‘I am what is around me.’ B. Matisse: 1951
The only thing we all have in common is our environment. Most people will not be fully aware of what is fully going on around them. It’s a shame that people don’t spend the time to admire the space around them, our background as designers allows us to see the world in a completely different light than most. This takes an entire life time to learn and understand, but we all strive to create something that is truly beautiful. Just how this is accomplished is different for everyone, most will not learn what it is until they have reached an older age, some may never believe that they have reached it.
Everyday provides something that amazes, something new and exciting, either through the beauty it portrays or because of the attention to detail that has been placed behind it. But what of the things that are left unnoticed? What has become of them? Are they not worthy of our glances? Is it that the best artists and designers are the ones that move away from the stereotypical approach to engulf that which we cannot see?
Even sitting here my eyes pick up on a book about writing an essay. What use is this to me now? Within the front cover, written with patience, is the name ‘Barbara Baker’ a Great Aunt of mine, the book is all well and good, but what is really fascinating is that I had just found myself in a moments lapse of thought. How had this book traveled to become in my hands? How long had it been there? Connections with the past intrigues me, the hidden detail adds an exponential character to this boring, tattered and musty book.
What would the difference be if another relation; of Barbara Baker? Does their history dictate the true emotional value of the book? It is just a book after all, nothing more.
Further more, would the book have been left unnoticed without the knowledge of this essay being written? Is this a fortunate case of serendipity, or simply coincidence? This idea of serendipity could happen as part of the design process and has a chance of happening everyday, it’s just that we have to be aware of our surroundings. Design ideas can come at anytime, but it takes the knowledge of what to do with this discovery that makes it worthwhile. The best known example is the production of Velcro; George de Mestral a Swiss mountaineer who returned home covered with burrs from plants. On picking them off he realised the same idea could be used as a fastener, thus the invention of Velcro. [McSweeney & Raha, 1999: 55]
The main way of thought concerns cognitive design; “the mental action or process of acquiring knowledge and understanding through thought; experience and the senses. A result of this; a perception, sensation, notion or intuition.” [New Oxford American Dictionary II edition; 2005.] Donald Norman (2004) also describes three other ways of thought; Visceral and behavioral “are about ‘now,’ your feelings and experiences while seeing or using the product.” The key one to look at is Reflective design concerning the more long term ‘relationship.’ Reflective design is the emotional attachment to an object, your self image, personal satisfaction and memories but as Norman later states (p39) that “a deep reflective component [can] be attractive to some and bore or repel others.” Unfortunately for designers all three of those attachments can be modified by advertisements and branding exercises by companies, which produces inaccurate representations of the product. Over the years branding and advertisements have become more like propaganda than informational cues for consumers using terms like “magical” [Apple, 2010].
Our bodies are constantly engaged with the environment we are in. Sight is usually considered the most predominant of these senses but, as Pallasmaa argues the sense of touch particularly captures a much more in-depth idea of our world. He argues that sight is just a mere extension of our hands.
“We are connected to world through our senses. The senses are not merely passive receptors of stimuli, and the body is not only a point of viewing the world from a central perspective. Neither is the head the sole locus of cognitive thinking as our senses and our entire bodily being directly structure, produce and store silent existential knowledge.” Pallasmaa J., 2009:13.
True design must encompass all senses, but cannot become a distraction, good design needs to be seen as a whole, following along the theoretical approach of Gestalt Psychology ‘The whole is greater than the sum of the parts’ [David Hothersall, 2004]. The most used example is of a Dalmatian sniffing under tree, seen not as legs, body and head but as a whole. In German the word Gesamtkunstwerk or translated as the total work of art it has become accepted in English to describe aesthetics. Often products are created by people many thousands of miles apart, and who will never meet, it is likely that each one is creating a small part of a much larger product, with no consequence to the overall appearance. Design must be felt, viewed at every angle, smelt, listened to, and most importantly considered, this can only be accomplished by creating prototypes and viewing it as a whole. If enough attention to detail was taken to the final look as the tiny details, design would be of a much higher quality. In art take for example the work of artist and engineer Nick Veasey, 2010, who produces large scale X-ray prints of everyday objects, in particular methods of transport. X-Rays that are usually used in medicine, have been used to look beyond the surface, past the clean and clinical and away from the normal. We soon find that the tiny parts that make up flowers, machines, animals and other objects soon become far more beautiful when we can see them all a whole.
“Plants and flowers are captivatingly beautiful things. Look beyond the surface and that beauty is accentuated.” [Veasey N., 2010]
The idea of reacting to the environment must be embedded into each new product, and will be attached to it. At this point it is very natural to consider how a product fits into the principles of ‘Cradle to Cradle’ [Braungart, M. 2009] but the truth is that every product should follow these ideals regardless. What really should be considered, and is lacking, is the consideration to the ‘character’ of the product as it ages, just as my Great Aunt’s book. It is up for debate wether an inanimate object can have ‘character’ or not, however consider this; take two identical phones, hand each one to two different people, after three years of use, each one will have different configurations, marks and dents, it’ll become clear that both owners will have a wealth of tales to tell. Is that ‘character’ an irrational reaction to an inanimate object or a connection to the past? Are we scared of damage to our products, especially ones that came to us at a financial expense? Juhani Pallasmaa writes, ‘this fear of the traces of wear and tear and age is related to our fear of death.’ [Pallasmaa, 2009, 32] We do not want to age and die, it is human nature, we reflect this by creating designs with timeless qualities. There is always the argument that if all designers were to create products that were timeless, where does the progression come from? Without taking chances and following the commercial safe route, all designs will never change, in some regards this would suggest that those ‘timeless’ products would loose all value as the market became saturated. Risks must be taken if a product is to push the boundaries of a product.
As is Human nature our entire environment has been designed and considered even what we believe is natural landscape has been controlled to suit our ways based on our reactions. It’s hard to define what these reactions to the environment narrows down to. One possible conclusion in design would be the creation of a narrative, or a way of storytelling seen as ‘a method of creating imagery, emotions and understanding of events through an interaction between a storyteller and an audience.’ [Lidwell, Holden, & Butler, 2010: 230.] Using a narrative, we as designers can turn the normal, into the fascinating, the way in which this is accomplished is unique to the particular designer. Sometimes we have to be radical and take a chance, otherwise we would not be designers at all.
We are always designing and adapting objects unintentionally. This none-intentional design is arguably more mainstream than the latest product from the most sought after company. No matter how hard designers try to integrate products into consumers lives, the user will always find new and unintentional ways of use. We must encourage these ideas to create better design, rather than leaving sole responsibility to a single designer; the most inspiring and thought provoking work comes from different fields of expertise combining efforts into one product. Take for example the design of the Herman Miller Setu Office Chair, (designed by Studio 7.5) [Herman Miller: 2009] which has taken technology from an array of different fields including; textiles, engineering, medical and industrial design, working harmoniously insofar as you don’t notice that they are combined, good design should never be noticed.
This hidden combination can be seen in the electronics industry, devices such as the Apple iPhone (and other such touchscreen devices), where the design of the hardware is usually forgotten in everyday use. It is effectively after all just a flat object, with no relation to function from it’s form, the software has become the primary design This appears to be the way most digital products are heading, [Objectified: 2008]. This leads to the question, is it the job of the Product Designer to create the GUI (Graphical User Interface), or is it a Graphics designer or a programmers job? The field of product design has become so large that even the designers themselves are unsure what the title means. The magazine Core77, has come very close in, defining five categories; Commercial Design, Responsible Design, Experimental Design and Discursive Design [Tharp B. & Tharp S: 2009].
These areas however only define Product design. We need to consider the plethora of art and design fields in order to be well sculpted as designers. This allows a more diverse range of products to the consumer, ultimately creates a more competitive product and creates as Patrick Jordan, 2002 stated “products that are not merely tools but ‘living objects’ that people can relate to; products that bring not only functional benefits but also emotional ones.” Our minds have grown to use tools in such a way that we don’t even notice they become mere extensions of our body for example you only notice a pen in your hand when it doesn’t work [Pallasmaa, 2009]. Although not suitable in all cases, if we can complete this within our designs we will have successfully completed our jobs.
Design is based on our unique understanding of our environment. Each designer has his or her own way of comprehending their own senses, whether they use this knowledge during the design process is debatable; what is certain, however is the ability to observe is essential. Creating a narrative within designs allows for a deeper emotional connection with the user, and in most cases, particularly the electronics industry, is all that makes the product different. Knowledge of different fields allows a greater understanding and above all, the ability to expand the combinations of materials and functionality. Perception is key, and must always be noted and channeled back into the design process, thus producing work that is unique and sustainable. The ultimate goal of designers is to create what we believe is beautiful. This will always be an individual approach, but the only thing to be certain is that true beauty has only been achieved in nature.
Above all design must be enjoyed.
