Ken,
As much as I agree on the difficulty of getting people to remember and separate multiple definitions, I agree about the value of a broad definition and also agree on the value of several narrow definitions.
The problem with the broad definition is like the old joke about the generalist who knows less and less about more and more until he knows nothing about everything. As the net is made wider, the catch is more mixed. That, like so much of life, is good news and bad news.
The problem with narrower definitions isn't exactly the specialist joke (he knows more and more about less and less until he knows everything about nothing.) It's that the important lessons may be just beyond the confines of the definition. As a graphic designer, I wouldn't learn from the parallel experience of other design fields. Or maybe I'm being too broad; I've seen web designers who aren't interested in anything known by print designers and vice versa and package designers who don't care what signage designers know.
One of the strengths of design broadly and one of the strengths of many specific design fields is heterogeneity. As much as many designers love to systematize, one of design's strengths is that we have yet to manage to do it to ourselves. A broad definition becomes less useful for lack of precision. A narrow definition becomes less useful for being exclusionary.
(When I was in grad school, I did a project that may have been one of the most important things I did for several reasons, not the least of which was getting the chance to hear a CalArts undergrad declare "That's not design.")
Gunnar
----------
Gunnar Swanson
East Carolina University
graphic design program
http://www.ecu.edu/cs-cfac/soad/graphic/index.cfm
Gunnar Swanson Design Office
1901 East 6th Street
Greenville NC 27858
USA
[log in to unmask]
+1 252 258 7006
http://www.gunnarswanson.com
|