The first object to attract our attention on Atelier Bonk’s stand in the Ventura At Work exhibition in Milan was the candle stick holder.

That is until it was pointed out to us that it is actually a potato masher.

It’s a very simple mistake to make. Especially if you’re as daft as us.

The Potato Masher Stoemp by Atelier Bonk.

Bruges based Atelier Bonk is the result of a co-operation between designer Tim “Interror.be” Baute and graphic artist Stefaan de Croock, a.k.a. Strook.

The name of the atelier may cause uncontrolled sniggering among British primary school children; the work however is worthy of a little more mature respect

The concept is very simple: Strook draws something and Tim then transforms the 2D drawing into a 3D object.

Strook’s art has the impudent rawness of street art, his weapon of choice is the marker pen, and Tim’s metalworking background allows him to transform Strook’s lines and curves into objects that loyally translate the original graffiti narrative into a socially acceptable object without losing any of its boldness.

The collection was, effectively, premiered at DMY Berlin 2012 when Tim exhibited the first result of the co-operation: a powder-coated steel bench that can be used indoors or out. The bench formed the focal point of the Atelier Bonk stand in Milan, and was complemented by a live drawing performance by Strook which illustrated the design process. And the large piece of steel he was drawing on.

In addition the collection includes a powder-coated aluminium coffee table, Merged, an object which in its form language is very reminiscent of many classics from the modern era – yet which has a background that couldn’t be any more different.

Further proof if it were needed that form does follow function, and the path you choose to get there is ultimately what is important and interesting.

We’d love to say that the potato masher Stoemp is our favourite item in the collection. But you wouldn’t believe us. You’d just think we were saying that to cover up our embarrassment.

What we really like about Atelier Bonk’s approach is less the products, delightful as they are, and much more the combination of methods and processes they use and the possibilities that arise through this combination.

As with all good contemporary design Tim and Stefaan have carefully considered the options before them: and from these options devised something new that allows them to create new objects that are as interesting as they are respectful of resources.

Specifically they have created a sort of  “design development system”, a system that is endlessly customisable, and not just in terms of the pattern, but also in terms of form, size and proportion. The creation of objects isn’t automatic, it always involves the creative and experienced input from both Tim and Stefaan.

But from this input comes an infinite number of possibilities.

And in our modern world of consumers looking for individual objects within the context of familiar form languages, we can think of nothing more interesting for the market.

And in our modern economic climate we can think of nothing more valuable for designers.

More details on Atelier Bonk can be found at: www.atelierbonk.be

Milan Design Week 2013: Atelier Bonk

Milan Design Week 2013: Atelier Bonk. Strook doin' his thang....

....and what results from his thang.

With DMY Berlin standing in front of the door like some excited child waiting to be taken to its chums birthday party, all eyes are slowly turning to to the German capital.

The first Berlin design events are already running and until June 9th the gallery “Haus am Waldsee” is presenting the exhibition “Home of the Future” by and featuring Werner Aisslinger.

We already posted a few photos in a (smow) facebook gallery.

Staircase Sofa in cooperation with Vitra and Honeycomb Landscape in cooperation with Kvadrat. As seen at Werner Aisslinger: Home of the Future, Haus am Waldsee.

Delightful as the exhibition unquestionably is, for us one of the more interesting aspects of the exhibition is/was the objects that weren’t on show. For all the Bikini Island concept Werner Aisslinger premiered on the Moroso stand at Milan Furniture Fair 2013.

Essentially a multi-level, multi-component living room/den system Bikini Island combines sofa units with a range of add-ons to create a modern modular system.

Yes it is outwardly more lifestyle than design.

No that shouldn’t appeal to us.

However, just as with the very closely related Level 34 office system for Vitra, Bikini Island is the result of not only careful observation of contemporary society but is also unmistakably the work of a designer looking for solutions for a reality still to come.

As such, for us, it really should have been included in Home of the Future.

Bikini Island by Werner Aisslinger for Moroso as seen at Milan Furniture Fair 2013

Not least because when viewed in the context of Home of the Future Bikini Island in many ways represents the combined realisation of many of the ideas explored in the exhibition.

And also highlights the current limitations of taking experimental design projects into commercial production.

For example:

Bikini Island features space for hanging flowers, but no option for integrating plants into the system.

The publicity material speaks of Bikini Island as being domestic furniture for a digital age, yet the system itself remains confusingly analogue with no options for accommodating modern technology.

Both situations that Werner Aisslinger tackles in projects on show in Haus am Waldsee.

But which, we assume, went a little too far for Moroso and their distribution network.

