Profile
Subscribe
Starcks latest statement, “everything that I designed is absolutely unnecessary.” has started an interesting discussion.
You could take this discussion in any direction you please really, from if designer products are necessary, delving into the need to surround ourselves with beauty, or beautiful functionality, and take it all the way to the necessity of furniture….(which is where Starck was going).
If what Starck meant is that you can live without it - Sure - I get his point, you can, and many people have, do and will survive without designer pieces or furniture at all in there lives.
But I am pretty sure, as is Allison Arief says that this is another good way to create a hype about his work and generate interest, and that this was the motivation for this statement.
Even if this was his intention, the bomb has been dropped, so to speak and the thought is out there.
Stan says that it would be possible to get by without furniture - prehistoric man did… we could settle for pillows and throws and that would be that…
I Don’t really buy into that theory - for two reasons … prehistoric man didn’t have designer furniture but the certainly had furniture - sitting on a rock and leaning on another is a form of a chair, or sitting on logs around a fire is similar tositting on sofas, all be it less comfortable.
They say that the mother of all invention is necessity, which is one of the truest truisms.
We wouldn’t have invented sofas and chairs and pillows and lamps if they weren’t necessary on some level or another.
So on the debate whether we need furniture - Sure we do!!
If we can live without it - Sure! With a whole lot less comfort. And as far as I am concerned - furnishing a room with pillows and throws is furnishing non the less.
What do you think?
Photo courtesy bonluxat.com Phillipe Starck - Arm chair
