JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for PHD-DESIGN Archives


PHD-DESIGN Archives

PHD-DESIGN Archives


PHD-DESIGN@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

PHD-DESIGN Home

PHD-DESIGN Home

PHD-DESIGN  2002

PHD-DESIGN 2002

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: Design By All

From:

Gunnar Swanson <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Gunnar Swanson <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Sun, 3 Nov 2002 15:44:32 -0800

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (118 lines)

 From Klaus:
>I also feel rather uncomfortable when reflections on a fascinating issue are
>countered by opponents that do not permit the many shades of gray between
>the extremes.
>
>Apparently, the very thought that designing could be a practice that
>constitutes being human is threatening some designers wishing to preserve
>design as a privileged expertise of few individuals, invoking all kinds
>polarities including rational/intuitive, elites/masses,
>individualism/collectivism and so forth.

 From Kari-Hans:
>Dear Lubomir, Glenn, Gunnar,
>
>Siding with Ken's more elaborate response, I am puzzled by consistent
>breeding of the 'black-or-white' / 'either-or' positions in the
>discussion.
>
>Why is it that we so often end up in this 'nothing or everything'
>dichotomy? This seems to be a recurring obstacle in a community with
[snip]
>I have not seen any of the 'proponents' of the 'design-by-all' or
>whatever we might call this position, advocating that 'everybody
>should design everything' or 'all design should be done by laymen'.
>
>
>However, I have seen the 'opponents' repeating that this is the
>argument of the 'proponents', which has been repeatedly and fairly
>patiently dismissed by the 'proponents'.

By my inclusion in Kari-Hans' salutation I can only assume that I am
believed to be one of the spokesmen for "nothing or everything"
described here so I feel like I should respond.

I do not believe I am such a spokesman nor do I believe that my post
indicated that.

I may be missing where the rainbow of gray shades was presented. I
know that "Design By All" originated with another thread. If someone
would like to direct me to posts in any other thread that would
enlighten me, I would appreciate it. I reread the "Design By All"
thread and am still mystified as to what it is about. There seem to
be a couple of solid points:

1.
Some people bravely argue for the inclusion of people affected by
design in the design process and for the notion that some decision
that are made by professional designers might be better made by users
of design. This makes me repeat what I said in my earlier post:

Duh.

Is there anyone out there who would like to argue for designers
ignoring others, making decisions in a vacuum, and subverting
people's control over their lives in every manner possible? As a
general proposition, this ranks up with "We should treat other people
well" and "We should not kill or fellow humans for sport."

2.
There is also an argument that design (in a broad sense of the word)
is a fairly basic human activity and that it is not limited to people
who have business cards that say "Designer" somewhere on them.

Duh (and, I should add: So what?)

One of Ken's posts on the subject rightly pointed to what seems
obvious: There are some design activities that many people can do and
others that fewer people can (or would want to) do. Is anyone
anywhere really claiming that, as Klaus suggests, we should "usurp an
activity that is common and basically human"?

Who are these "designers wishing to preserve design as a privileged
expertise of few individuals"? Are they straw men for an argument
that nobody but a complete fool would put forth?

Was there anyone in this thread (or any other) who suggested that
elitism for its own sake, exclusion for the sake of personal
enrichment or ego gratification, or a generalized attack on democracy
in all its forms?

In reviewing the thread I -do- think I made an error in
interpretation: I wrote: "The moves back and forth between various
senses of the word 'design,' the conflation of various stakeholders
having a voice in the design process and notion that design
can/should/would/would happily be done by all. . . . It's dizzying"
but I admit that upon review it may be clear that nobody said
anything as substantive as I implied. The strange logical dance got
us all the way to the obvious. Duh and duh.

Although my post attacked Philippa's introductory logic, it lauded
the fact that she produced a concrete example. It raised some
interesting ideas about the roles of the users of design in the
design process. I thought her claims for similarity between user
modification and designers' lack of real originality were slightly
overstated but deserved discussion and clarification.

I pointed out what I thought were some interesting questions that
stem from her example. I clearly did not advocate a "black or white"
or "either/or" positions. If I seemed to paint others as doing so, I
was just trying to figure out what was really proposed that sustained
so much conversation. Whether others think the questions I asked
about Philippa's example were either interesting or on-topic, I
repeat my earlier question about this thread:

Huh?

Gunnar
--
Gunnar Swanson Design Office
536 South Catalina Street
Ventura CA 93001-3625
USA

+1 805 667 2200
[log in to unmask]

http://www.gunnarswanson.com

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

For help and support help@jisc.ac.uk

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager