Relational Objects – Jonathan Muecke


Relational Objects

The three proposed objects test the limits of typology, material, and form.  The aim of these objects is to defy a ‘standard object measurement’ in order to form new ‘relational objects.’

The objects are designed to draw relationships.  This ‘relational’ sense in the object is produced from connections to other objects / other spaces / and other functions through considered shifts of typical typologies / material ideas / and shapes.

1.  ARC



6 Responses to “Relational Objects – Jonathan Muecke”

  1. davidatstudiomake Says:

    I wonder about the cloud…as rendered it feels thick, dense, defined. But I relate ‘cloud’ to a soft, ethereal, enveloping entity…is this object about “on” or “in”?

    I wonder how a slight shift in material/fabrication would affect the form, density, and subsequent relationship…I once had cloud in my hand when a spool of thin gauge stainless steel spring wire unexpectedly exploded. The cardboard core became a blurred nucleus at the center…much like the idealized version of the Diller+Scofidio Blur Building.


  2. Alessi Says:

    Could you please explain us better the function of the 3 different icons? How these 3 pieces would be used: make few examples to understand how the concept could be improved….


  3. jonmuecke Says:

    Alberto, Gloria

    The three icons function is to assist the other functional objects around them – for example other Alessi table top objects whose use is well defined and well understood.

    In the case of the three ‘relational objects’ their functionality is subdued and in check with all the other aspects of objects – material, form etc…

    This ‘equal object formation’ is new and very able.

    For instance :

    The ARC defines environments of objects. It draws boundaries – it is also very light and very thin.

    It would be best made from a thin stainless steel strip bent repeatedly to form a partial shape. It is made of one piece of material.

    In this case you could put objects in it, around it – etc.

    The CONE reflects accurately the environment of objects around it but has properties of its own – it is hollow – it is very light – it is a icon shape.

    It would be best made from a thin stainless steel sheet progressively stamped into its shape. It is made from one piece of material.

    In this case you would associate objects to it – etc.

    The CLOUD relates our objects to something that is undefined – that is semi-solid and
    re-shapable. it is also made of one continuous spun stainless steel fiber. It is very light.

    In this case you could put objects on it, in it, through it – etc.

    Ultimately, these ‘relational objects’ assist other objects. They do not replace them because they do not compete for the same functionality. They are meant specifically to increase our understanding of the objects we already own.

    These actions that the ‘relational objects’ incite are fundamental and common to everyone.

  4. sklinker Says:

    If you are saying that these activate the meaning or use of other objects, then you should show us some images of them doing just that. You are telling us that their relevance is contextual without showing any context. Make these walk the talk for us.

  5. katiemacd Says:

    I am attracted to the openness of these objects–it would be nice though to see some of the ways that this openness could be employed.

  6. Alessi Says:

    Jonthan, your work is very interesting, but it is necessary to see some visual examples to be more interactive…


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: