|
|
Post by jake on Aug 20, 2008 10:28:52 GMT
I think this is rampant post-modernism. Yup. A lot of it is Po-Mo at its worst. I think that a lot of this type of high-end craftsman furniture tends to suffer from being over-built and under-designed. The level of technique is staggering, of course, but instead of that technique being entrained to achieving an aesthetic outcome, it is allowed to define the aesthetic. Compare the Savage chair to this in a similar sci-fi vein. One of them works for me, and it's the designer, not the craftsman. The rocker is the only thing with any real style (to my eyes). The Koi box is nice, but meh, it's a box. |
|
|
|
Post by jake on Aug 20, 2008 10:37:32 GMT
as far as i am remember, the modernism tag came post the second world war, as an explanation of the change between the wars after the french had tried to make art deco uniquely there own. paul  Modernism started at the end of the C19. Art deco was a modernist movement itself. Post-war stuff has become labelled 'mid-century modern', but there was plenty of Modernism around before that - Cubism, Dada, Surrealism, etc etc. Another example, Mies Van der Rohe's Barcelona Pavilion - late twenties. |
|
|
|
Post by thebloke on Aug 20, 2008 11:12:00 GMT
Having had a quick peek at Mr Grims link, most of that stuff leaves me stone cold, beautifully made but poorly proportioned...some of it's even clumpy! The only piece there that does anything for me is the console table by Philip Boorman...very nice Simple, straight forward and well proportioned - Rob |
|
|
|
Post by Alf on Aug 20, 2008 12:34:35 GMT
The level of technique is staggering, of course, but instead of that technique being entrained to achieving an aesthetic outcome, it is allowed to define the aesthetic. Agreed. The turning fraternity suffer from an awful lot of that, not helped by the frequent lack of need for any function. What really bothers me is when function is an issue, and that's disregarded in favour of clever-clever stuff. |
|
|
|
Post by mrgrimsdale on Aug 20, 2008 12:38:43 GMT
This is no ordinary Banana Stand. This is M&S banana stand. Yeah OK £34.99. The ma in law doesn't go into M&S |
|
|
|
Post by modernist on Sept 4, 2008 20:40:53 GMT
I've missed out here as I've been working away for a few days and it is just up my street.
Just a few observations
I don't see any evidence that Parnham was pretentious. There was an emphasis on standard quality construction and "traditional" methods. Lindley is a bit of and exception as he has blatently traded on his name. The idiots would buy it if it was Lindley MDF.
Art Deco is part of modernism
Arts and crafts, Barnsley et al was also very expensive and therefore hardly for the proloteriat.
I find some of the A & C design features highly unnatractive, octagonal panels for one but it was good craftsmanship.
It's an interesting point that you can attract students onto expensive courses by advertising stratosperically priced pieces ( and I suspect may be right)
the general public have only ever heard of oak and consider anything made from it to be craftsmanship
"Queen Anne front, Mary Anne behind" has always been with us and could be a debate in itself.
Racing car design does trickle down aerodynamics, engine mapping, efficiency, improved handling (just try a driving a 1970's ford!) etc etc. Maybe it's just the distance between racing and road has increased.
Brian
|
|
|
|
Post by woodworklady on Sept 17, 2008 5:33:15 GMT
I wonder if they ever sell for those prices. I guess they do and good luck to them. Work must be sporadic, mind. My guess is the makers don't have a wife or kids and can live on dust and biscuits until the next 'commission' comes in! LOL Nicely said!! |
|
