Well, at last there are some brave individuals out there who are not afraid to lampoon their peers and poke a stick into the many bombastic aspects of our profession. Pre-eminent is Jody Brown, who has used the downturn of 2009 (and the free time this has provided) to write the most amusing commentary on design since Osbert Lancaster. Check out http://www.coffeewithanarchitect.com if you are willing to waste hours laughing at the absurdities of the architectural world. And you will know who to blame if this blog starts to take a similar direction…

On the visual front, I recommend an episodic film by Mitch Magee featuring ‘Mr. Glasses’, a somewhat baffled architect resembling Le Corbusier – a painfully recognizable parody of the designer as heroic nerd and/or social misfit.  It can be found at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ywo_v2YZNxA&feature=relmfu.

Enjoy!

The first example is a typical occasional table of timber construction.  What makes the piece extraordinary are the elaborate turned leg details with four carved and applied strap features that together recall wrought ironwork.  There is no ‘logic’ as such to this feature or sense of irony about the ‘correctness’ of materials – it simply represents the whim of the cabinet maker to inject something unexpected into the design.

The second example is a far superior piece, and better documented thanks to the lot description provided in this month’s Clars auction catalog.  The table was designed by Warren McArthur (1885-1961) and made for the Arizona Biltmore, Phoenix.

At first glance this appears to have a hexagonal timber top on a thin-section, ebonized frame. However it is in fact all metal, a combination of copper sheet and wrought iron.

As a more self-consciously ‘designed’ piece this also has a clearer message: it evokes the homeliness of a family dining table (natural copper standing in for the warm patina of a hardwood top) but with a rugged metal construction suitable for heavy use in a hotel environment.

Executive-style desk, possibly in teak, c.1960

The most striking feature of this desk is the complex design of the frame, which is similar to a wishbone car chassis: it comprises a horizontal x-frame that supports both the top and the filing/storage units, and terminates in four splayed legs. The animistic design of the frame brings to mind horns or antlers, perhaps to reflect the executive-user’s bullish ambition?

It is hard to tell from the images but the top also appears to have curved edges, reinforcing the organic undertones of the design.

Pedestal table, c.1970

An attractive design, possibly by one of the major manufacturers (Hille?). The L-shaped steel supports clustered to form a cross is an elegant solution using inexpensive off-the-shelf sections. This is the only image available and so the connection of the supports to the underside is unknown.

Dining table, 1930-50

An appealingly simple design which is a hybrid between the craftsman and modernist styles. The plank legs and cross-bar peg connections suggest this could be made by a talented amateur from found materials, but the quality and elegance of the item make it likely that it was commercially produced. Date of manufacture is hard to guess, but signs of modest wear suggest anywhere from 1940 to 1970.

A few examples, found recently on the Bay Area Craigslist, are shown below. They have been chosen because the various pieces have unusual or particularly elegant details. The designers are unknown, at least to me, and we welcome any further information on their origins and date of production:

Drop-leaf table with an unusual reverse-folded central section – assumed Danish, c.1960.

This is an extraordinarily compact design where each element is pared down to the minimum. See for example the leg supports, using a gateleg arrangement with the two hinged sections half the depth of the main frame to give a flat profile when folded. The general appearance of the fully expanded table is also intriguing – a combination of Danish modernism and Japanese minimalism.

Glass-topped coffee table with sloping under-shelf and chevron-style legs – assumed American, c.1960.

An idiosyncratic design veering towards the Jetsons aesthetic, this is almost a parody of mid-century modern living. A particularly enjoyable feature is the shelf which seems designed for the display (rather than the actual reading) of coffee table-style books, to be glimpsed in all their glossy wonder through the glass top.

2 x 3 chest of drawers on front and back H-frame legs – possibly Danish, c.1960.

Despite the poor quality images this has the look of a classic modernist piece, with Danish-style legs and the proportions of a credenza.

Nest of tables with rosewood tops and chrome-steel legs, c.1965.

Unlike the typical nest of three tables in diminishing sizes this consists of one large table that is twice the width of the two smaller (but equally sized) tables, enabling them to be concealed almost completely.

More examples to follow as we come across them.

One example is the Eastlake table, a design that comes in a variety of sizes and shapes but which share certain common characteristics.  These include the fretted leg form with little three-dimensional modeling, and the central pin or newel feature at the intersection of the leg frets that appears to tie them together. Here are some illustrative examples:

If we reinterpret the Eastlake style in its fundamentals, we can envisage forms that are essentially ‘flat-pack’ in nature, joined with a central knuckle or pin. Some examples are shown here, drawing upon simple geometry to delineate the forms and dictate the size of the central joint:

The version on the left uses a combination of aluminum and glass to define the shard-like legs, joined by a steel or aluminum plug in drum form.  The version on the right is a more lyrical design, with legs in aluminum only.  Both tables have glass tops.  The central design is more closely related to the Eastlake precedent, being a side table in oak or similar with an aluminum newel.

510-220 3210

The geometry sets the following constraints:

-  Circle B repeats six times at regular intervals around circle A, forming a hexagon.

-  Circles B and C are located tangentially to circle A and each other, determining their relative diameters.

Based on the above the ratios can be calculated as follows:

An interesting feature of this geometry is the complexity of the relative ratios, both in terms of one radius to another and as a progression of radii from the smallest (C) to the largest (A), which can be expressed as 1 : 1.732 : 3.732.

Proportional systems are only useful to the designer when they offer creative parameters to the design process rather than rigid constraints. If the ‘rules’ are too prescriptive the result is a vapid ‘design by numbers’.  For this particular system the designer could simply adopt the relative ratios of the three circles as a proportional determinant, or also make use of the underlying hexagonal geometry. The examples below use both proportion and location, but with the use of squares located within three circles as a design variant:

This simple pattern can be elaborated by including squares outside as well as within the circles:

This variant on the initial geometry doubles the range of potential proportional relationships: The diagram below shows the relative ratios of the three squares within the circles (left), outside of the circles (middle) and combined (right):

The interlacing of one geometry with another system (the circle-square relationship in the above example) provides dynamism to an otherwise static progression of ratios, and underlies much of CODA Projects’ concept generation. Whether it results in truly harmonic forms is debatable, but this approach does succeed in liberating the designer from the banality of the Cartesian grid which by definition is additive rather than harmonic.

Despite its oddly masculine features and crude execution the figure does nevertheless evoke a sense of suffering that I have tried to emphasize in the new piece of work, below:

The small wooden maquette (with a head just one inch high) is crudely carved but has a surprisingly powerful presence. I cannot remember what inspired the idea, or how it was produced. This is probably an advantage when re-fashoning existing work as the new piece can be unfettered  from any earlier objectives or agendas.

The original figure (above) and examples of the new artwork:

Examples of the figurative work on display: