EDITORIAL | HYPEBEAST Interview
EQUILIBRIUM OF TELOS
Peter Yee’s Philosophy of Life and Design
Peter Yee at “RENAISSANCE 2.0” solo exhibition at K11 MUSEA. March, 2024.
Introduction by Cherie Au
Interview and Photography by Edward Chiu
Installation Photography by Jasmine Cheung
After 25 years of creating some of the most innovative eyewear and over 110 design and utility patents, this might be the first time you’re coming across his name — Peter Yee, Oakley’s former Vice President of Design, is a legend in the sports performance eyewear game for having a hand in shaping the industry from behind the scenes with his aesthetically formed and high function creations. A designer’s designer recognised by only those in the know, Yee is a true visionary credited not only for shaping Oakley’s design ethos, but also various trajectories of design philosophies renowned in the world today.
Creator of the Romeo from the X-Metal series, Eye Jacket, OVER THE TOP, O-Wire, Monster Dog, and many more, Yee recently held his first-ever solo phygital exhibition “RENAISSANCE 2.0 x PETER YEE” during Art Basel Hong Kong at K11 MUSEA in collaboration with phygital retail platform SPIN.FASHION, showcasing the above works and other avant-garde designs from Oakely’s archives through augmented and virtual reality, as well as mixed-reality via the Apple Vision Pro.
For the American-Singaporean designer who immigrated to the United States at the age of three, his Telos — Greek for “end ‘purpose’ or ‘goal’” — has always been to design something special, beautiful, and meaningful that fulfills a purpose for someone. “I do things that are difficult,” says Yee, speaking on his hobby of free dive spearfishing, an extreme sport that requires one to dive as deep as 20 meters in a single breath while aiming at a moving target with a harpoon, “I do it at the highest level I’m capable of.”
Pushing his body to its limits is per the norm for Yee, and this philosophy, of course, trickles down into his design. “What I did as a designer was 100% intellectual [...] So I always thought, ‘Oh, that’s how I balance myself out.’ I would do these hard physical things with these hard intellectual things.” It’s this “Telos” behind Yee’s works that led him to design the current globally recognised Oakley logo.
25 at the time, Yee was doodling little zeros alongside Eye Jackets when it caught Founder Jim Jannard’s eye. Tasked with creating the new logo and given all the creative freedom he needed, Yee’s contribution to Oakley was this new aesthetic centered on the idea of accelerating curves. “O” for Oakley, “O” for “optics”, and seemingly in the shape of a human eye, this simple and aesthetically beautiful logo communicates strength and power, and is part of what Yee describes as the “intellectual” bit behind his works.
“Because the way I work is… I’m only about winning,” laughs Yee. “My job was to kick my own ass everyday [...] If you’re in first place, that’s no fun. You have to keep pushing.” For the designer, it was never about getting his name out there. The opposite is true, in fact. As a product and industrial designer, Yee’s objective was to use his understanding of engineering and form to create beautiful, highly functional pieces that he himself is proud of.
XYE, Peter Yee’s personal brand, was established in the same spirit. “One of the things I’ve discovered about myself is that I don’t like to tolerate mediocrity [...] My brand’s sole mission is to attempt to create uniquely meaningful, uniquely beautiful designs of function and art.” Yee attributes this in part to his competitive nature likely inherited from his father, an Olympian and professional basketball player, and to his background as an Asian American who works to make his family, fans, and others like him proud.
In conversation with Peter Yee, we get a glimpse of the man who has always designed for the benefit of someone, how he did it, and the next Chapter of his already legendary career.
Q: Let's start with something about philosophy. What are your life and philosophies?
Peter Yee: That's a great question. When I think about it, there are parallels between what I do in my life and what I do professionally. I've always been naturally competitive in everything I do. It's not by choice — I just can't help myself.
