Ves al contingut. Salta a la navegació
06
Cat | Eng | Esp

ELISAVA TdD

Seccions
06 PEDAGOGIA DEL DISSENY, 1991

Design down under capricorn. Design: a cultural and economic imperative


In May 1989 a large gathering of designers from every kind of design activity together with design educators and industry leaders held what was described as the Australian Design Summit in the national capital, Canberra. From that meeting came the resolution to create a new national focus body for design. Thirteen months later, in September 1990 this new design iniciative was to be formally launched as the Australian Academy of Design.
The objectives of the Academy, whilst focused on the future of design in Australia, provide an interesting agenda which has, I believe, a significant relationship to the future directions, challenges and possibilities of design education at every level and in every nation of the world.
The choice of the traditional title of Academy for this new design body was the subject of much debate and some concern that its focus might well be perceived merely as an attempt to elevate the activity of design to the same level of high scholarly regard that is traditionally accorded to the learned Academies of the Arts and the Sciences.
Indeed, many design educators would no doubt argue that the achievement of a higher scholarly regard for, and the recognition of the design activity alongside the traditional learned institutions of the Arts and Sciences, would do much to advance the status of the field within the entrenched hierarchy of subjects recognised as the Core curriculum of primary and secondary education and as a discipline within the University.
 
 
Design or perish?
 
The aims and objectives of the new Academy of Design are expressed in much more practical and instrumental terms, and also convey a sense of urgency and a call for action. This may suggest that this European outpost, amongst the awakening giants of the developing nations of the Pan-Indian Ocean Pacific region may, indeed, be articulating a sense of the potential erosion of its cultural and regional identity, to say nothing of its status as an advanced technological society and all of the material comforts that go with this. Those aims and objectives are:
 
-  To provide the national focus for design and the impetus to design necessary for Australia's future economic and environmental prosperity.
-  To promote the acceptance of the role and benefit of design as crucial elements in Australia's economic performance and for the well-being of all Australians.
-  To foster the application of design as a key element in the development of an internationally competitive manufacturing base, in the development of efficient service industries and in the creation and maintenance of quality environments.
-  To promote excellence in design.
-  To develop in Australia a deeper understanding of the nature of design and design processes and the value of design.
-  To realise a national influence and purpose for design.
-  To contribute to the development of an Australian design ethic.
-  To advise Government on matters relating to design.
-  To initiate, coordinate and conduct studies in relation to design.
-  To represent the full interests of design in Australia.
 
Each one of these statements, however, carries significant implications not only for Australian design educators but for design educators everywhere in the world for they imply values and attributes for design which are universally relevant. The urgency with which these aims and objectives are stated also suggests that, in spite of die popular appeal accorded to design activity, certainly in this affluent Western nation of conspicuous consumption, there is an underlying perception that all is not well and that design and designers are by no means in control of the purposes to which their skills and imagination are put.
 
 
Consciousness raising about design
 
Whether or not this new body sees itself as primarily involved with an educational mission all of its less obvious economic or instrumental objectives go to the core of every citizen's understanding of what constitutes creative, productive and humanly rewarding labour. In order to realise a national influence and purpose for design, it must surely embrace the concerns of the users of other peoples design decisions, or the lack of them, as well as those who make the decisions. The them and us situation which has characterised the relationship between designers and non-designers, or that of the professional design practitioner specialisms and their clients or consumers is clearly one of the entrenched impediments to open understanding of design that must be addressed.
A bold and hopeful feature of the new Academy which may help address this lack of openness and raise consciousness among practitioners themselves is its decision to invite membership from distinguished practitioners from every field of design. Divisiveness exists even among specialist areas of many modern technological professions in the same discipline. Engineering, like Design has long exhibited this enclave mentality so that if this ambitious program of consciousness raising and the forging of a common creative purpose succeeds within the diverse ranks of the professional practitioners, perhaps design as a creative activity will be demystified and made more transparent and accessible to the society at large.
 
