My question is directed in response to Klaus, (but of course anyone can
weigh in on this comment)
*in my experiences, much of what designers do is to make drawings, prepare
presentations, work out arguments for why their proposal is a good one and
this has much to do with communication skills, which goes far beyond the
writing of specifications. i have never met a successful designers who
cannot argue for what they propose others can realize.*
If design/ers are to inspire and their responsibility is in communicating
this inspiration effectively, how does this role change when the
inspiration comes from the user? With so much emphasis on
community/customer/user/human centered research, does the designer become a
translator and/or messenger for the inspiration they obtain through
user/human centered design? I am increasingly inclined to believe that
translation is becoming a significant part of the conceiving, planning and
making that is found in design today
-stef
On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 10:18 AM, Robert Harland <[log in to unmask]>wrote:
> Dear Francois
>
> When I raised this issue previously on the list, I argued that the term
> "design" usefully holds together a relationship between "conceiving,
> planning and making" in some kind of singular pursuit (an object, system or
> experience).
>
> If "conceiving, planning and making" are unrelated, they are better called
> "conceiving," "planning" and "making," not benefitting from the conjoining
> opportunity "design" affords.
>
> For example, I may "conceive" of an idea for a cake, but never make it, in
> which case I have merely "conceived" of the idea. Or, another person might
> suggest an idea for a particular kind of cake, and I may "plan" to buy the
> ingredients, in which case I have merely planned. Or, I may "make" a cake
> to a recipe, conceived by another person with ingredients bought by someone
> else, therefore only involving myself in making. My singular participation
> in each of these are unrelated acts of conceiving, planning and making. I'm
> conceiving, planning or making.
>
> By using "design" to stand for the "conceiving, planning and making" of an
> object, system or service, one might understand how a cake comes into
> existence, through design. However, design does not work so well to
> describe these words when used in unrelated contexts, such as conceiving of
> a car, planning a party, or making a necklace.
>
> For me, "design" usefully stands for the relationship between these
> activities in some kind of linked pursuit, whether a single individual
> undertakes all three, say in the realisation of a piece of jewellery by an
> individual, or the realisation of a building by a team of people including
> architects, engineers, surveyors, building contractors etc.
>
> In this sense, for me design is relational and links different activities
> with a consistent intention.
>
> As a former graphic design practitioner, I fully appreciate the idea of a
> conceiving, planning and making undertaken separately by highly skilled
> individuals. Within a context of graphic outputs, I called this design,
> clients understood this and commissioned work that included all three. In
> this sense, design stood for more than the individual activities of
> conceiving, planning and making a brochure or website. The sum was more
> than the parts. Specification tended to happen mostly as part of the
> planning phase.
>
> I hope this further explains why I drew on this example from Buchanan.
>
> Regards, Robert
>
>
>
> Dr Robert Harland | Lecturer | Learning & Teaching Coordinator for School
> of the Arts | School of the Arts, English and Drama | Loughborough
> University | Recent publications | Harland, R. G., 2012. Towards an
> integrated pedagogy of graphics in the United Kingdom. Iridescent: Icograda
> Journal of Design Research, 2012, 2 (1).
> https://dspace.lboro.ac.uk/dspace-jspui/handle/2134 <
> https://dspace.lboro.ac.uk/dspace-jspui/handle/2134/11349
>
>
>
> On 08/01/2014 12:21, "Francois Nsenga" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:
> [log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>
> Dear Rob,
>
> Quoting from Richard Buchanan (2001), you wrote:
>
> "design is more than specification - it is - 'conceiving, planning and
> making'"
>
> I entirely concur on the 'conceiving, planning' part of your proposed
> definition of design; although, to me, both terms are synonymous - and not
> meaning 'more than' - with specifying an artifact. However, I hope you
> don't extend the definition of 'design' to 'making' processes that I tend
> to leave up respectively to technicians and skilled workers, more prepared
> and apt by training.
>
> Francois
> From warm, comfortable weather in Kigali!
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]<mailto:
> [log in to unmask]>>
> Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
> Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
> Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
> Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
--
*Stefanie Di Russo*
PhD Student
Faculty of Design
Swinburne University
*twitter:* @stefdirusso <https://twitter.com/#!/stefdirusso>
*linkedin: public
*profile<http://www.linkedin.com/pub/stefanie-di-russo/35/16/a84>
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|