Hello Terry and List members
terry - I am going to have to take you up on your issue of "most fields of design" where "visual appearance is not particularly central". Please can you identify which are these fields that you suggest are in some kind of majority position? I am totally bemused by this aspect of your reply to João, which related to design quality of academic papers.
I am a fashion and textiles designer. Do I really need to explain to you that the global apparel and textile market is one of the largest in the world? It was valued at US$1.7 trillion in 2012 and employs approximately 75 million people. Source: http://www.fashionunited.com/global-fashion-industry-statistics-international-apparel (accessed 13.09.14) What field are you referring to as being “most" design?
Visual appearance is an important aspect of fashion and textile design, just as any other- because like anything that is designed and made, how something appears is an important aspect of what it is and can never be considered as not particularly central. If it appears poor or badly designed (in João’s comment): then thats what it is. And in the case of fashion and textiles/apparel design also touch, temperature, performance, cut, sizing, fit for purpose, wash care, garment construction, wardrobe functionality, trend relevance etc (too many characteristics to mention here) are also core aspects of a designers thinking that implicitly and explicitly contribute to visual appearance. How can it ever not be central?
I also wanted to respond to you in an earlier thread about ‘design thinking’ but did not have the time or focus, when you wrote from a historical perspective that ‘design’ or ‘design thinking’ seemingly came into existence in the 1950’s/60’s. It seems superficial and simplistic to ‘parachute' design into the world, only as recently as the middle of last century. The contemporary practice of a clothing and textiles designer involves a direct lineage and heritage from what must be one of the most ancient fields of technology and making, and yet simultaneously utilises leading edge technologies for design, communication and manufacture.
As ever- I am bemused and often concerned by the narrowness of what continues to be defined as ‘design’ (or 'design thinking’?) - by the dominant discussants on this list. I remember that Martin Salisbury made a great comparison recently about what he sees as a serious, ongoing problem of confusing design for e.g. illustrated children’s books or a wedding dress - with design for a sewage system. Considering the qualities of presentation of an academic paper as not being central to the interpretation of its meaning, displays a similar naiveté about the skills and insights of graphic design.
It is such a pity that this limited, academic version of design has become so insular and inward looking, as there is so much to learn from ancient fields and the depth, breadth and richness of design practice
Fiona
Fiona Candy
[log in to unmask]
www.a-brand.co.uk
www.vimeo.com/fionacandy
On 13 Sep 2014, at 15:43, Terence Love <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Hello João.
> Before being too concerned, its possibly good to remember that there are lots of different kinds of design activity and for most fields of design, visual appearance is not particularly central. In many areas of design, visual appearance is of little concern at all.
> For those working within the visual design fields, though, I can understand the attitudes of other kinds of designers might be pretty frustrating!
> Best wishes,
> Terry
>
> ---
> Dr Terence Love
> Love Services Pty Ltd
> PO Box 226, Quinns Rocks
> Western Australia 6030
> Tel: +61 (0)4 3497 5848
> Fax:+61 (0)8 9305 7629
> [log in to unmask]
> --
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [log in to unmask] [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jo ão Ferreira
> Sent: Saturday, 13 September 2014 9:14 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Cc: Jo ão Ferreira
> Subject: The (lack of?) design quality of academic paper formatting
>
> More often than not, the formatting guidelines for design conferences are so poor, they would barely meet the most basic standards of graphic design 101.
> The same holds for the overall website design and other communication mediums such as leaflets, conference proceedings’ books, as well as several journals and books on design research and so on. I wonder why this is the case, and furthermore to what extent does the poor (ludicrous?) design of design conferences and other academic mediums of communication affects the message being conveyed (supposedly that design is somewhat important for the world.)
>
> Reading a poorly designed paper about design is somewhat like attending a lecture about language where the speaker is constantly making blatant grammatical mistakes.
> There is an obvious conflict between the medium and the message.
>
> All of us in the design research community should call for higher standards of design for all design research communication.
>
> (a slightly annoyed) João Ferreira
> PhD candidate, TU Delft
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
