Dear Paulanna
I have no access to the British Ikea catalogue but if you give me specific item numbers I will look at is as open minded as possible (item numbers gives me access to the web catalogue)
and Vivienne...this is not a matter of taste. I am not pretending anything when it comes to the design qualities of Ikea products. I am just stating the evident: There is a large group of users that do not want products that they are not "familiar" with. Familiarity comes with picking upp a vague idea of style in those sections of magazines that introduce new trends. Ikea designers might use their creativity in a different way as Ron Arad, but there comes a point were wavy book-shelfs will have reached a wider consensus (probably when people have so few books that they have to make the shelf more important than the meager contents) and a Ikea designer will design a wavy bookshelf in a suitable technology and material to make it affordable. And I am as sure that Paulanna will call that a copy as I expect Antonella to want it in environmental friendly marble.
...oh,
...and please do not remind me of the fact that the "ögla" chair looks like a thonet, or the "frosta" like an Aalto. Ikea has never claimed that they designed them...and by now, even legally the models are in the public domain.
I have high respect for the protection of intellectual property (in part because thatt's what I live from) but in a just society, culture generated by that society to return to society
"And I am as sure that Paulan...
"And I am as sure that Paulanna will call that a copy as I expect Antonella to want it in environmental friendly marble."
HAHAHAHA. Dear Lord. Seriously, I don't see why people get so upset about IKEA. They are not ripping off any dead designers' estates. In fact, they are selling to a market that would not buy the designers' product anyway because of price. They sell to a different consumer for the most part.
Other than that, besides the obvious aformentioned chairs mentioned by Koen, I don't see much in the way of copies in their catalog (save for a Saarinen dining table). I don't consider something a copy simply because it is "inspired by" or uses similar materials. Seriously, how many famous designs can you think of that are inspired by earlier designs? Have you even looked in that Taschen chair book? Many of them copy each other over and over in terms of basic shapes and materials.... You wouldn't dare call them copies ... because they are tied to more prestegious names perhaps?
Seriously, if this is you standard then Risom copied Aalto, or Rapson copied Risom, or Maathsson copied Rapson, etc (I don't know the exact timeline, just an example).
It's a phrase like 'save for...
It's a phrase like 'save for the Saarinen table' that illustrates (perhaps better than I can) my argument. The aforementioned Ikea mission statement in their catalogue (the one with the pictures of their suspiciously young and photogenic designers)says that their products are both unique and individually designed. Fair enough. Then take a look at their so-called 'Snilla' or 'Hannes' work chairs. A Robin Day Polyprop chair from 1962 by any other name - and Robin is quite alive thanks for asking. If Ikea choose to plagiarise the work of others (albeit with minor cosmetic manipulations) thats between them and the design's originator. My objection is that I'm asked to believe that what I'm looking at is somehow a unique Ikea design or by an 'Ikea' designer (their words) - when I know its not. This is not the same as, say, Aalto and Risom working with similar materials.
who cares?
The other point is, they are not pretending that it is a real Robin Day piece etc. They are making design available to all, which is respectable. You can find anything wrong and nitpicky to say about any designer or company. The bottom line is that if they didn't do their job then a lot of people would be left out. I am not saying they are perfect, but I am not going to pretend that making designs inspired by other desginers is a carnal sin. What do you care? If you can afford a real Aalto then zippity-do-dah. Don't pee in the poor man's cheerios if he is equally grateful for a $50 hunk of particlebaord as you are your overpriced designer piece! In the end, it really just doesn't matter. I am much more concerned about people's general satisfaction and happiness that being a design snob.
That being said, I don't own anything from IKEA (not to say I wouldn't, they are just not in my area and their shipping is more expensive than the products themselves). In fact, almost all my pieces are original classic designs. Woopty-doo for me. Sometimes my own collections make me feel ill, because I don't want to feel lumped in with the other snobs. I jsut happen to have been very lucky in my finds and very dedicated to thrifting about. There is something slightly relieving to me about those people who don't know to care ... those who really are only affected by the aesthetic that surrounds them with no strings attached.
If we want to be really...
If we want to be really picky about design - why stop at furniture? Why not throw away all "designer jeans" that really don't look any different than the first jeans ever created by Levi's. Any blue jeans besides Levi's is a copy. Quick! Burn them before other design addicts find out! Blue jeans are a massed produced product just like a chair. I am sure you find even fewer differences among designer jeans than designer chairs.
20 million or more polyprop...
20 million or more polyprop chairs have been sold (every bit of wasteland in London has at least one abandoned but defiantly indestructible Polyprop chair on it)so its not expensive. Who cares? I think you'd care if a grinning Swedish nobody in a catalogue was taking credit for YOUR ideas. When the Dictionary of Oxymorons get printed 'Ikea Designer' is a shoe-in, with 'well known Sydney journalist' not far behind.....
