Dear Colleagues,
I am a bit disturbed that our world is going towards chaos, anarchy,
subversion, and violence. The art of disruption has been practiced
for decades by both left- and right-wing elements, and in particular,
all kinds of warlords and organized crime barons. Anarchy does not
benefit ordinary people. It benefits warlords who are free to act as
they want. The periods of anarchy and disruption have been the most
painful in human history. They did not bring to a change in the
status quo. They did not benefit poor people. They are created and
used by particular interest groups that wanted to operate with
impunity. Talk to the Russians. They had experienced this at least
two times in the last 100 years. The first time -- in the period
1917-1923. The subversion went so far that dozens of millions of
people suffered atrocities, murder, rape, and famine. Just do not
tell me that this was the price for human equality. No one become
equal. Then in the period 1990-present, Russian people suffer a
second time, a similar fate, this time without physical pain, but in
a debilitating and stagnating economic deadlock of special interests
and organized crime.
The solution is not to generate subversion at random. The solution is
to propose a viable alternative. Subversion is easy to do. A handful
of people can create a lot of damage in the contemporary, highly
technological world. It is difficult to DESIGN a new social
organization that can be implemented in a democratic society without
undue hardship for the general population. The leftist project
completely collapsed. Russia and Eastern Europe illustrate this well.
China is also pulling out of the leftist project, but in a more
strategically savvy way. Where do you find a successful
implementation of the leftist project?
Think about this and think how you can contribute to humane and
enhancing design that will be fair to all and would not create undue
suffering. Sounds unrealistic? Well, I would say just difficult to achieve.
Kind regards,
Lubomir
At 11:36 AM 1/8/2008, Carl DiSalvo wrote:
>Hello Cigdem and others sharing this interest,
>
>You might also want to take a look at the literature and exhibits of
>tactical media. There is an interesting and under-discussed
>relationship between tactical media in design. As starting points I
>would suggest the catalog for the exhibition The Interventionists.
>
>The Interventionists
>Users' Manual for the Creative Disruption of Everyday Life
>Edited by Nato Thompson and Gregory Sholette
>MIT Press 2004.
>
>You might want to specifically look at the work of Nathan Martin
>(Carbon Defense League / DeepLocal). Martin wrote a master's thesis
>on Parasitic Media as art practice and now practices design. You can
>access the essay here: www.carbondefense.org/pdf/writing_7.pdf
>
>Carl
>
>
>On Jan 7, 2008, at 3:14 PM, Elizabeth Goodman wrote:
>
>>I'd suggest getting in touch with Anne Galloway -- www.plsj.org --
>>or at least checking out her writing. While not focused on
>>sustainability per se, Anne has done a lot of thinking about
>>hacking, subversions, etc. She organized a panel in 2004 on
>>"Designing for Hackability," which seems relevant.
>>
>>Liz
>>
>>******************************************************
>>Elizabeth Goodman
>>PhD student
>>UC Berkeley School of Information
>>www.confectious.net
>>
>>******************************************************
>>
>>
>>>Cigdem Kaya wrote:
>>>*
>>>I have been collecting data about various industrial design projects
>>>that involve social responsibility in some way, most of which is
>>>imbued
>>>with an amateur spirit, around the concepts of participation,
>>>hacking,
>>>subversions, teaching a skill, interventions, parasitism, democratic
>>>design, lending authorship, activism, guerrilla design, DIY,
>>>interrogative design with reference to Wodiczko.
>>>*
>
>Carl DiSalvo, Ph.D.
>Assistant Professor
>School of Literature, Communication, and Culture
>The Georgia Institute of Technology
|