Just a quick note Ken,
First, Dori asked not what was the "design research artifact" but the
artifact used to "convey/communicate design research". In that sense
although communications of knowledge in conferences are also artifacts, I
think that, if that knowledge do not passes through to an audience of
practicing (future) designers it would almost worthless. I'm thinking about
the impact of "communication" as I understand from Dori's question. I'm also
influenced by how vital is for design research skills to pass on to the
future designers. I'm also interested in knowing how thrilling and
compelling, knowledge can be to "artistic minds" such as, at least my,
Design students.
Second, the tradition of the guilds is not the only ancestor for design
education or design research. I argue that the true ancestor (in fact of
most design schools) was the Florentine Academy of Disegno (in which the
Florentine art guilds were incorporated in the early 1600's). I guess some
of us have been repeating the same story about the influence of the guilds
in the construction of Design education that it looks true.
Please read Karen-Edis Barzman's The Florentine "Academy and the Early
Modern State, The Discipline of Disegno", CUP (2000), if not take a look at
monumental Pevsner's Academies of Art, Past and Present.
I would say that the aristocratic, higher intellectual position of the
academics inflated to encapsulate all objectual production in the 1700's and
1800's. The arts and crafts and other correspondent European and American
movements reacted to that and, the same as they have made a Myth out Gothic
Art, they made a Myth out the guild master.
A position that claims that modern designers are the intellectual heirs of
guilds is: one, not true; two, contributes to loath the intellectual
research skills that since the 1500's were used by artists.
It is not by accident that in a great number of countries, architects were
the first industrial or product designers, because that's what architects
(and sculptors) had been doing for the past 400 years: furniture, table
ware, decorations., etc, and most of the times ordering (with drawings)
guild masters to execute the products.
I like to think that designers are the heirs of the intellectual artists
founders of the first Academy devoted both to serve as knowledge producing
institution and professional education. It is not also an accident that
painters educated in the highest tradition of Fine Arts were the graphic
designers.
Amongst others, the central discipline taught in the Florentine Academy
since 1563! was Mathematics (mostly geometry, in fact). Other was Dissection
of corpses, naturally not intended to make beautiful drawings but to
understand the body mechanics. Another was life drawing, not as an artistic
expression but as a form of inquiry. These and other drawings were not
secret but highly discussed and shown. The Academy, as authorized by Cosimo
I, had also the designation of Studio, which means University, although it
was also designated Universitá (which meant Guild) and Compagnia, which
meant association.
If I had to exclude a tradition, as the least important to modern designers,
I would exclude the guild tradition. Even the manual insistence in the
Bauhaus was a phony one. Think about who were the bosses, where they had
studied, and what they have done previously.
Well, this wasn't a quick note, after all.
Cheers,
Eduardo
|