Dear Paulanna
I could not find anything under "Hannes other than a computer desk, but I found "Snille" or what you call: A Robin Day Polyprop chair from 1962 by any other name. well..I have to disagree. Robin Day was neither the first one to make a polypropylene seat/backrest combination on a steel wire frame, neither did he invent the so called Ackerblom back support nor the simple nmechanical need for wide rims to make the piece stable. Off line Patrick was kind anough to send me a few other exemples that raised the same question. When Aalto or Grcic draw a glass with a particular taper that is the best compromise between stability and the taper needed to press the glass properly and to get it out of the mould, is that their intellectual property?, no it is not. If Robin Day shapes his backrest according to those days' ergonomic standards, is that his creation, of course it is not. Aplying similar industry standards, technological or functional knowledge is using knowledge that is in the public domain and should stay there. You can't possibly bend laminated wood in a compact fashion without looking like an typical Aalto bend wooden piece, simply because that is what he is doing. When Ingo Maurer did his large size so called Bulb-Bulbs, did we screm and siad that he was copying Edison? No his creative act was to make it in an unusual size.
Robin Day used known technology...with it's restrictions and possibilities, known features for comfort and strenght and made a well proportioned, refined combination of these elements and that is what we admire and that is why we think he is a good designer. "Snille" is a similar aplication of all those things but without the refinement and the culture of Robin Day...and it shows.
In another thread HP asked, who was it again who dipped a sponge in slip and fired it....and Patrick answered: Marcel Wanders. To dip sponges (potters use them all the time) in slip and fire them is what ceramic students have done for ages in every craft school I know. The only reason why I find it interesting to react on your copy is a copy is a copy statement is that we see more and more this grabbing for claims. What was a long standing joke in craft schools is now Marcel Wanders' property etc. etc. For decades now we have been eroding public interest by the sometimes silly claims for individual interest and this is just part of that. As Witespike pointed out none of the people who's individual rights you want to defend would agree. They worked in a time when design was not claiming left right and center whatever you could transform in a published idea, they worked in a time when designers put their creativity to the service of the public, and nothing was more rewarding that to see ones ideas generate new variations amoung other designers and craftsmen.
Oh I should have appreciated ...
Oh I should have appreciated that the design is not a copy of a highly succesful chair design whose vast sales serial rippers -off Ikea were jealous of but purely the result of manufacturing necessity. As we say in England, pull the other one its got bells on.
Hello Koen...
I know people will always want something different and there are markets for almost all of our tastes and budgets i suppose, i was just saying,( maybe in a rather glib way im sorry) that its a good job were not all the same, god forbid that anyone be so unlucky to be anything like me!. I wasnt directing any comment at anyone honey.I am however rubbish at martial arts but will challenge Stephen to a drinking match anytime...
Hi Vivienne...
I am anxious to hear Stephen's reaction...I like the self-confidence that comes from both your reputation and this bold challenge...but watch it, he is Australian as you...
As for Paulanna...
It is obvious you are on some kind of mission, which is fine with me but personal attacks especially when questioning the obvious (Stephen is indeed a well known Sydney journalist and writer) is too far below the belt. If I had seen your comments before I wrote mine I would not have written a word. I do not know if you have the equivalent in good old England but in Belgium we call that "Throwing pearls at the pigs".
Koen
I think setag nailed the point about Stephen's Ikea sponsored junket and Stephen's very aggressive reply quite demonstrated the suspicion that someone who introduces himself as 'well known Sydney journalist' may have a bit of an ego thing going. I don't suppose even Tom Cruise introduces himself as 'a well known Hollywood actor'. Oh and before you say it Stephen I have written a book - only mine's still in print and has an Amazon sales ranking.
You didn't meet my point Koen that Ikea's Snille chair is virtually identical to Day's Polyprop - a chair which earned Day royalties for a long time. I suppose its a coincidence that Ikea have produced this shortly after a big resurgence in sales for the Hille original? The Ikea chair looks the way it does not because of any technical demands but because it is a cynical and shameless "me too" copy. That IKEA then tell us that its products are the fruits of their in -house designers (this is my main and still unanswered point) adds insult to injury.
Like I said earlier - you...
Like I said earlier - you can find fault of some sort with any well known company or designer. The majority of IKEA's products are not copies. But they are not perfect, and I won't pretend they are. I will reiterate that their ability to produce modern furnishings for everyone is a very respectable thing, perhaps outweighing the fact they have a handful of what you would consider to be a copies. While they may not offer the quality and lasting value, they have acheived the goal many designers have failed at for affordable design. Like it or not, it takes a huge corporation to be able to mass produce products at the quanity needed for price control.
IKEA - what's it for?
It could be argued that IKEA is good for some basics - where something fairly innocuous, like book shelving is required. The important things are the books and the function of the shelves is more important than the form, provoded the shelf isn't intrusive or ugly. Here IKEA Billy will do the job for a large number of books for a bargain price. Also they occasionally have the occasional good quality item - I've just bought a very plain frosted glass garden table from IKEA for under £50, which is perfect with Stark Lord Yo chairs.
However I have to agree with paulanna that their design pretentions are more than faintly ludicrous and some of their copies are junk - I find their Aalto style bentwood stools particularly irritating. Their stuff on the whole could be a lot better, they should ditch at least half the products and make the rest (even slightly) better quality - eg why not plywood instead of hardboard for shelf backings and drawer bottoms? Muji does it better, in my humble opinion.Also their meatballs are disgusting!
And someone who starts a thread about a visit to the IKEA HQ(even one where all expenses are paid) with the heading "Huge news" must surely expect a little ribbing. I thought at first that this was meant to be ironic, but obviously not.........
If you need any help, please contact us at – info@designaddict.com