Dear Martin,
You wrote:
“This again is a fascinating subject but one fraught with opportunities for misunderstanding due to the inadequacy of word-based language alone as a means of exploring the topic (sorry Ken!).”
I want to say again, I am not discussing the issue of drawing, why one draws, what one can communicate through drawing, what requires words, and what doesn’t. I have sympathy and appreciation for several aspects of this discussion, including issues that seem to be contradictory.
My note about the need for words was specifically — and exclusively — dedicated to research communication. Research communication requires words because we need words for the meta-narrative of research. Other forms of communication do not require words.
Drawing may be ambiguous, but words may also be ambiguous in many cases. At the same time, drawing may captures issues, information, and impressions that we cannot communicate with words.
So there is no need to apologise. I do not disagree with you. I have questions with respect to all the issues raised here. I do not have a clear opinion. I agree with nearly everyone, and — to paraphrase Don Norman — I frequently disagree with myself.
What I do say is that not all drawing involves reality rendering. And I certainly agree with Jacques Giard about learning to see if we are to draw. And it has sometimes been my experience that I must draw to see.
Warm wishes,
Ken
Ken Friedman, PhD, DSc (hc), FDRS | Chair Professor of Design Innovation Studies | College of Design and Innovation | Tongji University | Shanghai, China ||| University Distinguished Professor | Centre for Design Innovation | Swinburne University of Technology | Melbourne, Australia
—
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|