Klaus, Terry, et al,
2009/9/14 Klaus Krippendorff <[log in to unmask]>
> terry,
>
> yes, of course.
>
> [...]
>
> lay-designers don't need a design discourse. they usually design for
> themselves, rearrange their furniture they way they see fit, cook a great
> meal, carve a nice figure from driftwood. all of this requires much
> imagination, but not necessarily coordination with other designers and
> stakeholders.
>
> competence in the use of a design discourse is what you acquire in design
> education. if you don't talk like a designer, can't think like a designer,
> can't work with others as a designer, you are not a designer
>
So, lay-designers aren't designers. I'm looking at the term "lay designer"
as a specialization of the term "designer," which is a pretty natural way to
consider the 2 terms. I /think/ Klaus thinks of the two groups - "lay
designers" and "designers" - as being disjoint (or nearly so). Whereas I
consider "lay designers" to denote a subset of "designers."
And what about people who have a natural talent in discourse? Of course
they are in a relative minority, but mightn't some of them make good "lay
designers" with reasonable design discourse skills?
Cheers.
Fil.
> klaus
>
[...]
--
Filippo A. Salustri, Ph.D., P.Eng.
Mechanical and Industrial Engineering
Ryerson University
350 Victoria St, Toronto, ON
M5B 2K3, Canada
Tel: 416/979-5000 ext 7749
Fax: 416/979-5265
Email: [log in to unmask]
http://deseng.ryerson.ca/~fil/
|