IKEA, breaking rules, story telling, sustainability and art
August 16th, 2006
About a year ago, I purchased a VIKA AMON/ CURRY (DIY table top and legs) as a simple table package from IKEA. When I brought it home, I, like many others, began laying out the parts to assemble the table. However, with white walls and a white carpet, I came to realize that the white table brought a little too much white into the room. So what to do? I flipped the table top upside down and mounted the legs to the white side (the wrong side), leaving me with a beautiful, unsealed fiberboard surface as my work area.
Big deal. So what?
Well, over the course of the year, I witnessed an all-too-common, yet spectacular transformation in front of me. As I set cold cups of lemonade and iced tea on my table, condensation naturally formed and pooled on the table to make those annoying cup rings. I began by fighting this “cup graffiti” with napkins and coasters, but then this led me to question “why do we use coasters” and “what’s with my obsession to keep things looking pristine?” As time went on, I began to notice where I sat and the areas where my cups were leaving marks, telling a story about my presence, use, interaction and influence on the table.
This led me to begin thinking about “how can we design objects that wear well with age?†Instead of producing aftermarket polycarbonate iPod cases (worse yet, eco iPod cases 2) or using synthetic protective coatings and sealants, can we design modern objects that become worn with beauty, like an old beloved baseball mitt, the rich patina on the statue of liberty or the weathered silver of outdoor teak? My final epiphany came when I actively began composing the image on my desk. If art is about intent, then my actions of intentionally picking cups for their shape and size and consciously placing my drinks in locations that I thought would benefit from the next condensation mark has added a little beauty and creativity to working at my desk.
Readers, what are your thoughts? In an age of designed obsolescence, it seems like there are ephemeral products (disposable cups, electronics) and products of permanence (furniture, jewelry)? How can we design products that have wear well, beautify our lives, and develop emotional connections to their owners and what is their place in the product landscape?
Related post (of IKEA misuse): DIY IKEA Coffin
Popularity: 4% [?]
August 16th, 2006 at 10:44 pm
I have had precisely this same feeling about today’s product design. We’re being sold the idea that cold, sterilized cosntructions are the top of beauty, and when they acquire a trace of wear they are ugly and thus obsolete, and thus time to buy a new one (Apple design is particularly gulity in this area). After spending a number of years pacing up and down the aisles of thrift stores, I am often in awe of the beauty and style of older tools, furniture, appliances and other common goods, especially with which they age, often asking myself “My god, how could someone throw something so beautiful away?” If fact, I’ve just started a photo-blog about my thrift store experiences (http://www.thriftstoreadventures.blogspot.com/) partially devoted to the beauty of the beat up toaster, among other things.
August 17th, 2006 at 3:31 am
This brings to mind the casemodding trend, which illustrates the consuming public’s dissatisfaction with modern design. A computer cased in hand polished hardwoods and brass fittings will look much cooler in ten years than that ridiculous imac (obsolescence aside). As long as they produce cheap, ugly plastic consumer goods we’ll continue to replace them when they get scuffed and broken. There’s no profit in durability.
August 17th, 2006 at 8:46 am
Great post!
August 17th, 2006 at 11:15 am
I like the similar idea of “invisible feedback”—the concept that the use of an object or substance shows you its progress. Examples are black soap that disappears when your hands are clean, tooth dye that disappears when you brush correctly:
http://www.core77.com/blog/object_culture/extra_feedback_in_invisible_processes_4258.asp
August 17th, 2006 at 11:44 am
“There’s no profit in durability”
...that’s a very good point. Following present models of product development, volume and new production bring in the bucks. ...but what about this “service economy” people are buzzing about? How do we make that happen?
...and also, can you think of any brands or objects that are durable, retain value, and in doing so gain customer loyalty so that it is profitable in that manner?
I seem to recall that Jansport used to have a 100% guarantee policy. If it wore out, they either repaired or replaced it, no matter how old. I remember wearing out my favorite backpack in high school and after they evaluated that it was not cost effective to repair it, they sent me a new one of their equivalent line… I believe Patagonia has a similar policy on their apparel and equipment.
August 17th, 2006 at 4:02 pm
Doc Marten’s boots! Before they became trendy, they produced a quality product that looked better as they wore in. It reminds me of the yuppie Harley riders with their new shiney leathers and chromed out bikes. They are like the Disney version of what bikers are supposed to be. Weathered, scuffed leather adds a certain validity of experience and gives a subtle visual cue to others. The punk rock scene adopted this aesthetic to great effect. Wear is a rejection of conventional norms of neatness and order. Its interesting how the punk rock and biker looks have been sterilised and co-opted by mall culture.
August 18th, 2006 at 6:45 am
Sears sells a brand of kids’ jeans (ToughSkins, I think) that are supposedly guaranteed not to wear out (especially at the knees, where most kids destroy them). In the event they do, they’ll replace the pants. My mother made it through 4 kids with very little money by using this trick. She’d buy the jeans, and hand them down to each one of us, knowing they’d be replaced if necessary. It worked! I’m all for reusing the “used” items of others. In fact, I’d be willing to bet that there’s hardly anything in my home that *I* bought new.
November 3rd, 2006 at 10:59 am
I wrote my Masters Thesis on a similar thread, namely how can we design objects that communicate our own vision and intent yet also facilitate a user interaction that brings value to the product that is independant of the designer. This approach can promote the user to take responsibility for the product and hopefully form a relationship with it that will foster more sustainable practices and attitudes.