Design Addict

Cart

Classics you dislik...
 

Classics you dislike  

Page 6 / 6
  RSS

whitespike
(@whitespike)
Illustrious Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 3499
27/10/2008 5:18 pm  

I'll get flamed for this ...
But I really don't like the Eames LCW or LCM. It isn't from an aesthetic point, but rather from a functional one. It's just too low to the ground, and everyone knows it. For their purpose, I think that the DCW and DCM are a more successful design.


ReplyQuote
NULL NULL
(@tpetersonneb-rr-com)
Illustrious Member
Joined: 5 years ago
Posts: 522
27/10/2008 5:38 pm  

Yeah, I have to agree with...
Yeah, I have to agree with whitespike that the LCW is too low. Strangely. Like - I don't know - a '58 Corvette.


ReplyQuote
LuciferSum
(@lucifersum)
Illustrious Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 1874
27/10/2008 8:10 pm  

I suppose it depends
I suppose that the argument depends on what one is trying to accomplish. Certainly one rule doesn't always hold true for every object. Saarinen's pedestal group set out to accomplish a clarity of form (incidentally I think the tulip chair is horribly malfunctional as a chair)
The Eames set about designing a single material shell, starting with the plywood first, and then the plastic. The metal supports - no pun - played the supporting role to the actual seat surfaces. Of course, you can't overlook Ray's role (and artistic history) in the design of the chairs. It was her decision to keep the LC/DC with the wood bases because she preferred their cohesiveness - contrary to the 'plinth' concept.
If Jacobsen was creating an environment that could easily flex between public and private a single pedestal seems like the rational (if not necessarily formal) direction to go. I am correct in my assumption that the wood legged swan doesnt pivot? And - not to trivialize the issue - but have you ever seen a swan with four legs?
(and I think a crab on a skewer looks...delicious!) 😀


ReplyQuote
LuciferSum
(@lucifersum)
Illustrious Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 1874
27/10/2008 8:18 pm  

Not flamed but
Not going to flame you Whitespike, but I think your argument about the functionality of the LCW demonstrates the subjectivity of 'comfort'. Personally I love the LCW and find it immensely comfortable. In fact, it was the comfort that prompted me to buy one- before having actually sat in it I was appalled at the idea of spending (then) $500 on it. Still, I often find guests who sit in the chair tend to perch at the front edge of the seat rather than relaxing back in it.
Another funny illustration is the Eames Low Rod base (cat's cradle). I had a side shell on a Cats Cradle base that I didnt really like for anything other than looks. However, a good friend LOVED it. Every time he visited he would seek out the chair and sit in it. At 6'2" he looked remarkably like a grasshopper in it, which contributed to the amusement.


ReplyQuote
whitespike
(@whitespike)
Illustrious Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 3499
27/10/2008 9:04 pm  

I do find the LCW to be...
I do find the LCW to be comfortable for what it is. But once you're down it's hard to get up! And it is only comfy as a temporary sitting solution - it isn't something you would really "lounge" in ... even though that key word is used in it's very own name. This being the case, if you agree that is is a temporary seat, the difficulty of getting up is a problem.
There are a couple of factors that make that chair hard to get out of. There's the obvious - it's really low to the ground. But there is also the angle of the seat, which angles acutely to the back. Then there is the material - the unupholstered wood creates a slick surface. Therefore when you sit you instantly slide back into the sharp angle, low to the ground. This could possibly be overlooked if there were arms to help you get up.
I had one for less than a year. That'll teach me to buy for aesthetics!


ReplyQuote
whitespike
(@whitespike)
Illustrious Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 3499
27/10/2008 9:14 pm  

Pissing contest
And not to make this a pissing contest between Charles and his best pal Eero, but I actually think Eero's executions were much more successful if you define success as a marriage of form and function.
The Executive chair by Eero, I think successfully tackles many problems that an Eames chair takes several designs to solve. For example, the Executive is:
1. Comfortable. More so than any Eames side chair, except for maybe the soft pad. But it is also more attainable than the soft pad.
2. Suitable for dining or casual sitting. No need for "LCW" or "DCW" here.
3. Aesthetically pleasing. While it may not be the highest on the list of coveted modern classic chairs, it is a very handsome bugger you have to admit.
4. The arm chair's arms are ignorable. The Saarinen executive has comfy, low profile arms that don't intrude when not needed. I can play an acoustic guitar comfortably in one of these, whereas most armchairs have arms that would get in the way. This can be helpful for a number of tasks. The Saarinen's arms stop well before the edge of the seat, making this possible.


