Back in Amsterdam




We are back in Amsterdam. After a week in Milan, full of hectic moments, meetings and conversations, many congratulations and compliments, not to mention a lot of inspiration. There was no better place to celebrate our 20th birthday: Droog + up to a beautiful future.

The photos of our installations, made by Thijs Wolzak are now ready. They give a good insight in the past, present and future of Droog. Respect for the existing has always been with us and it still is today. You could see this in the products we presented at our first show in Milan, in 1993, like the Rag chair by Tejo Remy. Two of these chairs stood in our reception this week. More recently, UP is an on-going initiative focused on redesigning dead stock to bring it back in circulation. We copied China with the project The New Original. Copying is a less obvious way of respecting the existing, while it is also a way of creating something new. The same mentality resulted in new high tech manifestations of the Rijksmuseum historical collection that we hacked. They are parts of the same story - design does not have to start from square one.

The pictures also show how a stylish presentation and cheerful interaction can go hand in hand. Next to the serene setting of the Rijksmuseum interpretations, our staff was preparing tattoos for the visitors. We brought together ideas, prototypes, ready-made products and a new collection. People were eager to buy the things we offered in our pop up store but at the same time they were engaged by the videos on show. The message we wanted to evoke is that beauty and responsibility are no opposites. We respect the past, but we’re also interested in future projections. They are no contrasts but part of the same story, they are our DNA in which the twist always reappears, whether in the many hilarious moments in the Material Matters Media or in the aquarium with a miniature Chinese restaurant. We like bringing different worlds together, and turning things upside down. Design is a serious matter, but a serious matter can be entertaining as well.

For those who were not able to make it, I hope you enjoy the photos and videos.


UP and Qatar

We launched UP - a model that aims to increase the value of dead stock through redesign – with collaborating companies Makro, van Gansewinkel, Vlisco and Mediq in 2011. While we are further developing the business model with our partners, we are also presenting the UP concept in other places in the world, exhibiting the first product results together with lectures and workshops.

Home game

The first destination was Helsinki during the World Design Capital celebrations last May. For UP, it was a home game. The whole city is imbued with concern for the environment, and stores already offer products based on the redesign of leftovers. The message was easy to convey with connections everywhere.

Qatar

The second stop, Doha in Qatar, was a totally different experience. The gap could not be bigger. In Qatar and other Gulf states we meet societies of abundant consumption, of never-ending building activity, with houses due for demolition when they are still brand new and where waste management does not exist. The sky here is the limit.

Presenting UP in Qatar was a real challenge. Advocating the redesign of dead stock and showing how one can upgrade seemingly valueless items, like cheap trays and cutting boards, in this environment of opulent luxury could have been like crying in the wilderness. But to my surprise it worked out very well. When I briefed the students at VCU university — many of which, as I was told, had grown up in context where money does not count — they became immediately enthusiastic. Rather than out of a concern for the environment, it seemed the decisive factor in sparking interest was that they could play with a bunch of products. They didn’t have to start from scratch. They were not asked to make drawings or renderings but to touch the raw materials (trays, medical utensils, cutting boards, cups and saucers) and let their fantasies go wild. They immediately were challenged by it and seemed triggered by these simple, low-style products.

After my lecture, which was very well attended, many people expressed how happy they were with the idea of UP, particularly because of the general mentality in Qatar. Leftovers will be difficult to find in this place because everything is destroyed immediately, but at least there were a few suggestions for things that could be saved, like banners, flags and water bottles. I’m not under the illusion that UP will make a big change in Qatar, but is has brought awareness to a young generation, awareness of what one could do with waste, even with the most simple, seemingly invaluable things. I am looking forward to the results of this workshop, and the next stop that UP will take us.

VCUQatar Gallery presents The UP Factory by Droog
October 15th - November 15th, 2012
Virginia Commonwealth University
Doha, Qatar
More info.

More info about UP.

Image: Shoes by Studio Droog, 2011
Material: carpet (supplied by 2012Architecten/InterfaceFlor), leather laces


Why Material Matters

Interview with Renny Ramakers
by Agata Jaworska

This year in Milan, Droog presents Material Matters, a future furniture fair. The presentation speculates the impact of a shift in policy from taxing income to taxing raw materials and waste, and its impact on the design industry. The future fair features 20 design companies—both real and imagined—that might come to thrive given the change in policy.

