Design vs Nature

Two of the most opposite features, yet at the same time their ambiguous tangle is intriguing. Nature forces us to build houses to protect ourselves from its roughness. Yet we like to have it surround us in the form of a garden, for example. However design, as a verb, balances itself to cope with nature and its mood. In the utmost extreme situation one could destroy the other. Therefore design is constantly challenged by nature.

As for my work, I see nature as a playground, a great source of structures, chaos, shapes..., which can be translated into a language of forms expressing the cultural and emotional values of life. It serves as a point of reference when applying one's own imagination. To me, design is as a language, as an ongoing process in which I react on what I see around me.

Ecology for that matter sounds too futuristic. I don't see ecology as an argument needed to practice my profession, nor as a brand in order to produce. But for now I can only hold myself responsible for my choices when dealing with this issue. I see my work as an attempt to contribute into the process of translating unrecognized viewpoints.

Together with Anthony Kleinepier, we have produced various settings. The setting creates a possibility to experience the works in a context. Staged, but still a context it could be received as one living scenery. Although the items are defined as functional products with their own references. When they are installed in a setting, they are not meant to be as displayed products offered to the consumer. But the setting as one concept, of which the emphasis is on the willingness to rethink our views in relation to what surrounds us and refresh ourselves by playing with rules.