 |
 |
Dear Carlos Not all observations are arguments, nor do they need to be - hence the binary opposition of Argument/Non-argument. Becoming aware of a tendency is part of a general critical awareness in practice - it might be a critique that expands our awareness - it might just be a comment that could help improve things in a routine way. Whatever, we need to attend. cheers keith russell OZ Newcastlee >>> GK VanPatter indicates the need Œ... to resist the temptation to create idealized notions of design ...¹. However, I was struck by his wild guess (quoted below) as it does not correspond with my experience of design education in the UK. No current postgraduate programmes that I know of in graphic design, interior architecture, art direction, motion graphics, sustainable product design - as tutor, examiner or colleague - set briefs but these are set by the designers themselves. One of the ways by which uncertainty is usually managed is to split issues into binary oppositions, whereby one of the two terms is prioritized (idealized) while the other vilified. e. g., theory - practice; tame - wicked; leadership - management; and in this case, design industry - design education. To infer a binary opposition from a wild guess lacks the necessary rigour to be considered an argument. Carlos Sapochnik --------------------------------------- Middlesex University London On 10/11/08 06:03, "GK VanPatter | NextD" <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Much of design practice remains confined within what we call the brief > business. Briefs are defined, framed problems. Taking a wild guess I would > say that 90% of design schools around the world still reflect this tradition > and remain engaged in teaching process tools and skills that not only assume > a design brief but are specifically, systematically geared to jumping off > from that downstream framing. (Often that framing is being done by others > with no design background.)