Cool furniture, design objects and desiderata

[ethanm]

There appears to be an overblown premium placed on appearing "natural" or "effortless" on this forum - be it clothes or home "decoration".

I'm not talking about effortless or natural or anything. I'm talking about Foo's ridiculous position that using art to make a space more beautiful (also called decoration) is in bad taste. Again, all made even more ridiculous by the fact that we all know he had succulent orbs on his wall at one point.

 

[TheFoo]

I'm not talking about effortless or natural or anything. I'm talking about Foo's ridiculous position that using art to make a space more beautiful (also called decoration) is in bad taste. Again, all made even more ridiculous by the fact that we all know he had succulent orbs on his wall at one point.

For ****'s sake. Is parsing language unusually challenging to you?

I didn't say art shouldn't be used to add beauty to a space. I said it should not be used as mere decoration and wall-filler. Why? Because good art is an aesthetic and intellectual experience that requires sufficient space and freedom from distraction. And to be clear, I'm not saying that means to clear out all of one's furniture and create a gallery out of a living room. Rather, we should do the best we can within practical and financial limits to ensure artwork is optimally displayed.

The other underlying point is that picking good art requires thoughtful and studied appreciation rather than the impulse of afterthought.

 

[ethanm]

The other underlying point is that picking good art requires thoughtful and studied appreciation rather than the impulse of afterthought.

I have a feeling a lot of artists would disagree with you on this point. A lot.

 

[TheFoo]

I have a feeling a lot of artists would disagree with you on this point. A lot.

You've met many artists? I assume not if all you've got is a "feeling" on the matter.

The ones I've met hate the idea of people buying their art just because it's pretty or to decorate a space. Not sure why you would infer otherwise--doesn't everyone want their hard work to be taken seriously? This is true for tailors, doctors, winemakers, architects, etc. Artists also. Part of the fun of studio visits is being able to directly engage an artist in discussion about his work. They clearly perk up when you "get" what they are trying to do.

This is why I suggested earlier that one should spend some time learning about art before buying it.

 

[ljrcustom]

The cork side table / stool is a Jasper Morrison design, so contemporary and not mid-century. Chewbacca chair is a Hans Wegner design from 1950-ish.

The cane has held up quite well, and our daughter climbs onto those chairs all the time. Anyway, nice thing about cane is it can be repaired relatively easily.

Glad to hear the cane has held up well. True that caning can always be redone, but it's never fun when a guest falls through a chair while visiting.

 

[ethanm]

Because it looks nice is as good a reason as any to buy art. Saying otherwise is the height of douchebaggery.

 

[ljrcustom]

You've met many artists? I assume not if all you've got is a "feeling" on the matter.

The ones I've met hate the idea of people buying their art just because it's pretty or to decorate a space. Not sure why you would infer otherwise--doesn't everyone want their hard work to be taken seriously? This is true for tailors, doctors, winemakers, architects, etc. Artists also. Part of the fun of studio visits is being able to directly engage an artist in discussion about his work. They clearly perk up when you "get" what they are trying to do.

This is why I suggested earlier that one should spend some time learning about art before buying it.

I have to agree with you here. At least when it comes to actual art, ie. not the posters I had on my wall back during college. This is likely the reason I still haven't found the right piece to hang above my own couch, since moving in 15 months ago.

 

[ljrcustom]

I framed this recently and placed it at the shop entrance. It's a bit 'on the nose' but I couldn't help myself.

The print looks nice. But DAMN DUDE THAT FRAME!!

 

[TheFoo]

I think that foo is broadly correct, and I don't understand why so many people are piling on him.

There appears to be an overblown premium placed on appearing "natural" or "effortless" on this forum - be it clothes or home "decoration". It parallels a societal obsession with the concept of "genius" IMO. All foo does is actually break it down and state plainly the component parts of the apparently effortless effort.

Most people do not have a natural talent for decorating a space, and because of their aversion to actually devoting effort to being methodical about it end up with awful looking personal spaces.

While placing hardcover art books out for "perusal" is a step too far for me, personally, it is not find it logically inconsistent from what I think are a key reasons for the placing of art in the more public areas of a home - the projection of your own taste on your space, and a public statement of your taste.