At the moment Bikin Island is still a concept and we’re not so green behind the ears as to believe that it will appear as an off-the-peg, ready-to-buy product any time soon.

Our hope is that in the coming months Werner Aisslinger can persuade Moroso not to be so conservative and to maybe consider adding one or the other more radical element to the system.

And certainly judging by a conversation we had with another designer in Milan about Moroso we are hopeful that the company are moving away from their more reserved, traditional positions.

Time will tell.

And for all wanting to learn more about how Werner Aisslinger thinks, and what he believes is possible, Home of the Future can be viewed at Haus am Waldsee, Argentinische Allee 30, 14163 Berlin until Sunday June 9th (That’s the last day of DMY Berlin for all planning visiting the festival :))

Bikini Island by Werner Aisslinger for Moroso

We quote:

“It’s probably fair to say the biggest surprise at Salone Satellite 2012 was seeing Rui Alves aka My Own Super Studio. Because we thought 2011 had been the last year he was allowed to exhibit.”

Fast forward 12 months later. And guess what the the biggest surprise at Salone Satellite 2012 was…. ?

He has however promised us that this is his final, final, final year at Salone Satellite. A thought which to be honest doesn’t disappoint or otherwise upset us because 2013 was also the first year in which works by Rui Alves could be seen in the main, professional, grown-up, halls at Milan Furniture Fair.

And if the rumours are correct next year should also see one or the other appearance in the bigger exhibition halls.

Something that would make us very happy.

Milan Design Week 2013: Rui Alves aka My Own Super Studio

For his Salone Satellite swan song Rui was presenting a collection of furniture that once again underlined the quality of his craftsmanship.

For us the highlight of the collection was the sofa. A deliciously effortlessly reduced down piece the sofa combines a turned wooden frame with a pressed felt seat to create a sort of simplified domestic sinkhole in which to vanish of an evening. Or Sunday morning..

With an obvious, and potentially deliberate, Scandinavian inspired form language “Sofa” presents a nice mix of materials in a fresh, unapologetic fashion. A true delight.

The rest of the 2013 collection was for us just a bit too generic; that said the simple wooden chair and “side table with book rest” did attract enough attention to justify a longer, more detailed, look.

In Hall 16 meanwhile Italian manufacturer Valsecchi1918 was presenting two new works by Rui: A_Chair and Tableone.

A_Chair had previously been shown as part of Rui’s presentation at Salone Satellite 2012. For our part we completely ignored it in our post, and would still maintain that LAPA was the better chair. That said in the bright colours on the Valsecchi1918 stand it not only looked like a very self-assured and competent piece of work, but more importantly fitted in well with the complete Valsecchi1918 programme. The extending table Tableone meanwhile was commissioned by Valsecchi1918 and the detail of the finish on the edge of the table top is a real joy to behold.

If an absolute scunner to photograph.

Obviously with Rui’s work there is always going to be the question of in how far his meticulously carpented objects can be recreated in mass production. However the examples on show on the Valsecchi1918 stand in Milan certainly left us convinced that the company understand their craft.

Which given that they’ve been producing items out of wood since 1918 is probably to be expected.

As we said 2013 is officially Rui’s last year as part of Salone Satellite, but is also, hopefully, the first year in which the hard work and commitment to his ideals finally starts to reap tangible rewards.

We certainly hope so.

And we will of course keep you updated.

As older readers will know a large proportion of the menial labour at (smow) is carried out by a team of highly qualified Vitra Eames Elephants.

In the past we’ve praised them, for example, for their help moving USM Haller units around our warehouse.

(smow) recently moved into a new base in the Leipzig Baumwollspinnerei complex, a former yarn works largely inhabited by artists, sculptors and their ilk.

Being naturally curious beasts our elephants didn’t take long to start exploring the galleries and creative spaces that house our new neighbours.

And one in particular embarked on a trip that involved meeting numerous old acquaintances…..

In the context of another project we are currently researching various aspects of Egon Eiermann‘s architectural output.

And have discovered the most wonderful contradictory positions as regards dealing with his legacy.

Contradictory positions which pose the more general question as to how one should approach modernist architectural legacies.

Should all works be saved? Are all buildings really worth saving? Are there alternatives?

Stadthaus Krefeld by Egon Eiermann (Photo Source: Wikimedia Commons)

In Stuttgart Egon Eiermann’s IBM Campus is under threat of demolition. Constructed from 1967 to 1972 the sprawling campus has remained empty since IBM moved out in 2009; and the new owner, having failed to find any new tenants or alternative uses, went bankrupt in 2011. With no interested parties in sight, and, according to the Stuttgarter Zeitung, the necessary renovations potentially costing around 100 million Euros¹, the administrator has applied to have the buildings demolished so that the site can be sold for new development.

In Krefeld meanwhile the city authority recently decided to invest around Euro 40 Million in the renovation of Eiermann’s 1953 Stadthaus rather than build a new city hall. Among the reasons given by Oberbürgermeister Gregor Kathstede was that Krefeld was/is applying to be a UNESCO World Culture Heritage Site on the basis of three Mies van der Rohe buildings, and to simultaneously leave an Egon Eiermann building to rot or even pull it down would be unjustifiable.²

But does it matter who was responsible for a building?  And should one even have sympathy with an architect such as Egon Eiermann?

Aside from being the opinion that one should tear down the remains of the Kaiser-Wilhelm-Gedächtniskirche in Berlin to make way for the new church – plans Eiermann had to abandon due to the level of protest in Berlin – Egon Eiermann did tear down Erich Mendelsohn’s universally admired Schocken department store in Stuttgart in order to build his own Horten department store.
A decision that attracted international criticism and even moved Walter Gropius to protest.

Defending his decision Eiermann claimed Mendelsohn’s building was “substandard” and that the building generally wasn’t fit for its function.³

Somewhat amusingly in discussing the Stadthaus in Krefeld Martin Linne, head of the city’s planning department, told the Rheinische Post “Eiermann had the idea that the heating in the roof should heat in the winter and cool in the summer…. The problem is: his technology has never worked properly”⁴

A situation that will sound familiar to any one who has ever worked in a prize winning building in Leipzig’s hip Lower East Plagwitz Village.

Could/should one therefore not apply the “good for the goose: good for the gander” test and tear down Eiermann’s “substandard” Stadthaus?

Schocken (later Merkur) Department Store in Stuttgart by Erich Mendelsohn (Image Source: Wikimedia Commons)

Referring to the planned demolition of the Schocken department store Erich Mendelsohn’s widow is quoted as saying “Later generations will be much better placed to asses Erich Mendelsohn’s importance in the development of 20th century architecture – and so we condemn that one of his few remaining works should be voluntarily executed by his countrymen”⁵

That later generations are better placed to decide on the importance of any cultural good is, we believe, an indisputable fact. But does one actually need the building to achieve such?

When dealing with architects of yore the answer is potentially yes, because all to often we lack the documentation to be able to otherwise assess the work.

However the works of an Egon Eiermann, or indeed an Erich Mendelsohn, are not only well documented in the architects own archives, but we have the reports, interviews and discussions that surrounded the planning and construction.

The building is then just the physical manifestation of the process.

We don’t believe every building is automatically worth keeping, just because it is from architect X or Y.

Where a building is no longer required or is no longer capable of fulfilling its intended function, it must make way for a construction that can.

Which of course doesn’t mean automatically tearing down old buildings. As a first step must surely come the question if one can’t make alterations. Adapt the building to its new function and/or new technological standards.

On the one hand there are ecological considerations in tearing down an existing building and raising a new one.

There there are the costs.

One of the current stars on the international architecture exhibition circuit is the Tour Bois le Prêtre high-rise block in Paris. Earmarked by the city authority for demolition the architects Druot, Lacaton & Vassal proposed instead a “living renovation” of the block. A renovation which has not only improved the standard of life of the residents and greatly reduced their energy usage, but has done so at a fraction of the cost associated with demolition and building anew.

Similarly, in addition to the considerations involving Mies van der Rohe, according to Oberbürgermeister Kathstede building a new town hall in Krefeld would have cost some Euro 20 million more than renovating Eiermann’s building.⁶

Egon Eiermann's Horten (now Galeria Kaufhof) Department Store in Stuttgart.

A further excellent example of such considerations in the context of Egon Eiermann’s legacy can be found just across the Rhein from Krefeld.

The A3 motorway in Duisburg is spanned by a bridge – a bridge designed by Egon Eiermann as part of his German Pavilion for the 1958 Brussels Expo.

Following the Expo the bridge came to Duisburg and for the past 54 years has linked the two halves of Duisburg Zoo.

According to the Westdeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung, WAZ, when the motorway need widening from 4 to 6 lanes rather than simply scrap the bridge the responsible planners extended it a bit so that it fitted its new purpose.⁷

Simple decisions that save resources, save money and, for us, continue the constructions legacy better than simply maintaining the bridge as it was where it was.

The context of the bridge’s use has changed. Why shouldn’t the bridge itself also change?

Form famously following function.

Similarly the Stadthaus in Krefeld was originally built as the headquarters of Vereinigten Seidenwerke and has only been used by the council since the late 1970s.

New context. New function. Why not new form?

Which of course in terms of the IBM Campus means one could relax the planning regulations in terms of the interior and technical considerations so that the buildings can be used in a new context.

Saves resources, saves money and, for us, continues the ….

Decisions to keep or demolish buildings are largely emotional. But they shouldn’t be.

There can be very good reasons to preserve buildings that have a particular importance, but such decisions must be made in a sober, cases-by-case way.

And we shouldn’t have so much fear of changing buildings. Change is after all what keeps us all fresh, helps society evolve and develop. Is what made architects such as Egon Eiermann so important.

The three examples above of Egon Eiermann’s work highlight the problems involved in dealing with the legacies of modernist architects. And also make clear that in the coming years there will be an awful lot of similar decisions to be made in relation to an awful lot more modernist buildings.

And so now is perhaps a good time for all involved to decide what is truly important.

Just a thought….

1.http://www.stuttgarter-zeitung.de/inhalt.kulturdenkmal-der-alten-ibm-zentrale-droht-der-abriss.4c6dc2b4-0660-4200-b930-b10a7134205f.html Accessed 30.04.2013

2.http://www.krefeld.de/C1257455004E4FBF/html/1B42165B3F003134C1257944005909D6?opendocument Accessed 30.04.2013

3.http://www.spiegel.de/spiegel/print/d-42622632.html Accessed 30.04.2013

4.http://www.rp-online.de/niederrhein-sued/krefeld/nachrichten/stadthaus-wird-ein-aha-erlebnis-1.2757924 Accessed 30.04.2013

5.http://www.spiegel.de/spiegel/print/d-42622632.html Accessed 30.04.2013

6.http://www.krefeld.de/C1257455004E4FBF/html/1B42165B3F003134C1257944005909D6?opendocument Accessed 30.04.2013

7.http://www.derwesten.de/staedte/duisburg/expo-bruecke-zog-von-bruessel-nach-duissern-nach-neudorf-id7881543.html Accessed 30.04.2013

More intuitive readers will have enjoyed our post on the exhibition “Objects for Neighbours” from IMM Cologne 2013 and for all our interview with the participants.

To be fair you’d have to very intuitive as it hasn’t been published. Yet.

We are however working on it.

You can therefore imagine our absolute horror on bumping into two of the participants at Salone Satellite during Milan Design Week.

There being little worse than admitting that you still haven’t finished something.

Fortuitously, not only are Thomas Schnur and Karoline Fesser very amiable and forgiving characters, but the work they were showing in Milan was of a quality that meant we could easily negotiate the conversation away from Cologne.

Milan Design Week 2013: Contrast. Thomas Schnur and Karoline Fesser

The Woonling Collection by Karoline Fesser is a modular seating system based around a simple single element: a round cushion. The design in the concept comes in the form of a connection system that allows the cushions to be freely connected vertically or horizontally to create the seating system you need/want. And then re-configured as your needs/wants change. Stools, armchairs, sofas are all possible.

The system is still in development but we really liked the freedom involved, the possibilities for further development and also the way it plays with a visual image more akin to very stable, very inflexible sofa systems. And so we’re really looking forward to seeing where Karoline takes it.

Sample Avenue is a collection of glass vessels. Developed for the aforementioned Object for Neighbours exhibition Sample Avenue has been conceived to reflect the socio-macro architecture^1. that can be found on every street. Created from one glass bell cut into three units and then separated by wooden trays, Sample Avenue is a flexible, modular storage system for all those things that deserve to be on show even when not in use. Or cupcakes.

Sample Avenue by Karoline Fesser as seen at Salone Satellite Milan 2013

As the old saying goes “Good fences make good neighbours!”

But temporary ones?

Such or similar could be considered as the context for Thomas Schnur’s Barrier. Again developed specially for the Objects for Neighbours exhibition, Barrier is a room-divider that tackles the idea of creating your own space, your own territory, in an otherwise open, free space dominated society.

We don’t all want or need a solution as all encompassing as Workbay by Ronan an Erwan Bouroullec, often it is just about temporarily separating oneself from part of a room; for example work done for the day, physical separation from the desk. Or your better half is still working away in a corner and you want to read.

Comprising a steel frame and a removable cloth cover Barrier is a phenomenally simple object that when not being used as a room divider can be “opened” by removing the cloth. Over long periods you can use the open structure as a hanging system. And over shorter periods as a friendly reminder of the room divider it will soon again become

In addition to Barrier Thomas Schur was also presenting Rubber Lamp, an equally simple yet much more technically involved object. Curiously resembling the comedy rubber chicken that was popular in certain circles in the mid 1990s Rubber Lamp isn’t as rubbery as it initially looks. Or indeed feels. A central steel rod running through the silicon body allows the bulb to be freely and securely positioned as required. Just a delightfully simple, playful product.

More information on the complete portfolios can be found at www.karolinefesser.de and www.thomasschnur.com

And for all who’ve now got a taste for the delights that were on show at Objects for Neighbours. Our post is on its way…..

1. The term socio-macro architecture is ours. Just to be clear, and to save Karoline any potential embarrassment.

Barrier by Thomas Schnur as seen at Salone Satellite Milan 2013

Woonling Collection by Karoline Fesser as seen at Salone Satellite Milan 2013

Rubber Lamp by Thomas Schnur as seen at Salone Satellite Milan 2013

In December 2012 Vitrashop, the shop fitting arm of the Vitra Group, and of course the original rock on which the Vitra seed germinated and grew, took formal occupation of their new distribution centre.

Conceived by Tokyo based architects Kazuyo Sejima & Ryue Nishizawa aka SANAA, the imaginatively titled “SANAA Factory Building” is the latest addition to the Vitra Campus and was officially presented to the public on April 19th 2013.

Vitra Campus: SANAA Factory Building.

Vitra CEO Rolf Fehlbaum first approached Kazuyo Sejima & Ryue Nishizawa in 2006 to discuss the possibility of them developing a project for the Vitra Campus. Initially they were pencilled in to build what was to become the VitraHaus; however, Rolf Fehlbaum re-considered and decided that because SANAA had never developed an industrial space it would be an interesting idea to ask them to do just that for Vitra.

SANAA readily agreed, for in addition to the challenge of working in close vicinity to so many buildings from established architects, the scale of the project inspired and motivated the pair, or as Kazuyo Sejima puts it “….we could never build a house with such a large footprint”

And when one considers the construction’s circa 160 metre diameter and total floor space of some 20,000 square metres, it’s very hard to disagree.

Aside from its size, the SANAA Factory Building is defined by two factors: Its shape and its outer facade.

The most most instantly striking of which is the outer facade. Created from double layered acrylic glass the facade is composed of 6 different “wave” patterns assembled to form a non-repeating, apparently random, facade much like a freely hanging curtain and conceived to give the construction a lightness that disguises and reduces its size.

We can’t confirm if that works or not. On the one hand we don’t have any other 20,000 sq metre buildings we can use as a ready comparison. But principally we are unsure as to in how far the curved walls aid and abet such an effect.

The SANAA building certainly doesn’t appear noticeably larger than any of its neighbours, but they are all quadratic. And the SANAA Factory Building is round. In itself a small innovation for a distribution centre.

Initially SANAA developed quadratic and round models for the building, but ultimately decided on the round version in order to make the building on the one hand more accessible for lorries and on the other to improve the work-flow inside. The argument from SANAA being that for distribution centres circles are a better form that quadrats. A not illogical argument.

The SANAA Factory Building is however not a perfect circle, Kazuyo Sejima & Ryue Nishizawa have deliberately distorted the form a little to create a sort of squashed egg. Or perhaps given the way it is connected to the neighbouring Nicholas Grimshaw building, a slightly squashed penicillin fruiting body.

The motivation with the off-circle was to keep the building more organic, not so industrial: despite having finally completed an industrial project SANAA obviously aren’t quite ready to be called industrial architects.

SANAA Factory Building for Vitrashop in Weil am Rhein

Anyone expecting to find in the Vitra SANAA Factory Building a repetition of the undulating floors of the Rolex Learning Center Lausanne or the almost completely transparent landscape of  the Toledo Museum of Art Glass Pavilion will be disappointed. Sorely disappointed.

The SANAA Factory Building is an industrial facility and has been designed as such.

Indeed walking round the building we were reminded of what Antonio Citterio told us in relation to his own three Vitra factory projects “… Vitra don’t need a statement, Vitra need a productive space, a Vitra factory space”

What SANAA have created in Weil am Rhein reflects that very well. It isn’t arrogant, isn’t vainglorious, it isn’t a “statement”, it is a space where Vitrashop can work, in the words of Sejima “… a very comfortable space for the workers”. One of the major features in this context is the endless rows of skylights which flood the space with daylight to create a homogeneous working environment, and environment which ideally makes the factory interior appear smaller, friendlier, more personal.

On the day we were there there sadly wasn’t any daylight flooding in, but even in Weil am Rhein a little rain must fall.
And when no rain falls we see no reason to doubt that the sunlight will flood. And that it will create a pleasant working atmosphere.

