or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Fine Living, Home, Design & Auto › The ubiquity of famous modern furniture pieces
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The ubiquity of famous modern furniture pieces - Page 2

post #16 of 39
I feel the same way, i chose a Moller chair for my study.

Something considered common on the Internet are not necessarily that common. Also, they often allow customisation in material choices, and can be placed with other things less common. Both remove you from the accusation of having made simple choices based on trend.
Edited by SkinnyGoomba - 9/15/13 at 7:17am
post #17 of 39
But why should you care about being accused?
post #18 of 39
You are taking that quite literally, but for the same reason that you would not buy all of your clothing from one source. You are more likely to be acknowledged for having made your own choices if you curate your interior. That is forfeited if it appears as if you sourced the contract quality show-room samples all from the same place or handful of places.

The residential choice, which is often the more personalized choice, can be more delicate and also of a higher quality. You may have bought the famous piece, but you adapted it to fit your style and interior and chose material that would age well rather than material that would qualify for replacement in a few years.
post #19 of 39
You always see the Corbusier chaise in black leather as a cliche accent piece in home decor mags. Here is a version that gives it a very different look. It is actually very similar to the original prototype in canvas. I could see this at a beach house or in a home with a neutral color palette.

post #20 of 39
I am currently enjoying the juxtaposition of old and new in some settings. Take the cliche Barcelona chair and place it in a mix of vintage and it offers a distinctive contrast of styles. I would also agree that this approach is fashionable now and will look dated eventually. In the meantime, I enjoy it's fresh perspective.


post #21 of 39
In many offices:



In one of the residences that the owner really appreciated Le Corbusier's work and was one of his campions in spite of a few defects in the house. Here you can see how they made choices which are more appropriate of a residence.

Edited by SkinnyGoomba - 9/15/13 at 11:15am
post #22 of 39
Thread Starter 

It's tough to make an analogy between furniture and clothes as furniture can be so distinctly different while clothes can be very subtle. I would not fault a man for wearing navy suits just because everyone wears navy suits.

 

Perhaps the closest analogy for furniture is art. For the most part, one buys furniture because of its distinctive look, as long it achieves a minimum level of utility. The world would be an awful place if every building had the same Warhol prints.

post #23 of 39
Kent,

I make the analogy with regard to brand and styling. It's very difficult to retain a sense of personal style if you simply arrive at Tom Ford and provide your CC. Compare to the person searching for exactly what they want from multiple brands and also bespoke tailors and you may or may not have a better result, but you will certainly see personalized style.

A collection of modern classics used to be considered 'eclectic' but now has all been lumped into one category, since in many cases they can all be bought from the same places.
post #24 of 39
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mafoofan View Post

Many of the icons you named are timelessly beautiful and well-designed. The Saarinen table, for example, is arguably as perfect a form as one can conceive for a table. I'm glad it is ubiquitous. It means there are a lot of beautiful tables out there.

I actually dislike the Tulip table. I don't like the resin-coated finish; it looks like plastic. It would look better as bare steel. More importantly, a table should have a wood or glass top as metal is too cold to rest your arms on it.

 

But even if I loved it as much as you do, I wouldn't want to see it everywhere. I would much prefer a world with more variety. To make another analogy, in the world of architecture, all major buildings are unique. As great as the Chrysler Building is, it would be awful if it were ubiquitous.

post #25 of 39
The saarinen table can be had in wood, and the base is made of aluminum. The white top is a laminate. I don't think of it as the peak in design of pedestal tables.
post #26 of 39
I think you just don't like the designs in question, rather than the fact that they're ubiquitous.

Because if I think of a design I really love, I don't tire of seeing it on a daily basis.

Having said that, it's obviously possible to 'overdose' on something and just get tired of seeing it. Some people are more prone to this than others; they get bored very easily and need a lot or variety and constant change. It's just a different personality type.
post #27 of 39
Thread Starter 

Foo: what does your dining area look like? Do you have the Tulip? I only found diagrams of your living room.

post #28 of 39
I don't look for furniture to be distinctive. I also don't look for art to be distinctive. I look for furniture to make sense and to be made well. I look for art to pique my curiosity and thoughts.

Many modernist designers would like nothing more than for their things to become ubiquitous, and many modern designs are specifically designed not to be "distinct." Very distinctive and eccentric-looking pieces don't make for a nice living space--it is far more important how various things come together versus how attention-getting any individual element is. In this way, interior design is in fact very similar to dressing well. People who fixate on wearing unique ties, pocket squares, suits, etc., don't understand style--so it goes with furniture.

Our dining table is a marble circular Saarinen. We are currently using Eames fiberglass chairs, but will be replacing them with Chair Ones on concrete bases shortly. Photos of our living room are posted already.
post #29 of 39
Thread Starter 

You gotta be kidding me. Nearly everything in your living room is distinctive, far more so than a Barcelona, Saarinen, etc. Your rug, Arktura Nebula coffee table, Tom Dixon Mirror Ball lamps. Only your Knoll is not. 

 

That's what I don't like about your living room. Too many powerful, distinctive pieces competing with each other for attention. If that's what you like, then that's fine, but don't tell me you don't look for distinctive furniture. If your only criteria was "to make sense and to be made well" you could be buying Amish—obviously you have other criteria as well.

post #30 of 39
Here we go again.

lurker[1].gif
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Fine Living, Home, Design & Auto › The ubiquity of famous modern furniture pieces