1,000% agreed.

"Genius" does not mean one doesn't have to study, refine, work hard, develop methods, etc. It means you get more bang for your buck when you do all those things. Talent is leverage for effort, not a substitute for it.

Not sure why this forum is so obsessed with the delusion that impulse is sufficient for developing style, taste, etc. Maybe it is a way to comfort oneself that he can't actually be wrong or bad or have poor taste?

Nobody I know who excels at anything has done so without significant and concentrated effort--no matter how easy they might make it look to others.

On the books: I object to laying out things simply to look smart, but I think it's perfectly "natural" to leave out and display books one is interested in to share with visitors. It can be a great jumpstarter for conversation. Also, it's nice to have some of your favorite books easily at hand rather than shelved/stored away.

 

[TheFoo]

Because it looks nice is as good a reason as any to buy art. Saying otherwise is the height of douchebaggery.

Show us this "because it looks nice" art.

 

[SkinnyGoomba]

The print looks nice. But DAMN DUDE THAT FRAME!!

Thank you! Much appreciated!

I have a feeling a lot of artists would disagree with you on this point. A lot.

Not so much, take Rothko for example. He seemed to almost loath his own success and refused commissions where his art would end up being overlooked as part of the scenery and not much more.

 

[apropos]

ethanm, I'll try to break this down for you.

Great art might happen to decorate a space.

But IMHO one shouldn't go out specifically to buy art to decorate a space.

Why? Because saying you buy art because "it looks nice" is reducing art to decoration. Art v decoration is a subject that has been covered ad nauseam by countless people so I'll let you Google that one yourself.

Look I get it - it can be difficult to understand the distinction initially, and I found myself in your shoes some time ago. We are surrounded by so much apparent "guidance" out there that reduces art to mere decoration. There are countless blogs out there that teach you how to "create" a gallery wall (and so on), but every time there is actually nothing about the actual component pieces - the art.

 

[brokencycle]

I like how when foo posts something and two or three people are critical of it, all these posters who rarely post come out of the woodwork to defend foo from everyone piling on.

 

[ChetB]

@mafoofan Curious: what's the sideboard/credenza/whatever you call it beneath the TV? I've been on the hunt for something low and long like that.

 

[Journeyman]

For ****'s sake. Is parsing language unusually challenging to you?

I didn't say art shouldn't be used to add beauty to a space. I said it should not be used as mere decoration and wall-filler. Why? Because good art is an aesthetic and intellectual experience that requires sufficient space and freedom from distraction. And to be clear, I'm not saying that means to clear out all of one's furniture and create a gallery out of a living room. Rather, we should do the best we can within practical and financial limits to ensure artwork is optimally displayed.

The other underlying point is that picking good art requires thoughtful and studied appreciation rather than the impulse of afterthought.

You've met many artists? I assume not if all you've got is a "feeling" on the matter.

The ones I've met hate the idea of people buying their art just because it's pretty or to decorate a space. Not sure why you would infer otherwise--doesn't everyone want their hard work to be taken seriously? This is true for tailors, doctors, winemakers, architects, etc. Artists also. Part of the fun of studio visits is being able to directly engage an artist in discussion about his work. They clearly perk up when you "get" what they are trying to do.

This is why I suggested earlier that one should spend some time learning about art before buying it.

I understand what you mean, and I think that you've done a much better job of explaining yourself in these posts, as opposed to your position in your earlier post.

However, while I understand that studying/considering art before purchase may help you to appreciate the artist and his/her motivations more and so on, I still think that there is nothing wrong with buying something simply because you like it, simply because it speaks to you.

After all, "art" (however we define it) is meant to talk to people, meant to say something. Whatever that may be is ultimately up to the individual who is viewing the art. If you look at a picture (or other art) and it says something to you that you like, is it necessary to consider the other factors? Isn't it sufficient to simply like and appreciate it?

You mentioned winemakers and, to me, wine can be similar. If you're at a restaurant and someone brings along a bottle and you like it, is it necessary for you to research the wine or the vintner in order to "properly" enjoy the wine? Isn't it enough to simply enjoy the way it tastes and the way it pairs with the food? You can enjoy that without knowing anything about the actual wine itself, or where it was from or how it was made.