Landers Typography II Final Spreads by landersc2

The Designers of Classic Herman Miller

Edited by Donald Albrecht

The Designers of Classic Herman Miller Edited by Donald Albrecht The great postwar modern furniture designs are classics, because they are still great Herman Miller, the company that led the office revolution, is a name synonymous with the best modern residential as well as contract furniture. Classics by super-designers— Charles and Ray Eames, George Nelson, and Isamu Noguchi—can still be purchased from the Herman Miller for the Home collection. Their designs, plus the work of more than a dozen other important Herman Miller de signers, are described in detail and shown in color and black & white photographs, with original drawings by Nelson and the famous Frykholm picnic posters, all from the Herman Miller archives. This book is essential for collectors, dealers, curators, designers, and other devotees of modernism.

243 illustrations, including 134 plates in color

The Designers of Classic Herman Miller

The Designers of Classic Herman Miller Edited by Donald Albrecht

MIT Press

First printing, 2020 First MIT Press edition, ©2020 Massachusetts Institute of Technology All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form by any electronic or mechanical means (including photocopying, recording, or information storage and retrieval) without permission in writing from the publisher. Design by Carly Landers. Set in Helvetica Neue and ITC New Baskerville. Printed and bound in the United States of America. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data. Albrecht, Donald. The Designers of Herman Miller/Donald Albrecht. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-7643-1119-3 1. Miller, Herman. 2. Furniture-United States. 3. Designers-United States. I. Title. NK1412.E18K57 2020 745.4’4922— dc20

94-24920

CIP

Table of Contents

Acknowledgments 5 Introduction

Part One: Designers Of Mid-Century Classics 13 Chapter 1: Charles and Ray Eames

Chapter 2: George Nelson

Chapter 3: Isamu Noguchi

121

Part Two: Designers Of Other Herman Miller Classicsâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;Past, Present, And Future 125 Chapter 4: Gilbert Rohde Chapter 5: Alexander Girard

127

Chapter 6: Robert Propst

143

Chapter 7: Jack Kelley

149

Chapter 8: Don Chadwick

155

Chapter 9: Bill Stumpf

161

Chapter 10: Tom Newhouse Chapter 11: Geoff Hollington

165

Chapter 12: Bruce Burdick Chapter 13: Stephen Frykholm

173

Chapter 14: Other Designers: Paul Laszio Fritz Haller Poul Kjaerholm Verner Panton Jorgen Rasmussen Peter Protzmann Ray Wilkes Tom Edwards

191

Conclusion

203

133

167

179

Bibliography 208 Index 211

Grouping of wire chairs in abstract pattern.

Photo 1951 by Charles Eames

Charles and Ray Eames Pat Kirkham

1. Charles Eames/Virginia Stith, 1977. 2. Frank Lloyd Wright, An Autobiography (London, 1977), p. 362. 3. Paul Schrader, “Poetry of ideas,” Film Quarterly, spring 1970, p. 10. See also Blueprints for Modern Living, p. 52. 4. Walter McQuade, “Charles Eames isn’t resting on his chair,” Fortune, February 1975, p. 98.

Much of the Eameses’ work stands in the best tradition of the design reform movement (which argued for making high-quality everyday objects available at reasonable prices), and also in the best tradition of modernism (which, from the 1920s on, offered a vision of harnessing new technologies, industrial production, and relevant design to the service of humankind). Charles and Ray Eames belonged to a generation of designers who, before, during, and immediately after World War II, were determined to make the world a better place in which to live but were not wedded to a narrow or solely stylistic definition of modernism. Without ever losing sight of their serious objectives, the Eameses brought to their products a lightness of spirit that, to a degree, disguised their commitment and dedication. Their furniture, their films, and their exhibitions delighted the eye, the mind, and the spirit; they also worked well. The Eameses’ work was often innovative, although they always insisted that designers should innovate only as a last resort.1 They reveled in the particular constraints of specific briefs and in the rationalistic search for the best possible solution to the problem at hand, yet they produced work that has been described as poetic. If, as Frank Lloyd Wright said, the poetry of architecture is that which touches the heart,2 then it is not difficult to understand why Paul Schrader and others have referred to the work of the Eameses in that way.3 It was not simply their liberal use of hearts and flowers, their direct appeal to what they perceived as universal truths and the inner humanity of people the world over, or even the power of their ideas and the exquisiteness and affectiveness of their compositions and imagery that made many of their products so memorable; as in a symphony, the whole was much more than the sum of the parts. In their passion to convey their enthusiasm to others, the Eameses “shaped not only things but the way people think about things.”4 Their films, exhibitions, and multi-screen presentations show them to have been at the forefront of new thinking about the most effective and pleasurable ways of communicating knowledge to large numbers of people. Their exhibitions and multiple-image shows, in particular, reached large and largely appreciative audiences. Their design work was respected by the

cognoscenti and, at the same time, popular in the sense of being seen, used, enjoyed, and admired by many. In this they achieved the modernist designer’s dream of enriching the lives of ordinary people with quality objects produced by means of the most up-to-date technology. The multifarious influences on the Eameses’ work, including ideas drawn from the Arts and Crafts movement, from Frank Lloyd Wright, from European modernism, from Japanese architecture and design, from “primitivism,” from contemporary fine art, from the “Romantic” interior, from Californian modernism, and from a belief in the pleasures of work, have been traced. No matter what the sources, the end result was invariably distinctive and informed by a concern with structure; for the Eameses, designing a chair, an exhibition, a film, or the front page of a newspaper was as much about structure as was designing a building. Despite this, there was not a single aesthetic formula that related to

Display showing varieties of storage units produced 1950-1955 Photo 1952 by Charles Eames Office

Preliminary drawing for Eames ganging stacking shell chair showing measurements and details. 1955

Variations of molded plywood chairs and tables. Photo 1946 by Charles Eames

5. Esther McCoy, “Charles and Ray Eames,” Design Quarterly 98/99 (1974-75), p. 29. There is also a direct link between the design process of looking at a problem from the scale above and the scale below (a process Charles Eames learned from Eliel Saarinen) and the film Powers of Ten.

every area of their work; the architecture, for instance, favored the geometric forms of International Style modernism, whereas a great deal of the furniture was more plastic in form. Their buildings and many of their furniture pieces were minimalist, yet their films, multi-screen presentations, exhibitions, toys, and decorative arrangements of objects drew on addition, juxtaposition, fragmentation, cross-cultural and extra-cultural reference, repetition, and excess. However, as Esther McCoy has pointed out, the interaction between the minimalist frames of the Eameses’ build ings and their “varied and rich” contents was similar to that between the structure and the content of their films and exhibitions.5 Eames products were part of a shift in postwar American taste to ward favoring organic over geometric forms, and they found success at a time when modernist design was broadening from a movement with aspirations toward the monolithic to a pluralism in which alternative aesthetics coexisted more or less happily. The Eameses eschewed exclusive insistence on a machine aesthetic, which they used only when and where it suited them. The Cranbrook experience was crucial to their joint work; it validated the eclecticism inherent in Charles’s earlier designs while extending his knowledge and understanding of International Style architecture and design, and it tempered Ray’s more purist modernism. In Eero Saarinen and in Ray, Charles Eames found empathetic and immensely talented collaborators. The furniture he designed with Saarinen certainly proved seminal to the later work of the Eames Office, but it was with Ray that Charles produced some of the most visually interesting and technologically adventurous furniture of the mid twentieth century. For every designer who was influenced by the Eameses in terms of style, there were others who drew strength from their commitments to design as a problem-solving exercise, to quality at every level, and to engagement with a wide range of activities, issues, and commercial contexts. They became well known as designers and communicators in the United States, in Western Europe, in Japan, and in India. After World War II Japan paid great attention to American design, and from the early 1950s on the Eameses’ work was publicized there by Torao (“Tiger”) Saito of

Original Eames molded plywood chair. photo 1946 6. Ray Eames and Elaine Sewell Jones, interviews with Pat Kirkham, 1983 and 1991 respectively 7. Eames Report, 1958. 8. Charles last visited India in January 1978, shortly before his death, and spoke to staff and students at the NID. Ray last visited the NID in December 1987, when she presented the first Charles Eames Award. 9. Reyner Banham, “Klarheit, Ehrlichkeit, Einfachkeit . . . and wit too!” in Blueprints, pp. 184-187. 10. See Holland in Vorm, ed. G. Staal and H. Wolters (Haarlem, 1987), which illustrates furniture very derivative of that of the Eameses by W. Rietveld, U. Gispen, F. Kramer, and C. Braakman. See also Gingerich, “Conversation with Charles Eames;’p. 329; Wilk, “Eames Furniture: Antecedents and Progeny,” and Guy Julier, “Radical modernism Composite of images of wire chairs and sofa compact prototype. Photo 1960 by Charles Eames

in contemporary Spanish design” in Modernism in Design, ed. P. Greenhalgh (London, 1990), p. 222. 11. Gingerich, “Conversation with Charles Eames,” p. 328. 12. Banham, “Klarheit,” pp. 184-187. 13. For example, the Hopkins House, in London (Michael and Patti Hopkins, 1975) and the Sainsbury Centre, in Norwich (Norman and Wendy Foster, 1974-1978). 14. See Bernard I. Cohen, “Introduction to the Office of Charles and Ray Eames,” in A Computer Perspective (Cambridge, Mass., 1990), p. 5.

Japan Today.6 In India they became near-celebrities after the release of the Eames Report, which considered the question of design in modern India in relation to small industries and the “rapid deterioration in the design and quality of consumer goods.”7 Insofar as this report led to the establishment of the National Institute of Design, the Eameses had a direct impact on design education in India.8 Their indirect influence was felt in many other countries through design teachers who took them and their methods as models. The furniture was particularly influential. Beginning in 1950, the plywood and plastic pieces received considerable publicity in leading Western European design magazines, such as Domus and Bauen and Wohnen, and department stores. 9 It inspired many designers, particularly in Italy, West Germany, France, Britain, the Netherlands, and Scandinavia. 10 Eames furniture was manufactured and distributed by the Herman Miller Furniture Company, or by firms under license to it, all over the world. The management of Herman Miller was horrified at the first imitations of the molded plastic shell furniture but soon realized that this did not stop the upward sweep of the sales curve of the originals. More than 5 million of the chairs were sold in the 25 years after they were first produced.11 All over the world people experienced these chairs and other pieces of Eames furniture in offices, schools, colleges, and homes. The Eames House (their only widely known architectural work) was celebrated in Europe as proving that the purist, rationalist aesthetic of the International Style could produce habitable buildings.12 The influence of the Eames House on modernist and “high-tech” architects (particularly Norman and Wendy Foster and Richard and Su Rogers) is widely acknowledged, not least by those architects themselves. They, Michael and Patti Hopkins, and others have paid homage to the work of the Eameses, not only in the concepts and structures of their buildings but also in their use of Eames furniture.13 Their exhibitions, films, and multi-media presentations, particularly those prepared for World’s Fairs, were seen by great numbers of people. Several generations of Americans were introduced to scientific and mathematical concepts through them—particularly the exhibitions. Charles’s “deep understanding of the processes of science and technology” greatly impressed some of the top experts in those fields.14 This and the role he and Ray played in demystifying and popularizing the computer deserve greater recognition than they have so far been given. The exhibitions that were most criticized in their time for being overloaded with text, objects, and ideas suggest that, had they been working in the 1990s, the Eameses would have been fascinated with interactive media and “hyperreality.” It seems more than likely, for example, that they would have been involved in developing the communications and educational potential of interactive video, which allows for the differential exploration of images and information.

Molded plywood furniture grouping. Photo 1946 by Charles Eames

Pedestal tables for Herman Miller. 1953

George Nelson Michael Webb

1. George Nelson, conversation with D. J. DePree (Zeeland, Mich.: Herman Miller Archives, 1982).

George Nelson’s long, productive life (1908–86) encompassed the birth, heyday, and decline of American Modernism. He made a major contribution to that movement as a writer, advocate, social critic, impresario, and architect. He was “an original thinker,” observes design critic Ralph, “with a gift for communicating Ideas and finding good people. His office had a consistency of thoughtfulness, even when it was whimsical or humorous,” Nelson’s associate, designer Bruce Burdick, agrees: “George was a unique person who will be remembered for his thoughts and writings about design. His words were more important than the projects.” As design director for Herman Miller from 1945 through the mid1960s and later as an outspoken consultant. Nelson found what he called “a glorified cabinet shop” and helped make it an industry leader, a powerhouse of modern residential and contract design. He was passionately involved with this family firm over four decades, sharing the spotlight there with Charles and Ray Eames, Alexander Girard, and, briefly, Isamu Noguchi. He brought these designers to them because he wanted nothing but the best and, as he explained, “I can’t have all the ideas.” “It scared the daylights out of me to pull Charlie into that act because I knew that, if I lived forever, I never could turn out stuff like those chairs he did,” Nelson confessed. I realized it was absurd for me to be director of design because no one was going to direct Charlie.”1 Nelson and Charles Eames were almost exact contemporaries and were often as close as siblings, sharing a passion for excellence and a loathing for compromise and expediency. Communicating ideas was another bond, and they collaborated seamlessly (with the enthusiastic participation of Alexander Girard) on a multimedia educational exper iment. First presented at the University of Georgia in 1953 and reprised at UCLA the following year, “A Rough Sketch of a Sample Lesson for a Hypothetical Course” was a one-hour sensory extravaganza that has become the stuff of legend. Students were electrified: one exclaimed to Nelson, “All teaching should be like this.” Although Nelson consistently supported the Eameses, he sometimes resented the fact that they won more respect than he. It’s easy to see

78 Display of furniture and decorations.

Display of shelves.

why this happened. The Eames Office designed chairs and tables that resolved basic issues and never went out of style. They solved problems on an abstract level and took as long as they needed to get things right. The Nelson office was under pressure to respond to immediate needs, and their problem solving often focused on instruments of daily life that have changed over the years, such as typewriters, record changers, and Dictaphones. These are now historic artifacts, and the desks and cabinets designed for them are material for a time capsule. Every design aficionado is familiar with the Nelson classics: the platform bench, Marshmallow love seat. Coconut chair. Sling sofa, ball clock, and bubble lamps. However, Nelson was personally responsible for only the first of these and an early prototype of the last. As head of his own design office he handpicked brilliant talents and gave them the freedom to develop his ideas in their own way and to independently on

Display of shelves and drawers by George Nelson.

2. Michael Darling, “Ambient Modernism: The Domestic Furniture Designs of the George Nelson Office, 194463” (unpublished thesis. University of California Santa Barbara, 1997). 3. Nelson, interview with Mildred Friedman (Zeeland, Mich.: Herman Miller Archives, 1974).

the design of furniture, graphics, clocks, lamps, exhibitions, interiors, an experimental house, and much else. That freed him to meet with clients, deliver lectures, organize a new approach to art education, conceptualize an exhibition, plan another Aspen design conference, or do what he loved best—write. Irving Harper, a former associate of Gilbert Rohde and Raymond Loewy, who joined the office in 1947 and was Nelson’s principal associate for seventeen years, told architecture curator Michael Darling: “George was heavily involved with the first group of furniture, but after that his involvement was more minimal. He used to dream aloud about designs, and his ideas were mostly verbal. George was a great design head, but to call him a great designer is inaccurate and unfair to the other designers in the office. I would call him a Diaghilev of design.”2 Nelson was happy to admit the debt he owed his colleagues, though the practice of the time was to credit the head of the firm for everything that emerged from the office. He was one of a handful of American designers—Raymond Loewy, Charles and Ray Eames, Henry Dreyfuss were others—whose names were celebrated and highly scalable. In his later years, Nelson seems to have lost interest in product design, thought continued to subsidize his speculative ventures. “If I had my druthers, [writing] would be the number one activity and the other stuff would be number two.” He told design curator Mildred Friedman.3 “I find I’m getting more and more interested in why things are and what the meaning of this and that is, and much less intrigued by the quality of an object, although I like looking at them.” He joked that his parents had always wanted him to be a writer, and in the final analysis, they won. Everything Nelson did seemed to happen by chance. Born in Hartford, Connecticut, to arts-loving parents of Russian Jewish ancestry, he went to Vale with little idea of what he would do with his life, chanced on an exhibition of Beaux Arts sketches, and decided on impulse to study architecture. He taught himself to draw, graduated, and began wwhat he expected would be a teaching career. Laid off at the beginning of the Depression, he went flat out to win the Paris Prize (a prize offering

fellowships and residencies), and, though he failed, the momentum brought him the Rome Prize and a two-year scholarship to study at the American Academy there. While in Europe he met and interviewed several leading modern architects, starting with Le Corbusier, and on his return to America, Nelson sold his essays to Pencil Points magazine, supplying a convincing facsimile of the drawings the French master failed to deliver. Those sharply observed profiles led to an editorial post at Architectural Forum. In partnership with architect William Hamby, he designed a radical town house for airplane builder Sherman Fairchild on the upper east side of Manhattan, During the war he taught at Columbia and sketched “Grass in the Streets”—a concept that anticipated the pedestrian shopping mall. He took on a special project at Fortune, another Henry Luce magazine, where he designed the slatted platform bench as a way of deterring Pretzel chair.

4. D. J. DePree, memo to Jim Eppinger (Zeeland, Mich.: Herman Miller Archives, November 29, 1944).

callers from sitting in his office for more than fifteen minutes. It failed that test, but became a durable icon; the foundation of another career. Toward the end of the war, he and Henry Wright, his coeditor at Forum, wrote a book, Tomorrow’s House, proposing innovative solutions to everyday needs. Unable to meet his deadline for a chapter on storage, he conceived the Storagewall—an expansion of an ordinary cavity wall to contain all the impedimenta of daily life. This seminal design was published in Forum and later in a splashy Life feature, provoking wide public interest and intense hostility from the furniture trade press, which feared that the invention could ruin the case-goods industry. Those articles excited the Interest of Herman Miller president D. J. DePree, a devout Calvinist with a firm belief In providence and honesty In 1930 sales of heavy reproduction furniture were lagging, and the firm, located in Zeeland, Michigan, faced bankruptcy Gilbert Rohde, a New Yorker who had picked up on European trends in his mid-forties, urged DePree to switch to Modernism and fabricate the clean-lined designs he would supply, arguing that applied ornament and faux historicism were dishonest, He won his case, and the struggling company achieved a unique reputation. In 1944 Rohde died and DePree was shocked by the mediocrity of the furniture experts who applied to take his place. Hoping for another stroke of providence, he invited Nelson to dinner at a Detroit hotel and gave his associates a glowing report of the meeting: “He is recognized among the architects, has a splendid background; is thinking well ahead of the parade; does not want to be limited to the use of wood in planning furniture; believes that more and more units will be built into the house but that a manufacturer of a line such as we have will not suffer for a long time to come…. Although I haven’t seen any of his work, I am convinced he is a star in at least some of the things he is doing.”4 Nelson protested that he knew nothing of the business and had many other projects on his plate. The long-distance courtship continued until letters of agreement were exchanged in summer 1945, He would be paid $20 for each drawing that was accepted and a 3 percent

Models of shelves.

Nelson Basic Cabinet series: hotel desk and vanity unit on a platform bench. Photo 1949

Caption for photo

208

Bibliography

General Books Blake, Peter. No Place Like Utopia: Modern Architecture and the Company We Kept. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1993. Dormer, Peter. Design Since 1945. London: Thames and Hudson, 1993. Eidelberg, Martin, ed. Design 1935-1965. What Modern Was? New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1991. Emery, Marc. Furniture by Architects. New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1983; expanded edition 1988. Fehrman, Cherie and Kenneth Fehrman. Postwar Interior Design 1945-1960. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1987. Fiell, Charlotte & Peter, Modern Furniture Classics Since 1945. Washington D.C.: AIA Press, 1991. ———. Modern Chairs. Kolln, Germany: Taschen, 1993. Gandy, Charles D. and Susan Zimmermann-Stedham. Contemporary Classics: Furniture of the Masters. New York: Whitney Library of Design, 1990 (originally McGraw-Hill, 1981). Garner, Philippe. Twentieth-Century Furniture. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1980. Greenberg, Cara. Mid-Century Modern: Furniture of the 1950s. New York: Harmony, 1984; reprinted 1995. Hiesinger, Kathryn B. & George H. Marcus. Landmarks of TwentiethCentury Design: An Illustrated Handbook. New York: Abbeville, 1993. Horn, Richard. Fifties Style. New York: Friedman/Fairfax, 1993. Jackson, Lesley. The New Look: Design in the Fifties. New York: Thames Hudson, 1991.

209

Books by or about Herman Miller and its designers ———. Contemporary Architecture and Interiors of the 1950s. London: Phaedon, 1994.

Abercrombie, Stanley. George Nelson: The Design of Modern Design. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1995.

Knobble, Lance. Office Furniture: Twentieth-Century Design. New York: E. P Dutton, 1987.

Aldersey-Williams, Hugh and Geoff Hollington. Hollington Industrial Design. London: Architecture Design and Technology Press, 1990.

Mang, Karl, History of Modern Furniture. New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1978.

Caplan, Ralph. The Design of Herman Miller. New York: Whitney Library of Design, 1976.

Meadmore, Clement. The Modern Chair: Classics in Production. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1975.

———. Connections: The Work of Charles and Ray Eames. exhibition catalog. Los Angeles: Frederick S. Wight Art Gallery, 1976.

Piña, Leslie. Fifties Furniture. Atglen, Pennsylvania: Schiffer, 1996.

Cruikshank, Jeffrey L. and Clark Malcolm. Herman Miller Inc.: Buildings and Beliefs. Washington D.C.: A.I.A. Press, 1994.

Marigold Lodge. Zeeland, Michigan, Herman Miller, n.d. Hunter, Sam. Isamu Noguchi. New York: Abbeville, 1978.

Pulos, Arthur J. The American Design Adventure 1940-1975. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1988. Sembach, Klaus-Jorgen, et at. Twentieth-Century Furniture Design. Köln, Germany: Taschen, n.d.

Kirkham, Pat. Charles and Ray Eames: Designers of the Twentieth Century. Cambridge: MIT, 1995. Nelson, George. Chairs. New York: Whitney, 1953; reprinted New York: Acanthus,1994. ———. Display. New York: Whitney, 1953. ———. Storage. New York: Whitney, 1954. ———. Problems of Design. New York: Whitney, 1957.

De Pree, Hugh. Business as Unusual. Zeeland, Michigan: Herman Miller, 1986.

———. George Nelson on Design. New York: Whitney Library of Design, 1979.

Sparke, Penny. Furniture: Twentieth-Century Design. New York: E. P. Dutton, 1986@

———. Herman Miller Furniture Co. The Herman Miller Collection. catalogs. Zeeland, Michigan: Herman Miller Furniture Co., 1948, 1950, 1952 (also reprinted New York: Acanthus Press, 1995),1955/56 (also reprinted Atglen, Pennsylvania: Schaffer Publishing, 1998).

Simpson, Miriam. Modem Furniture Classics. New York: Whitney Library of Design, 1987.

Herman Miller, Inc. Action Office System. Zeeland, Michigan: Herman Miller, Inc., 1984.

von Vegesack, Alexander et. at. 100 Masterpieces from the Vitra Design Museum Collection. Weil am Rhein, Germany: Vitra Design Museum, 1996.

———. Reference Points. Zeeland, Michigan, Herman Miller, 1984. -. Burdick Group Pages. product brochure. Zeeland, Michigan: Herman Miller, 1992.

———. Action Office: The System that Works for You. Ann Arbor, Michigan: Herman Miller Research Corp., 1978.

———. Herman Miller for the Home. product catalog. Zeeland, Michigan: Herman Miller, 1995.

Propst, Robert, et. al. The Senator Hatfield Office Innovation Project. Ann Arbor, Michigan: Herman Miller Research Corp., 1977.

———. Herman Miller Pricebooks: Seating & Furniture. Zeeland, Michigan:Herman Miller, 1995.

Renwick Gallery. A Modem Consciousness: D. J De Pree, Florence Knoll. exhibit catalog. Washington D. C: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1975.

Herman Miller Catalog. Zeeland, Michigan: Herman Miller, 1996.

University of Illinois. William Stumpf, Industrial Design. exhibition brochure. Urbana-Champaign: University of Illinois, 1995.

———. Changing the World. University of Michigan, 1987. Neuhart, John, Marilyn Neuhart, Et Ray Eames. Eames Design. New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1991. Propst, Robert. The Office: A Facility Based on Change. Zeeland, Michigan: Herman Miller, Inc., 1968.

210