Do It Yourself: Democracy and Design
Contributions are requested for a special issue of the Journal of Design
History covering the area of Do-it-yourself. For the purposes of this
issue, the definition of Do-it-yourself is broad, and includes any
productive or creative design activity carried out by non-professional
consumers. Especially welcome would be contributions which expand the
published canon of works by exploring the historical importance of DIY in
different countries and at different points in time.
In Britain, Do–it–yourself as a largely post-war phenomenon has enabled
the consumer to emulate those above them in social hierarchies, express an
individual aesthetic unbounded by the strictures of mass-production and
consumption, and allowed entry into previously exclusive areas of leisure.
Starting as early as the 1930s, radio programmes, and then television
appearances throughout the late 1940s and 1950s by W.P Matthew promoted Do-
it-yourself as a means of improving the home. These were followed by the
well-documented television appearances of Barry Bucknell during the 1950
and 60s, which along with DIY advice magazines and the increased
availability of suitable materials and tools enabled people to cover
up ‘outdated’ interiors and create a personalised version of Scandinavian
Modern. More recently, encouraged by a host of popular television
programmes, such skills have been employed to remove such additions and
restore interiors closer to their ‘original’ form, as well as
create ‘period’ interiors in contemporary homes.
However, the definition of ‘Do-it-yourself’ does not start and end with
the domestic interior. The extension of the home into the garden, as
evidenced by numerous ‘garden makeover’ television programmes, has
developed into a considerable industry perhaps more associated with active
leisure pursuits. The construction, maintenance and repair of vehicles as
either a necessary economy or hobby activity have boundaries crossing into
the areas of artistic customisation of standard products; and for many,
the construction of technological products early in their history has
represented the only possibility for owning radios, televisions, and more
lately, computers.
DIY can be therefore be viewed as the antithesis of mass production, as it
is not a designed end product or professional service which is marketed,
but an individual creation which is consumed. In this respect, it can be
seen as a craft activity. Moreover, as the ultimate expression of an
individual’s taste, DIY can be seen as an accurate yardstick by which the
popular aesthetics of design can be measured. Whether seen to be
conspicuous consumption, an act of emulation, a defiant act of self-
expression, or an attempt to democratize social activities of the elite,
DIY is very clearly an intrinsic part of the material culture of everyday
life.
The special issue is open to contributions covering any aspect of DIY
design, in a number of different contexts: these may include but are not
limited to-
• DIY as a design phenomenon
• Comparisons of the history of DIY between different countries
• Pre-histories of DIY
• The domestic interior
• Garden landscaping
• Alteration and Restoration of the home
• Construction and customisation of vehicles
• ‘Make do and mend’: DIY fashion and beauty
• DIY publishing/fanzines
• Construction of technological products
Abstracts of up to 250 words should be sent in the first instance to: Paul
Atkinson, School of Design Technology, University of Huddersfield,
Queensgate, Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, HD1 3DH, or by email to:
[log in to unmask] A proposal will then be made to the Editorial Board.
Acceptance of a proposal does not guarantee publication in the Journal.
Submissions for paper titles included in an approved proposal will be
invited and individually refereed and evaluated for publication in the
normal way. Only those accepted papers which are fully ready for
publication at the appropriate time will be included in the Special Issue -
otherwise they will appear in a subsequent issue of the Journal.
|