Dear Ken and all,
Historically, where it gets interesting is not when or whether any sort of artefacts were produced but whether a *design* for them was made first. As far as I can see that is the a useful way of differentiating between designed objects and other objects.
An example, I'm currently just completing a handrail for a curving staircase. There was no design created for this shapely balustrade, i.e. no thing I could hand to someone else and say this is what is intended to be made. I'd suggest this balustrade is NOT a design object (regardless of how beautiful it looks). Instead of creating a design prior to manufacture, construction was based only on decisions about materials and the use of particular craft practices. You might want to argue that these constitute a design or the practice of design. To do that, however, would seem to flow straight into the theory difficulties of the 'everything is design' problem, which is probably in the long term not helpful - for design theory or design research.
Hence my original question. It is useful for the scholarship of design history to explicitly differentiate between design objects and other objects. Whether a design was created first is the most obvious start. In terms of research practice, this suggests the starting point is to first find the design.
Best wishes,
Terry
--
Dr Terence Love
PhD (UWA), B.A. (Hons) Engin, PGCE. FDRS, AMIMechE, MISI Director, Love Services Pty Ltd PO Box 226, Quinns Rocks Western Australia 6030
Tel: +61 (0)4 3497 5848
Fax:+61 (0)8 9305 7629
[log in to unmask]
--
-----Original Message-----
From: [log in to unmask] [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ken Friedman
Sent: Friday, 11 July 2014 7:02 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Dating methodologies in design history research
Dear Chuck and All,
While one can use such documents as "first advertisement, review article, patent application, demonstration or other means communicating” to date modern designed artefacts, human artefacts before the modern era lack this kind of documentation. To date designed artefacts over the centuries, one must use several kinds of methods.
The first human tools date back 2.5 million years, to an era long before writing of any kind. Archeology offers the methods required for this kind of research. For the most part, Elif’s inquiry involves artefacts since human beings began to live and work in cities. This is the past ten thousand years.
To get a sense of this era, I’d suggest starting with L. Sprague de Camp. De Camp writes about ancient technology and engineering in a useful volume. I’ve included references and links to Amazon for some useful volumes.
de Camp, L. Sprague. 1987. The Ancient Engineers. New York: Ballantine Books.
http://www.amazon.com/Ancient-Engineers-L-Sprague-Camp/dp/0345482875
The designed artefacts of early technology came without documentation or patents. To learn more about these, I suggest reading the history of technology and civilisation in different times. For the first industrial revolutions that took place in the Western Middle Ages, Arnold Pacey’s books are useful:
Pacey, Arnold. 1991. Technology in World Civilization: A Thousand-Year History. Cambridge, Massachusetts. The MIT Press.
http://www.amazon.com/Technology-World-Civilization-Thousand-Year-History/dp/0262660725
Pacey, Arnold. 1992. The Maze of Ingenuity: Ideas and Idealism in the Development of Technology. 2nd Edition. Cambridge, Massachusetts. The MIT Press.
http://www.amazon.com/Maze-Ingenuity-Idealism-Development-Technology/dp/026266075X
Also see Jean Gimpel:
Gimpel, Jean. 1977. The Medieval Machine: The Industrial Revolution Of The Middle Ages. London: Penguin Books.
http://www.amazon.com/Medieval-Machine-Industrial-Revolution-Middle/dp/0760735832
Joseph Needham’s massive history of science and technology in China is far too large for most folks to read, but Robert Temple has produced an excellent summary volume with an introduction by Needham himself:
Temple, Robert. 2007. The Genius of China: 3,000 Years of Science, Discovery, and Invention. Rochester, Vermont: Inner Traditions.
http://www.amazon.com/Genius-China-Science-Discovery-Invention/dp/1594772177
Patent law begins in the late 1400s in Venice, in the 1600s in England, and the 1790s in the United States. It is only after the 1600s with well organised patent records, wide use of newspapers, and widespread advertising that more contemporary kinds of dating become useful. Henry Petroski demonstrates how to use these kinds of tools in his work. A rich set of examples appears in:
Petroski, Henry. 1994. The Evolution of Useful Things: How Everyday Artifacts-From Forks and Pins to Paper Clips and Zippers-Came to be as They Are. New York: Vintage.
http://www.amazon.com/Evolution-Useful-Things-Artifacts--Zippers-Came/dp/0679740392
Best regards,
Ken
Ken Friedman, PhD, DSc (hc), FDRS | Editor-in-Chief | 设计 She Ji. The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation | Published by Elsevier in Cooperation with Tongji University | Launching in 2015
Chair Professor of Design Innovation Studies | College of Design and Innovation | Tongji University | Shanghai, China ||| University Distinguished Professor | Swinburne University of Technology ||| Adjunct Professor | School of Creative Arts | James Cook University | Townsville, Australia
Email [log in to unmask] | Academia http://swinburne.academia.edu/KenFriedman | D&I http://tjdi.tongji.edu.cn
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]> Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|