Symposium 4: Craftsmanship & Mass Production

February 19th, 2010

Reading: Applied Art Between Nostalgia & Innovation by Kristian Berg Nielsen

Presenters: G. Cohen, A. Russo,  E. Tandaramp & I. Wennerberg

1. Explain the debate between John Ruskin and futurist Marinetti. Which one can you relate to and why?

The debate between Ruskin and Marinetti is one that will never be settled. Ruskin is best known for his contributions to the arts and crafts movement of design, highlighting the importance of and appreciation for imperfection. Marinette on the other hand, a futurist, believes the industrial object (a product of mass production) is more important than the individuality of something hand crafted. Both points are completely valid. I don’t side with either philosophy but can offer defenses and criticisms of both.

Ruskin’s ideals blend perfectly in a society that honors and sometimes worships strong accounts of individuality. The arts and crafts movement also fosters a greater sense of creativity. On the flip side, hand crafted products cost more, take longer to produce and are sometimes irreplaceable. The amounts of resources (time and money) devoted to a single output are so great that the practice can only be considered viable for certain goods (jewelry, artwork, etc.). Attempting to create large-scale products (cars, homes, etc) would be far too impractical to meet collective societal needs.

Custom crafted jewelry by a friend (below)

[http://www.etsy.com/shop/fromthemoon]

A custom designed car (below)

[http://www.fastcoolcars.com/images/wallpaper37/2005-nopi-big.jpg]

Although many argue Marinette’s philosophy is too limiting and the outcome uninspiring, there are certainly advantages to mass production. First, it lowers cost allowing more consumers to afford everyday objects (trash cans, plates, etc). Spending less on many things, may allows for greater expenditures on handcrafted items as well. However, this too is a double-edged sword. Manufactures may not take the appropriate measures to ensure their product is of upmost quality as turning a profit is first and foremost in their mind. Cheap, quickly made products may require sooner replacements, calling for an unnecessary use of raw materials again. Additionally, the designs can sometimes be overly vernacular, uninspiring and lack individualization.

Given my choice I would select John Ruskin’s hand crafted product. It is more important for me that I know where my goods came from, what they represent and that I take care of them. I’m willing to sacrifice quantity and low price for something I know was built to last and built with a heart behind it.

2. Do Danish designers employ futurism in their design for solving everyday problems?

I do think Danish designers employ futurism in their designs. As noticed in many homes, it is very popular to follow current trends in furniture, accessories, etc. However, I find Danish design peculiar in the sense that these massed produced products began along the lines of arts and crafts. For example, the Royal Copenhagen china collection. What began as a very special and unique collection has since become more popular and the products more massed produced. In an attempt to fall between the definition of arts/crafts and futurism, the plates are still hand painted. I believe this collection truly reflects the essence of Danish design.

[http://www.royalcopenhagen.com/Craftmanship.aspx]

Symposium 3: Making High Quality Design Available to the General Public

February 12th, 2010

Reading: Danish Democratic Design (1800-2000): A Tender Birth of Democratic Design Culture by Jarl Heger

Presenters: D. Heller, H. Kelfer, K. Ryan & J. Treitman

1. Do you see a merge between politics and design in Denmark? If so, why is it successful?

I’ve only been in Denmark for a month, and with no previous knowledge about politics and design my knowledge base to answer this question is limited, however I do believe there’s been a merge in politics and design within the country. In the article Danish Design – A Structural Analysis, author Anders Kretschmar notes that the Danish government has begun to encourage designers to work internationally. During class we were informed that the government’s incentives had been successful.

It is encouraging to see that Danish designers have become more recognized globally, however success doesn’t come without a few drawbacks. To begin, we’ve seen more designs copied by discount stores such as Tiger. In my opinion these knock-offs discredit the designer, as someone else is now making profit from their once original creation. At the same time, the abundance of affordable good-looking products made popular through the merging of politics and design may further inspire others to design. Is it good or bad? I think the answer to that question depends on how much of an elitist you consider yourself.

Coatrack from Tiger (first photo) mimicking Eames' (second photo) famous 1953 design.

Tiger [http://www.tigerstores.co.uk/products/1/tiger_home/1000887/coat_hook_/]

Eames [http://www.furniturestoreblog.com/2008/11/22/modern_coat_rack_by_eames.html]

2. Choose something that you have bought here in Denmark. Is it well designed? Why did you buy it? Is it a product of democratic design?

