What does it mean to be comfortable, and what does it mean to be uncomfortable?
In one of the sessions with my psychologist, we discussed what it means to be comfortable and what it means to be uncomfortable. After all, if I accept comfort for myself, it can be painful for someone nearby, and vice versa. What is true and correct in this case? Should there be a balance, or should I put myself and only my needs first? I suggest considering this topic, translating it and materialising it in furniture and everyday objects, which by default are called and created to be comfortable. Here I create deliberately non-functional or uncomfortable objects, if they are painful for us, but perhaps they are comfortable for themselves. I suggest the viewer think about this topic.
In this project, I explore the nuanced relationship between individuals and the objects around them, particularly furniture—an entity we traditionally expect to serve us without question.
However, like our relationships with other people, interactions with furniture can represent conflict, compromise, and even disagreement. This series challenges the conventional expectation that furniture should prioritise human comfort and functionality. Here, each piece possesses its own “character,” one that may not immediately yield to our needs, inviting us to reconsider our understanding of comfort itself.
The pieces in this exhibition intentionally disrupt notions of ease and usability. In doing so, these works act as metaphors for human interactions, where individuality and personal boundaries often intersect with — and sometimes conflict with — the expectations of others. Just as people assert their identities and values, the furniture here embodies a unique «self» that resists being fully moulded to serve our expectations.
Through this work, I seek to question the broader societal emphasis on utility and control, inviting viewers to explore empathy, acceptance, and the beauty found in imperfection. Each interaction becomes a dialogue, challenging the viewer to reflect on the nature of comfort, the boundaries we set, and the assumptions we place upon others — and ourselves.
More broadly, this work may challenge society’s focus on utilitarianism and control. By inviting us to reconsider our relationships with the objects around us, I ask you to consider the expectations we place on others — and perhaps ourselves. This approach can evoke feelings ranging from frustration to introspection, turning discomfort into a tool for self-awareness and connection with the object.
WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO BE UNCOMFORTABLE?
What does it mean to be comfortable, and what does it mean to be uncomfortable?
In one of the sessions with my psychologist, we discussed what it means to be comfortable and what it means to be uncomfortable. After all, if I accept comfort for myself, it can be painful for someone nearby, and vice versa. What is true and correct in this case? Should there be a balance, or should I put myself and only my needs first? I suggest considering this topic, translating it and materialising it in furniture and everyday objects, which by default are called and created to be comfortable. Here I create deliberately non-functional or uncomfortable objects, if they are painful for us, but perhaps they are comfortable for themselves. I suggest the viewer think about this topic.
In this project, I explore the nuanced relationship between individuals and the objects around them, particularly furniture—an entity we traditionally expect to serve us without question.
However, like our relationships with other people, interactions with furniture can represent conflict, compromise, and even disagreement. This series challenges the conventional expectation that furniture should prioritise human comfort and functionality. Here, each piece possesses its own “character,” one that may not immediately yield to our needs, inviting us to reconsider our understanding of comfort itself.
The pieces in this exhibition intentionally disrupt notions of ease and usability. In doing so, these works act as metaphors for human interactions, where individuality and personal boundaries often intersect with — and sometimes conflict with — the expectations of others. Just as people assert their identities and values, the furniture here embodies a unique «self» that resists being fully moulded to serve our expectations.
Through this work, I seek to question the broader societal emphasis on utility and control, inviting viewers to explore empathy, acceptance, and the beauty found in imperfection. Each interaction becomes a dialogue, challenging the viewer to reflect on the nature of comfort, the boundaries we set, and the assumptions we place upon others — and ourselves.
More broadly, this work may challenge society’s focus on utilitarianism and control. By inviting us to reconsider our relationships with the objects around us, I ask you to consider the expectations we place on others — and perhaps ourselves. This approach can evoke feelings ranging from frustration to introspection, turning discomfort into a tool for self-awareness and connection with the object.