I used to play hockey, and currently, for around 15 years now, I free dive and spearfish. That means I hold my breath and dive down as deep as 20 meters or more if I need to, to shoot a big fish. It’s a very difficult sport in that you're fighting the urge to breathe, at the same time feeling the weight of the ocean and trying to hunt while being in a state of zen to use less oxygen and [trying not to die] in the process. It’s a strange dichotomy of being extremely zen-like while in a hyper state of awareness.
In my life, I do things that are difficult, and I think I get a lot of this from my parents. My dad was an Olympic athlete in basketball, and he's not taller than me. Whether it's fighting or playing hockey or whatever else I'm trying to understand, I do it at the highest level that I'm capable of, which makes it challenging, and then if I succeed, it will be rewarding.
If we go into the design world, the designs that I'm known for for Oakley are iconic and special because they don't look like anything else. That's not easy. But if I can do it, it's rewarding, and it somehow translates because people admire the older designs that aren't produced anymore — they're somehow drawn to them. There is a tangible emotional connection to it, which for me, is so fulfilling because that's what I try to do. I put emotions into inanimate nonliving things. If I do a good job, they will emulate those emotions to those that look for it and find it.
Most if not all designers want to create beautiful products or artworks. But I feel that not everyone necessarily creates unique, beautiful pieces of design. To do unique, again, is difficult. You’ve got to be brave. What does brave mean? Brave means you're willing to put forth your maximum effort into something that may completely fail. That's how I've always designed in the past. That's how I still design today for my clients, and that's how I foresee designing for myself. Because I also want to be surprised by what comes out.
Great question, by the way. Because again, it's been very recent that I've realized some of the things I do are pretty extreme. It was interesting; when I played hockey, it was extremely 100% physical. What I did as a designer was 100% intellectual, not a lick of physical. So I always thought, ‘Oh, that's how I balance myself out.’ I would do these hard physical things with these hard intellectual things.
Q: I think this leads nicely to the next question. Drawing inspiration from the Greek philosophy of “Telos”, what was your ‘ultimate goal’ when you first started designing?
That's easy. My ultimate goal is to prove that I'm a good designer and that I can make beautifully meaningful designs that fulfill something for people. That's about all I can describe. Early on, I wasn't sure exactly what that was going to be — it just started with Oakley.
Even then, the goal didn't change. I wanted to make special things. I'm very proud of my family lineage and I want to do right by that. My parents aren't with me anymore, but I would still want to do things that would make them proud. [With] my upbringing, the way I think is that I want to do really cool, special things. It was never because I wanted everyone to know my name. In fact, no one knew who I was. I'm going to do something more for myself. Because I'm a product designer, an industrial designer, I have an understanding of engineering and form. As simple as that is, it must be beautiful and it must be high functioning with beauty combined. That’s what I want to create.
Q: How has this “Telos” evolved over the years? What is your next ultimate goal?
The goal is the same. Now that there's more people that know who I am, know of my work, not only do I want to make my family and my name proud, I want to make those who have supported me from [my past] designs proud. I don't want to disappoint them.
Most of my fans think I've been retired since I left Oakley. Fair, because I don't talk about what I do. If I came up with my own design, I’d not only have to fulfill my own expectations, but the fans of my work that know all the Oakley stuff, so whatever I come up with has to be on par if not at a higher level. There's a little more at stake.
Q: Before we go into the designs of eyewear in general, maybe we could talk about the initial catalyst: The process behind creating Oakley's logo.
Oakley's logo was interesting. As an industrial designer, I’ve always liked graphic design. I always would doodle and put little logos on my own sketches of different things. When I first started working for Oakley and when I’m designing the Eye Jacket, I would do little logos or zeros, and the founder [Jim Jannard] really liked them.
He was playing with the idea of a new logo and asked me, ‘Hey, what do you think about working on a new logo for the brand?’ I was 25, 26. My answer was, ‘Okay. Sure.’ The journey to doing it was fairly short and natural. If you know the old Oakley logo, it consists of straight lines and radial arcs. I think my contribution to the Oakley brand is bringing in a new aesthetic. It's more about using accelerating curves, like a beautifully aerodynamic sports car.
There's no radius. There’s no straight line, no start and no end. It's symmetrical on two planes. It reads left or right aesthetically, and even metaphorically. It looks and feels like it's moving, quite quickly, and with ease through space. If I think about the designs I've done, some of them will call it timeless. All those things I mentioned like the accelerating curve, strength and power are embedded into a very simple logo. But that simple logo is transmitting all these notions all the time — it just was a natural thing. It’s the letter ‘O’ for Oakley, and for ‘optics’. If you look at the O, it also looks like the eye, the human eye.
That's the intellectual part I talked about. I try to do that with everything that I touch. If some small amount of that comes out, then it’s likely that it would be successful.
Q: How would you describe your approach to designing for the eyes? Is it similar to Rei Kawakubo of COMME des GARÇONS, where she explores how garments can alter the wearer’s body shape?
I think that's a really good question. I guess I do design for the eyes, but you have to think about it more for the face. If we think of our body as real estate, in a sense, your face is the most valuable real estate you have. There are designs that look good on the table, but they don't look good on your face.
There is this very unique balance of proportion and function. [It should] fundamentally fit you well, look good on you, perform very well and not look like everybody else's stuff. Again, that's not an easy task. I've been doing this for so long in my head, I already have the image of a person. As I'm creating, I am thinking how this would accentuate a person's natural features. The challenge is that we all look different. There's no one size fits all.
Q: I was listening to a Podcast that you featured in recently and you mentioned your superpower is that you don't know too much about something. How do you keep this superpower going once you've mastered a particular product?
I would say it’s both my superpower and also my weakness, and that is my ignorance. My ignorance is that I don't know what's possible, therefore I also don't know that it's impossible. One way I stay ignorant is I don't look at other people's eyewear. It was easier in my early years. But like you say, as you master things, as you create things, you inherently gather more knowledge. That's one superpower of mine. I just create from what I think it should be, with my logic and rationale — not somebody else's.
Q: Do you prioritize aesthetics or the need to match performance in your designs? How do you balance the two?
Certainly it's going to vary depending on whose brand it is for, what does that brand stand for? What is it going to be used for? In what manner and what capacity by whom? All those answers would likely [fall on] a sliding scale of aesthetics and performance, and it would slide closer to one side or another. There'll be instances where it'll be directly in the middle. There may be instances where it'll slide much closer to aesthetics or much, much closer to function. For me it has to be highly functional, which by default is also going to be highly beautiful. So for me, I believe in win-win scenarios, and the only way I know how to win is to create something with both.
Q: Going back to eyewear, how did the concept of the OVER THE TOP design come about?
OVER THE TOP is honestly the brainchild of the founder, Jim Jannard. And if, when I use the word brave, I don't know anybody that's braver than that guy. He was willing to put it all on the line because he just would believe in it. He was actually working with another designer and they had taken the design in different ways, and I think it somehow wasn't working right for him. Eventually he asked me if I would take over the project. What you see today is a result of that.
It was fun to reimagine. You're literally deconstructing and reconstructing something all over again, questioning everything. That's a great exercise to do, and to have something that comes out of it that really trains people's heads.
I remember somebody asking me, ‘What's a functional reason for that?’ And I gave them a scenario. What if you were in an accident or you were born with a defect and don't have ears? That stopped them in their tracks. OVER THE TOP is also a great example of thinking differently of approaching problems in a different way, coming up with solutions that you didn't know was a problem to begin with.
I would say OVER THE TOP also represented the golden years of Oakley. Anything is possible. Nothing's off limits, and there's a huge amount of bravery. Just as successful as it is and iconic as it is, it could have been miserably unsuccessful. But again, it's the bravery of the founder, and I think I learned a lot obviously from that experience and working with that.
Q: When you were at Oakley, you had that dog tag with the tagline ‘Total World Domination’, which was a kind of motto back then. Do you believe you have achieved it or it's a never-ending goal?
I think on one level, it was achieved during my time. Pragmatically, it's a constant battle. If you're in first place, it's no fun. You have to just keep pushing. During my time, if I look back, I didn't see anybody. So who do I have to beat? It would be ourselves — we had to keep outperforming ourselves. That's hard. It takes a lot of effort. But I think it's worth it.
Q: In a way, it’s like you have to destroy your own legacy to create a new one.
Absolutely. Every day, I'd come to work, look at what I did the day before and it's either ‘yes, that's good,’ or ‘nope, I can do better.’ That's what I do every single day. My job was to kick my own ass, every single day on whatever projects I had in front of me. Watches, eyewear… That was my challenge. If you were walking in my office anytime, you would not find anyone else’s sunglasses in there, because there's no point. ‘Total World Domination’ was a funny goal, but it was our true spirit. It represented the spirit of the brand, and to continue total world domination in a meaningful way requires a lot of effort — it is a lot harder staying number one for a long time than being number two.
Q: Looking back, what was your most successful failure?
Man, you gave me such hard questions… My most successful failure… I would say it’s this watch, the Minute Machine formerly known as Tank. We had to change the name.
Q: Because of Cartier?
Yes! We got a ‘cease and desist’ or something like that. When we got that, we felt proud. Like, ‘Hey man, they care what we do!’ Anyway, it's not exactly a failure, but it's a failure to success.
The original target of the watch was to create it for a retail price of US$700, but the way I designed it with all the thicknesses and everything, it became too expensive. The development team asked me to change things, and it literally took the life out of it to make it for the right price. It was just a shell of its former self. And I was just like, ‘I hate this,’ but I got to do a job. Technically I failed — I couldn't design the watch for the right price. And at that time, [Oakley] Founder Jim, who obviously loved our watches, heard what happened. After seeing the original, and what I had to do to change it from the original, he told the development team, ‘I don't care, make the original one and just sell it for what we got to sell for.’ So the price went from US$700 to — I think — US$1,200.
When this came out, it was sold out instantly. It's an example of the power of good design over a particular price point. I think this would probably be the most successful failure I've had. Because the way I work is, I'm only about winning. I'll do whatever I have to do ethically to win in whatever I'm doing. I don't believe in cheating to win. That's meaningless. It has to have meaning for me.
Q: Would you like to talk about your upcoming personal project?
Of course. One of the things I've discovered about myself is that I don't like to tolerate mediocrity. That’s driven me to create my brand, [with the] sole mission to create uniquely meaningful, uniquely beautiful designs of function and art.
I'm 56, but I do feel that I'm young enough. But that will go, the knowledge and understanding to create something special. I should do it while I can, because one day I won't be able to. I don't want to look back and regret, so now's the time. It's the fear of regret, isn't it? It's also the reality that the world is a more challenging place today. It's a reality that I see my kids struggling to find the right career. But if I can create something meaningful, maybe they'll want to be a part of it.
Q: And on the logo ‘X’, what is the story behind it?
X is… it crosses the border through my life and my profession. Back in the day I played a lot of video games. My gamer tag is ‘X TOY’. I also have a sports car, an NSX. It kind of all fits together. X is also in a lot of adjectives that describe my design work. I believe in excellence. You can say, some of the designs are very ‘exciting’, they're ‘extreme’. Many adjectives again have the letter ‘X’. I'm also known as designing ROMEO, the first design of the X-Metal collection.
That's where the X comes from. Symbolically, it's also the crossroad between art, the function of creativity and science, the laws of physics, performance, aesthetic. That's what it represents too. It’s also oftentimes used as an aiming device. It’s about precision. You're shooting for something — that’s really important. There's all these symbols that we can come up with, and it just felt like it was fitting. And it looks cool too.
