As if youngsters on a deserted island, wannabe cooks, uncertain top models weren’t enough, BBC2’s TV programming schedule has been enriched by Design for Life, a talent show focused on designers. Design guru Philippe Starck – yes, the same one who only recently had declared that design was dead and it had left its place to the eco-sustainable - chose 12 contestants for the show. These contestants have competed against each armed, armed only with ingenious projects, amongst which we certainly remember a vertical coffin thought for space saving in cemeteries and noose shaped light bulbs. The winner for this season is Ilsa Parry, a 29-year-old designer from Liverpool and the prize is a 6 month internship with Starck. But Ilsa’s carrier started way before Design for Life: she has already taken part in shows, won prizes and she has even taught design.
Why have you decided to show yourself to the world by means of a reality show?
This was a great opportunity for me and it gave me a chance to see if my ideas could adapt to an high level and professional design. Before the show, I worked in my studio, I invented prototypes and in the meantime I taught in order to have the economic support I needed in order to realize my prototypes. I wanted the opportunity to meet someone like Starck and learn something from his experience. More than anything though I wanted to make my ideas and projects turn to reality.
What difference is there between Design for Life and the Big Brother?
In my opinion, this was an opportunity to show everyone my talent and to learn something more about the design industry. The fact the show was broadcast on TV was obviously positive for me because it let me express my opinions and make my voice heard. Comparing this show with the Big Brother is difficult because the contestants of Design for Life had a schedule, a personalized agenda for each day. Philippe Starck wanted to use the show to express his opinions and to show the world what he considers products of design. For us it meant that everything revolved around him and around our will to prove our talent. The message was pretty intellectual and centered on design and the goal was to raise the interest of those who are into design and not of those who are into the Big Brother. In order to raise the audience, the authors obviously had to make the show a little more similar to the Big Brother and they had to focus on entertainment so that our viewers wouldn’t lose interest and would continue to watch us every day.
Were you on camera 24/24h?
No, not in the same way as on the Big Brother. We didn’t have hanging cameras, but the producers stayed with us so they would sometimes interview suddenly.
Did you use this opportunity to show off your personality as well or did you use it to show off your work and design idea? Did your personality emerge at any time?
There weren’t many occasions for my personality to come out or for me to show my life, my friends to the audience. Nonetheless, I think my work and my way of thinking did emerge in the program. I wanted to exhibit my ideas and the program focused exactly on this concept. I’m glad that these ideas were valued during the show and that Design for Life was able to show the audience my work style.
Most of the English press has criticized Starck and the program heavily by stating that the French designer hadn’t chosen the best contestants and that his real goal was to discredit English design.
Parry laughs I don’t believe that at all.
Do you think the press says that because Starck is French?
Yes, although I don’t agree with it. I really don’t think that was Starck’s intention. I think he had a message to communicate to the public in relation to what he considers good design. He based the selection of the contestants on this concept. He evaluated the projects and the concepts presented to him by possible candidates without meeting them in person. In the beginning, we only spoke to the production staff and not directly with Starck because he is so busy. The candidates who asked to participate in the show had just graduated or were keen on entering the design industry.
Why did you present a project on a vertical coffin in order to be taken into consideration for the program? Is it because Starck seems to be obsessed with the idea of death or is because of an existing issue with lack of space in cemeteries in the UK?
I knew nothing of Starck’s ideas before the program. I have never really followed his work and before Design for Life I was totally unaware of what he thought or did. I went to Design for Life without knowing how he was and without having any kind of knowledge of his opinion on design or of his reputation.
So why did you choose this project?
The coffin projects has its origin in Starck’s request for examples of design with a strong concept behind it. This is the reason why he declared both to the press and to the potential contestants that also ideas with no possibility of concrete realization would be considered. I presented a new idea for coffins that is based on the idea of helping to save space in cemeteries.
The first assignment you were given was to buy environmentally friendly and sustainable products. What did you buy? It seems as though Starck did not appreciate your choices.
Starck was pleased with my choices. I bought two objects: a glass bowl (an example of good design) and a technological device thought for cutting and mixing salad mechanically (an example of bad design). I proved that I could use my own hands to chop and mix the salad in the bowl by using only one object. This way I obtained the same result I would have obtained by using the mechanical device, only I did it reducing the use of industrial processes and materials to the minimum. The glass bowl I chose can also be used for many other purposes.
Were you inspired by the Viking horn when you designed your Pippa and Spyke products? (see photo 1 here below)
