Design Critiques 3: The coffee table, Noguchi

[Mark Singer]

Here is the classic Noguchi Coffee table . It is wood and glass.
It has been made for years and is still in production.....comments?
Other tables? It was designed in 1944, so it is around 60 years old.

[Roy Wall]

The lumber looks like 4/4........I think 8/4 would be better.

And, I"d prefer a little "sleeker" / modern design in the legs.......

[Carl Eyman]

Well, obviously a lot of people like it or it would not have been around so long. I don't like it because of the "mixed media". I prefer all wood, all glass, etc. Secondly, I find the shape of the top impractical. It comes way out into the room from the sofa putting items on the far side of the table out of reach. It takes more floor space than necessary. The free form shape of the legs is pleasing, but overall it is not the coffee table I'd choose.

[Bob Hovde]

... Secondly, I find the shape of the top impractical. It comes way out into the room from the sofa putting items on the far side of the table out of reach. It takes more floor space than necessary. ....

On the other hand (OTOH?), if you have a large room and this is in the middle of a "setting" of a couch and a couple of chairs, it now gives each of them someplace to put items. Besides, I get the feeling that this isn't for the average family room. It's too formal. It would be more likely to have an "art" piece or two on it than a TV guide, the morning paper, and a coffee cup.

Bob

[Jamie Buxton]

Think what a revelation that table must have been 60 years ago.

[Carl Eyman]

Jaime: It really probably was not a revolution or a revelation. In the 1930's there was a style of furniture called "Modernistic" It is probably what makes me shy away from the unconventional in furniture. If you can pull up some pictures of it on the web, you'll see what I mean. Incidentally, I'm not classifying this table in the Modernistic style, but for those people who were into Modernistic, this would not be shocking. IMHO

[John Shuk]

I think for my part I look for a more "timeless" design when I look for furniture. I don't think that would lend itself to just any setting. I realize that no piece fits jusst anywhere. It also strikes me that the piece could have been made of any material and that there is no relationship of the wood itself to the piece. IMHO

[Jim Hinze]

I do not personally like the modernistic style. It borders on too formal, especially with the glass top. The curves are nice, but the entire piece could be made from vitrually any wood with minimal impact to the final piece.

I'm sure (as most have already stated) that it must be a popular piece and was probably qute something in it's time, but I find it unmemorable...

[Keith Christopher]

I'm not a huge fan of glass tabletops. I like the symmetry in the legs which creates kind of a flow. The glass top is there to show the wood in the legs IMHO. I'm also not a fan of this style table support. I can't truly explain why I just never seemed to latch on to it. Nice piece, well made I'm sure, but I would not buy one.


Keith

[Mark Blumer]

When my wife and I were first married, one of the first pieces of furniture we bought was a metal version of this table. The base was made of chromed tubes welded into the exact same configuration. We used it for many years and then passed it on to my married son who is still using it.

I looks to me like one of the design considerations, for the pictured table, was ease and cost of manufacturing. The two legs are identical. All you need is one pattern for a leg and you are in business. As for the shape of the top, remember the era that this was designed in. Post WWII (that is not Forrest Woodworker II) modern "Danish" had a lot of freeform designs in it and this fits that feeling. Also, the top follows the flow of the base.

Mark Blumer (East Lansing, MI)

[Roger Myers]

Sixty years is a long time, so there is certainly some support for the design, but not from me. While I favor traditional designs a great deal more than other styles, I do appreciate many different styles as well...This table however (at least as shown in the rendering) has virtually no appeal to me.

Incidentally Mark, what would the appropriate name for this style/period be?

Roger

[John Stevens]

Presumptuous of me to offer an opinion on the work of an established artist, but maybe it'll help me learn something. IMO, the top has a pleasing curve and proportions, and the base has a clever symmetry. Reminds me of a smooth river rock or beach pebble. Reminds me a little of Rodin and Henry Moore sculpture.

It's interesting that the number of people who posted to say they dislike the piece far outnumbers those who posted to say they like it. I wonder if that reflects some sort of "reporting bias" (i.e., people are more likely to speak out about things they don't like than about things they like), or if the proportions and shapes were poorly chosen. It would be interesting to measure the proportions of the various features of the top and base to see how often the golden ratio or dynamic proportions crop up.

Just about the only thing I don't like about the piece is that the transitions between the curves on the base don't appear smooth and continuous. I wonder if that's merely because the picture isn't accurate. If the pic is accurate, I wonder if the clunky transitions were intentional, and if so, why.

I'm also interested in Roy Wall's idea to make the base in 8/4 instead of 4/4. Might be a more interesting proportion of TxWxH in the short pointy ends. Taking that idea a step further, I wonder what it would look like if the wood was so thick that TxW for the straight sections was nearly 1:1. And what kind of cross section would you go with in that case--square with rounded corners? Circular? Same profile as the pointy ends? Hmmmm....

Your thoughts?

[Jim Dunn]

Now I just a novice at this, but my minds eye says 3 supports balance that type of structure better. That's my opinion and as I remember the original "instructions" that's what is wanted in this forum.

Jim

[Kevin Arceneaux]

Nice table, I like the lines. But.......

Is it practical? Not to me and I would guess, most people. I don't live in a big house, a gallery, or in a museum. I do have a living room, but it has been turned into a workout and sewing area. You couldn't have that where there are critters or kids. While I do not mind looking at designs, I prefer something that I can use. I have been to Falling Waters and loved it. But I wouldn't want to live in a house like that or have furniture like that.

[Scott Coffelt]

I always enjoy that design. I've seen many off shoots of it since. I even have a style that I intend to build some day. If I can find the picture, I'll post it. I like the darker wood with it.