Dear Terry, Yoád , Lubomir, and all colleagues
Yoád, you close your latest post mentioning: "...the creative and design
generating phase of the becoming of things..." I think here is where
originates the general misunderstanding that we all are victim of in our
lengthy exchanges that most of the time become pure "dialogue des sourds",
with all the consequences often experienced.
Indeed, those among us trained to generate artifacts out of inner,
personalized 'creativity', to tell us what they do, they use the terms
'design' and 'designing', essentially meaning 'Communication' of their
inner whatever through or by the way of their 'designed' outcomes.
Also with the similar ultimate aim to generate artifacts, as rather
impersonalized outcomes generated through methodical arrangements of
diverse elements found in the outer environment, as opposed to the inner
environment of self, they too use the same terms of 'design' and
'designing'. Eventually, they also use the term 'Communication', but this
time not in generic sense of 'creativity', only as an eventual after fact
process of transmission of whatever one is asked to convey about the
arrangement/artifact, not 'created' but proposed instead.
As long as we, as a group, shall keep talking to each other but each
meaning or referring to different things, many outcomes including massive
understandings, boredom, frustrations, soliloquizing and withdrawal out of
the list will inevitably occur! And thus our collective energy will remain
wasted in endless mere social verbiage, instead of to investing it in
finding and structuring a professional goal common to us all, whatever this
goal will be chosen to be.
Regards,
Francois
Kigali
On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 5:06 AM, Terence Love <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Hi Lubomir and Yoad,
>
> Its possible and easy to talk about or conceptualise about design activity
> from many points of view and theoretical backgrounds.
>
> The real question is, which point of view or conceptual frame is more
> useful in any particular situation?
>
> Mostly, I find myself designing things to result in particular outcomes.
> Typically, I've found it more effective to do that from a functional point
> of view and regard communication as a subfunction.
>
> Over the years I've designed across a lot of different domains (including
> documents and signs). While its clear communication often has a role
> somewhere in a project, I can't think of any design domain or design
> project in which communication was either the primary or only consideration.
>
> Can you?
>
> Best wishes,
> Terry
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|