i say glasgow
not the airport.
not the bin lorry crash.
not the coma scale.
not the distillery.
not the east midlands.
not the fishing mega-store.
not the grin (interesting, though).
not the herald.
not the irn-bru.
not the jigsaw puzzle.
not the kiss (again, interesting).
not the library.
not the mortality.
not the nino.
not the outcome scale.
not the prestwick.
not the qmu.
not the rangers FC.
not the smile.
not the tragedia 2014.
not the university.
not the vikings.
not the whisky.
not the zip.
it is a chair – a stool – a taburett.
and it is not any famous one.
one of these pieces of furniture that catch your eye and (if you are a good listener of your inner instincts) you hear them scream get me, get me. you do not get it immediately, but time-to-time you stop by the store, to look at it, to walk around it, touch it and in this case – to sit on it – or not – rather be like – it looks great on this shelf. it looks great.
in the end you decide to get this perfect bargain for amazing 34,99 only, which could be easily the price for the materials you would use for making your own (and maybe even better).
open the box
unwrap it
to be honest, the very first sit was kind of problematic due to its construction – the three legs which you firstly have to screw in – oh what a mechanism – i could really make it myself – do not really support the whole weight of a normal adult human being.
it looks great, though.
questioning
when getting such piece of design in a big and ordinary furniture store you should be less naive than when shopping at the other places. you should expect the lower price which goes hand-in-hand with the lower quality. but do you ever think of the company or the person who actually designed it? do you think of the people who manufactured it? do you think of the person who cut the wood for it? (not the case here, not the wood, lies) and do you ever think of the driver who delivered your piece to the store?
i tried to think about it. i tried. and I tried to search. and I got to the dead point at the very beginning – who actually created this chair?
no names
no dates
no places
it seems like this chair just appeared to be. and it looks great.
some blunt information about the material and the size, more color options and the list of the other places where to get it. but that is it.
—
another way around or a holy piece
the original is made by the American furniture design company called UM Project, founded in 2004 by Francois Chambard, who seems to be french living in the united states.
(the names of his wife and children in his bio)
UM stands for users and makers.
F.Ch. says – interested in getting his hands dirty, but also by the recognition that the market was craving more personal, tangible products and experiences beyond the conceptual promise of brands.
their name for the chair is holy stool– why – and is not very different from my version – only the material is not the some pieces of wood&shit&stuff&glue but pure maple. dipped into the paint (or at least that is how i imagine it) from the bottom up – while my chair is the other way around.
the other potential users experience is same instability as i do with my cheaper version of this stool, while the studio claims that the legs are far apart, which makes the stool stable and perfect for everyday use in homes or offices.
they said – users and makers.
—
i am not sure how to feel anymore.
it looks great
saturday morning, mess around me, me in bed.
it looks great
glasgow close to me.
it looks great
confession – i never sit on it.
piles of clothes dirty clean tidy laptop pills projector bags and purses boyfriend book jacket not me but it looks great
consumer society? are we greedy? or do we just get stuff because it looks great?
it looks great, though.
another confession – i will probably never sit on it.
however, this has been the first chair that i have ever bought. the first piece of furniture that i have bought for myself only not because i need it but because i wanted it.
and another confession – yes, we are greedy.
i need to think about it all over again.