 |
 |
Hi Carlos, I think I agree with the general tone of what you are saying if I understand you right. The origin of the 'Art and Design' terminology, in the UK at least occurred sometime soon after the start of the industrial revolution. The ability to mass produce products resulted in the need for products to not just work but also be attractive to wealthy customers. That is to align with the appearance of the interior décor of expensive houses and the fashionable clothes of the wealthy within. This led to the employment of industrial artists who added 'designs' to the surface appearances of products, machines and any creation of the industrial revolution whose appearance needed beautifying. Much of the training of that time needed by these industrial artists creating designs on the surface of products was similar to that needed by artists and private schools started up to teach 'Art and Design' that were very closely associated with Art education. The design of the products beneath their surfaces was the exclusive preserve of engineering designers. There is a separation line between designers that use mathematics and those that do not. Typically, those that are not taught mathematics as part of their education in design activity are those that were previously seen as 'Art and Design'. I've suggested (strongly!) that it would be helpful to move that boundary and have increased mathematics education in those design fields in which it is absent. The other way, there has been a fairly strong thrust to include Art and Liberal Arts education in the design realms that use mathematics for at least 40 years. It will be interesting to see how increased involvement in meaning making sides of design changes meaning making, and how meaning making becomes adopted in more mathematical sides of design. My guess is they will come together in computer automated design software within the decade and perhaps a lot sooner. I can see this as a sort of 'select the product type and click the words that you associate with the meaning you want to communicate, and then choose one of the 5 design solutions that have been automatically produced for you by the software'. The interesting design work will be designing the software. . . . Best wishes, Terry -----Original Message----- From: [log in to unmask] [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Carlos Pires Sent: Tuesday, 16 September 2014 6:02 PM To: PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design Subject: Re: background vs design Dear Terry, On 16/09/2014, at 07:15, Terence Love wrote: > knowledge'. I was suggesting that clarity and theoretical embodiment > (if that is ontologically possible) about this difference is still > developing in Art and Design. It seems to be clearer in for example > textile and fashion In discussing this particular topic, I think we must ditch, once and for all, the term "Art and Design". The mere act of using this expression obliterates centuries of human history. It's bad for Art. It's bad for Design. For starters, Art has a very specific place in culture, regardless of the way you look at it. Its motivations and implications are absolutely un-conflatable with any other human activity. Its history, though intertwined with every other aspect of culture, is unique. We should be aware that there is a huge semantic problem with the english word "Art", because it is used as a label for every pictorial expression, no matter how far removed it might be from actual "Art". I know that some people might pick up the "semantic" thread and pull on it in, to try to unravel my argument. Well, there's another problem with saying "Art and Design": it stopped being used 20 years ago. The cool kids don't use it anymore. And given the fact that communication is based on convention, when you use a dialect of your own, nobody will understand you. > The above difference occurs in say Graphic Design, in the difference > between 'color theory' (type a) and 'the use of color theory by a > human while designing' (type b), or in typography the difference > between 'information about leading, font metrics, kerning and > typefaces' (type a) and 'design activity involved in setting text so > that when it is printed it feels like it has a clear information > hierarchy and the page has even greyness in the body blocks' (type b). Again, this is a type of remark that shows you are not focusing your efforts in understand what design is, and how it is possible that something like "Communication Design" can exist. I don't see any problem in the existence of: —Aerospatial design —Architectural design —Communication design —Engineering design —Fashion design —Graphic design —... The problem you seem to have in understanding communication design is probably related to the immaterial nature of communication. That's what is DESIGNED in communication design: meaning (as it was already pointed out by a few people in here). And that type of work, i.e., design meaning, is done at a systemic level. The example you tried shows you are reaching out to that systemic quality of design, but your puzzlement shows you didn't reach it. You can take comfort in the fact that you are not alone in this puzzlement. Great minds before you already showed that same failure to understand the interconnectedness of matter and information that renders communication possible. Saussure and Peirce, for instance. They couldn't come to grips with it. But that was 120 years ago. Shall we move on? Best regards, ================================== Carlos Pires [log in to unmask] [log in to unmask] ------------------------------------------------------------- Design & New Media MFA // Communication Design PhD Student @ FBA-UL Check the project blog: http://thegolemproject.com ----------------------------------------------------------------- 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 ----------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- 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 -----------------------------------------------------------------