 |
 |
From a conceptual perspective: there's also the interesting possibility, when working generatively, that introducing inaccuracies, slippages and misinterpretations may assist us in developing new concepts - a kind of willful ekphrasis, if you like, where we allow the confusions elicited by such elisions to force us to generate new vantage points and thus formulate novel designerly problems... The contradiction implicit in my term willful ekphrasis is deliberate; I hope it shows, in its construction, that very play between concepts wherein generation of this kind can occur... it's kind of like Orwell's doublethink, only one that's performative, constructive and generative, one that expands our available options for thought and action rather than constricts them. Obviously such conceptual practice would require a sense of lightness and play, one which allowed a practitioner to move from a grounded practice for verification and validation of effectiveness to free conceptual movement for generation as and when necessary in the process. While I wouldn't think it was a beginner's tool, and that it may only have use with problems that seem intractable, I feel it should be part of any designer's training right from the beginning. Adam On 7 April 2010 12:23, David Sless <[log in to unmask]> wrote: <SNIP>