 
Design advocacy to government
 
At the political level in the places where decisions are made which affect the well being of every person, the creation of a unified, coherent and informed voice for and about design has much to recommend it as a strategy for consciousness raising. Clearly this bold attempt to unify the currently disparate, often confusing and frequently competitive forms of design advocacy through creating a common ground for design practitioners deserves support.
There can be little doubt that the creative energy of design and its skillful application towards the creation of a better society has not been articulated in clear ways to those people in charge of governing society. The past failure to decisively influence the Board Rooms of industrial or commercial enterprises towards better design practice also stems from ibis lack of clarity and the conflicting forms of design advocacy from the design practitioners themselves. These are also educational issues of the greatest importance.
 
 
Design in the popular culture
 
Australians like the citizens of the other advanced Western nations have succumbed to the seductive popular exploitation of design through the massive interventions of the media in the service of the market economy. Design, in this context, has reached cult status since the 1970's when «designer jeans» first heralded the creation of the designer as hero and heroine rivalling the cult of personalities that feeds the entertainment industry in the Western cultures.
Design has become familiar to the population at large but its appropriation merely as a symbol of modernity and as a vehicle chiefly to cultivate community desire for more and more products has further clouded the way for the design advocate as educator. Perhaps the Academy's slated aim to contribute to the development of an Australian design ethic goes to this issue. What constitutes design ethics - how are they to be taught?
 
 
Design as a symbol of modernity
 
Design as a symbol of modernity has even greater implications in global terms. Those emergent nations which have been so long held in a state of total dependence on the Western technocracies see design, as expressed in the forms of desirable but largely unattainable or unaffordable consumer products, as the ultimate reality of modernity. It is already sweeping away much of their indigenous cultural inventory based on centuries of development of functional, culturally laden artefacts which may have been by far the better models upon which a modern and more efficient technologically advanced, productive culture could be developed.
How will the design educators in these places deal with these distortions of the meaning and purposes of design. Should design ethics he centrally concerned with these serious issues and, if so, this is but a further burden and a challenge facing design education.
 
 
Demystification of design process and product
 
The need to demonstrate that design is a holistic, interdisciplinary and indivisible creative activity, characterises the work of our best design educators but the distortive popularisation of design and its inevitable association with the notion of technological and economic success makes this articulation of the human value of appropriate design practice increasingly difficult to sustain.
There is a tendency, in the interests of clarification, for some educators to over simplify the meaning and purpose of the activity. This is encapsulated by descriptions of the creative processes of design as being «ordinary human capabilities of mind» or in the catchy phrase «everyone is a designers. We, the cognoscenti, know what is the intention of these explanations but, in the face of the current connotation of design in the popular mass media which has now been attached to such things as designer drugs and, more recently, designer sex, there is a greater danger that such simplifications may serve to further trivialise the design activity.
In the competitive environment, which is the domain of the school curriculum, design may be seen as another attempt to burden the teacher and the pupil with yet another critical, urgent parcel of learning at a time when our education systems are reeling from the imposition of more and more demands for specific and largely «technologically imperative» subject areas.
As a counter to this objection the idea of progressing design education in our schools as a holistic, across the curriculum experience holds some merit and attraction. The danger here is the inherent territorialism of die core curriculum which could see design being appropriated in highly selective ways to underpin, to cosmeticise or merely make more palatable other «required» subject areas.
 
