A point of interest regarding the conference: the correlation between chair and person.
in class, we discussed the advent of the discussant's chair selection at the beginning of the conference. Everyone in class more or less agreed that each person was personified through the design of their seat. Ben brought to our attention that none had been assigned specifically, but instead selected personally upon arrival (although I didn't ask if the chairs had in fact been chosen with the presenters in mind.) Regardless, a fair amount of parallels were found between each discussant's disposition, and the formal qualities of their chair. Perhaps this was a fluke, but quite possibly a demonstration of 'good' design at work. I wonder if we could have figured out who would sit where before they had entered the room. Is a personality predestined toward certain design elements? (maybe we could conduct an experiment in this vain?) I would also be interested to know if each presenter felt their chair represented them in the way we think they did, and furthermore, if we could hypothetically swap them and make an equally strong argument. I, for one, think that Nicholson and Betsky could have swapped chairs to the same effect, and that Kipnis was not necessarily the "Nimrod".
1)Nicholson: Konstantin Grcic - "Chair One" (swivel model)
http://www.konstantin-grcic.com/2)Mau: ?-"Ego Chair"
3)Kipnis: Marc Newson - "Nimrod Chair"
http://www.marc-newson.com/4)Betsky: ?-"?"
