Catastrophe Chic: A Commentary

Abstract

Today’s designers are grappling with a daunting task: how to create designs to help people combat a range of man-made and natural catastrophes including bioterrorism, nuclear holocaust, hurricanes, earthquakes, floods, tsunamis, fires, and more. For many of these designers, their work has an added dimension: not only are they creating highly functional designs for dire situations, but also designs that are visually appealing and attractive—that have elegance of form as well as ease of use. These designs raise a provocative question: what is the role of aesthetics in designing for disasters? At what point does concern for visual appeal run the risk of trumping or trivializing very real safety concerns? The issue was highlighted at the Museum of Modern Art’s seminal exhibit “SAFE: Design Takes on Risk” held in New York in 2005. Writing about the exhibit, its curator Paola Antonelli noted that the intention was to include objects not only because of their functionality and economy of materials, but also because they were “beautiful.” Alluding to some of the exhibit’s designs for protecting personal property, she wrote: “designers suggest we turn objects that we need because of our anxiety into something beautiful, sublime, uplifting, delightful.” Well-designed objects for safety, she argued, catch our eye: “Whether they are injection-molded with advanced materials or assembled with found parts and powered by a hand crank, they are arresting.” 1 The curator’s language was startling. Gas masks, smoke hoods, and body armor that are “sublime” and “delightful”? The idea of balancing form and function is usually axiomatic in any discussion of design, but exhibits such as SAFE—with its range of historical examples—raised the central, though not often discussed, question: how to factor in formal considerations when looking at designs for protection and security.2 Some designs for safety are indeed arresting, such as Stephen Armellino’s molded, bullet-resistant mask (1983) with its totemic look and the Stop Thief! Ply Chairs (prototype 2000) designed to keep women’s handbags safe with their useful seat cutouts for holding handbag straps are witty riffs on Thonet and Arne Jacobsen Series 7 chair designs (Figure 1). 1 Paola Antonelli, “Grace Under Pressure,” catalogue essay in SAFE: Design Takes on Risk (New York: The Museum of Modern Art, 2005), 96, 9. 2 The discussion of the aesthetics of safety has been underway for several years. Antonelli in MOMA’s “SAFE” exhibit catalogue cites Eric Howler’s “Anxious Architecture: The Aesthetics of Surveillance” in Archis 2:3 (2002): 9–23, which talks about “the awesome idea of ‘Paranoid Chic’ style.” (Antonelli, “Grace Under Pressure,” 15).