Achieving Cradle-to-Cradle system

There are two ways to achieve a cradle-to-cradle product life cycle system: reusing recycled material from existing objects or repurposing those existing objects for other functions. I am focusing on the latter of these methods because I want to challenge user's perceptions of first-use and second-use functional objects.

I believe if I am able to alter an object in such a way that it is unrecognisable to the user, then none of the previous associations of that object are seen either and the object is not tarnished with the potentially negative connotation of "trash".

So, which object, which process, and which function should I choose?

Materials used in a different way

Tejo Remy & René Veenhuizen have produced a chair that appears to be inflatable, but is actually cast from concrete. The Dutch designers have disguised a material associated with construction by forming it to look like something some individuals would have in their home, or are at least familiar with (inflatable furniture).


The objects are both visually appealing and a good example of how a designer can add value to a material by applying it to another situation.

Where's my chair?

Another piece of work by Max Lamb, the Pewter Stool is a great example of Lamb's hands-on approach towards design. Lamb used traditional sand casting methods to cast the pewter in the shape of the stool on a beach in Cornwall where he used to play as a child.


Lamb first melted several pewter ingots on a portable gas stove. After etching the design into the damp sand and then using a pole to to make a hole for the legs, he poured the molten pewter into the mould.


After leaving the pewter to cool and harden, the stool is excavated and cleaned off in the sea. Apart from sourcing the pewter before hand and bringing it to the beach, Lamb has successfully created a stool using the advantages of the conditions at the beach. He has not gone to the workshop after and refined the piece, instead left its aesthetic rough and something that look like it has been formed at the beach.

Dinner is served... "sorry, what's that about the cutlery?"

"Found", by Spanish designer Oscar Diaz is great example of an individual achieving a desirable handmade object by applying a manufacturing process to an existing object. Diaz first selected the plastic bottles that would enable him to make the most functional knife, fork and spoon (using the designed curve of the bottle to make the 'cup' of the spoon), cut his required shapes and then coated these in copper and then in tin.


The stages of the plating process. This manufacturing process would probably be out of reach for most individuals. The skills could be learnt, from school technical studies or workshops, but some of the equipment would be difficult to come by for a normal individual. Is there an opportunity to hand in your used plastic bottles and get a set of cutlery back? (for a price of course).


Diaz has shown the result of a detailed and precise process of experimenting with materials and processes. It is the plating process, in this example, that changes not only the users perception of the plastic bottle, but also its function. I can see that in order to change how individuals view any item, disposable or not, everyday or not, I must apply a process to it, changing its shape, function, appearance, etc.



Anyway, all that talk has made me hungry... Waiter?!

Time for a think(er)...

The "Thinker Table" by Tom Price is an example of a design that has all the potential to promote a Green approach, but the designer is not that way inclined. Price could have used scrap material, PVC offcuts, in this design but has chosen not to and also chosen not to mention the Green potential in the description on his website.

Why? I believe that Price might have felt the quality of the final outcome should be the highest possible (commissioned by Chinese gallery, Chapter 7) therefore purchasing and working with new material - the gallery may have even stated that they wanted the quality of new material rather than the worn out look of waste PVC.

Some may acuse Price and other designers of sheltering under the wings of "Green design" by the way some of their work is presented or construed by the public - The Campana Brothers work uses what looks like could be existing, waste material, however it has been reported that for some of their designs, new material was bought and worked with.

But we should not get caught up in a "Green" or "Not Green" debate, the important part is that the user sees the potential for the Green design - the scrap PVC instead of new material. This will further expand both their appreciation and belief in the far reaching grasp of Green design.

Spooning...

So many spoons! these are the work of british designer Max Lamb. This is but one example of Lamb's work that shows his passion and desire for the handmade item, and also the quest to find a range of manufacturing processes to achieve it (by himself).

This shows that any individual has the potential to make their own everyday items, however this does not take into question said individual's craftsmanship skills or even their desire to achieve something similar...

But, the potential is there, leave the rest to me! With a little bit of help and instruction, we could all be making our own spoons for breakfast, or lunch!

The previous post, showcasing the jar tops and the screw-on watering spout, are both examples leaning towards the commercial design end of reuse.

A book I have been reading recently is further at the other end of the scale. "Home-Made: Contemporary Russian Folk Artifacts" by Vladimir Arkhipov is a book showcasing everyday objects made by Russian individuals during the perestroika period in the late 1980's.
The items range from flickknives and screwdrivers made in prison, shuttlecocks made from plastic bottles, a television aerial made from old forks and a doormat made from a merry night's worth of beer bottle tops.


All the individuals in the book show a great amount of ingenuity towards crafting solutions to everyday problems, however the individuals comment on their objects so matter-of-factly that we sense they do not think their creations are special in anyway. Of course they think they are functional, and many of them are very proud of both the object in question and of their own skills to craft these items, but special? No. Useful? Yes.

Some of the objects in the book are similar to ones that I have seen my father and grandfather make, I have also fashioned some similar objects, however much less that previous generations. My father and grandfather, and the individuals in the book simply state that there was no money to buy the things that they made instead.


Now that many everyday objects can be bought very cheaply and are distributed across the country, are we as a society losing some of the skills required to make and fix our objects? Some skills are passed down from parent to child, but if objects are so accessible, so cheap and so easy to buy, why would I spend time making a version which probably doesnt function aswell as the bought one?

Pride - I like making my own things, especially if it is something that I could buy in a supermarket. I feel a great satisfaction that I built 'this', 'this' is here because I took the time and effort to build it, rather than take the easy option and purchase it.

Individuality - A homemade object will always look less 'perfect' and finished than a commercial version, but because I have made it myself, and a stronger emotional bond was formed during that process, I appreciate the incomplete aesthetic. Also, no one else has a brush like 'this'.

just one more function, please

The jar tops project by Jorre van Ast is a great example of how design can put just one more (positive) obstacle between the consumer and the waste cycle. The application of the different jar tops with ranging functions creates several functional consumer objects from existing ones that would have been put in the bin, or recycled (individuals may keep some jars for storage, but the good intention can end up with you overun by jars!).

Do other objects have the potential for second-life purposes? If so, what type of objects? High tech or low tech? Are these objects found in the street or are they used by the individual?

Take glass jars for example, my grandparents generation would keep jars because of their storage functions. However, this was in a society and culture that had to reuse and repair because there simply wasnt the money to buy everything new. Times have changed.

But projects and products like jar tops act as a statement about the difference between the reusing habits of my generation and those previous, and are also very useful!

Plastic bottles are viewed in a similar way as glass jars today - the individual is buying the contents of the container (bottle or jar) rather than the container aswell as the contents. Therefore, when the contents have been emptied, the individual sees the container as simply a by-product of the soft drink or sauce, making it much easier to either litter, or bin or recycle the object.

The latter is a positive but even better and more energy efficient that recycling is to gain another function from the object, and then recycle it.

Jar tops and also the screw-on watering spout by Nicolas Le Moigne are examples of this.