“Design addresses itself to the need,” Charles Eames explained in Design Q & A, the 1972 film presenting his responses to curator L’Amic’s questions about design. (Design Q&A, n.d.) The statement offers a useful starting point for discussing work now so familiar that its appearance can overshadow its original purpose.

Before an Eames chair became a classic, it was an investigation. How could materials support the body comfortably? How could production become more efficient? How could well-designed furniture serve a wider public? (The Work of Charles and Ray Eames: A Legacy of Invention, n.d.)

To understand Charles Eames’s contribution, we need to examine how those questions were pursued. We also need to recognise the creative partnership with Ray and the collaborative practice through which their work developed.

Purpose gives design direction

Charles often described design as the arrangement of elements towards a particular purpose. This places responsibility on the designer to understand what a project needs to accomplish before deciding how it should look.

That purpose extended beyond an individual brief. Charles and Ray considered the overlapping interests of the designer, the client and society. 

For Impey Studio, this remains a useful way to examine our practice with the work ethos of grand maestros. A space must answer operational requirements, but it also affects the people who use it and the place to which it belongs. The quality of the design depends on how carefully those relationships have been understood. What need are we addressing? 

The evidence of experiment

Their plywood furniture provides a concrete example of this discipline. Charles, Ray and their colleagues initially investigated a single moulded shell for the seat and back. The plywood could not withstand the stresses at their intersection. They changed the design, developing separate moulded components for the seat and back. (Moulded Plywood Group)

This is a revealing moment in the design process when the material challenged the initial ambition, and the designers need to adjust and persue the purpose.  The eventual form emerged through their resiliance to revise an idea in light of evidence; a  continuous movement between investigation and production.

We can understand this as a form of practical research a “design Maker” mindset that resonates deeply on how Impey Studio work. Making generates knowledge; the next version benefits from what the previous one revealed. The finished object holds the results of that learning, even when the effort is no longer visible.

“What works is better than what looks good”

Ray and the intelligence of collaboration

Ray’s contribution is part of the authorship of the work. Her background in modern art and talent in graphic design brought a developed understanding of composition, colour and the relationships between forms. 

Her concern also extended directly to performance. “What works is better than what looks good,” which makes the duo where technicality meets rigorous aesthetic. (The Work of Charles and Ray Eames: A Legacy of Invention, n.d.) Understanding this collective effort gives us a fuller account of how design happens. The strength of an idea depends partly on the quality of the exchange around it.

Innovation requires historical understanding

Charles and Ray valued the knowledge behind existing designs. Charles’s advice to “innovate as a last resort” meant understanding what already works before deciding what needs to change. (Voyles, 2025) This is particularly relevant to contemporary practice and the approach specifically in regards to perfecting an idea. An understanding of history allows us to judge what a new proposal contributes. 

At Impey, this connects with our approach to material research. We study how things are made, how they behave and what they mean within a particular context. That knowledge gives experimentation direction and allow us to keep evolving an idea or a specific material.

The ambition: design for all

Charles and Ray Eames sought to make well-designed, high-quality furniture accessible to more people. Their work extended from the home to schools, airports and other shared environments, bringing careful attention to comfort and construction into everyday life. (The Work of Charles and Ray Eames: A Legacy of Invention, n.d.)

This ambition remains an important measure of their legacy. The value of a piece begins with what it offers the person using it. Comfort, proportion and ease of use can be appreciated without knowing its designer or its place in history.

A standard for our own work

The enduring value of Charles and Ray Eames’s practice lies in the relationship between purpose and process. They investigated needs, worked through material difficulties and developed ideas through collaboration.

For us, their legacy establishes a vision and ethics towards the design practice.  Have we understood the people involved? Have we learned enough from the material? Are we preserving the craft? 

These questions keep the work relevant. They bring the discussion of a classic back to the responsibilities of designing and to the care required to make something worth keeping.