JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for PHD-DESIGN Archives


PHD-DESIGN Archives

PHD-DESIGN Archives


PHD-DESIGN@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

PHD-DESIGN Home

PHD-DESIGN Home

PHD-DESIGN  March 2017

PHD-DESIGN March 2017

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: A typography request

From:

"Eduardo A. Corte-Real" <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Wed, 22 Mar 2017 15:22:07 +0000

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (1 lines)

Dear Don this is the kind of stuff  that I really like:



Dear Ken and other dear colleagues,

(sorry for the long post. Maybe some Earl Grey, is now not necessary)



You asked, more or less, How could a modern research Design PhD could be built based on Academic studio work?



Let’s get back to what is the reason for your query on this.



I “complained” about the interference of people from other areas in Design Education that proclaim the wrongness of its lack of adequacy to university.



Sometimes these people twisted history to fit their narratives. 

Some of these people, to justify their proclamations, go even deeper in time depicting a history of design education based in rudimentary processes of transmitting knowledge.

Some of these people describe design education as a byproduct:

 of art education, by itself ( art education) a form of:

 myopic distorted system of producing knowledge when compared to their field of origin. 



But worse than that, some people claim that they know, 

not only, what Design is, 

Design should be, 

but (come on!) what Design was…



My post, followed Fernando’s call on Stigmergy and Design Education which, curiously enough had very interesting answers… 



“poor” Don, for once I agreed with you, when you opened all fields of inquiry to Design researchers even if they look far reaching. 

 

But let’s get back to what my post was about: 



Design Education and Mars attacks on its core.  



Let me clarify something about my previous post: 

When I say Academies, I’m referring to Art Academies or Fine Art Academies since they were from where Design Education came out. 



Of course that I’m calling Design Education, the system that includes a kin of Educational Institutions that Designers-to-be went/go to become Designers.



This requires that, for a little while, Anglo-Saxon native speakers forget, for clarity sake, the broad meaning that both the verb design and the noun design have in their language and accept that the word started to have a social meaning referring to a profession that we could more globally call (at its origin) applied arts. 



That’s why I claimed the Academic strength of Academies of Art as forefathers of Design PhDs.

I hope that thousands of books, conferences and articles produced by Art Academics are enough to rest my case on this.





(this requires extra breathing)



However Ken, you asked me a more refined question regarding the studio practice of the academies and how this tradition could be the basis of modern research based PhD studies. 



I could decide not to embark in this discussion since I truly believe that Art Academies produced enough work to root Design PhDs.

I could decide not to embark in this discussion since I truly believe that Art Academies produced enough work to root Design PhDs.

I could decide not to embark in this discussion since I truly believe that Art Academies produced enough work to root Design PhDs.



(in case of any of you didn’t understand what I was saying)



 I could simple go back to my initial first assertion: 



Contemporary Design PhD studies can have their legitimacy in the Academic work of Art Academies that produced treatises, anthologies, articles and conferences on infinite subjects related with the Arts (Applied or Fine) of the respective Academies. So, if you want to find a genealogy of such doctoral studies you should not focus on how cabinet makers cursed and spat (to the ground) while carving immensely rough blocks of wood.

Or why carpenters slammed poor apprentices’ heads.

Instead you should focus, for instance, how some academics tried to define a theory of vision, or, based on that, devise a process of chemically fixate images, or imagine architecture for an ideal society based on Plato’s Republic… 



But let me dance with you a little while longer before I get into the core of how studio based design education might be the base for contemporary PhDs. 



(a longer break is now also wiser)



As you know, the first University in Bologna was called Universitá degli Studi di Bologna and most of the early Italian Universities have this type of name that literally means: 

The whole of the studies in the city (Bologna, Pisa, Rome, Venice and so many others). 

Studi is the plural of studio and, of course, your English “studio” derives from this. University comes from that wholeness in the word Universitá. 

So, I would say that what you call studio practice of Art Academies corresponds to some sort of practical study done academically. This may seem like a joke or pun, but it is really what happens and happened.



The problem with people that didn’t went through art&design education is that they imagine that, in art educational institution’s studios, people were like Forest Gump banging ping-pong balls to the wall. 



(just another break to feel the ball going forth and back.. ping-pong; ping-pong)



Studio work, at least in my school, represented studying a lot. 

(And studying a lot should be the basis of any doctoral endeavor).



 The same people (in case you forgot, I’m referring to people who never went to art schools and believe that art schools are a sort of occupational institutions for forest Gumps) think that reproducing a corinthian capitel with milimetrical correction (now this needs almost a poem like division)

with shadows according to Gaspard Monge’s geometry

 was some sort of amusing flamboyant pointless bravado. 

Some people think that for reproducing a corinthian capital you don’t need to study the f. capital

 in all its geometrical complexity, 

its symbology, 

genesis, 

applicability

... and history. 

Some people think that being able to know late gothic alabaster Nottingham sculptures (and being able to afterwards critically develop new ideas from there to develop a vacum cleaner or a logo)

 was simply comparable to plumbing. 





(starting almost another subject)



The mythology about studio work in Design Education,

 enhanced by those who didn’t went through it,

 is 

that students would be developing their “creative” work almost alone, 

only sometimes being observed by autistic professors, 

and in the end being submitted to a Critic

 from where the final assessment came. 



On the contrary, 

(according to my experience)

 a project, developed in studio work, normally would have several phases, all discussed and assessed: 

1. a research phase in which not only the history of solutions for similar problems was thoroughly exhausted,  but also all the legal and technical constraints where surveyed, visual documentation, ethnographically or graphically produced or gathered and… sometimes read Heidegger’s Thinking, Dwelling, Building



2. , and, afterwards, a second phase through painstaking infinite sketches, drawings, models and prototypes, achieve the most sublime form, shape or whatever, respecting its feasibility but, alas, being able to move forward in the discipline, being able to produce original work, innovative and relevant, culturally meaningful and socially active, 



3. and a final phase of detailing and defining all the elements necessary as if it would be really produced or constructed which included a multipage text called “justifying and describing memory” . 

Of course that nothing of this has to do with PhD contemporary studies, no, it doesn’t… 



Academic studio work, as you call it, happens on, 

probably, 

one of the most competitive areas in Higher Education: 

Art. 

Art.

Yes, Art.



Getting in to a relevant Art School, at least in Europe, requires a lot, in terms of previous work and academic record, as well. Once inside, very few will become real artists, only one or two out of hundreds will become relevant artists, only one out of thousands will gain progress and open new frontiers. 

But this fact do not exclude the others from being really good and  consistently work for the progress of humankind through their art.









Well, my initial diatribe reacts mainly to a trailer of a documentary called “Design Disruptors”. One of the leading stars starts to declare that traditionally, Design Education has been related with Art Education and it shouldn’t be anymore. For him, Art has to do with creating problems and design about solving problems, so they should be separated.

There are several issues with this claim. First, the idea about problems with no solution had an author: Giulio Carlo Argan. It would have been nice to quote him. 



Second, since Design solves problems shouldn’t it be wiser to be near to the place where problems are generated? 



Third, again, the leading star never went to an art or design school. He had a degree in engineering and a PhD in Japan allegedly on Design. Nevertheless he applied and was chosen to be president of one of the most prestigious Art&Design Schools in the US… After six years, he quitted after a vote of disapproval by more than 80% of his colleagues. 



Also in the trailer, he claims that art schools are far from business. This, like other myths about art schools, is irrelevant since objects of art have the greater disproportion between cost and price. In fact, one work of art can multiply by ten its prize making rich several people in the process.



(Now I’m getting to a conclusion) 

However, the highest stupidity amongst those who claim that design should live separated from art has to do with the discipline of Art History, or History of Art. 

History of art gives a perspective of how human societies produced objects of excellence, of human excellence, I must say. 

A education in Art History is an education not only on the variations of aesthetical perception but also on applied technical innovation. But more than this, it gives a perspective on the quest of humans for their indisputable humanity. 

This has not only to do with masterpieces, but also with notions like “style” overwhelmingly vertical in all human object productions, rich or poor, in some periods of Time.  



I’m sure that, during the XXth century we all have witnessed how human problems, engineered or submitted to business, have driven humanity. Extracting Design from art would be another steady step towards a soulless ignorant bright future.      



Best, 

Eduardo

.

Eduardo Corte-Real

PhD Arch.

Associate Professor

Professor Associado com Agregação

[log in to unmask]

Eduardo Corte-Real

PhD Arch.

Associate Professor

Professor Associado com Agregação

[log in to unmask]









-----------------------------------------------------------------

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

-----------------------------------------------------------------

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

For help and support help@jisc.ac.uk

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager