rethinking about design methods

o When I first refused to study design methods
o Design method?
o Art or Design
o Codes
o No-honest and honest inspirations in my design

When I first refused to study design methods

The first time I heard the espression “design methods”, I did not want to hear anything about it. I refused to think that it would be possible to stereotype in such a personal matter, or even worst, I thought, “No way! I am not going to read about the design methods of other designers… I’m fine with mine! At least I would like to learn about some technical skills like using computers, drawing, prototyping…”
In January I hade my first bad mark, and I refused to compromise my idea to improve the grade.

Coming to Melbourne I had the opportunity to study again in a course called “Design Methods” and there was the possibility to substitute the course from Politecnico with the course from RMIT, without damaging my career and my marks. While reading I discovered that what I was thinking was not totally inappropriate. I was wrong in considering the course superficial and rethorical. I then found interesting readings about the course. There are some “honest” expressions that I would like to cite:

“One of the greatest excitements in being a designer must surely be the vicarious thrill of being the eminence grise behind the familiar products of industry and commerce, knowing that a certain colour, shape, detail or function is such a way because that is how you wanted it.”(Kenneth Grange, 1982).

Usually the differences in designs between various designers and artists are the characters and careers and their individuality. Here some words from the introduction of Objects of Desire Design and Society since 1750 (1986) written by Adrian Forty, that illustrate this difference,

“…Chippendale’s furniture designs might be said to differ from Sheraton’s because Chippendale and Sheraton were different people, each with his own artistic ideas. It is when we try to identify the reasons for these differences that we run into difficulties, wich become more acute when we consider not simply the work of individuals but the appearance of whole classes of goods involving a multitude of designers: why, for example, was office equipement designed in the 1900s universally different in appearance from that produced in the 1960s? Putting this down to differencies in artistic temperament would be ridiculous…

Design method?

The term “design method” is an attempt to define a deep process of our mind. Trying to give a definition of design methods or trying to depict a stereotype of these processes should be considered impossible. In the most cases it is considered impossible to try to define this “primitive concept” but in other cases various theorists (they are not always designers) try to find a solution or a comprhensive explaination of the words “design methods”. In its simplest aspect the term “design” refers to every kind of process that aids in creating a building, poetry, paintings, journey’s, and parties. We talk of projects when we act and make decisions thinkig about the results.

Design comes from the latin word “designare” that means drawing,doing signs by acting, but we relate the word design to the word project, that comes from the latin word projectare JECTARE means to launch PRO means forward.

Today the word design has acquired a particular meaning influenced by historical factors such us the industrial revolution or the years 1950’s and 1960’s “…when the frst literature on design methods began to appear in most industrialized countries…” John Chris Jones (1980).


Many people know what design ( I’m talking about the process not the term) is and we could say many people could be designers. The skills used in being a designer are not related to the skill set required for science or art, but our way of thinking and finding solutions concludes that, a design method is a thought, it is a process of our mind, it is something that we cannot see we cannot touch, and we choose various instruments to visualize what is going on in our brain. We use codes to express these thoughts. These codes include gestures, drawings of gestures with our pencil, words as gestures of our mouth, dance as gestures of our body.

“A bee puts to shame many an architect in the construction of her cells but what distinguishes the worst of architects from the best of bees is this, that the architect raises his structure in imagination before he erects it in reality. At the end of every labour process we get a result that already existed in the imagination of the labourer at its beginning”
Karl Max (1818-1883)

Art or Design

As a designer my first strenght is in trying to express my thoughts , my ideas with universal codes, with languages so that everybody can understand. As an artist my first strenght is in trying to express myself . I can recognize when I’m “doing” art just for me or when I am “doing design” to comunicate something. Designing is not just about solving problems, we talk about design the very first moment we use codes to make others understand our ideas, so that we are not the only ones that understand. Design is recognised as being a useful art form however it can also be identified as useless. I don’t think of design as a kind of useful art form because this assumes that all designs should be good designs. I believe art differs from design. An artist can choose to do something that is not comprehensible to anyone. He can choose to do something with a code invented by himself and therefore nobody else can read it.

I often read that design differs from art because of its utility, but I know a lot of useless products that sell better than usefull ones. This means design is about comunicating something with or without a goal. It is a choice anyway to have “no-goal”. This could be the solution to our design. The biggest complication is concerned with the fact that every man has different thoughts. This in turn means every single man has different designs, and even if we try to use the same codes it will be impossible as there will always be some of the mind processes missing.

“True, the designer may sketch or draw profusely but his drawings are by no means totaly explicit about waht is going on in his head. Unfortunately for those who would wish to draw a map therefore most of the route remains hidden, for it is what goes on in the designer’s mind which really matters.”
Bryan Lawson (1986).

Codes

The best method to express our ideas, is through choosing the code that we know best and trying to encode our designs with them. An example using the language-code is by thinking about narrative technique as a “stream of consciousness” or other kinds of interior monologues as an attempt to write on the page. These things are really going on in our mind. Trying to use a code that someone else could understand (design), like a very famous, informal painter or a sculpturer from DADA, would not think about what they are saying (art). Someone else could try to interpretate their thinking and the very first thing they could say would be a reaction or a revolution just because they are using a new and different code from all the other codes. We would say it was incomprehensible for us to try to give it meaning, transforming art in design, relating art to social or political matters or even worst to business, not caring too much about the real process of mind of the artist.

Sometimes I would like to hear expressions like this: “Picasso painted Guernica in that way that day becouse he was drunk. Yes he was trying to express the hunger about the bombing of Guernica by Franchisti, but in that precise moment he was drunk, and when he saw the picture he liked it”

I have given this example, because I want to say that somethimes theorists try to give definitiosn about design methods and they are not even designers. While I was reading something that I found really interesting in the book How Designers Think the Design Process Demystified written by Bryan Lawson (1986). Even if I don’t agree with him in some aspects, Lawson, in my opinion, is more honest than other writers. This is evident in some of his following expressions;

“In the end perhaps design must be learnt rather than taught.”

“It is obviously essential for a designer to have a good understanding of the technologies relevant to his field, but this alone will not make a successful and productive designer.”

“For many of the kinds of design we are considering it is important not just to be technically competent but also to have a well developed aesthetich appreciation... The designer must understand our aesthetic experience, paticularly of the visual world, and in this sense his work may seem not unlike that of an artist.”

“… he is judged by the solutions he produces rather than the methods by wich he arrives at those solutions.”

“Most of the maps of the design process which we have looked at seem to resemble more closely the non-designer, scientist approach than that of the architect: first analysis and then synthesis.”

“There is a danger with this approach, since writers on design methodology do not necessarily always make the best designers, and taht must obviously include this author too.It seems reasonable to suppose that our best designers are more likely to spend their time designing than writing about methodology.”

No-honest and honest inspiration in my design

The final solution is the really end of our design, nobody could know the real inspiration or how our mind was thinking in that determinate moment of creation, it is up to us being honest or not, in the end the most important thing is being conscious of our choices.

The image above is about “vicky” a concept dishwasher presented in a work simulation experience with Whirlpool Europe ( Cassinetta di Biandronno, Varese, Italy, october 2004). In this case I sayd inspiartions of my design were key words as: nature, organic, technology, witheness and that the shape was inspired from the design of natural spears, that was in part true, but I found the real inspiration for the shape while I was on the train going from Como to Milan looking at a mountain’s profile.

The image above is about “giara” a concept waste-paper bin for beaches in a work simulation experience with EB&C Centro Ricerche Enrico Baleri ( Milano, Italy october 2005). In this case the true inspiration for my design was from mediterranean elements and in particular ancient greek anphoras used in the past to store the wine.

Bibliography

“Kenneth Grange at the Boilerhouse, An Exhibition of British Product Design”, The Conran Foundation Boilerhouse Project, Consultant Design Director to Wilkinson Sword Limited, 1982

“Design Methods by John Chris Jones Second edition with new prefaces and additional texts”, previously published as J. Christopher Jones, Design methods seeds of human futures, John Wiley & Sons, New York and Chichester, 1970 with eight reprintings between 1972 and 1982 and second edition 1980 pubblished by david Fulton Publishers, London, from 1987 to 1990.

“Objects of Desire design and society since 1750” by Adrian Forty,1986. Thames and Hudson.

“How Designers Think The Design Process Demystified, second edition” by Bryan Lawson, Butterworth Architecture, An imprint of Butterworth-Heinemann Ltd Linacre House, Jordan Hill, Oxford OX2 8DP, Bryan Lawson 1990