Just to clarify our terms while discussing "design criticism," "criticism"
means considerably more than evaluating, also taking into account
identifying, classifying, interpreting and, some would argue most
importantly, establishing meaning. Engineering, electronics, business
systems design, etc. have already been the subject of some study in this
regard (a good place to see examples of such historical evaluation would
be SHOT, the journal of the Society for the History of Technology). But
it’s important to also be aware of the implications and context of our
practice while it’s taking shape, not just retrospectively.
Because design has remained so rooted in practice and public reception,
criticism has never fully developed and plays a minor role in design
studies. Without a well-developed tradition of design criticism, we lose
the first step that other fields take for granted, namely creating a
dialogue and building a shared sense of community and history. In art and
literature, criticism is the first step towards compiling histories.
Histories build identities. While designers are absorbed in the present,
it's important to grasp where we've come from, who we are now, and start
to shape how we're going to be understood in the future.
|