Skip to main content

The movable chair and you.

The folding chair. 



I sort of love it, you sort of love it, we all sort of love it. Probably because it's only sort of a chair. It wobbles and creaks, it's not terrifically comfortable, and it's not devilishly handsome either. But what if I told you that the humble chair you see before you is part of an urban solution to electrify public spaces?

One of the basic problems of designing a public space is that you could never in a million years conceive of all the ways that it will end up being used. You may plan for a public fountain that becomes an impromptu swimming pool. You might design a beautiful bench seating area that winds up as a bird-dropping collector more than anything else. People are going to take your space and run with it, so why not make it a little easier?

Enter: the movable chair. The proposed solution by William Whyte, one of the patron saints of urban planning, moveable chairs allow the designed space to become a designable space. Benches are static and often enough aren't where you find yourself wanting to sit. Ledges are more interesting, but they can only offer so much in the way of practicality. But movable chairs? *chef's kiss*

You'll find that people will drag the chairs together to arrange a social gathering. They'll place two of them opposed to each other for a seat and a footrest. They'll stand on them to get a better view of Shakespeare in the Park. And that's fine. I would never claim to know more about how people live their lives in that space than the people themselves, and I see no shame in letting them help me in the everyday process of designing it. I know we go to school to get a professional degree for this and all, but I'm all in for accepting that your average joe knows more about what they want than we do.


Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

In criticism of criticism.

How many of your ideas are actually yours?           And, to that point, how many of them do you even agree with? In the age we currently live, countless writers, critics, and general snobs make their living by giving an opinion on things that most of us have never experienced. If I read a (beautifully written, I might add) movie review by Roger Ebert, I still haven't seen the film. I may have some idea of what it was like to have seen it, but only from the perspective of Mr. Ebert himself. If I then decide to watch the movie, who could say how much different my experience will be for having these ideas preloaded into my head--ideas about whether it is a two or three star worthy film, if I had ought to believe in the characters as written and portrayed, or pointing out the holes in the plot that might otherwise have passed clear over my head. Will I enjoy the film any more or less for having this external knowledge of it? Is it possible that I'll never watc...
1 comment
Read more

The design of anti-design.

 This article brought to you by (brand name).  Or maybe by No Name™. That's what you're seeing there in the yellow: a brand whose whole identity is based on having no brand name. You won't find any Eggo, they only make "original waffles". No Charmin either, just "bathroom tissue".  Make no mistake, this campaign of anti-design isn't concerned with actually destroying brand image (they'll happily sell you all the bright yellow merchandise you can carry), they're more so trying to convince you that not having a design somehow puts them on the moral high ground. That, by spending a single cent on marketing or packaging design, all the other companies have duped you and you'd really be a fool not to buy all this plain yellow goodness.  It is, of course, just another way to market a brand.  To stray from consumer goods and into other areas of anti-design, this is a problem that I've often had with some works of minimalist architecture. I...
1 comment
Read more

In defense of luxury.

 Allow me to introduce you to my first car: a Mercedes S-Class If only.  My actual first car was a clapped-out Chevy Lumina (though she was good to me). But what my car did have were airbags and ABS brakes-- two features that were once considered to be luxury features  exclusive to cars like the S-Class, yet somehow found their way onto a car that I bought from my cousin for $800. If it seems like I'm getting somewhere, it's because I'm trying to. Research is expensive. There's not really any way around that unfortunate fact, nor around the equally unfortunate fact that someone has to pay for it. I don't know about you, but I definitely can't afford to. Here's where luxury comes in. If rich people want to pay prices that would make you or I limp at the knees in order to have the latest-and-greatest gadgets and doodads then, hey, they have my best wishes. The money that luxury consumers pay for the honor of being the first to use these newer and better techn...
Post a Comment
Read more