This article forms part of the Decorative and Applied Arts Encyclopedia, a master reference hub providing a structured overview of design history, materials, movements, and practitioners.
While strolling along the Rue du Jour in Paris on a chilly day, I noticed an object. It demanded attention with its unapologetically vibrant pink presence. At first, I didn’t understand why it made me stop and double back. But there it was: a pink bicycle, every detail—seat, rims, even the dérailleur—painted in the same striking hue.
Yet, upon closer inspection, something felt off. There was no chain. This was not a bike intended for cycling. Suddenly, the question became unavoidable: if a bicycle isn’t meant to be ridden, is it still a bicycle?
In that moment, its transformation from a functional object into a static piece of art was undeniable. Stripped of its purpose, the bike became something else entirely—an aesthetic object, perhaps designed to provoke thought or invite admiration.
This encounter raises a broader question for design enthusiasts. When does an object lose its essence? Can we redefine it by separating it from its intended function? As I walked away, I couldn’t help but see the bike in a new light—not as a tool, but as a statement. Perhaps that was its real purpose all along.
What do you think—does removing function enhance or diminish an object’s design?
Related Articles
Discover more from Encyclopedia of Design
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.