The auditorium is warm and dim. All the freshmen are together, at least all those that made it out of bed. It is 8:15 am and there are bobbing heads left and right. Lecture only started 15 minutes ago. Were we doomed from the start, or are we all cursed with the late nights of RISD studio? I think that a combination of factors lead to the sea of bobbing heads. Is it accurate to state that the auditorium seating is comfortable enough to lull 300 plus students to sleep? I think yes.
When I think of functionalism, I think of a chair. How often do I use it? When I use it am I aware of the reaction and condition of my body? For example, when I sit in the wooden seat with attached table I am upright and slightly leaning on the back rest. This keeps me alert and comfortable when writing notes. I doubt that I would be able to absorb as much information if I was sitting on a cushy overstuffed chair. The design language is not only read through my eyes, but read through the overall interaction with the object.
The act of sitting, it is safe to say, is one of the most commonly interacted within any given setting. Sitting is defined also with an environment and body interaction. There is a response made by the person to certain seating. If an environment does not have seating does that translate that it is not a resting spot? Just as parking lines indicate an action (parking), chairs can communicate through its own language.
One of the most obvious words of chair language is translated “sit.” The question is when to sit. For airplanes there are more than a few reasons the seats take up the ratio of space they do, but the idea of “stay in your seat” is pretty clearly expressed through the size of the chair, and the effort it takes to pass by the other passengers.
On a Subway the seats are made of some sort of smooth plastic. Though just enough indentation in the seat to keep you from sliding too much, there is a sense of movement and change. When stepping into one of the cars, of the Subway, there is a rush to acquire a seat. When the doors open there are already people filed by the door ready to hop over the gap and part the wall of bodies ready to take their spot. The case of New York City is that it is fast pace and constantly moving; the main transportation seating just reflects that and is designed accordingly.
Reflecting more on the functionalism of seating I revisit the definition. Functionalism is defined as a design based on the purpose of that building. (Web, 1) The definition is taken from an architectural stand point but I think that it still applies to design. I think that it has to do with the mentality of the user, “humans.” People avoid touching. Something about grazing jacket sleeves or outer thighs or even bags get people to react in a bug eyed, shifty way. Where is close proximity tolerated? The elevator is one, waiting in lines are another but both these are usually sort and not much else can happen during these times. The Subway is one place where it is still uncomfortable but because of the length of time spent between stops there is an ease that develops. On the subway, people are comfortable enough with the cupped seats to sit next to a complete stranger. Same goes for airplanes. There are armrests, but we cannot imagine the experience without them. Under what other circumstances outside of public transportation would that be acceptable?
I used an example in the timeline of the Aeron chair; I have experience this past summer in using one. Though the office was air conditioned usually, some days it didn’t seem on and that is when I loved the Aeron. It has a mesh bottom and back support and it was very bouncy and I felt as though I was in a bouncy breezy hammock. I think that it spoke comfort to me and I enjoyed it the first time I sat in it. During my time there this summer I was introduced to another chair, the liberty chair by Humanscale. It is supposed to be a step up of the Aeron but when I tried it out for a few hours I still enjoyed my Aeron more. It really has to do with preference but when I saw the liberty chair I assumed that it was supposed to make me feel cushioned but it felt too solid. The Aeron is lighter and quite a bit bouncier. I think that based on this experience I was able to decide which felt better in my case. As an Industrial Designer I am excited about knobs and screws and complex adjustments. Is there an allure to gadgets that require multiple adjustments? Yes, but I don’t think as an overall design that the Aeron should have so much. Would my mother enjoy adjusting it herself? Probably not the language of that chair is too complex for my mother to grasp. That is why the Liberty Chair is probably better for my mother. The liberty chair doesn't have very obvious screws or adjustments, but it looks like a fancy computer chair in a language that my mother can understand.
I made a timeline regarding functionalism based on what I’ve read about the subject, but I think that the only way for functionalism to be tested and understood is through experiencing in the setting. Just like when it is appropriate to create a model in order to discern if the shape is on the right path. The process in investigating not only the surface of design but the underlining structures of how Functionalism can read in environment is integrated deep in the grain of the seemingly mundane everyday objects that are guiding us and talking with us throughout our lives. Unless we turn our attention to appreciate the communication of these objects we will neither understand functionalism or be able to use the language.
Web Cited
1- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functionalism_(architecture)
No comments:
Post a Comment