design forum - DesignAddict


	> Edit your post


	title of this thread your message but once again the response tends to be negative emoting, rather than rational criticism. The most effective antidotes to the post-modern, or to any other form of decadence (and that is all that post-modern really is), is humane reason. Here is what is wrong with the Starck chair: 1. The legs, lacking bracing, are probably flimsy and very likely to bend, or break, when subjected to the tipping and leaning such chairs are exposed to, whether used in public places, at breakfast tables, at pool sides, or what have you. They also appear too skinny for the upper part of the chair so leave it looking as unstable as it probably in fact is. 2. It has vestigial arms that cannot comfortably accomodate a pair of human forearms; thus the arms have no function except bracing, which could have been achieved with less material and more elegance without them. 3. The vestigial wing backs are too low lean one's head against for a snooze, even if one were to be so masochistic as to wish to rest one's head on metal tubing. They also provide no useful comforting of the trunk, and probably somewhat over-restrict upper body movement to no effective end. 4. Where there should be lumbar support, there is a big hole. This is a chair designed for persons who wish to buy amusing looking chairs that are uncomfortable for other persons to sit on. End of discussion. No emoting necessary. associated web images (optional) associated web link (optional) your email your password create a forums account \| you forgot your password?