 
Design professional versus design educational activity
 
Teachers in general education are judged by the community at large, by results. In the drive to develop effective and assessable curriculum outcomes that may be judged by the community at large as client, design is vulnerable to the intervention of the outwardly attractive exemplars of professional design activity. Product rather than process tends to influence the construct of many current design programs in schools.
Given that the design professions themselves have not been able to articulate a coherent view of what constitutes desirable design practice the recruitment into primary and secondary schools of «real» designers, meaning successful design practitioners is also problematical for design educators in general education.
Already Australian schools of design in the professional or higher education sector have experienced the effects of these quasi-professional interventions in secondary schools where young people are completing their academic preparations for admission to higher studies. Whilst clearly possessing basic skills and creative capabilities in the visual and operational arts their conceptual view of the activity of design has already been narrowly channelled by the given exemplars of professional design. That is not to say they have been exposed to bad design perse but that, in general, the design experience has been highly instrumental, usually professionally sophisticated and given in isolation from all other kinds of creative and exploratory design activities.
The models, the exercises they have undertaken are invariably highly specific professional design works superficially attractive and undeniably technically proficient. Getting these young people to explore, to challenge and to discover the wider horizons of design activity offered in the foundation programs of well constructed university design education is a difficult task requiring time consuming but necessary remedial work.
«Designers in Schools» as these programs are called may well create more problems for dedicated design educators than they solve and clearly the gap between design as education and design in its present professional form and purpose needs to be addressed.
 
 
Other interventions in design education
 
In Australia the latest «buzz-word» to describe the process of restoring value to the products of the industrialised world is that of quality or, more fully. «Total Quality Managements».
The most visible aspect of the cultural inventory of any nation resides, not merely in those artistic and creative activities institutionalised in the prestigious art galleries and museums, or in its literature or in its sciences but in the work its people do, in the things they make, in the man-made environments they build. In short in the quality and humanly appropriate aspects of their daily lived-in experience.
It follows that the most important and life-long contribution every person makes to their society should be the work that they do but those charged with the educational preparation of our young people for the past two hundred years have increasingly emphasised the economic functions involved in education for survival. This in turn has led to the pursuit of economic development and production which has served chiefly to lead our society into a condition of widespread social disfunction, it has not created a human quality of amenity.
The charge on falling quality standards is similarly focused on purely economic factors but not the connection between the cultural significance of the work that people do and the meaning and value of that work. This is the proper domain of design but it plays little part in the politically endorsed strategies aimed at restoring quality in the arts of manufacture. Here is yet another dimension to what might also constitute a significant element of appropriate design education and it is a problem which needs to be focused on the creatively human, rather than only the means of creating valued products as economic and technological imperatives.
 
 
Consumer activism
 
Another intervention which now impinges on basic issues of design education is the concern for consumers rights which like the Green Revolution, sprang from citizen activist groups. Inevitably, the thrust of this movement, which has already invaded the crowded curriculum space of our schools, focuses primarily on the economic factor, not on the basic factors if providing appropriate human amenity.
To be sure there is merit in preparing our young people for survival in the financial and economic jungle of adult life in our culture but no popular consumer magazine yet published has seen fit to fully acknowledge the key role of design in the achievement of real quality and real value in the products and services of our technological society.
Today our vaunted technological civilisation is hostage to its own man-made crises but for all its apparent material success and prosperity it is rapidly becoming a humanly uninteresting civilization for the majority of its inhabitants.
The world as a whole, the South as well as the North, the democratic, as well as the authoritarian regimes is still bent on increasing industrialisation, production, economic efficiency and wealth creation in strictly material terms.
 
 
Design as a way of thinking about and acting upon the world
 
When asked by the media why the creation of the Australian Academy of Design should be seen as a significant event its first President responded in a way which some might say adds yet another definition of design to an already overloaded menu. He said: «Everything that does not happen by accident happens by design.» We designers, of course, know what he meant even without the elaboration of that remark which surely followed but was probably not published.
Taken too literally such a definition suggests that every outcome of human creative activity should be attributed to Design. This is dangerous stuff in the highly competitive and politically charged environment of the school staff room.
Design educators will acknowledge the potentially important contribution that this new Australian design initiative can make through the pursuit of its objectives which reflect, I believe, a universality of concerns that we can all relate to.
The problems it identifies also provides a timely reminder of the need for Design, with a capital «D» to find more effective and more socially relevant ways to articulate its position. It is time that we, in design education, gave more attention to building and then communicating the proper knowledge base of the discipline for there is no other area of human endeavour and creative power which is as important as design that has so gravely neglected its responsibility to earn the scholarly regard so central to its achieving its rightful place within the «Core» curriculum of our primary and secondary schools.
Until that happens, its place within the higher levels of education, in our University system and in the body politic at large, its key role as a creative strategy, a creative agent of change in the pursuit of a more human and genuinely productive society will not be achieved.
 