In the past both Sejima and Nishizawa have repeatedly stated that for them making a structure clear is a central priority in their work. A philosophy they have remained true to with the SANAA factory building; the shelving blends effortlessly in with the structural beams, floor gives way to wall to roof, or as Rolf Fehlbaum puts it “…normally things are hidden, here you can see everything”

Almost.

For although we’re not in the habit of contradicting Rolf Fehlbaum, there is one thing you can’t see.

Outside.

Just as important as structural clarity in the SANAA canon has been the interaction between between a building’s interior and its external environment. The SANAA Factory Building in contrast stands there very much as an object stubbornly determined to keep itself to itself. Even the windows as metaphoric eyes on the outside world are placed too high to allow any meaningful view in or out. Their sole function is aiding illumination.

As such the SANAA Factory Building would appear to be the first time that SANAA have found themselves limited by a brief. Or when not limited then at least forced to approach the project with a different philosophy.

On the one hand there are the economic limitations, an industrial building such as that in Weil am Rhein clearly has a much lower budget than the museums or housing projects SANAA normally develop, but also the practical limitations. Aside from the legal framework that such a building must conform to, especially in Germany, come banal points such as that, ideally, no one should be able to see inside a distribution centre.

The transparent restaurant kitchen or production facility may have become accepted standards, however which company freely presents to the world the contents of its warehouse?

Inside the SANAA Factory Building for Vitrashop

With the completion of the SANAA Factory Building the Vitra Campus has not just been expanded by one building, but has one more Pritzker Prize winning architecture bureau to its name following on from Herzog & de Meuron, Tadao Ando, Avaro Siza and of course Frank Gehry.

Kazuyo Sejima & Ryue Nishizawa won architecture’s most prestigious award in 2010 and in the citation the jury notes that “The buildings of Sejima and Nishizawa seen deceptively simple. The architects hold a vision of a building as a seamless whole, where the physical presence retreats and forms a sensuous background for people, objects, activities and landscapes”

A description that could also be effortlessly applied to the SANAA Factory Building.

Yes, it just looks like a steel warehouse and lazy scribes could portray the glass facade as an architectural Emperor’s new clothes that cloaks an all too apparent conceptual nakedness. However start inspecting closer, analysing for example how the construction has been created, how the roof is supported or how the technology has been integrated, and you will discover a lot of hidden depth and fascinating detail.

SANAA Factory Building is unlikely to go down in history as Kazuyo Sejima & Ryue Nishizawain’s greatest work, nor is it the greatest work on the Vitra Campus, it is however a captivating object that places it functionality unselfishly above all other considerations, an object that serves the workers rather than the architects, an object that attempts to go new ways and has the bravery to risk new approaches. And as such is a fitting addition to the Vitra Campus.

Below a few images of the SANAA Factory Building. And by way of short explanation, given the truly awful weather on the day we visited we spontaneously decided to start photographing the outside in black and white. Hence the mix. Seemed appropriate given the mood of the day…..

During Milan Design Week 2013 Knoll formally launched the “Tools for Life” collection from Dutch architecture practice OMA, a collection overseen by OMA co-founder Rem Koolhaas.

The collection had previously been previewed as part of the stage decoration for the Prada Fall Men’s show in January, and was formally unveiled in the same location…. the Prada Milan HQ

A location that theoretically the likes of us should never be allowed to enter. But Design Week is Design Week.

Milan Design Week 2013: Tools for Life by OMA for Knoll at Prada Milano

The first thing to say is that the collection looks like it has been designed by an architect.

Just not in the easily accessible way we all know from the likes of Jacobsen, Eiermann or Haller. And certainly not in the tradition of the architects with whom Knoll’s reputation was founded; Mies van der Rohe, Bertoia, Saarinen….

It’s all very much the result of a conceptual thinker, a pure author collection from a designer working on the basis of a theory rather than a specific functional or aesthetic brief. Haute couture to misuse the Prada vocabulary.

For Knoll the signature piece of the collection is the 04 Counter. Three beams stacked on another, the top two can be rotated through 360 degrees thus allowing for a range of variable, fluid uses: seating, presentation, discussion. Innovative and interesting as the functionality unquestionably is, we’re just unsure who actually needs or wants such. And certainly in an object that stands around one metre high and two metres long.

The 03 Coffee Table works on a very similar principle with similar mechanics; however, being smaller in scale the movement makes a lot more sense, is friendlier, more desirable and is something we can well imagine attracting a following. Albeit a very wealthy following.

