The Bastard Chair by Els Woldhek
Dutch designer Els Woldhek has created the Bastard Chair, which makes use of the leftover scrap leather from a furniture factory.
From Els Woldhek:
The shapes from the leftover pieces decide the shape of the chair. As the technique of stitching the pieces together follows the outlines of the leftovers. The seed planted by the production methods, with the nurture and care from me, becomes the BASTARD.
Visit Els Woldhek’s website – here.
Chris in RVA on 31 Jan 2009 at 10:52 am #
Wow. Interesting idea, but nothing at all attractive about that.
Andrew Menil on 31 Jan 2009 at 11:16 am #
It has inner beauty.
Lance on 01 Feb 2009 at 2:58 pm #
Since when did stuffing get renamed “inner beauty”? It looks like they were made by the “special needs” children of the Campana brothers.
Peter Shaw on 01 Feb 2009 at 4:05 pm #
The chairs have inner beauty because they have soul, they have character and personality. The designer was not trying to make an aesthetically beautiful chair. Designers don’t always try to make things that look pretty. Sometimes they make things that are meaningful, things that have a story behind them.
Chris in RVA on 01 Feb 2009 at 9:06 pm #
@ Peter Shaw
Then that is one ugly story.
Peter Shaw on 02 Feb 2009 at 12:46 am #
Maybe one of the greatest things about this chair is that it seems to expose people who have a superficial understanding of design. People who are quick to call this chair ugly are incapable of understanding and appreciating it.
The reason it looks the way it does is because it was made with random scraps of leather, pieces of material that were unwanted, pieces of material that the factory had thrown away because they saw no value in them, like a bastard child. But they did have value, the designer saw this, and knew that they were capable of achieving something.
The chair is a metaphor that expresses the value of all human life, even the lives of the discarded, unwanted, and neglected. The chair is teaching us something profound about ourselves….if we’re willing to open our minds and listen.
The chair is not superficially beautiful, but it does have a deeper, profound beauty. The chair has more soul, character and personality than most “pretty” chairs.
It’s an abstract idea that superficial people don’t understand, because superficial people only place value upon pretty things.
penny on 02 Feb 2009 at 9:00 am #
@ peter shaw
(Applause)!!!
Lance on 02 Feb 2009 at 3:57 pm #
And it is a sad thing that people can not take a comment made in jest and laugh at it. So many sad people in the word it appears. Perhaps we should buy them one of these chairs.
But let’s face it, some people will always think of design in ways that others don’t. Some superficial, some of design as only art, some of design only for the rich, some as a way to elevate themselves above others with dry, monologues about an object as a living thing.
Point being I personally was making a funny, a point obviously wasted. It’s a shame more people don’t laugh and even more shameful that they think no one but themselves “gets” the meaning behind a piece of work which is more art than chair.
Andrew Menil on 02 Feb 2009 at 5:58 pm #
Lance, design blogs are filled with people who make negative comments on everything that looks different than what they’re used to. People who obviously make no effort to try and understand and appreciate a designer’s work. Your comment (and Chris in RVA) was a lot like that.
Unfortunately, your comment wasn’t funny or insightful, just negative and disrespectful. So it shouldn’t be a surprise that it wasn’t too popular.
Lance on 03 Feb 2009 at 2:51 pm #
I’m glad to know the second coming has occurred. Good to know.
kast on 03 Feb 2009 at 6:58 pm #
its look like a fat baby that crying for his mummy …but its look comfy for me and attractive as surely can make a discussion point if you put it on your living…
but after all its look comfy …
Lutecia on 09 Feb 2009 at 9:05 pm #
Well, if you must express your bitterness, because you can’t just shut up, and you must say something….maybe you could just say “I don’t like it”. Have you tried that before?
Chris in RVA and Lance have actually made the designer’s point stronger. The chair has no morphology of accepted convention, not even the curvy blob, it does not even amount to a cloud, so, we can’t run it through our normal aesthetic checklists. Because we don’t find it to eco with our imagery of possible shapes we hate it. Like we hate a bastard child. Chris in RVA and Lance have very simple minds and they reacted as expected. They need wood cubes and cylinders of primary colors.
I don’t like the chair myself, but I think I get it and I appreciate the concept…and I congratulate the designer.