Walking around furniture fairs and shows I can honestly say that I am sick and tired of seeing George Nakashima slab table knockoffs.  Not even trying to be creative or innovative, these tables follow the Nakashima design all the way down to the table top butterfly joinery.That’s why it is so refreshing to experience the wood slab table designs of John Houshmand.

Houshmand takes the same devotion and love for wood that is evident in a Nakashima table, however Houshmand uses glass as structural support for each table.  Houshmand lets each piece of wood speak for itself and lets what normally would be considered a flaw, such as a wormhole,  become a beautiful unique element in the slab.  Also setting Houshmand apart is his 900 square acre ranch in New York which his wood slabs are harvested and dryed.  In my opinion, true innovation in furniture begins with using timeless materials implementing new structural techniques.  Which is exactly what Houshmand achieves.  Genererally speaking, slab glass has not been used as structural element in furniture.  Houshmand beautifully juxtaposes the two materials of wood and glass in an unique new manner by incorporating inch thick glass as the structural support of the slab table. 

After graduating from Yale with a BA in Art Hstory in 1978, Houshmand explored a variety of mediums including ceramics and photography.  In 1980 Houshmand started a career with New York Contracting Firm, Clark Construction.  He has since lauched his furniture designs due to his interest in the hands on approach of working directly with the materials. 

To Learn More about John Houshmand and his furniture designs visit: http://www.johnhoushmand.com

Costume designer, Jenny Beavan, has stunned audiences again with her carefully selected fashion statements in Sherlock Holmes, starring Robert Downey Jr.  Beavan, a graduate of London’s Central School of Art and Design, has already received 8 prior academy award nominations and one award. 

Beavan uses eclectic wardrobe choices for Sherlock Holmes, which sets in London around the end of the 19th century.  Some of the suits and “get-ups” seem to come from a period much earlier than that of the late 19th century, but other clothing elements such as those masculine elements seen on Actress Rachel McAdams are very Chanel-esque and are therefore 20 years before their time.  The attire on the nemesis played by Mark Strong are much more contemporary and borderline modern.

A couple of Saturdays ago I received a call from a friend who wanted me to come by their house to meet another furniture designer that was from NC.  I was in the middle of my weekly thrift store and antique store shopping so after a little convincing I left my normal routine to meet David Jones.

After a brief introduction, David showed me some of his pieces on his phone and I immediately recognized he had talent and that the visit was definitely going to be worth my while.  He told me that he had just finished school.  I then asked where he graduated from.  I was expecting the typical answer which would be SCAD, RISD, Pratt, or maybe even Parsons or RIT.  His answer was Butler High School.  I little puzzled, I re-phrased my question “What College did you go to?”.   I was then informed that he JUST graduated from high school and is planning on attending Virginia Commonwealth University and study Industrial Design or Fine Art this next fall.

I love surprises and this was definitely a surprise and a treat.  Most great design esthetic comes from years of not only education but also experience so it is rare to stumble across a high school student’s work which is so advanced.  In my opinion David’s work is as good or better than most college graduates portfolios that I have come across.  David explained that he decided to focus on chair design for his AP 3D concentration.  

David’s pieces are all made from recycled and found objects from garages and what he could find around the house.  His concentration on this material was due to limitations rather than choice, as he explained he had little resources for materials since he was a high school student.  

As a child Eduardo Milieris was already decorating and designing clocks and watches.  At the age of seven, after being inspired by an Alexander Calder piece, Milieris came home and painted a piece which became part of a clock.  By the age of fourteen Milieris had designed and made a seconds meter machine.  During his studies at the School of Liberal Arts in Mondevideo, Eduardo conceived a three, one handed dials piece which was the foundation upon which Watchcraft developed from. 

 

To see a Milieris watch for the first time one will be transported to a different time.  Each watch is handcrafted from the “Patina of an artifact dug up by a treasure hunter” which will naturally age over time.  Every Watchcraft watch is Unisex.   At an age in time where high design watches are so immersed in the inner-workings and internal makeup of the watch, Watchcraft offers a breath of fresh air with a focus on external detailing.  That’s not to say that the innards of a Watchcraft piece are neglected, however the true beauty of this watch is the completely unique and eclectic shell.

 

My favorite series of Milieris watches are the “Gates of Time” collection.  I personally own a Limited Edition G23S Gates of Time watch # 194/1000.  The actual time keeping face of the watch is hidden behind two doors which open with a push of a button off of two spring hinges.  The concept is absolutely brilliant and the execution is flawless.  Perhaps the most intriguing aspect of this handcrafted artwork is its price tag – between $250 and $500 per watch! For something that is handmade here in the USA in New York that is a steal.  Recently a early limited edition Milieris watch auctioned for much more so there is potential for an increase in value in this functional craft piece. 

 

I can guarantee one thing, If you wear one of these watches out in public you will sure have people asking where you got it, because it is such a beautiful conversation piece.  

 

To learn more about Eduardo Milieris and Watchcraft Watches visit http://www.watchcraft.com/

I just saw Ironman 2 (Don’t judge) and started to think about the significance and sometimes ill placement of art and furniture in movies.  In Ironman 2 and in the first Ironman, Tony Stark is portrayed as an eccentric billionaire inventor with an acute eye for design.  Stark lives in a mid-century marvel-of-a-house on the coast of Malibu, California.  The inside of the house seems to be designed well by the set crew with what appears to be a mix the original mid-century design and some more modern improvement that have occurred over the years through renovations. 

 

However in both movies the two main pieces of furniture that are seen in the house and used by Stark are Mies Van Der Rohe’s Barcelona Chair and Charles and Ray Eames’ 670 and 671 lounge chair and ottoman.  With someone as eccentric as Stark and with a trained assistant that has been assembling a modern art collection for ten years including a Barnett Newman piece, why does Stark not have more obscure and rare furniture.  Nothing against the Barcelona Chair and the 670 and 671 lounge chair and ottoman, I love them and think they were incredibly innovative and are still great designs.  However, someone who is a perfectionist and as eccentric as Stark would prefer pieces which are more conversational and require a sophisticated education to know and understand the piece.

 

 Also I found an interesting improvement between the first movie and second dealing with the eccentric character development of Tony Stark.  In the first movie Stark’s garage was filled with exotic sports cars such as Ferraris, Lamborghinis, Buggattis and a Shelby Cobra.  However in the second movie, Stark’s garage is filled with one-of-a kind hotrods (it is implied that Stark Built).  This fits more within the eccentric character that Stark is.  Although he may have a Rolls Royce or fancy Audi to drive him around in for his public persona, he would prefer the uniqueness and individuality of a custom vehicle.  

 

 And why is it that the nemesis has the capability to bust a criminal out of prison, produce state of the art weaponry, but he lacks the ability to locate a darn parrot in Russia!  I know it is just a movie.

 

Jon Favreau, the producer, puts in a few iconic pieces in the hopes that the audience will recognize them as symbols of wealth and distinction.   Jon Favreau would be more true to the eccentricities of the character of Tony Stark by placing more obscure furniture in the film, however the immediate recognition of wealth and distinction seen through the furniture may be lost.

 

There is a great deal of art references and artwork seen in the movie ‘Titanic”.  There has already been some blogged discussion on why James Cameron chose to include several Picasso’s on the ship, which obviously were not on the original Titanic because these paintings currently reside in National Galleries (and one particular painting wasn’t painted until 1916, after the Titanic sank).  This is not my concern. 

 

 My concern is that the paintings were meant to show that Kate Winslet’s Character, Rose, is a person of distinction with an understanding of art, and not just art, but familiar with the current Parisian Avant-Garde Art scene.  But somehow she is intrigued by the art of her boy toy, Jack, (Leonardo Decaprio).  Jack’s sketches are definitely not avant-garde, his work is in fact traditional and elementary for what Rose would be used to seeing. 

 

When Rose first sees Jack’s Sketches, she makes several comments regarding the sexuality and the eroticism of the subjects.  If Rose was indeed as scholarly as the movie makes her out to be then she would be familiar with the work of the Austrian, Egon Shiele, whose work is incredibly erotic but also Avant-Garde. 

 

 The appreciation of Jack’s work by Rose is therefore either due to her being infatuated by Jack and therefore faking her appreciation for his work, or, more likely, a device used by the film team to necessitate the audience’s need for a common bond to the art.  Placing the familiar Picasso paintings in the room with Rose gives the audience an understanding that Rose is an Elite Scholar.  But also to appease the audience in the understanding of the work of Jack, the film team decided to keep Jack’s work traditional so that the majority of the audience can understand and relate to Jack’s work .  In other words, the mass audience wouldn’t be an able to relate Jack’s work if it was modern because the majority of the movie audience only can relate to known modern works, so if the film depicted Jack’s work as a unique modern style foreign to the audience then the audience would lose interest because they would not be able to relate to Jack. 

 

Hollywood has to compromise on a realistic film through the use of tactical devices in order to enable the majority of the movie audience the ablitly to relate to the characters

I say “Barcelona Chair” and you regurgitate “Mies Van Der Rohe” or “German Bauhaus”.  

There are two generally agreed upon generations of Amerian studio furniture makers: the first and the second generation. 

The first generation of furniture makers were dedicated to the preservation of the natural beauty of the wood they worked with and in bringing out the qualities of the wood that are essential to its character.  These groundbreaking craftsmen cut the trail for the second generation of furniture makers who focused on innovation and detailing that created a decorative style hidden with subtle meaning and narration. 

The most common names associated with the first generation of furniture makers are Wharton Escheric, Sam Maloof, George Nakashima, and James Krenov and Tage Frid. 

Wharton Escheric is considered the father of studio furniture making. Escheric was the first to start making a living soley making furniture by himself in his own studio.  His style and dedication inspired many of his contemporaries such as Wendell Castle to pursue a career in furniture making.  Starting out as a printmaker, Escheric began hand carving frames for his prints.  Soon the critics became more intrigued by the hand carved frames than the artwork that the frames were meant to highlight.  Escheric began to explore woodworking and developed a style which unifies the gap between the arts and crafts movement and the cubistic and abstract expressionist which were popular at the time.  Escheric considered himself a sculptor rather than a furniture maker.  He was devoted to the character of each piece of wood that he was currently working with and transforming the wood into a functional object, focusing on bringing out the subltle qualities of the particular piece of wood.  Wharton didn’t believe it was possible to make duplicates of a sculptural furniture piece because every piece of wood has a unique character which must be treated as an indidual unit and not to let the overall design influence the wood but rather have the particual piece of wood direct the design of the furniture.