AxisGroup International Inc.

Chasing Butterflies

Chasing
Butterflies

Alexander Manu
Humane Village Journal Volume 2, 1995

Thoughts on the big idea of design, redefinitions and responsibilities

The past couple of years have seen the emergence of two concerns as critical to the scope, and indeed the continuation of our profession as creators of the unnatural world: one is the need to redefine the terms of reference of the design activity. The other is the need for a guideline for the education of the designer, reflective of the above redefinition. These are convergent issues at this time, as we can not speak about one without affecting the other.

 

What is the context of this convergence? On one side we see a renewed social and environmental awareness, a sense of responsibility and the possible renaissance of the designer as an independent creator - responsible to society and not subservient to marketing whims. A creator who is concerned with today, but with "tomorrow" as well. A creator that recognises that we lack meaning in our individual lives and meaning collectively, as a profession.

 

We are also witnessing a disturbing - for some - love affair with technology and the transformation of design tools into guiding principles; tools are at times more transparent in the shape of artifacts than the ideas that guided their development. All in a world of mass merchandising, addictive consumerism, global brands, and the "massification" of cultures and identities. It is a state of sustained crisis, when managing uncertainty necessitates a culture of anticipation and change that includes, as intangible rules, the conflicting dynamics of design and innovation.

All of this points to the need for a redefinition of what design should be as we move in the unchartered territory of the post industrial world.

 

Purposeful social innovation that mixes equity and the abilities of local communities with international mixing, a respect of ecology and social justice - this is what the Humane Village is suggested to be, in providing some guidelines for durable development as opposed to a "sustainable" growth, which many believe is doomed to failure. Local developments with a view toward durability become the basis of a global awareness and action centered on Humane Villages as the supportive environments that meet the needs and capabilities of their inhabitants.

 

All of this could be considered remote the meditations of theorists, except that today more and more corporate executives are thinking and talking the same way.

 

The Power of Design : Ideas to tangibles

Many skeptics have challenged, and will challenge, the very idea of social design and social change initiated by designers as "utopian". They will point out that our apparent inability for effective action may make the Humane Village just another Utopia. While on the surface this may be a well founded argument, I am afraid that it is based more often than not on a limited definition of design and designers.

 

For the purposes of this argument, let's call a designer any individual who has the ability (trained or natural) of transforming ideas into implements, services, artifacts, communications, environments, systems or organizations. While thinkers of the past had ground-breaking ideas about "Utopian" futures - ideas that became timeless blue prints for social change - most of them were just that: thinkers. The power of design lies precisely here: in the ability of transforming ideas into implements, services, artifacts, communications, environments, systems or organizations. While our ideas may be lesser than that of the most famous Utopian, this ability to transform thoughts into tangibles could give designers the reasonable hope of changing the shape of the future.

 

Is Sustainable design the answer?

In the context of any activity, I see responsibility as a social issue, while seeing sustainability as an economic issue. Herein may lie our dilemma : should social policy dictate economic strategies (ends determining means) or should it be the other way around, with sustainability - a method, a tool - dictating social policy? I firmly believe that our mandate is to frame the former by using - as just one of the tactics - the latter. Words make a difference; they exclude or include, clarify or confuse. They set up boundaries in our thoughts and determine our passivity or activity. Which is why the difference between social responsibility and sustainability is so important.

 

Sustainable design cannot take place outside the context of a society in which a major reshaping of values has taken place. While designers can well conceive truly durable goods - in their physical and emotional qualities - without the required social shift such goods will hardly find a manufacturer willing to produce them or a consumer wiling to pay for them, let alone use them.

 

Social responsibility must be an overriding and integrating factor, transcending the barriers between professional fields of expertise and in effect becoming a personal investment in the well-being of others and the planet.

 

The Politics of Design is Social Responsibility

Design with responsibility as its politics is an attempt to change the dominant discourse of this society from the language of selfishness to the language of meaning, caring, social responsibility and ecological sensitivity.

 

Responsible design is a "soft" value. It requires an attitudinal change from material to spiritual values. It operates at the "values" level of the pubic, corporate and governmental mind. The politics of social responsibility is a goal that everyone can share. And with the Humane Village, we are providing a framework that is possible, plausible and economically realistic.

 

Social Forecasting

Some seem to think that the answers to the deep moral questions that technology can raise may be found in more technology; education and the media are enthusiastically telling us that if we are all just better mastering "the technology" then we could solve all kinds of problems involving society's prejudices. This is a pleasant idea, but a historical impossibility.

 

For every one who advances our technology, there must be someone who raises important questions about it's use. We need technology, but we also need people ready to question at every step our use of it. We need social forecasting.

 

What are we actually doing when we are making a tool, a toy or any other physical manifestation of thoughts? That is the big question. What is the impact of this building on the environment around it? What is its impact on the people using it? How does it improve or alter the relationships between people? How does this or that design outcome maintain the spirit of community and dependency that makes us human?

 

Ethics and social forecasting should be a part of every business-making decisions and procedures. The concern about ethics, of course, is not limited to the world of design, business- or business schools. People in many professions, from doctors and scientists to politicians and journalists, confront ethical problems and sometimes have been known to have lapses in judgment. Without any usable concept of ethics, the business world is left to shred at random. Ethical considerations involve hard research, hard thinking and imaginative responses. They require realism and self analysis. They require design.

 

Why not give ethics a less scientific, more emotional meaning, as the actual values practiced in a given community? Why not call it " The Humane Village"?

 

What is the alternative?

Many proposals have been advanced regarding the shift from the design of tangibles to the intangibles, from material to immaterial values, from products to services and so on. Some deserve further exploration:

• Why do we think that 'services' would consume less of everything?

• Why do we think that 'services' will make us less materialistic in the sense of possessing them?

 

The "immaterial", badly and irresponsibly designed will be as damaging as what we have today. We can probably find hundreds of examples of services that are as materialistic, addictive and as promoting of obsolescence as the products they have supposedly replaced.

 

The practical issue seems to be not as much one of moving from products to fewer products, but more one of "what kind of product, or service" we are to provide. The issue is thus one of strategies and tactics rather than large philosophical directions that by now many professions seem to share. When we speak about "less but better" or about "quality of products and experiences" we have to give "better" a defining conceptual framework. What is it that gives the "better" its defining qualities? Answers to these questions will make our ethical discussions less threatening and more palpable. But for this to take place, we must redefine design.

 

Why redefine design?

Design must transform and redefine itself, from the short sighted - and temporal - reliance on the formal to the much more meaningful reliance on the relationship- building capabilities that artifacts and environments intrinsically have. It is in this expressive and relationship-building role that design is at it's best and could effect social change. It is in this role that design becomes a social art with power and consequence. It is here that design is both responsible and responsive.

 

We must redefine design for as long as people - users, manufacturers, critics, designers, design educators, promoters - are focused on the "product" and not on the experience or the event that the design outcome creates.

 

The task is to redefine design through a conceptual matrix, from the general points to the outline of specific methods critical in their contribution to the success of the design activity of the future. Here I see two interdependent components:

 

• One is the the Conceptual Framework - in this case Social Responsibility

• The other is "The Big Idea"- Purposeful Social Innovation

 

Loosely defined, the conceptual framework refers to the placement of the product (and here "product" describes the object of the particular project) in a defined context. The "Big Idea" is the social happening or human invention that the design outcome is intended to serve.

 

The success of design outcomes should only be justly measured against the fulfilment, enhancement and protection of the meanings of the Big Idea. By loosing sight of Purpose we are in danger of destroying the social meaning of most of our artifacts. Thus, I consider the most important contribution to any design outcome either the enhancement of the Experience, the expansion of the Event and the maintenance of the spirit of the Big Idea. Measuring design outcomes against the Big Idea of Purpose will give us a new professional vocabulary - maybe one closer to the hearts and minds of business, media and the public.

 

Keeping this framework in mind, here is an attempt to redefine the activity and outcomes of design:

 

Possible Definitions

1.

The discipline of design is the conscious activity of creatively combining technological invention with social innovation for the purpose of aiding, satisfying or modifying human behaviour. Design plays an active role in creating the context of cultural development by establishing the artificial conditions within which all human activity in the industrialized world takes place.

In doing so, design creates (and at times becomes), Relationships between human beings and the constructs of their imagination.

 

2.

Design is a relationship of purpose. It is an aesthetic of relationships based on the flawless integration of the senses with play, discovery and mastery.

 

3.

Design is both the process and the outcome that make possible the relationship between human beings and their world.

 

We must awaken our intelligence, our motivation to learn and our capacity for knowledge - not merely a thirst for information, but one for a deeper understanding of ourselves, each other and the world to help us better understand life. We must learn to express ourselves using our minds. From here we can create concepts and make them grow - from theories and methodologies or however they may originate - into the structures that will redefine our world and reflect the ideas we value.

 

The Humane Village will help us to instil moral passion and a sense of purpose. Perhaps the social responsibility that the Village implies will bring about our ability to put balance back in our lives. It will make us human.

TOP