Worth a look, I think. I'm glad Kjærholm never went further with this version 🙂
very handsome website!
Is...
very handsome website!
Is it a fibreglass shell or a sling over tube?? I think eventually people sitting on the armrest would have been a serious problem if it was, perhaps if the flat bar for the rear leg had extended upwards, followed the line of the seat and split into a T shape? with leather on the arms?
Who knows?, As you say its best it wasn't continued
Thanks!
..Now that I have seen this one I will never be able to look at the "regular" PK9 the same way. Somehow the armrests are more consistent with the level of comfort suggested by the leather covered shell.
I do not want to start a war (of words) but I still have to find anything of this level of formal quality in the Eames collection.
sorry for sliding off topic...
sorry for sliding off topic but I got one of these Hans Olsen sofas the other day in green wool, very good condition. I couldn't find the same on the site, any suggestion of value?
http://messmate.blogspot.com/
pk chair
It looks beautiful from the back and I like the arms in theory on that chair as it always sits like a small potato chip. It priovides something to hold onto. From the front it's a total failure and must be qite painful to bump into.
Eames was way too egotistical and formulaic to get close to making this type of mistake, in my opinion.
Thanks Simon, hardly...
Thanks Simon, hardly outback, thats still another 500 km west! I think I'll hang on to it.
Egos and formulas? I wasn't quite sure what you were getting at there 606. Most name designers worked to a formula, its when the formula is applied indiscriminately that it will fail as a solution and become mannered. Eames worked in a dynamic production environment that was open to hybridisation of his "formulas" (or his wifes and Don Albinsons) . PK had a singular and refined formula and from what I know restricted himself to it, his choice of materials probably helped do away with many of the physical problems that Eames encountered which required struts and other complex solutions.
Apologies if I sounded didactic, I just wasn't sure what you were trying to communicate.
HP PK
I'm not sure what I mean't to say, now that I am questioned. I was comparing this erred chair to Eames' work, having read a comment above. I don't like Eames primarily because too many do. I don't think his work stands the test of time. I see him more of this heavily interdependent sort of social butterfly that couldn't do anything properly on his own. He had to constantly involve other people, companies, technologies to make designs that, in the end, don't speak to me at all. So he seems fussy and attention addicted.
Whereas PK designed in a manner that deliberately aimed to simplify, and not complicate in order to require a new technology or some big collaboration to solve the problem. The simplicity of the design intrinsically solved the problems rather than creating them. There is discipline with PK, rather than formula. I see each of his major pieces as distinctly unique and almost all of them near perfection.
If I look at Eames' work, I think of a modern utopian hospital where injured people are corrected by using the furniture; I see a bit of the leg splint behind all of it. Dreary.
I shouldn't compare.
.
In terms of aesthetics I prefer an individual PK piece over an Eames too but for different reasons. My preferance for PK is a gut reaction.
Eames have to be praised for the waves they've made and the general affordability of the furniture in its day, perhaps I'm wrong but I suspect the PK range was allways very expensive. Whilst no fan of planned obsolesence I find the lifespan of flat bar stainless a little disturbing, which is why I enjoy collecting Danish solid timber work, it slowly keeps craft skills and consumption ticking over.
If you need any help, please contact us at – info@designaddict.com