On 29/5/19, 7:37 pm, Terence Love" <[log in to unmask] on behalf of [log in to unmask]> wrote:
I'm seriously arguing that aesthetics is NOT part of design. That is It would be better if research definitions of design explicitly excluded aesthetics.
I too must dissent from this provocative and unusual exclusion. But I do so from a pragmatic professional position. In information design we have created a suite of standards against which to measure the effectiveness of our work. These are analogous to engineering design standards but specifically designed for our field.
Over half the standards are to do with avoiding the rubbish bin. Because there is so much information circulating in our society, most people have developed information avoidance strategies. We have to meet these information avoidance strategies head on and ensure that what we produce gets attention.
Some of these standards are concerned with issues that are part of the range of things that come under the heading of aesthetics. If we neglect them, our work ends up in the real or virtual dustbin, making a contribution to landfill and digital waste which in turn lead to environmental pollution, energy wastage, loss of productivity, and increases in social inequity and disadvantage.
I vote for keeping aesthetics in.
BTW, if you want to look at our standards and why we have them go to:
https://communication.org.au/standards-communication-information-design/
https://communication.org.au/standards-getting-attention/
https://communication.org.au/standards-engaging-people/
David
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|