Chairs

The craftsman makes things that are useful; the artist makes things that are good to look at. Or words to that effect. So when a craftsman makes a chair it should be good to sit in; when an artist makes a chair its not for sitting in but for looking at.
Thus Michael Marriot in designing furniture should be making useful objects; but from what I can see in an article in the Telegraph Colour Supplement, he does not. The article is about Windsor Chairs he has "reimagined". He says his designs "focus on function" - as they should - but by the look of the chairs he has designed, I think they would be most uncomfortable to sit on. The backs are hard, vertical and made from thin, cylindrical struts of wood. The seat is hard, wooden, not cushioned. They are, of course, not quite replicas of the style called Windsor because Mr Marriot has reimagined that style.
Though probably they never were comfortable.
I once had a short talk to give; I chose as my subject "Visual Aids". I remember that I began by saying something like :"Take a chair; how can we define what a chair is? Difficult. It is a seat on four legs with a back.... etc. If someone did not know what a chair was they would not have a very good idea of what the thing was that I was defining. Visual Aids make definitions easy to understand."
In a way they make definitions redundant.
Whenever my wife and I go shopping for a chair or settee or anything on which I have to sit, I always state my wish to try it out before buying, even though it looks comfortable and even though it is good to look at. I sit on it, lay back on it, wonder whether I'd be able to sit there for an hour or so.... Then and only then does...... she decide whether we buy it or not!