My first weekend in Denmark I accompanied my family on their Saturday shopping trip. Preparing for a ski vacation, we stopped at a winter sport shop. While browsing the camping equipment I came upon a spork. I’d eaten with disposable sporks since kindergarten, but decided it was a wise idea to purchase a reusable one for my packed lunches. Too often I use disposable silverware at work. With access to a sink it’s silly to contribute to landfill waste on a daily basis.

[http://www.lightmyfire.com/data/images/green-apple-spork-popup.jpg]

The spork is green, sleek and very functional. Its gentle curves feel good in your hand and the duality of its two ends provide the user with a knife, fork and spoon. The only downside is you can’t change between the fork and spoon without cleaning off the other side. I haven’t used the spork yet. I hope it woks well. One thing is certain, it will reduce landfill waste three plastic silverware pieces at a time.

Symposium 2: Marketing & Branding REFLECTION

February 2nd, 2010

Reading: Danish Design - A Structural Analysis by Anders Kretzchmar

Presenters: L. Rinquist, K. Stark & B. Tully

Overall Feelings

In general I believe our presentation was a success. We had clear talking points, proficient analysis of the readings and appropriate discussion questions. As a unit our group worked well; each member was reliable and always had their work finished on time. Strong group communication and thoughtful analysis of the material lead to a presentation that was both visually and intellectually stimulating. However, with that being said, there is always room for improvement.

What We Did Right

When structuring our presentation it became very important to us that classroom interaction occurred throughout the symposium. Thus, I believe we were successful at engaging the audience early on with the drawing exercise and comparative Target/Apple advertisements. Additionally I think it was a good idea to start the scope of our presentation wide, talking about the history of marketing/branding, only to become more defined at the end, which included the reading review and reflection questions. Finally, I believe our discussion questions raised awareness of key issues from the required reading; students left with good information to use in their Danish Design Journal reflection.

What Could We Have Improved Upon

Looking back on the presentation, I believe some of our earliest material was the weakest. The slides that included colors and shapes of logos were headed in the right direction, but I’m not sure they were poignant enough or relative enough to the situation. Additionally, our examples of advertisement campaigns were focused solely on American companies. Expanding our scope to include a few Danish companies would have been more appropriate. Finally, I believe showing more (pictures) and telling less (words) with the power point would have made a stronger impression on our audience. For example: in the history of branding slide we should have used pictures of branded cattle, not just words associated with the action.

What Should Have Been Left Out

I felt most of our material was relevant and beneficial to the class, however some points of our presentation were rather elementary and essentially common knowledge. Again, the section with colors and shapes was quite obvious and I hardly imagine anyone took new information away from that section. In general, the first couple points of our presentation could have been thinned out to create space for more discussion on comparative ads (like Target and Apple). Finally, the reading review outline may have been too comprehensive. It was almost too detailed that it gave away everything from the required reading to people who didn’t take the time to complete it before class. On the flip side, this may have helped sparked the quality discussion by the end of class.

Final Reflections

I’m happy and satisfied with our work. Nothing major needed overhauling in our presentation. We didn’t run short on time, we didn’t run out of time. People were engaged and their was a variety of discussion on all components of marketing and branding. I believe we satisfied the goals set out for us on this symposium.

Symposium 1: Defining Design & Designing Design

January 26th, 2010

Reading: Form & Distinction by Ole Thyssen

Presenters: J. Butts Jr, Annika Yates & Dani Hill

1. Now knowing that a design element must serve a function, how is the design of an object informed by the system in which you belong? Chose a design that fits within your system and discuss how it exposes that system?

I am a communicator. Well, we all are communicators, however I particularly communicate a lot. I spent majority of high school on the speech and debate teams, I serve as an Admissions Ambassador and tour guide at my home university and I’m majoring in Communication Studies. Now that is a lot of talking.

But what is it that allows us, especially in today’s society to communicate so fluently? I believe our rapid sharing of technology has led to great advances in the communication system. Therefore, the cell phone best fits and highlights the parameters of my communication system.

What began as a simple, mobile version of the standard telephone, has transformed leaps and bounds into a social networking and information-sharing device used by millions. Tweets from our friends keep us in the social loop, while CNN News Break text messages keep us informed on the world’s latest happenings. Internet phones have us surfing the web from the seat of our toilet and text Google makes the Yellow Pages a thing of the past.

[http://wphacks.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/web-icons.png]

Yes, the technology is remarkable, but what makes the cell phone so successful at communicating? Obviously, it’s a phone. But the real reason cell phones are successful tools of communicators is their price. Cell phones are affordable; often free with a service contract, giving majority of the population access to an array of wireless means of communication.

