Weaver's Week 2009-10-25

Anyway, the basic idea is that Philippe Starck (he's always named on screen as Starck, and we shall follow that precedent) is looking for someone to work for him for six months. To find the winner, he'll take a number of candidates, see what they can offer, and pick the best of them. If this sounds like another show, it almost certainly is. There are many differences between Starck and Sugar, not least that Starck knows what he's looking for. His challenges have an obvious function, they clearly build on each other, and he knows precisely what he's looking for.

Starck's genius is that he never explains precisely what he's looking for. After a couple of warm-up challenges to weed out the candidates he couldn't work with (including one who gave Starck exactly what he was looking for, and was removed for being too robotic and lacking imagination), Starck gave his Big Plan. He challenged his students to create something in the same vein as his own work: their products were to be ecological, democratic, non-electrical, empowering. Over the next weeks, the students would present first and final drafts, build prototypes, engage in branding, and eventually realise their work. With some of the students falling by the wayside during the process, natch.

It also tests the candidates to their limits. Starck wants free spirits, people who will not so much think outside the box as refuse to acknowledge anything vaguely boxy in the first place. When first presented with this brief, many of the candidates were completely flummoxed, and floundered around for a week. Only after Starck had threatened to pull the entire project were the designers allowed two more weeks to get their ideas together. Four went to the model-maker, and there was a lesson in punctuality and preparedness as one contestant almost missed his meeting entirely. Two went to prototyping, both assistive technologies – a stick to help people stand up, and a magnetic cutlery and crockery set to aid the blind.

As innovative as they are, the designs aren't the star of the show. That honour falls to Philippe Starck, the maverick designer whose works include a toilet brush looking like a sword, a transparent chair, the Eurostar trains, and luxury flats all over the world. With his wife Jasmine and their consigliere Eugené, Starck knows what he wants. At least part of the charm is Starck's French accent, as thick as anything from 80s sitcom 'Allo 'Allo, and still perfectly intelligible. The viewer isn't patronised with subtitles, and the accent brings out a more subtle point of difference to Starck. He's working in the French idiom, a Gallic theory of design clearly different from the British culture in which all the contestants were educated. The contenders need to take what they know from their education and experience, and be prepared to throw bags of it out. The real skill comes in knowing exactly what to retain, and what to question.

Viewers certainly didn't see was Starck's explanation of how his actual designs (expensive and exclusive) squared with his expounded philosophy. What we might have seen through the gaps was how the British system makes it difficult for people to think outside of the box – the only accepted validation in this culture is formal examinations and certification. Good news for teachers, less good for designers.

Interspersed in the show are a few vox pops from members of the British Design Council. These talking heads are explaining various terms and concepts that Starck or the contestants use in passing, providing an education for those of us who aren't design professionals. We also see Starck demonstrating his philosophy through the medium of soundbite, which strikes us as a bit limiting. Maybe it would have been possible to introduce him to the audience more fully, perhaps with a brief retrospective of his career.

Ultimately, though, we do think there's something missing from the shows. While there has to be a single winner, we don't see why there had to be such staged removals (two per week) from the competition. For our money, the best parts are those where people are thinking outside the box, where they're pushing the envelope.

The producers didn't break much new ground in this show. Speaking to The Independent this week, Starck said that he was unhappy with the way the show was edited. He thinks they could do better. In the producers' defence, design can be an intimidating subject, filled with people who seem to be completely detached from the quotidian world. Wrapping such fare in the familiar trappings of a reality show might well have brought additional people to the show. It's a difficult balancing act, and sometimes there's no right answer.

There are, of course, only two notable landmarks in Sydney, and it's always dangerous to buzz before the host mentions whether he's on about the one that looks like a coat-hanger. A question has the answer "ABC", described by reference to various parts of various European languages, no-one understands it. Another starter asks (in essence) what is 29 x 17. Now do it in your head! The Clare team pulls back some of its deficit, but then UCL gets a set of bonuses on geometric series, and their PhD Mathematics student gets two right, only missing a tricky summation. The audio round is on Motown covers of songs by The Beatles, and UCL's lead is up to 95-75.

Pharmaceutical drugs derived from plants forms a bonus round for UCL, and the first full house of the night. After remaining in touch during the first half, the London side is beginning to open up a lead, thanks to their knowledge of pre-Colombian Americas. The next picture round follows in no time at all – just two sets of bonuses after the audio – and UCL's lead has shot up to 155-75.

Three more starters should complete the win for UCL, more than the odd bonus would put the bow on it. A full house on the seeds of plants increases the lead past 100, only for Clare to get back in thanks to their intimate knowledge of Welsh counties. A question about DNA was moving from diploid to haploid, Adam Moore guessed well, and that just about wraps up the game for UCL. Though Clare come up well on Italian opera, UCL are equally good on zero-sum games and the top-level domains of European microstates. Clare get the run in the closing moments, but it's all far too late, UCL have won by 220-145.

Another good performance from UCL, everyone got at least one starter, Olivia Woolley and Adam Moore took four, and the side recorded 22/36 bonuses and two missignals. For Clare, Matt Cliffe led with six starters, the side was right on 10/29 bonuses, and there was one missignal. The overall accuracy rate was 54/91.

Next week: Christ's Cambidge v Emmanuel Cambridge. Our money's on Cambridge.