 |
 |
Hi Toon, Great topic and useful. The ways products are repurposed by users is an interesting phenomena. There was some work undertaken for Xerox in the 80s (by Leifer if I remember right) that distinguished between variance, variety and variability in design. One of them refers to the wide range of unusual ways and purposes that people use a product. The photocopier is a good example of unusual repurposing. Some years ago, based on work by J.C. Jones and J. Woollatt, some of us had a related interest in exploring how people 'design their lives' by using products often designed for other purposes. It potentially offered insights into improving product design processes - which is I'm guessing where your work is headed? There are some initial analyses and categories that might be relevant for your research at 'Love, T. (2003). Customers' Use of Products as Design Tools. In Proceedings of the 6th Asian Design Conference. Tsukuba' (great conference) there is a pre-print at http://www.love.com.au/PublicationsTLminisite/2003/product_design_tools.htm ) A core assumption in this kind of analysis is that 'a design' is a *set of instructions* for making or doing something (not the thing or act itself) and the 'activity of designing' is making such a set of instructions. From this point of view, a person only 'uses something as a design tool' (i.e. designs) if the result is they produce a *set of instructions* (a design)for making or doing something (changes to their life), rather than simply making or doing something or changing their life. Best wishes, Terry -----Original Message----- From: PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of toon Sent: Wednesday, 2 November 2011 7:39 PM To: Dr Terence Love Subject: The "intermediatness" of a product Hi all, You may remember me form earlier threads, I am a product designer (in my last year of my study) and have to think about what I would like to show the world at my graduation. I started out with the concept of happiness and products, you helped me a great deal with this. I found out that this (as the concept of ethics was about a year ago) is abstract and very hard to translate to the physical world. I looked at "the motivation of the designer" (for the modernists that was to make the world a better place) and "the intention of the designer" (that sometimes is different from what happens with the product in the real world.) And from these ideas I came to look at a product (that most take as an end point of the design) as an intermediate product, that will find its final form with the user. Like El Lissitzky said "Every form is the frozen instantaneous picture of a process. Thus a work is a stopping place on the road to becoming and is not a fixed goal." To give a simple illustration, one can take a cup and use it to put flowers in, than the cup is not a cup but a vase. So the user can "change" the product. It is clear in modular systems like LEGO. There the product you buy (the physical blocks) are not the end product, the concept of building is. Does anyone have any other illustrations or theories on this subject. Thanks for you valuable time. Toon Welling