I agree with the observation of scientists that Derek notes; that is my
sense too. I think of it as a kind of selflessness; they put the
determination of the (scientific) truth ahead of who specifically it is who
knows it. There are, of course, scientists who are quite self-centred and
egomaniacal - every barrel has a bottom.
I'm not saying designers are by intention self-centred and egomaniacal. I
think it's as Keith very eloquently described it: that's just how things
developed in design. I would respectfully submit that designers might
become even better than they already are if they learnt to be a *bit* more
like scientists.
Cheers.
Fil
On 30 March 2011 07:00, Derek Miller <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Dear Keith,
>
> That is a very rich description of why both artists and designers may be
> fearful of the transformation of their practices into theory, and hence
> "discipline" as the academy would have it. Thanks for that.
>
> Another modern example, by the way, is fiction writing. As an author
> myself, I'm of the view that one can indeed apprentice to a writer and one
> can indeed become better at the craft.
>
> I don't think a Ph.D. should be offered in creative writing, whereas it
> should be offered in literary theory, literary history, and literary
> criticism (perhaps others as well). Meanwhile, the Master of Fine Arts (as
> we have it in the U.S. ) is a superb degree for writers if working with, and
> under, good writers.
>
> My observation has been less eloquent that yours. It's more Austin Powers
> than Blake, namely, "They'll steal my mojo!"
>
> The funny thing about scientists is that they don't fear this. Yes, someone
> else might "get there" first, or worse, a competing theory may win out, and
> all that bother, but there isn't a sense of being redundant as soon as one
> becomes proficient. In fact, I'm argue that serious scientists, upon
> achieving a certain level of expertise, realize how rare indeed they are in
> the world, and how much value they can offer.
>
> I hope designers get there too. I don't think all design practice should be
> elevated to theory, just as I'm not convinced that the art of writing can be
> taught, whereas the craft indeed can be (I'm thinking of John Gardner here,
> who was divine at teaching this). But just as one can practice writing or
> study it as literature, I see a future when design too may need to grow
> comfortable with its duality, just as the productiion of literature is not,
> and need not be informed by, the theory of it. And so too can great
> historians and theorists exist on writing without even trying their hand at
> the craft.
>
> d.
>
> _________________
> Dr. Derek B. Miller
> Director
>
> The Policy Lab
> 321 Columbus Ave.
> Seventh Floor of the Electric Carriage House
> Boston, MA 02116
> United States of America
>
> Phone
> +1 617 440 4409
> Twitter
> @Policylabtweets
> Web
> www.thepolicylab.org
>
> On Tuesday, March 29, 2011 at 11:55 PM, Keith Russell wrote:
> > Dear Derek
> >
> > I agree with your complaints - ambivalence is prevalent - acculturation
> > is the man way of addressing the problem.
> >
> > And, there are very subtle reasons for these lingering inhibitions to
> > the development of design as an academic filed of relevance.
> >
> > The suggestion you make about "crafting solutions" is one entry point
> > to the deconstruction of the monster. In crafting we generally allow a
> > high level of technique, that is, knowledge that is made evident in the
> > practice but is not readily transferable or amenable to formula or
> > theory. Indeed, we can structure the argument such that to talk of
> > technique is to talk of a range of skills that are observable,
> > repeatable and transferable through the long and slow methods of
> > apprenticeship.
> >
> > For strange historical reasons, technology became the objects and
> > processes that embody technique - that is, the study of technique
> > (ology) became instead the machines that were constructed out of an
> > analysis of how craftspeople crafted things. We can think of a modern
> > example to exemplify this operation. Think of car spray painting as a
> > technique held by an expert that has then been transferred, through
> > robotic modeling, to a machine.
> >
> > This transfer has been accomplished for many craft practices, but not
> > all. Much of the resistance to theory in creative fields such as art and
> > design arises from the fear that transferable knowledge will be found
> > and hence the designer's craft techniques will be made redundant (think
> > of desktop publishing and automatic kerning) and from the realization
> > that the underlying craft skills are best protected by keeping what
> > might be know a secret (think of guilds).
> >
> > Then there is the world of craft knowledges that communities resist
> > elaborating because a fuller understanding of how things happen in
> > society would upset existing status arrangements. If we knew who in the
> > room was the person who tapped the dish and brought about the
> > crystallization of the solution then we might have to rearrange the deck
> > chairs and worse, we would be seen to be beholden to their "magic" skill
> > (think of Marilyn Whirlwind, the native Alaskan receptionist in Northern
> > exposure).
> >
> > We fumble, we stumble, we are awkward. But, we could know lots and lots
> > and lots more about what we do and what others do but do we really want
> > to know? The moral urgency about current world events is no good reason
> > for us to become more human; rather, the urgency is a sure guarantee
> > that we are being human enough. Besides which, as Blake would have it,
> > devils are the go-to people for answers.
> >
> > cheers
> >
> > keith russell
> > OZ newcastle
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > > > "Derek B. Miller" <[log in to unmask]> 03/30/11 3:56 AM >>>
> > Dear Harold,
> >
> > When people tell me they are involved in a practice, it means to me
> > that they are involved in an activity that has a beginning, middle and
> > end (even if the end is a new beginning); and that the practice is
> > distinguishable from other practices.
> >
> > The challenge I have with design taken to be "writ large" is that it
> > becomes indistinguishable as practice. There are other words, for
> > example, that also suggest processes of deliberate creation, and indeed
> > the word "create" is one of them. As is formulate or craft. Surely, we
> > all craft solutions.
> >
> > I understand you've been at this for decades, so I don't want to pick a
> > fight, but coming in rather new to the field from a position outside it,
> > I do see a few patterns:
> >
> > 1. That the field of design is struggling to estabilish itself as an
> > academic discipline, but is ambivalent about the development of theory
> > to explain and distinguish itself
> >
> > 2. That the everyday term "design" in English is regularly confused
> > with the discipline of design, and the practice of design, whether by
> > professional "designers" or people whom we impute to be designing. This
> > intellectual confusion seems so native to the conversations that I fear
> > people are becoming acculturated to it rather than aggrevated by it, and
> > therefore endeavoring to offer a remedy (and it begs the question of how
> > this addressed by scholars and practitioners working on design in
> > languages that provide other forms of differentiation to be made)
> >
> > 3. That "design thinking" isn't making much of an inroad among people
> > working on peace and security issues, because innovation and harnessing
> > creativity just is not viewed as the issue. However, design processes,
> > such as modeling, prototyping, simulating, co-designing and other
> > practices are capturing the imaginations of some key people because they
> > are very concerned indeed about A) how existing knowledge is not
> > becoming manifest in project/programming solutions and B) how to form
> > new cooperative opportunities that take us beyond debate or
> > deliberation.
> >
> > I did not mean to suggest * if I did * that design is limited to a
> > small set of activities. But to answer the question, "aren't we doing
> > this already?" with a statement of potential value, one does need to
> > propose (in my view) sets of actions that are accomplishable,
> > distinguishable, and useful to existing social processes.
> >
> > derek
> > _________________
> > Dr. Derek B. Miller
> > Director
> >
> > The Policy Lab
> > 321 Columbus Ave.
> > Seventh Floor of the Electric Carriage House
> > Boston, MA 02116
> > United States of America
> >
>
--
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/
|