2. Thyssen's cynical point of view regarding art and design system suggests that we are all "cogs in the machine" and that everything to bed done has been done before and everything that will be created will be made obsolete immediately. So why continue pursuing design?

Despite Thyssen’s cynical point of view regarding the design system, I believe we are more than “cogs in the machine.” As designers we hold immense power. Design can be forward thinking. Design can break boundaries. Design can inspire. To say it has all been done before is nonsense. Of course, you can’t create something out of nothing, but by no means has everything already been created.

As technologies develop quicker products become obsolete faster. For this reason it is crucial to keep pursuing design; design helps push limits. We’d never have laptops thinner than 1-inch if the first computer hadn’t filled an entire room. Today’s skyscrapers could never reach over half a mile if our first buildings weren’t made from wood. Our cars still don’t get very good gas mileage… but greedy oil companies at the root of that issue are an entirely story.

[http://stlouiscore.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/old_computer.jpg]

[http://www.passportchop.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/macbook-air.jpg]

To stop designing because everything has been designed would be like saying we should stop writing books because every story has already been told. There will always be new stories to tell and likewise problems design can help solve. Take a look at the world around us. The threat of global warming is quickly mounting its attack against us. This is a new problem. One our society has never seen before. With forward thinking and bright ideas, design will save the world. Green buildings, green energies, green modes of transit, etc. are all outputs of the design community stepping in to play the role of super man.

Sorry Thyssen, I have to disagree. Your views may be just another cog in the machine, but my ideas stretch a little further outside the box.

[http://ecohomeresource.com/images/TIME%20Style%20%20Design%20Cover%20%27Green%27_smallest.jpg]

Lecture 1: What is Design?

January 22nd, 2010

Below is a list of every designed object I touched this morning before leaving for school:

iPod • door handles • knife • drawer handle • hanger • bathroom key • shower fixtures • cutting board • thermostat • light switches • desk • bed • table • chairs • plate • fridge • kitchen sink/faucet • dresser • cup • water pitcher • house keys • back pack • school supplies • towels • cell phone

So then, what is design?

“Design is a plan for arranging elements in such a way as best to

accomplish a particular purpose.” -Charles Eames

_

“Design is where science and art break even.” -Robin Mathew

It doesn’t matter if you agree more with Eames or Mathew, both responses are correct. The concept of design is too expansive to pin down with a definition or axiom. Design isn’t about the meaning of a word, but an understanding of many inputs to a single output.

To change, is to create, is to design. Everything beyond natural elements in their environment is designed. The first humans whittled the ends of sticks to design spears. Apple Inc develops technology to design Macs. The spear was designed by changing the shape of the wood to create a weapon. Macs are designed by changing electronic technologies to create computers. The earliest spears were strictly utilitarian objects; the iMac has become so much more than just a computer.

[http://webprojects.prm.ox.ac.uk/arms-and-armour/600/1927.80.1.jpg]

[http://www.digitgeek.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/12/apple_imac_20.jpg]

Is one design better than the other? Does it matter that Apple’s products are more visually appealing than the Neanderthals? Design, like most things, is relative. Thousands of years ago, survival was the only thing on the minds of our earliest ancestors; the color of the spear didn’t matter. Survival in today’s dog eat dog world of business requires different, less barbaric, strategies. The symbol of status that accompanies a new iMac is one that showcases success and prosperity, key elements of survival in today’s business world.

In my opinion, good design meets the expected program for a product. I expect a towel to dry me off. If a towel is less absorbent towel than expected and I’m still wet, well, the design is bad. If I expect a handle to open a door and the handle easily breaks, that too is bad design. But, if I’m dry and the door opens the design is good.

Most of our everyday products are good designs: knives, toilets, beds, light switches, etc. But some products are great designs. Once again, the judgment is all relative to the adjudicator’s expectations. I believe my iPod touch is great design: light weight, intuitive and multi-purposeful. But not all great design is an advanced technology. If a knife cuts better than expected and fits your hand ever so perfectly, one may consider it great design.

[http://www.pocketpccentral.net/mp3c/images/ipod/ipod_touch_diagram.jpg]

There you have it. Design is utilitarian, design is aesthetically beautiful. Design is good, design is bad. Design is a creation, a manipulation a product of change. Our taste is certainly subjective, but that is what makes design great.