From Fairy Tales to Industrial Design
Sunday, April 29th, 2007On H. C. Andersen’s Boulevard in Copenhagen you of course will find a statue of him, but it appears a little shy – almost as if the sponsors excused themselves for erecting him at all – as it is situated on the pavement at the corner of the city hall, him sitting top-hatted in a chair with the cane in one hand and a little book in the other resting in the lap.
Whereas the statute is very predictable and unable to mistake for anyone else, and thereby supports the idea of setting a statement for this great son of the country, the place is not supportive at all. Only distanced by half a meter from the curb side, the surroundings are featured by the city hall, the hopelessly messy town square and the busy boulevard with noisy traffic, traffic lights and traffic jam. Not supportive at all of the idea of an author living more than one and a half century ago and known for his particular way of telling tales and writing short stories – and not at all in the way his products are read or listened to.
If you stay on that side of the street and stroll a few hundred meters further down towards the harbour you will notice a modern type building, which may provoke you to say that the marriage with its surroundings is not as happy as it could be. HRH Prince Charles may support you on that opinion, but one have nevertheless to say that the building in its architecture aims at supporting its raison d’être – that of exhibiting the design aspects of industrial products, from vacuum cleaners, bicycles to furniture and whatever is design related. Varying exhibitions are accommodated by an openly laid out interior architecture over several floors around a central mall giving visitors an impression of a space vaster than it really is.
The DDC, acronym for Danish Design Center, also provides meeting facilities, and sitting in one of the meeting rooms last Tuesday I noticed that they also had been designed to signal the overall purpose of the DDC and at the same time appear timeless and non distracting to participants. The view from there could be distracting, maybe, and this could be the reason why participants were seated with the back to the large windows providing afternoon backlit views to Tivoli Gardens on the opposite side of the boulevard. The wall we faced was featured by broad low windows providing a view over rooftops towards 19th century buildings – much calmer. We had the sun and the distractions in our backs – clever setup.
So, why do I write about these two observations? Is it because they have anything in common – they seem opposite? Well, they made me reflect on the aspects of design and wonder whether the type of artwork we do is subject to the same rules that make a statute successful throughout – or only partially, or what makes a design centre successful – or only partially.
We and the sculptor and the architect all design towards a purpose, and do that according to the ways we feel right to meet this purpose – within the boundary conditions given by possibilities and limitations in materials or construction volume. So, yes, we do have quite a lot in common. Where we differ is perhaps that the architect knows a priori where his artwork is going to be displayed, the sculptor perhaps also, but not always, and the textile artist rarely.
Having the artistic aspects in common and differing in the level of predictability of exhibition venues – I wonder what kind of thoughts this synthesis could lead to…