How did this idea come about?

I read an article in the newspaper. Economists, ecologists, political scientists and other scientists were envisioning an alternative economic model in which sustainability is built into the system. One of the things they imagined was that income tax was replaced with tax on raw materials and waste, giving a few examples of what might happen—like no more packaging , new businesses based on recycling, repairing and leasing…

That inspired me. I thought it could also inspire designers and the design industry. Designers are trained to design products. Every year designers and design companies go to Milan, and every year, we see so many new products. Milan is full of new for the sake of new.

When I read the article, I realized some designers are already working in a way that fits into the scenario. Dirk Vander Kooij reprograms abandoned machines into 3D printers that make products using material made of old fridges. Markus Kayser prints products in the desert using the sand as the raw material and the sun as the energy source. Studio Swine proposes fishing plastic debris from the sea, turning it into products on a converted boat factory.

I imagined an alternative fair full of these kind of initiatives. We brought together existing initiatives and invented new ones. The imaginary fair presents some 20 design companies based on the premise that raw materials are taxed and therefore they become very expensive. One invented company, Gallery™ sells what used to be ordinary goods as collectibles. Another, Optical World™ sells illusions. Sometimes we really need a chair to sit on, but sometimes it’s the image that we’re after.

Currently quite a few companies are dealing with environmental issues. What’s the difference with Material Matters?

Environmentally friendly design is still mostly about designing products which harm the environment as little as possible, by using sound resources and by designing products that can be easily taken apart. Material Matters is more narrow because it is only dealing with material scarcity, but at the same time it is broader because it suggests completely different responses. An option could indeed be upcycling, recycling or waste management. But I am looking for more ways to tackle the issue. Maybe renting things is better than a chair that you can recycle. Or if a product lasts your whole life then maybe recyclability is not the most important thing. It is important to broaden the scope.

Essentially the Fair presents business models. Could you see it as a collection of ideas that others could appropriate?

You can think about what impact this scenario would have on companies like IKEA. Its unique selling point is that the products are very affordable, but once materials become expensive, what would their selling point become? They could—just like we do with UP™— upgrade IKEA’s dead stock or offer second hand IKEA furniture. People could return used products, IKEA could redesign them, and people could buy redesigned IKEA stuff.

You could also think of developing new materials from alternative resources, like Suzanne Lee does with BioCouture™, creating fashion with bacteria. Another direction could be designing services instead of products, like teaching people how to furnish their house without buying new products. That’s what Waste Watchers™ does.

Play Shop™, a game that satisfies your need for shopping without buying anything, is an extreme example. How do you see the role of the designer with something like Play Shop™?

A designer could have designed the game. It’s not like design will ever stop turning out products, but designers should stop thinking that every need should be satisfied with a product. Sometimes something else might do.

You bring together reality and fiction in an interesting way, almost not making a distinction between the two. How do you see this?

The ambiguity between the real and the fake creates cohesion. Each company is almost like a one-liner, presented in a tongue-in-cheek way. It’s really about the diversity of possible responses, on the level of the business model and not the details. It doesn’t matter if they are real or fictional.

How do you see the design profession changing?

When Gijs Bakker and I created Droog, we noticed new directions in product design, bundled them and gave them a name. Now, almost 20 years later, you can see that there are quite a number of new directions that designers are going into, less related to product design. Product designers are finding new ways to create a business. Processes are becoming important.

When you look at the profession from the specific angle of material scarcity, you get a very diverse landscape. Material Matters is about virtual design, it’s about reuse, it’s about inventing new materials, it’s about durability, it’s about renting things. It is a mixture of totally different initiatives that at first glance seem not to be related. Bringing this together as a Furniture Fair can have an impact.

Why did you bring them together as a Fair, and not something else?

Just like in 1993, we are bundling the sign of the time. In 1993 this was based on bringing together new visions on products. Now we are bundling business models, scenarios, processes. A fair means that every participant is independent. So many designers are starting their own businesses. I wanted to open the fair to them. This year the fair is imaginary, and is curated by us. We hope to host a real fair next time.

Do you think we need the policy change in order to get such a movement going?

