idea_01 contact supported


APRIL 2011

In honor of Earth Day, we’re putting “Green”, and all its Greenwashing accomplices behind bars.
“Green” is guilty on the following counts:

1. Impersonating itself as discretionary- or a choice, instead of as a
responsibility of every architect, designer or builder
2. Cashing in on being trendy
3. Acting like it was just invented, particularly by big companies that have been ignoring it for decades and only contributing to the problem
4. Privileged status- you have to spend the green to be seen as green
5. Allowing LEED to lead the way down this misguided path
6. Disregarding good architecture and design – the notion that virtue makes for better design
7. Boring the hell out of us
It’s 2011, Green. It shouldn’t be about “going green”, we’re there, and we don’t need a Prius to drive us. What about sensible design? There needs
to be a natural codependency between design, context and sustainability – that leads projects to innovation. Designers and Architects should be integrating sensible thinking into all of their projects- not just picking at random to earn LEED points.
Let’s be clear- We’re not locking up Green because we don’t believe in sustainability, quite the opposite. We’re just sick of it whoring itself around town. We believe sensible design should be the norm – not an add-on accessory or radical trend. The incarceration of “Green” locks away all the bullshit capital-raising methods and brain washing that it implies.  
LEED seemed to start out with decent intentions. The very basic idea was to set some parameters and bring awareness to get the design industry in line. Anybody could study for the exam and increase their awareness and education. Now it’s an elite status, in lieu of responsible practice. No longer can a designer or architecture choose to take an exam to further their knowledge base- unless they have already participated on a LEED project.
Appropriate design has been around long before people were cashing
in on LEED.
Green hotels, Green McMansions… both are oxymorons. They take into consideration a behavior that isn’t controlled like reusing one’s towels, or materials that don’t have longevity in performance but are recycled; yet, they don’t look at context, size, amount of materials used, or how many tons of fuel is used to get people to there.
It doesn’t stop with architecture and design. It’s impossible to get through a day without “green” slapping you across the face. Just look at your inbox. Green Products, Green clothing, Green Technology… even Green news! Most of which are desperate marketing attempts or pathetic cries for attention. Today’s favorite: “Look good while hugging a tree- Sustainable Face Cream”, as posted by (who’s tagline is “green design will save the world”).  A decent site, but needs more discretion.
Consumers are so eager to gobble up green that the thinking behind such decisions are often blurred. This isn’t responsible behavior.
Buying “Green” has become a status statement but not necessarily a benefit to the environment.
Perhaps with Green now safely behind bars, the industry can forget about it’s professional associations cashing in on lucrative certifications and refocus on education and sensibility.

fuck green

going green



February 2011

KARIM RASHID is guilty on the following counts:
1. misunderstanding of design
2. false interpretation of design as a discipline
3. prioritizing self-representation over quality work
4. having bad taste / sensory malfunction / cultural-ageusia
5. bad fashion sense / needing a better stylist
6. being clueless (i.e., announcing the wrong award-winning design
at the Bombay Sapphire Design Competition in Milan where he was
head of the jury.)
7. misappropriation of materials and forms
8. prima donna attitude

True design is not simply a matter of subjectively making things prettier, or creating surfaces, or somehow turning a thermos into a clock. Good design is a complex challenge with social, economical, even political dimensions, and aims to manifest unspoken societal desires. Unfortunately, there are not even rudimentary signs that Rashid considers this in his products and concepts. Self-decoration and flamboyant self-representation disguise neither his ignorance nor his unprofessional attitude.

Indeed some things are a matter of taste, but there some great thinkers who wrote about cultural patterns in choice and preference. Among them; Adorno, Kant, Horkheimer, Bourdieu, Plato, Hume. We feel certain that Rashid isn’t familiar with even the names we’ve just listed, let alone the concepts these men have written about social context. If you claim to be a visionary, shouldn’t you at least have context?

Properly designed items need not be completely groundbreaking, but if this is your claim, then you are responsible for proper form, material, and attitude. This is what makes design fascinating. And fascination lacks by Karim. In his products, his performances (uh yeah, he's a djay too), and his „fashion“. It does seem petty we know, to make a crack about Rashid’s wardrobe, but If clothes make the man, it seems more likely that we would buy a used car from this clown, than a design object of his own making.
Karim Rashid & his works