Both of Victor Papanek's articles ("Do-It-Yourself Murder" and "Neon Blackboard") focus on human/designer need as the main constraint in all design problems. The above diagram is a reflection of the current (articles written in the 1970's) mindstate of designers, design schools, and society as a whole. Papanek blames design schools for teaching design skills and philosophy (often antiquated), but neglecting to teach practical, present day application of these and other essential skills required to make designs for the "social good". In turn, he argues that designers graduate and begin to diseminate design solutions which only deal with the surface of any given problem.
Papanek directly attacks American commodity culture, blaming corporate policy and economic concerns (ie. sales,shareholders) for the lack of interest in the bottom half of the triangle. He stresses that design should serve a moral code, that acknowledges the human need for entertainment and leisure, but not by sacrificing physical and psychological needs.
However, Papanek returns to a Modernist mindstate when he calls for increased standardization, and a drastic pairing down of the consumers choice of "styles". On top of that he demands a very broad and loosely defined education for designers, but offers no concrete examples. Post-Modernism is hampered by the same problems that Modernism faced; unrealistic expectations motivated by an overly simplistic understanding and assesment of world problems.
So my question is a big one, if design schools are producing designers who are specialized in dealing with the concerns at the top of the pyramid (sales, style, etc.), and if corporations, companies and design firms will continue to hire such designers, is there really a need for a change in education/philosophy? GM pioneered the idea of styling cars to imply progress, and even with society's increased interest in "green" policies, isn't it possible that we could just continue to fake progress and change on the surface and keep the capitalist machine rolling without changing the engine?
Ethically speaking? That is pretty much what we have done the last thirty years. Is that sustainable?
ReplyDeleteI have to agree with Shales.
ReplyDeleteMetaphorically speaking, it's like a huge moving boulder the size of Kansas rolling along.
You have three choices: 1)stand in front of it, and yell "STOP" thinking wrongfully that it will on your account, and result in crushing you, 2) stand aside and let it pass, merely existing in its wake as it rolls off into the distance, or 3)Jump on it and keep moving: trying to harness its power somehow.
It's been this way before we were born.
These days it's not so much about who is a good designer anymore: that has very little to do with it. I don't think it will ever change...which is one of the reasons why it motivated me NOT to be a designer.
Well done on your assessment of it though Nate.
Fuller's Spaceship Earth attempts to elucidate the urgency in conservation and replenishment of resources on our planet. Speaking of the earth as a self-contained machine he states
ReplyDelete"We cannot afford to expend our fossil fuels faster than we are 'recharging our battery,' which means precisely the rate at which the fossil fuels are being continually deposited within Earth's spherical crust."
He too, in a similar accordance with Papanek, invites progressive design in order to aid the problem of consumption.
"We must undertake to increase the performance per pound of the world's resources until they provide all of humanity a high standard of living. We can no longer wait to see whose biased political system should prevail over the world."
-I don't think it is sustainable. Whether or not we literally have enough resources or specific this or that is not the only thing that deems it unsustainable. I think the power we understand to have and will not allow it to be sustainable. I also think that we are very smart and motivated and that we will figure out other methods to cope with our impending 'doom'.
I wonder though, what will come 'first'; a wall of turned consumer backs or the halt or ebb of the more unnecessary manufactured goods?
I think "sustainable design" can sometimes be an oxymoron, the design process in itself of model making/prototyping/iterations creates so much waste.
ReplyDeleteEven though at NSCAD Design many projects are built around the concept of sustainability, and design that can solve a problem in a sustainable way, the way we go about solving it is not at all sustainable.
"I wonder though, what will come 'first'; a wall of turned consumer backs or the halt or ebb of the more unnecessary manufactured goods?"
ReplyDeleteI feel like the machine that is production will keep supplying as long as there is someone to buy. In the same vein, consumers will keep spending money on useless products, artificial newness, and "the next big thing" as long as it's supplied to them.
It's like a circle of destructive behavior.
As far as designers making socially transformative designs, I suppose that has to do with the morals of the individual designer. I'd assume most end up working for companies, and get paid to create "surface" improvements. Although, is that wrong? It's their job.
Oh boy, oh boy... The fact is that we're trying to run a capitalist system on a finite planet and tis is not sustainable. I am often reminded of my earliest lesson in environmentalism... The three R's. Remember them? I think we were taught about them in kindergarten. There is so much focus on the third R - recycle. What about Reduce? What happened to Re-use? The three R's lesson is supposed to be a progression. They don't have equal value. 1st reduce consumption, 2nd re-use what you have to consume and try to repurpose it (an example of this I like is re-using old tires to make a retaining wall for an earthship) and finally, if you can't do that recycle as a last resort... melt it down and make something new.
ReplyDeleteI don't think it is a matter of "changing the engine." That isn't going to be sustainable either.
We have to get out of the car. (metaphorically and literally)
A quote that has stuck with me my whole life and has really shaped the way I try to live comes to mind...
ReplyDeleteUnless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, nothing is going to get better. It's not.
- Dr. Seuss