For us the highlight of the collection is the 11 Floor Seating, a legless chair that at first glance looks as if it is just for relaxing; however, in context of modern working with tablet computers et al, sitting low down, knees raised, slightly hunched is likely to become a much more common option. And high-quality, well considered chairs that allow one to, effectively, sit on the floor are about as rare as Prada jackets in our wardrobe. For us “11″ just needs a slightly higher backrest to be truly functional.

The 11 Floor Seating from the Tools for Life collection by OMA for Knoll (The cushions will be upholstered)

Amongst the further objects the 01 arm chair has a not unappealing form language, albeit takes a little bit of getting use to. When we first saw them we didn’t like them at all, felt they evoked an unpleasant Star Trek meets 80s Miami Beach Nightclub imagery indicative of a designer trying too hard. However, having let them work on us for few days, we are starting to understand and appreciate them a lot more. It’s a bit like David Bowie. Didn’t get him for decades, then suddenly a few years ago we approached his music in a different way and since then find it much more appealing.

The 05 Round Table and 06 Table are technically very, very interesting; however, the less said about their appearance the better. And no, we don’t think we’ll ever get used to them.

Although we imagine they’ll be very well received in Moscow.

The real star of the launch however was Rem Koolhaas, who was followed round the Prada Cathedral by an adoring crowd, hungry for titbits of information, principally on his reasons for the choice of materials. A question he, patiently, answered at least a thousand times.

We of course weren’t part of the mob. At that point we were busy in hospitality eating croissants with a proficiency that would have put Polar Bear Knut to shame.

They were Prada croissants. When are we ever likely to get the chance to eat Prada croissants again?

Never is the answer. And yes they were lovely.

The 01 Arm Chair from the Tools for Life collection by OMA for Knoll. Here in its prototype upholstery.

Tools for Life is the first time Rem Koolhaas has taken on a furniture project. According to Knoll the first contact was made some 15 years ago, but Koolhaas didn’t have any real interest, or perhaps better put the necessary motivation, for furniture at that time. Then a couple of years ago they started discussing the possibility again and Koolhaas said yes, “….because Knoll asked us to do a collection rather than a single object, and that made it an interesting proposition”

And regardless of what you think of the individual pieces or the form language, as a collection Tools for Life works very well. It has a unity, a solidarity that binds the individual pieces together.

In our post from the Museum für Angewandte Kunst Köln exhibition “From Aalto to Zumthor Furniture by Architects” we hypothesised that what makes much of the furniture designed by architects such as Eiermann, Jacobsen or Le Corbusier so appealing is that it was largely developed for specific projects, it originated in a specific context and so was influenced and formed by this context.

Furniture by Architects also showed what happens when architects develop furniture out of a fixed context, free as it were. Or at least showed what can happen.

Tools for Life by OMA for Knoll is a further good example. An interesting and not-unappealing collection it is, for us, driven too much by a desire to be an OMA furniture collection and as such lacks a certain nonchalance that is necessary to make furniture something that people want to possess and use.

As such we fear that Tools for Life is fated to become a historical footnote in the story of Knoll and OMA, good for a few glossy photos but otherwise culturally and economically irrelevant.

However there is enough genuine technical innovation and interesting new thinking in the collection to be fairly confident that if OMA and Rem Koolhaas are given a more specific brief, then something truly wonderful could result.

Or put another way, having seen the haute couture we can’t wait for the prêt-à-porter

Back in October at Orgatec 2012 Vitra unveiled Workbay, the new concept from Ronan and Erwan Bouroullec.

The latest stage in the brother’s career-long “room within a room” research Workbay is a flexible system based around fleece walls and aluminium supports that resembles a cross between the Alcove Sofa and the Bouroullec’s Communal Cells from Orgatec 2010.

When we saw Workbay in Cologne we thought,  nice idea, nice extension of the Bouroullec programme… and went back to concentrating on their Cork Desk.

In Milan, Vitra and the Bouroullec’s unveiled the full majesty of Workbay.

In an installation specially created for the Salone Ufficio section of Salone Milano, Ronan and Ewran Bouroullec presented Workbay Office: a visualisation of how Workbay can be integrated into an office to create a series of separate areas based around the basic Workbay structure enhanced with very simple add-ons.

Sofas. Shelving. Desks. Storage units. Sinks.

And because the Workbay system can be constructed to practically any length, circumference, diameter or indeed form, it can be integrated as and when required into any office of any size. And then rebuilt as situations dictate.

As such for us Workbay not only offers a completely new approach to office furniture, but as a system offers architects and interior designers a new freedom when designing new office spaces.

