jon, carla, et al.,
i very much applaud your assertion that designers need to make contribution
to cultural significance, to the meaning of artifacts. it echoes what i
suggested, based on the etymology of the word design "design is making sense
of artifacts." designers contribute to how people relate to technology.
but there is a difference between what designers do, should do, or be
educated to do and what they should do when writing dissertations, inquiring
into something, and organizing teaching. then they do need to contribute
something akin to knowledge: know-how, proven design methods, ways of
justifying designs to those who matter. this is not the kind of
generalizations that scientists cherish in the form of theories or
abstractions, knowledge in the renaissance sense, but some communicable
ability nevertheless.
klaus
-----Original Message-----
From: Jon Allen [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Thursday, October 07, 2004 3:38 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Culture and Design
Dear Carla,
Should a PhD in design be described in cultural terms?
We think it is unhelpful to describe studio invention as a contribution
to knowledge. This remains the key criterion for the PhD beyond the
Faculty at Monash, as in all universities. But we felt strongly that
the imaginative work of artists and designers in creating new ways of
looking, forming and interacting should not be defined in terms of
knowledge, because this falsifies not only the sensory, intuitive and
creative processes of making but also their patterns of evaluation, as
with the sundry formalist and ideological, symbolic and metaphorical
criteria that may be engaged by a critic. Meaning in art and design
cannot be reduced to knowledge except with great pretension or
evasiveness; and so how much less available are the creative processes
to such a narrow epistemological framework?
Better, therefore, to define the PhD as making a substantial
contribution of cultural significance. The specification of cultural
significance has greatly helped us to recognize the rigour proper to
research in the studio disciplines, which of course design is.
We talk about research in terms of the 'contribution to knowledge', but
the real premise of design is not to contribute to knowledge, but rather
to contribute to the betterment of the human condition. This is a
crucial issue, and one that I feel is often missed by design researchers
in their search for 'new knowledge'.
Is knowledge explicitly the goal of design research, or rather should we
redefine design research in terms of design's contribution to humanity,
culture, and society?
This is a pressing issue for the design research community, and will be
an underlying theme that the Futureground Conference will address. I
think you would benefit from coming - especially as there is a discount
for PhD students.
Kind regards,
Jon Allen
Academic Co-ordinator Futureground
--
Dr Jonathon Allen
Department of Design
Monash University
PO Box 197,
Caulfield East
Melbourne
Victoria 3145
Australia
Phone: +61 3 9903 2070
Fax: +61 3 9903 1440
e-mail: [log in to unmask]
<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
-----
Dear all,
I'm doing my PhD about the influence of cultural aspects on
Design.
Can you please help me finding out the research centres
and/or the researches who work on this area of study.
I would like to know what are the topics they work on and
what are the methodological approaches they use.
Best regards,
Carla P. Giuliano
PhD student in Industrial Design
Politecnico di Milano/Italy
|