NBC TV introduction of the Eames Lounge Chair  

I consider all of
Eames creations to be designed by both Charles and Ray. I think they had a real equal working relationship. The time life stools are listed as by being designed by Ray and I'm certain that Charles worked on certain projects without Ray's equal active involvement (gosh, they were a busy team), but then again, perhaps not. They lived in California and had their own studio/workshop, so perhaps they were 50/50 in most things.
As far as the fabrics so, I haven't read much about their creation of their fabric line.
By the way, I for 2 1/2yard of Crosspatch in the Spring color tone and my friend who upholsters here in Minneapolis is going to recover my LaFonda armshell that's coming in the mail.
It's gonna be swell. (Crosspatch is above...with the rows of x's...)

Note the change in the header
I was reading and came across the fact that the Eames' TV introduction of the Lounge chair happened on the Arlene Francis Home Show, not on "Today".
My Mistake.

This video on the fiberglass...
This video on the fiberglass chairs is pretty nifty as well
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-D44TE0qH8c

Damn cool....
Great film......

Thanks for the link
That spot was fun to watch, I'm always startled by the Eames' softspoken, folksy demeanor when I see them on film. It contradicts the common fallacy that a temperamental, self indulgent, bombastic personality goes hand-in-hand with creative genius.

Politically Correct Hindsight
I'm of two minds when it comes to rewriting history to be politically correct. On the one hand, Ray got the short end of the stick when it came to due credit for her contributions. On the other hand, we can never know exactly what those contributions are. You can go back and look at the memories and recordings people have of the Eames Office, of Charles & Ray's relationship etc. I dont think there is enough evidence to split the credit evenly down the center. Charles - by all accounts - was the head of the Eames Office, he was the decision maker and the driving force behind the creative output, output that noticably faltered upon his death. What I will say is this: While their contribution may not have been totally equal, evidence shows that neither one produced a product that was solely theirs. I.e. there is nothing that is solely Charles, and nothing that is solely Rays. Both consulted on the development of every project along the way - as did various other members of the Eames Office. SO while it was never exactly 50/50, it was never one person solo. They were always partners. That is where I think the credit should fall.

Your're right, Lucifer
The wonderful book, "The Work of Charles and Ray Eames" goes into quite a bit of detail about Ray's involvement.
Based on what I read, here's the summary:
- Ray was the artist, Charles was the artitect.
- Ray did the bent plywood sculptures early on and it was those sculptures and her personal drawings that were the basis for the bent wood chairs.
- Ray was the one into color and probably single-handled designed all of the Eames Fabrics and probably was the primary person behind the color schemes of the Eames Storage Units.
- Ray is credited with the design of the Time Life Stools.
My best guess is that their entire output (furniture, interior and exterior architecture, films, etc.) were a joint effort.
The book goes on to say that even though they did stuff together, Charles had no problem allowing his name to be listed solely and neither Ray or the Herman Miller company did anything to change that.
Similarly, I'm amazed that George Nelson and the Herman Miller (and the Howard Miller company) allows Nelson to take full and total credit on all designs that came out of the George Nelson Associates firm.
The fact that Ray Eames, Irving Harper, Donald Pile and others didn't get full credit for their wonderful designs is perhaps the most troubling aspect of the fabulous American Mid-Century Modern movement.
I would like to see Herman Miller and ALL distributors of Herman Miller alter ALL of the advertising to include Ray.

It's not Herman Millers decision to make
"Charles had no problem allowing his name to be listed solely and neither Ray or the Herman Miller company did anything to change that."
Assuming that's the case, do you really think Herman Miller has any business attributing the designs in a manner contrary to the wishes of both Charles & Ray?

Once again
This discussion about attribution comes up once in a while and almost always includes some reference to the Nelson Office. Once again, it's important to remember that employment law states that creative contributions of a person become the sole property of the parent company. And also, dont forget, that the company name is George Nelson Associates. I think it has become a kind of urban legend that George Nelson (the person) was responsible for all of the works that came out of George Nelson (the company) Associates.
Some poor schmuck designed the iPod...but all anyone will remember is that iPod is an Apple product.

What IS insane, tho
is that Ray lived ten years longer than Charles, and lived to see a lot of the Eames pieces reissued by Herman Miller (and Vitra) and with the growing advances in the world thanks to the Women's Movement, I'm surprised that Ray did not attempt much in the line of publicity.
I guess her personality wasn't right for stepping out and accepting her rightful place in the history of really top-notch American designers.

women's movement, schwomen's movement
Come on, don't turn Ray into a martyr. Plenty of women demanded and were given credit, in diverse fields, long before the "women's movement" of the 1960's/ 70's.
You seem to fault Ray for being too "unenlightened" to blow her own horn. Perhaps you're projecting your own requirements for recognition onto her-- despite the unequal billing, she seems to have led a deliriously happy and satisfying life, from what I've read.
(AND, Ray's hardly been overlooked in the history of American design-- Charles' name is rarely mentioned without hers.)

There's no reason to take that tone.
If Florence Knoll could quietly run her company, design furniture that had her name on it, then Ray should've come out of the shadows a bit after Charles bought the farm.
Similarly, after Nelson's death, many of the known Irving Harper designs should be listed as Nelson-Harper.
I feel very strongly about people should have full credit for what they did.
I bought 2 1/2 yards of of "Eames" Crosspatch in the Spring tone, and it's clear that Ray Eames designed the fabric, so from now on, I'll refer to it was Ray Eames fabric.
Apparently, Mr. Caufield, you would prefer all furniture made by Herman Miller to be listed as Herman Miller without the designers?
Interesting name you have too....the character in the novel "Catcher In The Rye" was bit confused too. (Just kidding, really)

My point is:
This isn't an issue of somebody being denied their rights. Ray
was apparently shy and retiring (or, perhaps, just indifferent to fame) and content with letting Charles take the credit.
Since this seems to have been HER preference, it's wrongheaded to pose this situation as though it's an injustice to be righted.
Does a woman retain the right to be meek, or was that option banished by Gloria Steinem?
(and my ID gives the wrong impression--- it's MS. Caulfield, for the record.)

OK whc
Things are good.
I want perfection in a world where it isn't possible, lol.