Part 1:
First, I have to say the three little words: What the hell!?!?
There has been some threads lately with product being reintroduced either at a very high price like Eames' plywood elephant or in a modified version far from the original design like the colourful LCW.
People, these examples above pisses me off! ... grrrr, I would really like to have such an elephant.
But this weekend I came across a example myself at the Copenhagen Furniture Fair: Poul Kjærholm's PK4, also known as the "Holscher" chair.
First, some background knowledge about this chair. Kjærholm designed this chair in 1952 as a simplified version of his final project at Kunstakademiets Arkitektskole, the PK25, which proved to be too difficult and expensive to produce initially. Very few examples of the PK4 were produced, mainly to friends and family members. The metal frames were bent at Svend Holscher's workshop (a Plummer and father to Poul's friend, professor Knud Holscher, who attended the same school). Poul and his wife Hanne then wrapped the flag line around the frame themselves. Fritz Hansen showed interest in the chair but it never went into production. Instead Kjærholm started his legendary cooperation with E. Kold Christensen soon after in 1955 and later that year the famous PK22 was designed.
Now a small Danish company called Thorsen has put the PK4 into production. They already produce Kjærholm's PK1 dining chair. My problem is the price. The PK4 will cost $1550. I think it's way too high and again not in touch with the initial idea behind the product.
Kjærholm designed the PK4 chair as a inexpensive lounge chair that most people could afford. Similar to Verner Panton's Bachelor chair that Fritz Hansen chose to produce in 1955 instead of the PK4. Had the PK4 gone into production, I'm sure the price would have been very fair (as it was with Panton's Bachelor chair).
These days Kjærholm's furniture belong to the most expensive design icons there are on the market. Kjærholm died at the age of 51 and soon after Fritz Hansen bought the rights and took over the production from E. Kold Christensen. Since then the prices of his furniture have steadily climbed. A good example is the PK31 sofa with room for three people. Buying it from Fritz Hansen will cost you just below $33000. If Kjærholm was alive today, I simply cant imagine him approving this.
Beneath a link that show the new/original design of the PK4.
Part 2:
I think Kjærholm...
Part 2:
I think Kjærholm would be thrilled to finally see the PK4 being offered to the public after all those years, perhaps at a reasonable price of say $300-$500. I mean, this chair cant be expensive to produce at all. But when the price is $1550, only a limited part of the public will have immediate access to this chair. Sure, you can save up your money to buy it eventually but even then, this high price simply does not suite the PK4. Youre not getting your moneys worth. Had Kjærholm not designed this chair, no company would ever put it into production 55 years later. Today, the design of the PK4 is not nearly interesting enough and does certainly not contribute with anything new.
However, the price is only one aspect of this discussion. How about the PK4's new look? It's been launched in two versions. One is completely similar to the original design and the other is made with black flag line and a matt chromed frame (similar to the PK25). Why? Why try to make the PK4 look like any other Kjærholm chair?
The PK4 shows rough welds which back in 1952 was somewhat disguised by painting the frame black. But this new makeover simply looks wrong. I see it as a poor attempt to try updating the 55 year old PK4 with its handmade and rough, almost industrial look to an exclusive, sleek and modern lounge chair with a look that resembles all the other of Kjærholms masterpieces. It simply does not suite the PK4.
In my humble opinion, what would have suited the PK4, was to stick with the original design and to offer it at a price that showed respect for both Poul Kjærholm, the PK4 and his vision and intention behind this chair.
What really surprises me, is that this whole project has been supervised by Hanne Kjærholm. I honestly thought she would take better care of her husbands legendary heritage.
I talked with a salesperson at Thorsens showroom about this (it might have been the boss, Im not sure), but he had $$$ in his eyes so without even having a chance to make eye contact with this man, I gave up and moved on.
Beneath there's a link to the updated PK4.
Any comments?
http://www.thorsen.dk/default.asp?id=1656
I agree for the most part...
I agree for the most part but don't think the chrome version is too bad, I actually like it. From the little I know of his work I don't think he was really that much of a purist and the price isn't that outrageous for a European made piece, we're so used to cheap products now that we forget that decent labour and environmental practices come at a cost.
Isn't it just a case of expen...
Isn't it just a case of expensive chair or no chair at all? The market for this will be quite small and the manufacturers make it expensive simply so that they can make a profit. And no doubt if it does prove popular there'll soon be Chinese versions selling at the $300 you'd like. I've always understood that one of the historical reasons great emphasis is put on Danish design and craftsmanship is that, lacking, as Denmark does, the natural resources for heavy industry, its recourse to becoming an export economy was to add value and prestige to its products by virtue of good design and high quality. Its the reason Bang & Olufsen products, for example, still sell well despite being far more expensive (and no better sounding but much better looking) than Far Eastern ones and why a basic Jacobsen 3107 costs £250 new when a similar plywood stacking chair costs £20. This PK4 - a small run luxury (but maybe not luxurious) item - is just another case in point.
