DISSENY, EINA DE FUTUR, 1993 | articulo

Respostes a l'enquesta: "Disseny i llibertat en el procés de creació de formes"

GIORGIO BERSANO RICHARD BUCHANAN JULI CAPELLA QUIM LARREA YVES DEFORGES KIMBERLY GEORGE DOVEY ALESSANDRO MENDINI JOSEP MARIA MONTANER CHARLES L. OWEN ANTY PANSERA ANDRÉ RICARD ENRIC SATUÉ JONATHAN WOODHAM

GIORGIO BERSANO

Non c'è dubbio che il razionalismo (intenso come orizzonle del linguaggio) ed il funzionaiismo (concepíto come metodologia del disegno industríale) abbiano con-dizionato il design del xx secólo e influenzalo il contemporáneo progetto per ¡'industria. Del resto, i fondamenta-li contenuti dell'area del disegno industríale sono venuti fondamentalmente definendosi fra il 1920 ed il 1930, sullo sfondo di un intens if icarsi dei processi di macchi-nizzazione produttiva e di un radicarsi del connubio arte-indusfria. tendenze che il razionalismo ha trasformato in momento fondativo di una dogmática teorizzazione relativa alie assolute necessità di serializzazione degli ogget-ti. Ancora oggi dimensioni razionali e metodologie fun-zionali contraddistinguono l'assetto di quelle forme d'arredo dótate di una elevata complessità tecnológica o comunque legate a specifiche funzionalitá d'utilizzo. E¹questo il caso degli elec-ttrodomestici, delle armadiature da cucina, dei mobili per ufficio, dei contenitori di varia natura, nelle cui forme permane quel la classicità di volu-mi e di linguaggi che trova la propria matrice in una onestà di realizzazione tipica di tutta la cultura razional-funzionale, Tuttavia, non può essere scordato che altre tipologie d'arredo sembrano oggi proporsi quale terreno di sperimentazione di piú eclettiche soluzioni, di avan-guardistiche proposte, di alternative prospettive della forma: tavoli, sedie, divani poltrone. strutturatí secondo codici scarsamente razionali ma coerenti con le fluide dimensioni di una società post-industriale o con gli svi-luppi post-moderni della figurazione. In ogni caso, nonostante gli sviluppi del terziario avanzato e la dila-gante produzione di beni inmateriali, l'indústria resta ancora oggi un fundaméntale settore delle economic nazionali: dimensione condizionata dalla razionalitá produttiva della macchina e dalla pragmaticítà della organiz-zazione aziendale la cui logicità si esplicita formalmente clàssica conformaztone di oggctti costruiti secondo geo-metriche forme e razionali strutture.

Piü di recente, il panorama del disegno industríale ha evidenziato una precisa volontá di distacco dei codici dalla tradizione razionalista ed il parallelo rifiuto di ogni egemonia di una tendeza sulle altre. Si è cosi assistito ad un moltiplicarsi di percosi, riccrche, sperimentazioni, che hanno fondamentalmente riproposto l'ambito del design quale dimensione privilegíala di una narrazionc in cui linguaggio e scritrura, nella loro fenomenologica immediatezza, hanno travalicato ogni trascendete ideologia. Fra nostalgiche riprese di un arredo ottocentesco. la riedizione di classici pezzi apparlenenti alia storia del disegno industríale, la configurazionc di oggetti ispirati a minímalismi vísivi, l'esaltazione esasperata di un high-tech scarsamente convincente, ¡! design rivela la sua odierna natura di disciplina í'inalizzata alia costru-zione di immagini orientate a rappresentare simbologie collettive ed inesplorate dimensioni delia comunícazio-ne. Da oggetto seriale, il prodotto del disegno industríale si configura quale momento oscülante fra la artigiana-lità rcalizzativa e l'intervento d'artista, svincolato da qualsiasi rígida regola derivante dal mondo produttivo. Fino a configurarse talvolta, quale provocatoria presen-za oriéntala a denunciare quella fruizione distratta a cui la forma è dcstinata entro glí orizzonti di una labirintica metrópoli inquinata dal proliferaré di messaggi che annullano qualsiasi stabilitá della comunicazione.

II contesto attuale garantisce al designer maggiori liberta rispetto al passato: ma come sempre, la piü vasta gamma dei percorsi e dei possibili esiti si uniscc ad una crescente incertezza delle scelte e dei risultati. Nella tendenziale vanificazione di ogni consoltdata «tradizio-nc» del disegno industriale, il progettista scopre che la costruzione della forma si configura quale individúale ricerca, come avventuroso percoso dove ia rischiosa imprevedibilità degli itinerari si unisce alia laboriosa individuazione dei tragitti. L'ampliarsi delle prospettive implica una incertezza dei linguaggi che rivaluta, per contrasto, la consolídala stabilitá della storia: come se l'impossibile previsione del futuro c la fluidità delle strategic rendesse incvitabilc il recuperi) del passato quale rassteurante dimensionc contrapposta al vanificar-si di ogni riferimento collective Tale atteggiamento giustifica la tendeza alia ecletlica manipolazione delle citazioni ricavate dalla storia del design e ricomposte secondo arbitrarte modalità; spiega il proliferaré di ri-edizioni di oggetti che appartengono ormai agli archivi della storia del disegno industriale; influenza la nostálgica ripetizione di mobili ispirati a calde atmosfere otto-centeschc e a interni milteleuropei. Tendenza che si pro-pongono quaie recupero di tradizioni «altre» rispetto a quella del razionalismo, come riscoperta di una serie di storie del disegno industriale che l'cgemonia funzionale ha ¡n pratica oceultato sotto la rígida dogmaticítà delle proprie rególe e la metafísica universalità dei suoi modelli.