And we thought Workbay was just a flexible fleece and aluminum wall!

Ahead of Milan Design Week we received an email from a Belgian designer of our acquaintance letting us know where we could view their work. The email ended with a euphoric “This is finally Belgium’s year!”

A thought that really appealed to us, because as we wrote last year Belgium has the potential to be every bit as successful as Holland. And indeed should be.

And so with an optimistic heart we set off to the Triennale di Milano to view the exhibition “Belgium is Design”

And experienced our first disappointment of Milan 2013.

Belgium is Design was one of our highlights at Milan Design Week 2012, their 2013 show was at best a jumbled, incoherent mess.

Presented under the title “The Toolbox – Belgian Design & the Art of Making: A Tribute to Henry van de Velde” the show promised to present “… a portrait of the mastery of Belgian design”

It may very well have done.

If you could find it.

For much like locating anything useful in our toolbox, Belgium is Design 2013 forced the visitor to root through interminable chaos on the search for if not the Holy Grail that at least the correct screwdriver.

We didn’t. Life is far too short to spend foraging in the aftermath of an over ambitious exhibition designer.

What’s really disappointing of course is that following on from “Henry van de Velde. Leidenschaft, Funktion und Schönheit” in Weimar “Belgium is Design” is the second exhibition in a month associated with the name Henry van der Velde that lacked a sensibly executed exhibition concept.

Henry really deserves better.

Fortuitously that was to be our first and last experience of poorly organised Belgians in Milan.

As with 2012 the second part of Belgium is Design was on show at Salone Satellite. And as with 2012 the highlight for us was design studio Two Designers.

Specifically their “island” Curiosity.

We are at a real loss to find a term to succinctly describe Curiosity and so will have to make do with the less than snappy “A sort of  tray, shelf, table, storage box, fusion thing. With some material.”

Basically an object that stands in a room and fulfills several functions in one, while itself being an optically pleasing structure. A device to aid domestic organisation and give an impression of increased order.

Just delightful.

We admit to knowing very little about Two Designers; but having attracted our attention two years running that may soon change.

Milan Design Week 2013: Curiosity by Two Designers at Belgium is Design, Salone Satellite

In contrast to Belgium is Design the show from design platform “De Invasie” at Ventura Lambrate was a real pleasure to peruse.

Featuring a nice mix of Belgian design studios the highlight for us was without question Collectionnaire by Moupila.

As with Curiosity it’s hard to find an easy term to describe Collectionnaire. A modular storage cabinet Collectionnaire has a form language all of its own, a functionality all of its own and a size that means it will make any room its own.

As a concept we found the idea fascinating, and the realisation in wood works perfectly. In metal, for example, one fears a loss of the personality. Collectionnaire is not an object for everyone or every room. But where space and bravery collide, it should more than justify the, almost certainly, not inconsiderable investment.

Notable mentions must also go to Atelier Belge, a company whose development we have been following for several years and who never fail to produce. The Animal Desk by Fermetti on show at De Invasie perhaps not being being the newest object, but a delightful example of what they are capable off.

In addition we were very taken with the imaginatively named Coat Rack by Bram Vanderbeke, an adjustable coat rack system that can be stored in its own base, and and it was nice to see objects from Tim “Interror” Baute being shown in such a context

Tim Baute himself was presenting his latest collaborations with the graphic artist Stefaan de Croock  round the corner at “Ventura at Work”.  But more on Tim later.

Milan Design Week 2013: Collectionnaire by Moupila

Our final meeting with Belgium in Milan was “Landscapes for living in” by Muller van Severen at LAP Lambretto Art Project.

Premiered at Interieur Kortrijk 2012 Landscapes for living in is the first collaboration between the photographer Fien Muller and artist Hannes van Severen, son of Maarten.

We missed it in Kortrijk and so were all the more looking forward to seeing it in Milan. And it was every bit as delightful as we’d hoped.

Conceived in response to a brief set by the Kortjek curators  “Landscapes for living in” is a collection of objects that combine several functions in one unit: for example bookcase and chair or table and lamp. In many ways similar in concept to some of Verner Panton’s later work, no honest, “Landscapes for living in” has been realised with a charming clarity and honesty that endows it with a real familiarity.

A genuine joy to behold.

And despite the fact we’ve listed three projects here that could be described as being “fusions”. You’re not going to get the T word out of us…..

Against the bold claims of our communicant, 2013 was not Belgium’s year in Milan. It was however a further year that demonstrated the strength in depth and variety to be found squeezed in between Holland and France.

A strength in depth and variety that truly embodies the spirit of Henry van de Velde.