Absolutely not. Just like with my coffin project, I was inspired by the earth. I think our earth isn’t being exploited to its full potential in everyday life and I think it could be used in a more interactive manner. Just think of pic-nics!
You realized two products that present an incredible generational gap: the lighting fixture Kaspa (photo 2) for kids and the walking stick Flo (photo 3) for older people. Why the difference in age-based targets? We understand that you were inspired by your part-time job as a nurse for Flo, but why the ghost lamp for kids?
I have never designed products for a specific market or target. What I have done is think of something that could bring benefits to a group of people. In my work, I am inspired by the cycles of life and I try to maximize the opportunities of usage of materials by studying their potential benefits. In relation to Flo, I thought it could bring a sort of extra-life and a further motivation to continue moving. Kaspa only lights up when it is dark and does not imply a waste of energy. This way we educate kids and our future towards energy and natural resource saving.
Is this sensitivity towards ecology yours or were you influenced by Starck’s new ideas?
No, it is all mine. Proof of this is the fact that I ideated Kaspa before Design for Life began.
Is it true that you declared that you do not agree completely with Starck’s ideas? In what aspects are you similar? And in what aspects are you different?
The common elements between us are the will to create something that can bring benefits to others and the idea to use as little materials and industrial processes as possible. It is also important for design products to be elegant and that it has a visual appeal because beauty and benefits are closely linked. The way in which we consider an object of design in of fundamental importance. All these design related elements are of vital importance because if consumers do not like an object of design, they will not use it; therefore they will not obtain any kind of benefit from it.
And the differences between you and Starck?
I think every project of mine has its own history. I have a more emotional approach to my work, whereas Starck is more functional and practical. He is more for functionality and I am more for functional emotionality.
Starck says that design is over and that the modern world needs to focus on ecology. Is he playing around with us?
Parry laughsI think good design should be sustainable in any case and I think it is very difficult to assert that it is dead.
So this assertion of Starck’s is only a marketing move?
I don’t think so. I think what Starck wanted to say is that this is the right time to start thinking about sustainability and about the materials we use. It is also the right time to start talking about these issues openly. The world of design needs to become more humble.
According to the vast majority of the British press, Nebil Avas’ ideas were more in line with those of Philippe Starck. Why did he choose you?
I didn’t know who he was and during the show I didn’t have much time to get to know him. I think Starck chose me because my projects responded to his requests. He saw my determination and and he saw my strong belief in what I was doing.
In what way did you surprise him? Did he acknowledge your talent?
In the beginning, my production process was pretty complex. I was then able to simplify it and I showed this to Starck because he had only seen a couple of my projects, without knowing anything in relation to the realization process that derived from my ideas.
Among Philippe Starck’s recent works, we saw his speakers for Zicmu. What do you consider eco-sustainable about these products?
When I first saw them, I thought they were a little excessive for their function. I honestly do not know what could be considered ecological or eco-sustainable in this kind of product. I think he created a product that is appealing to a specific target of consumers who can afford to spend more than others and that is commonly insensitive to the waste of materials. Starck’s reinvention of high quality speakers can avoid this kind of problem.
Starck has declared that he will never again create objects of design destined to rich people and that he will never again create objects in limited editions.
Yes, I am aware of the fact that he said that although I do not know why he did. In my opinion, Starck’s words contradict his actions.
What are the eco-sustainable elements in the product Flo that you invented and created during the show?
I wanted to design an object that could help people to walk and that could make the quality of their lives better. To me, eco-sustainable means giving benefits to whoever uses a certain product and it also means using as little material as possible. I have tried to give some personality to the product in order for people to use it to their maximum benefit.
Must your design always be environmentally responsible?
Yes, I always take this aspect into consideration both when my products are created with a specific environmental role and responsibility and when they are created by focusing on who will use them.
Have your received compensation or a salary during your internship?
No, I didn’t. I was only granted the right to stay in an apartment in Paris.
How was your internship experience?
First of all, I learned how to use new software programs and I was also to collaborate with Starck’s wonderful staff. It was a great opportunity for me to develop and create my projects without the pressure of my everyday work life and without being stressed by my financial situation.

We only found out that BBC2 had broadcast the show with a 12 month delay from asking Ilsa Parry about her internship experience since the British media (i.e. newspapers and magazines) did not cover this story. Ilsa Parry’s internship in Starck’s studio took place between January and July 2009.

1. PIPPA E SPYKE	2. FLO	3. KASPA

Milan, 29 January 2010
Giorgio Rossi
Translation by Chloé Del Nero
HOUSE, LIVING AND BUSINESS