 
The creative synergy of design activity
 
In conclusion we should reflect on the potential of design as education in helping do away with the harmful separation between theoretical and practical knowledge which begins so early in our formal education systems. The malaise of modern technological society stems largely from the distortions created by the economic and technological imperatives that have been allowed to shape the material culture.
We need to re-connect our young people to the human dimension of the making of the material culture, to help give them power over the technological and economic means of constructing a society that is both humanly satisfying and humanly interesting.
The dominant models of the design activity which, thus far, have characterised the «successful outcomes» of design application in the technological culture have been those of products and product systems which have become mere symbols of modernity. The connection of too many of these things to the daily lived-in lives of ordinary people is not one of true human amenity but diversionary and ephemeral chiefly directed at satisfying immediate wants and not human needs. The political educational expediency of promoting design capability in the same context of the narrow economic imperatives that has been allowed to determine which knowledge is most worth in much of our curriculum at all levels needs to be resisted. This is a great problem for dedicated design educators in the face of the popular and seductive images of design as a symbol of modernity.
Although it has not been articulated in so many words, the creation of a membership structure for the Australian Academy of Design made up of distinguished practitioners from fields of work which rarely communicate one with the other, suggests that the traninstitutionalisation of design practice is a prime objective. In that sense, its outcomes may, indeed, become a new form of collective art.
A new movement of collective art which reflects the spirit of the modem age can only be made by a body of creative people who, by association and through a shared concern for the quality of human life can respond to the needs of the world of human affairs with their senses in a meaningful, imaginative, skilful, technologically and scientifically appropriate, humanly productive and co-operative way.
For those whose skills lie specifically in the transformation of products and product systems which rest on the application of scientific and technological knowledge, this means giving a new dimension to the meaning of «the Arts of Manufacturer, to Architecture and the «Built Environment».
In the first year of life of the new Academy that task of re-connecting will, in itself, be a re-education process as each of the participants, irrespective of their pre-eminence as expert design practitioners, surrenders their professional design territory to help build and then articulate and demonstrate a truly holistic «Across the Curriculum» design strategy, to design and secure, the future of Design.




Sobre l'autor



TONY RUSSELL


Professor i Cap de Disseny a The Curtin University of Technology, a l'Austràlia Occidental. Ha estat membre fundador de l'Australian Academy of Design.






Relacionat



06 PEDAGOGIA DEL DISSENY, 1991

JORDI PERICOT
Límits pedagògics del disseny modern




06 PEDAGOGIA DEL DISSENY, 1991

BERNHARD E. BÜRDEK
Nous mitjans i noves tecnologies en el disseny




06 PEDAGOGIA DEL DISSENY, 1991

ANDRIES VAN ONCK
La recerca del disseny




06 PEDAGOGIA DEL DISSENY, 1991

HAZEL CLARK
La història del disseny I l’ensenyament del disseny a la Gran Bretanya. Una avaluació




06 PEDAGOGIA DEL DISSENY, 1991

EILEEN ADAMS
L’ensenyament del disseny ambiental a l’escola




06 PEDAGOGIA DEL DISSENY, 1991

HEINER JACOB
Un enfocament integrat de l'ensenyament del disseny gràfic




06 PEDAGOGIA DEL DISSENY, 1991

STEPHEN KENDALL
El lloc del disseny a les cadenes de producció: una base per a l'ensenyament del disseny




06 PEDAGOGIA DEL DISSENY, 1991

KLAUS LEHMANN
Formació del disseny en el context europeu




06 PEDAGOGIA DEL DISSENY, 1991

SARAH DINHAM
L’ensenyament del disseny: el disseny de l’ensenyament




06 PEDAGOGIA DEL DISSENY, 1991

JOY H. DOHR, MARGARET B. PORTILLO
Marc de disseny associatiu per a l’educació