Thanks so much for all replies. They have been very helpful to expand my
understanding.
I also would like to comment on the Anarchy and subversion duo. I would
take Anarchy as a political concept, a grand narrative but subversion as
a minor method. Subversion isn't necessarily in the substrata of
Anarchy. In means of terminology, criticality and interventionism are
the words I like ,however; critical design terminology involves
subversion as well, despite its negativeish feel.
As a quite young researcher, maybe as a young designer beyond that, I
have always been uneasy with the lack of those "characters" who oppose
to kind of everything. It really is refreshing to meet with them and to
talk to them. Criticality of any kind as "interventionism, subversion,
transformation design, interrogative design, and social design" is
liberating.
My research and I am as well way behind the political (which I indeed
think is pretty economical) relationships Mr.Popov talks about. However,
I tend to see my work as --say- a small glitch to see that designerly
creation gives authory and reason for oppressed people to exist. And
there is a whole bunch of literature about this already.
Best,
Cigdem
|