because it's about her hood, you know, mijamies.

1 comment:

Adam said...

Very, very interesting.

While I appreciate the aspect of bringing furniture to light, the idea behind making it unattainable to anyone but the top 3% of the world's population is off-putting. It doesn't jive with what I've been learning and studying on my own time.

People that I look up to, like Gustav Stickley, whose work brought popular styles to the level where everyday people could own them (not unlike IKEA today). Or as Justin has mentioned, the intention of the Bauhaus artists to bring mass produced, yet modern, designs to the general public. Or my personal goal of making quality pieces that people who don't make $300,000 a year (as an example) could buy.

Sure, I like to ooh and aah over high art or whatever, but value is in the eye of the beholder. I think a riveted, aluminum chair is pretty sweet looking. Not $2.5 million sweet looking though. That chair would still be really awesome if it cost $100.

So, in conclusion, I think it's a nice thing to bring furniture to light, to say that yes, something can have function and form, that I can eat dinner on it and still find it eye-pleasing. But let's not let all the rich people have it to themselves.