nicola,
yes, it may help you realize what is carried over from the industrial area,
but i find the attribute "industrial" unnecessarily confining by committing
yourself to an industrial/material production perspective. as such, it
excludes: designing human interfaces, designing content for websites,
designing political campaigns, designing an organization, designing a
corporate design strategy, etc. these all are aspects of design
increasingly worth attending to.
klaus
-----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 Nicola
Morelli
Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2006 3:24 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Beyond Definitions (reply from Ken Friedman)
HI Klaus,
you said:
>>defining design with the attributes
"industrial" or "product" ties us to an older economy, encourages us to
address practices that are less innovative<< yes, this is one aspect of the
question, related to the definition, but another aspect is that by using the
same attributes in a different context we may reflect upon the meaning of
those attributes. YOu know how the displacement of things, or the
translation of terms from a context to another is sometimes producing
interesting insights, innovation and even a better comprehension of the
meening of the same terms. I personally found that using "industrial" design
in a post-industrial context helped me to understand what is there, from the
industrial culture, that can be "reused" in the postindustrial system of
production and consumption.
Nicola
Associate Professor Nicola Morelli, PhD
School of Architecture and Design
Aalborg University, Denmark
Web: www.aod.aau.dk/staff/nmor
________________________________
From: Klaus Krippendorff [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Wed 20-12-2006 15:34
To: Nicola Morelli; [log in to unmask]
Subject: RE: Beyond Definitions (reply from Ken Friedman)
on several economies working side by side, yes this seems to be so:
we have industry, producing hardware, for example; we have agriculture,
producing food and flowers (partly industrialized); we have hunters and
gatherers, maybe more for sports or in the form of the homeless.
most of these older economic activities work relatively routine, are
stagnant with little innovation.
we have also the media, including advertising and politics, and information
technology whose hardware components are produced industrially but whose
lives depends on human participation, the meanings that people read into it,
how they identify themselves in its terms.
this is where most of the innovation takes place. to me, designers always
spearhead cultural development. defining design with the attributes
"industrial" or "product" ties us to an older economy, encourages us to
address practices that are less innovative, more or less solved. this is
why i have argued that "meaning matters more than function."
klaus
-----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 Nicola
Morelli
Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2006 9:10 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Beyond Definitions (reply from Ken Friedman)
Hi all,
Ken Friedman replied to me and the list, but apparently the list did not
receiving it, so, here is Ken's message:
=============
From: [log in to unmask] [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2006 2:10 PM
To: Nicola Morelli
Cc: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Beyond Definitions, was Industrial Design
Dear Nicola,
Good thoughts.
One of the challenges we facein describing the context of design activities
is the fact that we still live in an industrial economy as well as in a
post-industrial economy.
Over 10,000 years ago, human beings moved from a hunting-gathering economy
into the agricultural economy. Following several developmental revolutions,
the first of at least four or five industrial revolutions began in the
Middle Ages. How many there have been depend on how you count.
In 1940 or so, a British-Australian economist named Colin Clark described
three economies, from the primary economy of agriculture, fishing, and
forestry to the tertiary economy of services. In 1976, Daniel Bell
elaborated this into an economy of five sectors in his book The Coming of
Post-Industrial Society. To place this in the context of design and design
research, I have reworked Bell's structure into seven sectors -- starting
with a Zero Economy for the nearly billion people who are shut out of much
of the world's economic activity to Economy Six, the ultra-post-industrial
experience economy.
The key fact of all these is that they operate side by side. All the
productive economies exist and need each other. At the height of the third
or fourth industrial revolution in the late 1800s, for example, the majority
of the world's people still worked in the primary economy to feed and
provide raw material to all the rest. In most advanced economies today,
three farmers feed all the rest of us. Nevertheless, without their work in
the primary economy, the other five economies would collapse.
The shifting proportions between economic sectors means that some of the
world lives in a post-industrial knowledge economy or an experience economy.
At the same time, we still need computers, cars, trains, telephones -- even
chairs, dinner plates, drinking glasses. Industrial designers have a role to
play in the important industrial economy that continues to make the
post-industrial economy possible by supplying the goods that people use in
their daily post-industrial lives.
Since much of this also involves the flow of information in automated or
programmed services -- manufactured through another kind of industrial
process -- your inquiry into the nature of a definition offers a valuable
insight into the logic of the designation "industrial design."
Thanks.
Ken Friedman
==============
Associate Professor Nicola Morelli, PhD
School of Architecture and Design, Aalborg University, Denmark
Web: www.aod.aau.dk/staff/nmor
skype: nicomorelli
|
