or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Fine Living, Home, Design & Auto › Cool furniture, design objects and desiderata
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Cool furniture, design objects and desiderata - Page 498

post #7456 of 8384
Quote:
Originally Posted by brokencycle View Post


I guess that explains the difference.  I don't have any place in my house where a bookshelf would make sense except against a wall.

Even against a wall it adds function, as all three outward facing sides would be usable. Did not mean to imply it has to be floated.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jr Mouse View Post

I could see wanting to place certain objects on the sides even up against a wall, but placement of the bookshelf in a room would be key.

Not sure why it would be harder to place than any standard bookcase.

I find the sides of typical bookcases to be a visual nuisance. They are monolithic and anonymous. They don't express anything about a bookcase's function.

Open-side bookcases are a nice option for that reason--the MDF Italia Minima system comes to mind as a great example. But precisely because the sides are open, some sort of weighted bookend is typically necessary.

The most clever thing to me about the bookcase in question is that it facilitates open sides while also eliminating the need for bookends, as the books on the side shelves are secured against the structure of the bookcase and in turn secure the books on the front/back shelves.

In other words, the bookcase can be all book, with minimal structure. To me, that's brilliant.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkinnyGoomba View Post

A bookshelf as a room divider is quite fine, still I think that have single uprights turned the direction of the shelves and set in from the sides accomplishes both tasks (you can set the books either direction, use it as a room divider, etc).

I'd like to have a bookcase room divider that are not particularly tall, when they are tall they're usually a bit unnerving.

Not sure I understand what you're suggesting. You mean using one backless bookcase with two narrower ones facing outward on either side?
post #7457 of 8384
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post

I think this is unfair. I posted a picture of my new recliners, and have been rather good natured over the slew of insults, have I not? I also do understand his POV; I just don't fully agree with it.

I am mediocre so that's pretty on target. smile.gif

Dude, come on.

This has nothing to do with your good-naturedness. You admit you don't take design seriously, yet summarily dismiss the perspectives of those who do. Nobody likes the guy at the stamp collecting club who's always like, "Yeah, but I can go to the post office and buy one for 49 cents. Looks the same to me."

The fact that you can't tell my point-of-view apart from the other Matt's or Find Finn's is a case in point. You just see fancy, high-falutin', over-priced furniture. In truth, we have very different perspectives and tastes.

Would it hurt to bother learning some nuance if you're going to spend time here?
post #7458 of 8384
Quote:
Originally Posted by apropos View Post

The last few pages remind me of the tonal vs atonal debate - yeah there are those who feel that music should sound conventionally nice (furniture should be comfortable), and those who think that music can be an intellectual exercise (your furniture should serve a purpose).

Interesting analogy, though I'm not well-versed in music at all.

The way I look at it, we each can choose: shape our lifestyles to fit pre-existing expectations or do so in a way that raises them. The fun of clothing, food, furniture, design, etc. for me is that each is an opportunity to increase my capacity for enjoying the pleasures of life. Eating more of the same pie versus finding a bigger, better one.
post #7459 of 8384
Quote:
Originally Posted by mafoofan View Post

Dude, come on.

This has nothing to do with your good-naturedness. You admit you don't take design seriously, yet summarily dismiss the perspectives of those who do. Nobody likes the guy at the stamp collecting club who's always like, "Yeah, but I can go to the post office and buy one for 49 cents. Looks the same to me."

The fact that you can't tell my point-of-view apart from the other Matt's or Find Finn's is a case in point. You just see fancy, high-falutin', over-priced furniture. In truth, we have very different perspectives and tastes.

Would it hurt to bother learning some nuance if you're going to spend time here?

Foo, it's not that I'm dismissing your POV in the least. I agree with parts of it, but not quite all of it, and was just pointing out even you do not necessarily live up to your own standards...and that I find that okay. I like a lot of the stuff you post and I'm not one of the guys here calling you "a joke" or something like that as I find your passion worthy. When it comes to the furniture itself I certainly see differences in quality and workmanship but I also see something you do not seem to, namely, the premium of having that designer name on a piece. I'm looking at Barcelona style chairs currently and having a problem seeing why a 2k edition, hand ground and hand buffed chromed barstock, for instance, is worth an extra 3k because that hand ground and hand buffed chromed barstock has a different name on it.

I also might not see all the nuance you do but to suppose I do not see any is also wrong. This is an example of where we really butt heads in that tis all/nothing with you and I see things on a spectrum.

Cheers.
post #7460 of 8384
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post

When it comes to the furniture itself I certainly see differences in quality and workmanship but I also see something you do not seem to, namely, the premium of having that designer name on a piece. I'm looking at Barcelona style chairs currently and having a problem seeing why a 2k edition, hand ground and hand buffed chromed barstock, for instance, is worth an extra 3k because that hand ground and hand buffed chromed barstock has a different name on it.

Okay, this is what I'm talking about.

You're assuming that differences you can't see aren't there, rather than entertaining the possibility that you simply haven't refined your taste and knowledge enough to detect them.

My critique of your lounge chairs had nothing do with who designed them.
post #7461 of 8384
Quote:
Originally Posted by mafoofan View Post

Okay, this is what I'm talking about.

You're assuming that differences you can't see aren't there, rather than entertaining the possibility that you simply haven't refined your taste and knowledge enough to detect them.

My critique of your lounge chairs had nothing do with who designed them.

I was saying more than one thing with that statement but I was not making that particular assumption.

One of the things would be if two things are built exactly the same, with exactly the same materials, there are in fact no differences no matter who stamped their name on it. The premium for the name exists and is something you are willing to incur based on your many posts in this thread. I am not necessarily ready to incur this premium. I will not argue if either position is "correct" or not, as I acknowledge we all have individual preferences, etc.

Also, you made an incorrect assumption concerning my ability to discern you, Matt, and FF have different tastes/perspectives. When I raised their names my point was an example from them would receive a different reception from you. I have no way to prove this but this is my very strong suspicion.
post #7462 of 8384
Btw I like your bookcase, and what's more, I like your comments on it.
post #7463 of 8384
Quote:
Originally Posted by mafoofan View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bounder View Post

Finally, your vase is a joke.

It was a joke when you bought it. It is a joke now. Trust me. That vase is not the design hill you want to die on.

Really? I must have missed the punch line.

Quelle surprise.

Quote:
All your vases have flowers in them all the time? A vase can be its own object worth admiring.

I am in the form-should-follow-function camp. This applies equally to a chair and a vase. Some things, e.g. a piece of sculpture, are pure form and, hence, the form is the function. But something like a vase must be a good vase or it is poorly designed, no matter how, ahh, unusual it looks.

If it is OK for you to have a poorly-designed vase because you find it pleasant to look at, it is equally OK for Piobaire to have a poorly-designed chair because it is comfortable to sit in. In each case you are choosing something that appeals to you, personally, over good design.

But, you know, even if someone, like Piobaire, enjoys design, it isn't always necessary to obsess and try so hard. It is possible to over-think things and there is nothing wrong with deciding to just go with what feels nice. Maybe the best thing isn't always the "best" thing. There is something to be said for normalcy.
post #7464 of 8384
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post

One of the things would be if two things are built exactly the same, with exactly the same materials, there are in fact no differences no matter who stamped their name on it. The premium for the name exists and is something you are willing to incur based on your many posts in this thread.

Who's saying they are pay premiums just for certain designer names? My distaste for knock-offs has nothing to with their lack of branding.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post

Also, you made an incorrect assumption concerning my ability to discern you, Matt, and FF have different tastes/perspectives. When I raised their names my point was an example from them would receive a different reception from you. I have no way to prove this but this is my very strong suspicion.

You are not suspicious. You are paranoid.

Neither of them would have posted the lounger you picked. I understand: you believe either that they would, and it would have been received differently, or if they wouldn't, it would be because it doesn't have the right designer behind it. You're still not considering the possibility all three of us independently think it's an ugly chair.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bounder View Post

I am in the form-should-follow-function camp. This applies equally to a chair and a vase. Some things, e.g. a piece of sculpture, are pure form and, hence, the form is the function. But something like a vase must be a good vase or it is poorly designed, no matter how, ahh, unusual it looks.

I am also in the form-follows-function camp. But I understand that sometimes an assigned function is so simple and inconsequential that categorical distinctions like "vase" or "sculpture" become near meaningless. What is the difference between a vase and a sculpture with a hole in it? One man's poorly-designed vase is another's sculptural object. When your vase fails to function properly and becomes sculpture, there is little to no impact on the functioning of the environment to which it belongs. It might as well have been sculpture all along. So why distinguish? Why think function was ever a critical part of the equation to begin with? In contrast, when your sofa fails to function properly and becomes sculpture, you're living room is fucked. The distinction then matters and so to does the function and whether form follows it.
post #7465 of 8384
Quote:
Originally Posted by mafoofan View Post


Neither of them would have posted the lounger you picked. I understand: you believe either that they would, and it would have been received differently, or if they wouldn't, it would be because it doesn't have the right designer behind it. You're still not considering the possibility all three of us independently think it's an ugly chair.

You must have missed where I said it's sort of fugly. What you're not getting is I find the Eames and Big Repo sort of fugly too.

I notice too, that no matter how hard I try to build bridges here, you ignore them and even go so far as to edit them out of replies.
post #7466 of 8384
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post

You must have missed where I said it's sort of fugly. What you're not getting is I find the Eames and Big Repo sort of fugly too.

I notice too, that no matter how hard I try to build bridges here, you ignore them and even go so far as to edit them out of replies.

Hold on--of all the comfortable chairs out there, why would you spend $1000+ on a fugly one? I am truly baffled.
post #7467 of 8384
Quote:
Originally Posted by mafoofan View Post

Hold on--of all the comfortable chairs out there, why would you spend $1000+ on a fugly one? I am truly baffled.

a) comfortable as hell
b) from what I can ascertain good material and decent workmanship
c) I judge them to be on the same continuum of the Eames and Big Repo and I wanted chairs on that continuum.
post #7468 of 8384
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post

a) comfortable as hell
b) from what I can ascertain good material and decent workmanship
c) I judge them to be on the same continuum of the Eames and Big Repo and I wanted chairs on that continuum.

Err, define "same continuum"?
post #7469 of 8384
For reference:

Piochair
ec39f15d_06511E0D-2FFC-4CBC-8BB7-A1726ECE6F45_zps20nnnsxm.jpeg

Grand Repos


Eames
Eames-Lounge-Chair-and-Ottoman.jpeg

Barcalounger DeLuxe
barcalounger_jacque_ii_pedestal_recliner-bcl40761-b.jpeg
post #7470 of 8384
That Barcalounger is sweet. Wish I had seen those first!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Fine Living, Home, Design & Auto › Cool furniture, design objects and desiderata