ReplyQuote
LuciferSum
(@lucifersum)
Illustrious Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 1874
28/10/2008 1:19 am  

Oh I love
I love the Saarinen Executive series. I campaigned long and hard against my boyfriend to get them for the dining room. Sadly - no dice.
I recognize the limitations of the LCW, but - since my knees are still ok - I've chosen to overlook them 🙂
You make a great point about the "reinventing the wheel" that the Eames seemed to do a lot, whereas Eero did it once and then moved on. However, my main issue was with the Tulip chair, not the executive. The base of the tulip is just SO dreadfully clunky and heavy. It fucks up your floor if you slide it, and it knocks the edge of the chair against the table if you swivel.
And semantics again: success is subjective. Is success the sum of good design, engineering, and craft resulting in a comfortable, long lasting product? Or is it selling a lot of freakin chairs? While the Eames struggled to reinvent the chair they also blew open their product base, giving Herman Miller lots of things to discontinue, reissue, then make Special Editions of. All Knoll has done is shrink the Womb chair and make the Tulip base the same plastic silver color as my computer. ;-D


ReplyQuote
NULL NULL
(@teapotd0meyahoo-com)
Illustrious Member
Joined: 5 years ago
Posts: 4318
28/10/2008 2:10 am  

I suspected...
That this thread would turn into everyone disliking everything for one reason or another.... :p


ReplyQuote
bustelo
(@bustelo)
Estimable Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 87
28/10/2008 10:21 pm  

Oh, now you have gone and done It
Next, I suppose you will suggest that the Emperor has NO clothes.


ReplyQuote
koen
 koen
(@koen)
Illustrious Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2054
29/10/2008 12:48 am  

something like that yes....
I desperately wanted to contribute to this thread and somehow I could not find any classic that I dislike. Coming close to a 100 contributions made me fear the worst, a second thread and still nothing on my behalf?finally I did see the light, I realized that if I do not like it, I do not call it a classic?.this certainly was a close call.


ReplyQuote
whitespike
(@whitespike)
Illustrious Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 3499
29/10/2008 7:05 am  

Oh, c'mon. There has got to b...
Oh, c'mon. There has got to be a classic that you don't like no? You like every one of them? Really?
I could say that I do not HATE any of them ... that would be true. They all offer something amusing, or we wouldn't be talking about them. But, seriously, I meant "don't like" as in "I wouldn't have it. It isn't too my taste" all the way up to "It's absolutely dreadful." Any level of displeasure.


ReplyQuote
Olive
(@olive)
Illustrious Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2201
30/10/2008 6:05 pm  

"one man's trash is another man's treasure"
I don't like the Platner piece cuz they look hostile to me, but I love the Noguchi table, despite it's massive over-exposure, because I love the curvaceous form. However, that Wink chair is just plain fugly, despite all its curves. I'm no fan of the Barcelona cuz I need a forklift to get out of the thing. But I find the Wassily quite comfortable.
My 'classics' are someone else's 'what a joke'. I guess that's why design is such a personal thing. There are very very few pieces that everyone of us here would look at and instantly say, "That's a Classic!"
OK...I'm suppossed to be working on my blog stuff...back to work...


ReplyQuote
Lunchbox
(@lunchbox)
Illustrious Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 1208
27/11/2008 5:51 am  

Add another one to the list...
Noguchi Cyclone dining table. Shocked to be saying it. But the longer I've had one in my home, the more it smacks of 90's design to my eye. Am I the only one? It is honestly beginning to annoy me.


ReplyQuote
LRF
 LRF
(@lrf)
Illustrious Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2967
27/11/2008 6:46 am  

classics you ...
classics you dislike.......
never made a classic i disliked!!!!!! that is why it is a classic!!!


ReplyQuote
Page 6 / 6
Share:

If you need any help, please contact us at – info@designaddict.com

  
Working

Please Login or Register