|A japanese example of flexible space, using panels to separate off parts of a room|
|Glub glub glub.|
One of the simplest (and most Denmark-related) arguments against this is in Verner Panton's beautiful Panton chair (1999). There is something so intuitive about the design of the chair, that makes it totally ambiguous. Some people may argue that a chair needs to look like a chair, but the Panton chair ignores this. Simply because it doesn't immediately strike you as looking like a chair, it becomes an undefined thing. This is perfect for flexible workspaces - the chair is not treated like a chair. It can be used for anything. And it can also be stored in small spaces is you need to clear more space in the room.
So what's the solution to flexible space? Is is clearly presenting the possibilities of a piece of furniture? Or is it creating an ambiguous 'thing' that can be whatever the user imagines it to be? Contrary to what I said two paragraphs ago (my opinion has since swung), I think Verner Panton got it right. But that doesn't mean all chairs/tables should be simple cubes!
OK, let's quickly go through the whole challenge thing. Did I enjoy life today? Not particularly. Technology test, forgot maths homework, extremely over tired and drew up a chair design at lunch which I then noticed had been already made by someone else (must have seen the design before, then it subliminally inspired me). So I hereby carry on the challenge to enjoy the day onto tomorrow. Let's hope it goes a bit better than today.