As for the chrome finish - its just one of those things that manufacturers feel compelled to do I guess to make a product as marketable as possible - Artek Pascoe in the States were doing it to Aalto's stuff right under his (rightly indignant) nose back in the 50s.
HP, the PK4 is actually very ...
HP, the PK4 is actually very comfortable. However shortly after you've sat down the rod at the front of the seat starts to annoy the back of your knees and lower thigh. This is also a problem with PK4's cousin, the PK25. You have to have very long legs to avoid this.
Room606, the quality appeared to be excellent, though it's not hard for Thorsen to provide these chairs with some good flag line and a good paintjob regarding the frame itself. But for people who see the chromed, more exclusive-looking PK4 for the first time and don't know the original version and its history, I think they'll wonder about the sloppy welds.
if nothing else its an...
if nothing else its an interesting of example of function versus style. If the rods had been polished flat bar and attached with some very tidy allen screws and the halyard replaced with leather it would be a very different looking but functionally almost identical.
I'm going to my fathers workshop on the weekend, I might knock up a frame!
Didn't he do a very similar chair in timber? I'm sure he did come to think of it.
Ive been sitting in and...
Ive been sitting in and buying a lot of used furniture lately and am allways suprised by the way that a chair that has an immdediate sense of 'oh yeah' comfort (perhaps like this PK chair) is not after a few minutes very comfortable at all and that a chair like a Wanscher or Olsen can be sat in for quite some time and I'm not really aware that I am sitting.
It allways amazes me that with these chairs freely available for any manufacturer to study the seat height,depth,angles widths etc that they still manage to produce uncomfortable chairs.
Its a huge failure of post modernism that we have this massive wealth of knowledge (which is supposedly 'quoted') and we do so little with it, as if we were medieval and have open sewers and live near the ruins of a Roman aqueduct.
ah I needed a rant...:)
This is a difficult question Martin...
My first reaction would not be unlike yours, but we consider P.K's furniture as part of the Danish furniture design heritage. There is also a traditionalist point of view that considers heritage the same way as historians consider the past. Historians look at the past, research it and re-write history. History is a selective part of the past and we all hope that it is selected on the basis of it's relevancy for the present and the future. Heritage is the same as the past. it is what it is and nothing can be changed to it. Tradition acknowledges the value of heritage but finds elements in that heritage that they (traditionalists) consider worthy of one form of another of updating. Where heritage is a gone thing, tradition is the confirmation that some of these things are valuable enough to continue.
I can not judge which one is the most proper one, I just see both having some value.
An interesting double standard
It seems every time we turn around these days someone is making a buck (or two...or three) off of the good name of some early designer. What seems to be the biggest outcry is not necessarily the cost of the piece, but the fact that the original was supposed to fit the modernist ideal of affordability. This upset is understandable; the democratic nature of modern design is being subverted by the willingness of manufacturers to lionize these products and then charge an arm and a leg for them.
What I find curious is our willingness to cling to the past, to what WAS a revolutionary design, but what is now merely representational of an revolutionary design. At the same time that we all (myself included) decry this corrupting of the designers concept, design, intent, etc. we very often scoff at the present day apotheosis of affordable design: Ikea (and sometimes Target)
In the US. these two companies represent true modernist ideals. They offer furniture that is generally aesthetically pleasing (bear in mind, thats a subjective statement), furniture that is of honest materials (everyone KNOWS its particle board), comfort, and affordability. Its an interesting double standard to apply. (and a funny thought of paying 600$ for a Poang chair somewhere in the future)
What are we really after when we're kvetching about price tags? Actual modernist principles, or a nostalgic view of a 'pure and honest' design?
pk4
I think it is still the least expensive PK lounge chair one can buy. So in a sense, it is opening up the PK market a little. My concern would be the quality - if it is made extremely well by Danish craftspeople, that would make a difference to me. (Previously there was a discussion about Fritz Hansen's current PK furniture - there, also, we see some shoddy work indicating some new manufacturing shortcuts - without a downward adjustment in list price. I think that line of furniture has bigger problems long term. PK4 is a nice design, but not so much something to awe about. Rather put on the deck and appreciate how it doesn't disrupt the space.
Most of PKs furniture doesn't require any welding - those are the pieces to study, I think.
Did they show that massive beatiful marble bowl of Kjaerholm's, by the way?
Hello Room606.
Nope, no...
Hello Room606.
Nope, no marble ashtray, however I saw it yesterday at Illum's Bolighus. It's not as big as you think, but would be nice for any PK fan to have on their PK61 coffee table.
The rough welds are part of the charm of the original PK4 but they look like poor, careless craftmanship on the updated version.
If you need any help, please contact us at – info@designaddict.com