The imagined policy change is the start of a thought experiment to speculate on design. Of course there are also negative aspects to taxing materials, like the disproportional impact on people who do not have much money. The point is not to convince the government that we should make the shift. It’s better to create a movement, and by-pass the need to make policy change.

The project started with imagining that policy changed. The government nudging people with new tax incentives. But in a way, the fair becomes a nudge for the design industry, minus the paternalism that would have come with the policy change.

Nowadays economists are taking into account the environment in their models, seeing biodiversity and water as economic assets. Material Matters wants to inspire designers to do the same—to build business models with environmental concerns at the core. It would be fantastic if this would generate a boom of new initiatives, building an industry of small creative companies that invent new businesses. And we never would reach the need to tax materials.

Join us.


“Sorry, but we don’t trust you architects”

The Tarwewijk case

In 2011 the renowned American critic Bruce Nussbaum posted a blog with the title “Is Humanitarian design the new imperialism?” This controversial statement came into my mind when we were confronted with cynical inhabitants of the Rotterdam neighbourhood Tarwewijk.

Tarwewijk has always been a problematic neighbourhood in the South of Rotterdam. It is one of the poorest and most densely populated districts of Rotterdam, inhabited by a high amount of immigrants who leave the area as soon as they get a chance, resulting in a 20% vacancy rate. There is also a high percentage of unemployment and illiteracy. It is one of those neighbourhoods that we would call “disadvantaged” and therefore, it is destined to attract a lot of well-intentioned temporary interventions by all kinds of parties including artists, designers and social workers. I think every city has such a pampered neighbourhood—an ideal target for social design.

A model

Our ambitions for Tarwewijk were triggered by Open House, a oneday event we did in New York’s prototypical suburb of Levittown in 2011 in collaboration with Diller Scofidio + Renfro. “Discover your inner service provider” was the motto as inhabitants collaborated with designers to establish businesses in their homes. The aim was to bring more vitality and interaction into the suburb, and also to improve its economic circumstances. A number of inhabitants opened their homes for a one-day business—including an unemployed teacher who opened a classroom and an avid gardener who opened a backyard farm. Architects Hayley Eber and Frank Gesualdi of EFGH created a model proposing ways of modifying existing regulations in order to enable such a bottom-up service economy to emerge in the suburbs.

Open House presented a model that we then wanted to test in a totally different kind of neighbourhood. We found Tarwewijk, a place where residents already were running their own businesses behind the facades, businesses like hairdressing, travel advise and radio broadcasting. Together with the inhabitants we wanted to make the existing network of hidden business activity visible and to celebrate Tarwewijk as a business district. At the same time we wanted to propose new strategies that would re-introduce work into daily life within the neighbourhood, loosening regulations and creating affordable workspaces. With a team of designers and our partners we have been working to make this happen.

One of those short-lived initiatives

However, when one of our collaborating design teams, TD, approached the inhabitants, they were confronted with stark cynicism. The residents considered our project as one of those short-lived intitiatives that they have encountered so many times before without any significant results. They accused the government that they were helping people to start a new business just because they want to get them off welfare support and to bring them into the tax system. They accused the architects that they steal their ideas: “You take our ideas, use them elsewhere and then you are gone!…Sorry, but we don’t trust you architects”. The residents of Tarwewijk seem to be fed up with all these patronizing attempts to help them. Instead of convincing the residents to continue with the “collaboration”, TD made a documentary, revealing their reactions instead.

At first I was shocked by these accusations but soon I began to realize that they were right. There is a gap between the design world and the people that designers want to reach. I started to distrust all this social work. I don’t doubt all the good intentions but who specializes in social design also needs victims—it’s their bread and butter. It’s time for a more strategic and long-term approach that has real impact.

Actual installations

We decided to cancel the one-day design event and to restrict ourselves to implementing the longer lasting concepts and strategies. We installed The Economat by Thomas Lommée, a converted photo booth which invites inhabitants to capture, describe and locate their personal “demands” or “supplies,” mapping and expanding the existing network of hidden homeworkers. The Green Machine by Doepel Strijkers, a production unit for compost that connects children to urban agriculture was installed in a centrally-located playground and connected to an existing family network.

