ABSTRACT

This work delves into the nuanced relationship between furniture, space, and the body, questioning conventional perceptions and interactions with elements of the interiors. The exploration is carried out by eliminating, abstracting, and interacting with the form of furniture, and examining the impact on space and body. Elimination of form introduces voids in space that make room for different interpretations for the same furniture. Abstraction simplifies the object form and encourages the participant to provide meaning and context to it. Interaction with furniture under constraints forms new associations with the way body inhabits space. Through these experiments, an ebb and flow between creativity and conformity emerges, highlighting the delicate balance designers must strike between novel aesthetics and functional requirements. Drawing from various historical and contemporary references, from Le Corbusier’s type-objects to the Merzbau, this report underscores the interplay of conventional boundaries and creative outbursts.

Keywords: space, furniture, body, creativity, conformity, perception

ELIMINATION EXPERIMENT

Furniture becomes an integral part of the interiors through which designers assert their unique vision and take forward the ideas of Gesamtkunstwerk – the total work of art.1 In doing so they challenge the perception of the viewer by creating distinct forms of site-specific elements that sit cohesively with pre-existing objects.2 The interior views devoid of furniture are reminiscent of looking at paintings within an art gallery. They depict the essence of the space without revealing its intended function. The introduction of furniture instantaneously imparts purpose to the interiors. Layering the intended furniture over its corresponding interiors forms a cohesive and picturesque composition. The juxtaposition of furniture over interior that don’t naturally correspond generates intriguing scenarios. When furniture is placed in an environment that it typically wouldn’t inhabit, it inspires new possibilities and narratives, sparking a dialogue between familiar and the unexpected. When the furniture cutouts are turned over, they become voids. These voids invite playful imagination and creative thinking. This makes room for interpretation, even in a known and iconic space. It tantalizes the imagination and engages the viewer to make their own sense of the unknown.

ABSTRACTION EXPERIMENT

The Abstraction Experiment aims at understanding how interpretation of an object and its space is based on the perception of a form. By abstracting the form of an object, this experiment removes the crutch of definition, and encourages participants to view the form through their own unique lens. The participants of this experiment are 18 MDes. Interior Design students from the Glasgow School of Art.

The responses of the Abstraction Experiment range from the predictable to the incomprehensible. Beyond commonalities, the responses run the gamut of imagination. The results highlight the key role context plays in interpreting an object from a form and a space from an object. This is evident in the abundance and variety of unique responses. However, the significant number of repeated responses indicates a common thread of interpretation, which exists even in the absence of context, coordination or expectation.

Since the experiment relies on representation of space by the participants, the unprompted illustration of the room itself gives us the opportunity to crosscheck this observation. Above are 8 specific responses. On the left two columns, we see the same object in completely different spaces, and on the right, different objects in the same space. However, hints of conformity are to be found in each similar space as well. All kitchens have square sinks, all bathrooms have round fixtures, the garden must be bound by a fence and the streetlights must be elevated from the poles. Even in creative thinking, there are common threads binding our definitions of what a living room, bathroom, kitchen entails. On the other hand, the unique responses exhibit divergent thinking in creative practitioners. Participants not only break away from established patterns but also stretch their imagination to envision scenarios and form connections that challenge conventional thinking.

INTERACTION EXPERIMENT

Furniture in its inert state resembles sculpture, poised for observation and activation. It’s through interaction that these objects are animated into functional elements within a space. However, this transition is not unidirectional. Deviating from convention encourages imaginative solutions to utilize the same furniture.

The board game is designed with the triad of space, furniture, and body at its core. The space is the board with ‘walls’ on two adjacent corners, hinting at the formation of a space in 3D. The furniture pieces are scaled down to match the wooden mannequins. Here the lack of abstraction forces the user to be creative with the limitations of actual furniture. The body manifests in two parts – actual mannequins and action cards. Georges Perec suggests that the functional divide of an apartment is unequivocal, sequential and nycthemeral!3 The actions are inspired by his model of activities that might take place in a nuclear family.

Certain actions become intrinsically linked to specific pieces of furniture due to habit, functionality and tradition. This experiment predetermines action and furniture. It thereby encourages players to interact with furniture in an unconventional way. One is inclined to pick the bed for sleeping. However, it finds a way to realize the act of sleeping with a coffee table and chair. Not only do the participants end up redefining the relationship between body and furniture but also discover the human form’s adaptability in unfamiliar situations.

The introduction of furniture inherently initiates the definition of space. In this experiment the space becomes the stage where actions are performed. Due to the constraints posed by limited furniture pieces, the space itself is also employed to execute the action. When tasked with the action of washing up with a dining table, one participant used the walls to form a shower cubicle by placing the dining table upright against the intersection of the walls. This highlights the intrinsic human ability to adapt and re-imagine spaces, even when bound by constraints.

CONCLUSION

We find that the drive for creativity challenges resource constraint, provides avenues for innovation, flexibility in use, and unique aesthetics. However, this is tempered by the conformity which stems from our traditions, necessity of daily functions, and restrictions of spaces and objects. The constraints of our body are also transformed into the constraints of the interiors. This push and pull defines the framework in which an interior space must be designed. This work encourages interior designers to question the familiar and embrace the unfamiliar. Its application can go beyond furniture to include objects, fixtures and other elements of interior design. Apart from the design aspect, this approach may kindle environmental considerations, societal impacts, and efficient resource utilizations.

This study considers an inward development of the interior starting from the body. It acknowledges the confines of architecture but allows for a creative outlook, independent of its structures. As the world progresses, it becomes necessary to re-imagine spaces, rethink associations to furniture, and find better homes for our bodies. It becomes necessary to make room.