Proposed strategies

Wouter Vanstiphout (Crimson) who was also participating in our project placed our project rightfully in the tradition of “incidental, exogenous and superficial attempts that an extremely short-lived, fashionable interest linked to a misleading optimistic tone”. The proposal he developed with Maxwan architects stood out because it is a strategy to stimulate long-lasting entrepreneurship in the neighbourhood. Tapping into the 20% vacancy rate in Tarwewijk, they allocated existing building blocks as a Special Economic Block, a safe area from municipal regulations, thematic zoning policies and trends in urban renewal and creative industries: “Freed from this, the blocks will attract the entrepreneurial energy, investments and jobs potentially already existing in the neighbourhood”. The Special Economic Block is worth investigating. It will attract entrepreneurial energy and it will create jobs. The rest is left for the inhabitants.

The question that is left behind is what is the role of designers in solving the socio-economic problems of these kind of neighbourhoods? Do those neighbourhoods need well-intentioned design stunts or are they better off with different municipal policies, loosening regulations, and more space and tools for self-organization. If we look at Dharavi, the pampering child of Mumbai, we see that the informal economy of this slum is blossoming (though of course there remain many pressing problems). And we see that the informal activity does not happen in isolation. Dharavi supplies luxurious hotels and restaurants in Mumbai. It is interesting how the formal and informal economy are co-dependent. Of course, circumstances are different in our part of the world, but giving space for more informal developments by the residents themselves should be recognized as a key way of moving forward. This is the role of design—to see how the informal activities that are happening already can be connected to broader strategies. Design should make the step from short-lived interventions to long-term strategies that cover all dimensions of the situation.


WIJkonomie Tarwewijk


image: Thomas Lommée installing De Economaat

It all started with Open House, a one-day event that we did in collaboration with Diller Scofidio + Renfro that took place in the prototypical suburb of Levittown, New York in 2011. Homes were opened up for business exchange, with the aim of reviving the suburbs through a bottom-up service economy that would introduce more contact and density into the neighbourhood. With this successful one-day event, we created a model that could revive neighbourhoods through self-created service exchange.

With the aim of testing the model in a completely different area, we teamed up with Jan Konings and Kosmopolis Rotterdam, who had been engaging with the informal work community in Tarwewijk, a multicultural community with considerable unemployment and illiteracy in the South of Rotterdam. Since Tarwewijk has a robust network of hidden business activity—from haircutting to car repair and radio broadcasting—we wanted to bring invisible business practice into public space and celebrate Tarwewijk as a business district.

Beyond the design event

Tarwewijk has come to symbolize the toughness of the socio-economic problems in the South of Rotterdam, and has suffered from being a testing ground for outsiders. However, it turned out that so many people have been trying to propose local change—often well-intentioned but short-lived—that many residents have become cynical to outsiders’ ideas. Therefore, rather than doing a one-day design event, we decided to implement projects in collaboration with residents and local organizations committed to continuity and to organize a design presentation and symposium at Netherlands Architecture Institute, where documentation of the installations will be shown and the Special Economic Block proposal by Crimson with Maxwan will be presented to decision makers.

The presentation will also show Masterplan by Jan Konings, a representation of how Tarwewijk might look in the near future, featuring concepts by TD Architects, Doepel Strijkers and Crimson with Maxwan. The Way We Are, an animation on the future of Tarwewijk’s identity by TD Architects will be screened. Documentation of the installation of De Economaat, a social machine that maps and visualizes micro-economic activities by Thomas Lommée with Netherlands Architecture Institute will be shown. Footage of the installation of Green Machine, a production unit for agricultural compost to be sold or exchanged by children by Doepel Strijkers Architects will be screened. Reaction of locals to our plans will be revealed.

The symposium, moderated by journalist Yvonne Zonderop, will feature Ole Bouman (NAI), Charles Renfro (Diller Scofidio + Renfro), Jan Konings, Robert Kloosterman (professor of Economic Geography and Planning, University of Amsterdam) and myself.

Wednesday, February 22, 2012
Start: 19:30h (doors opens at 19:00h)
Language: English
Location: Auditorium NAI (Museumpark 25, Rotterdam)
Admission: € 5 / € 3 for students / free for Friends of the NAI
Register.
More information coming soon.

WIJkonomie Tarwewijk is organized by Droog in collaboration with Jan Konings, Kosmopolis Rotterdam and Netherlands Architecture Institute, and is supported by DOEN Foundation.

Categories


Archives