E' impensabile che il processo del disegno industriale riesca a sottrarsi ai condizionamenti: esso rispecchia e rifíette le modalità di produzione e le simbologie del suo tempo. Quale dimensione emblemática di una época risente di specifici condizionamenti cconomici, lecnolo-gici, cultural!. Piú che un artista liberamente dedito ad

esprimere la propria vocazione creativa, il designer è un organizzatore di forme in qualche modo capace di risol-vere comptessi problemi a cui fornisce adeguate solu-zioni. In questo modo l'attivttà di progettazione industríale si delinea quale area di individuazione di scritture adeguate ad una serie di variabili (esterne al territorio fórmale) che si configurano come vincoli rispetto alie eomponenti visive, creative, linguistiche. Compito del designer è di utilizzare i margini di liberta e i condizionamenti imposti dai vincoli per dare luogo a innovative proposte. La sua è una liberta condizionata e il suo talento si applica ad un contesto che linguaggio e scrit-tura non possono modificare ma solo rappresentare, criticare, contestare, attraverso i volumi, le forme, i colorí di oggetti che la attivitá progettuale del designer definis-ce coerentemente con le richieste del mércalo o con le necessità dell'azienda.

RICHARD BUCHANAN

«Rationalism» and «functionalism» are occasionally used as labels for certain schools of design thinking in the early and middle decades of the twentieth century. But these terms do not adequately represent any doctrine or philosophy of design. They do not provide an intelligible description of any single school of design or any single theory of design. They are, in fact, highly ambiguous concepts -and, thus, are easily reduced to journalistic slogans to serve the needs of particular moments of popular controversy and debate.

Properly understood, however, rationalism and functionalism are themes of inquiry -themes that are subject to widely different interpretations in practice as well as theory. They give shape to the exploration of design without automatically providing a predictor of the result.

How do they give shape? «Rationalism» tends to be a methodological theme. It points toward the use of reason and deliberation in the design process. By exploring rationalism, designers sought to give discipline to the activity of design thinking. In effect, they sought to liberate design from its reputation of dependence on vague intuition and, indeed, on narrow commercial or «decorative» applications of the principles of the fine arts. Rationalism provided a vehicle for discovering and exploring intelligence in the discipline of design. This was a critical step in changing the status of design from a servile practical art, a quaint nineteenth century trade activity, into a liberal art of twentieth century culture.

But rationalism in design thinking was explored in many variations in the early part of the twentieth century, setting diverse patterns which continue to shape design thinking in the present. One patterns was an echo of neo-Platonism and theosophy, evident, for example, in the influence of Lauweriks on the German Werkbund and, ultimately, on the Bauhaus. Designers would be like dialecticians, seeking the harmony and unity of the universe through systematic explorations of geometric form in the practical objects of everyday life.

In contrast, another pattern reflected the materialist and empiricist philosophies of the positivists and neo-positivists. Instead of pursuing a dialectical path toward universality and idealism, other designers sought a science of design that would distinguish the cognitive from the emotive in design thinking. This path, too, led to the exploration of geometric form, but for a universality based on the elemental clarity of physical and psychological sciences. Of course, this went hand-in-hand with a minimalist aesthetic. This type of rationalism is illustrated in much of the design theory developed at

HfG Ulm, though the approach is evident in slightly different variations earlier and later in Europe and the United States, as well as in Asta (e.g. the Industrial Design Centre at Bombay).

Finally, another pattern emerged around the idea of rational experimentation with materials and forms. It was an approach that ultimately found strong intellectual support in American pragmatic philosophy through the writings of John Dewey (e.g. Art as Experience, which was basic reading at the New Bauhaus). In this approach, science and aesthetics were interconnected and mutually implicated in the activity of design and in the products of design thinking. Neither science nor aesthetics was primary; they were equally essential.

In contrast to rationalism, functionalism is a theme that tends to point toward principles. Once again, however, it is a theme with many variations. By exploring functionalism, some designers sought a comprehensive organization of man, society, and nature. The practical arts of design could enable men and women, as individuals and as social beings, to take their proper place in a harmonious universe. In contrast, the theme of functionalism enabled other designers to explore the rhythms of experience in local environmental contexts. Where industrialization and mechanization had broken or destroyed the satisfying give and take that human beings once felt in their immediate environment of daily living, designers might reestablish the aesthetic quality of practical life and technology.
Finally, other designers explored functionalism as a path toward efficiency and economy of daily living, seeking to apply modern sciences to the problems of daily existence in order to clear away the emotional and material obstacles to a natural life.

Was the designer's activity strongly conditioned by the concepts of rationalism and functionalism? Viewed as narrow doctrines or dogmas, any of the variations of rationalism and functionalism may appear, today, to have limited the creativity of designers. But viewed as themes of inquiry -as directions for exploring the possibilities for new design thinking in the twentieth century-rationalism and functionalism provided remarkably creative conditions for designers. These themes -and many others that are equally important- led to the establishment of design as a significant intellectual discipline peculiarly suited to the problems and challenges brought about by the cultural revolution that occurred at the beginning of the twentieth century. No single variation tells the entire story of design. But in the combination of all, we find the vigor of debate that has created design as a cultural art of our time. This art -more than the individual products created by this art, about whose qualities and value we may reasonably dispute- should attract our primary attention.

Positivism, pragmatism, and phenomenology exerted strong influence on design thinking in the past, and these philosophic orientations continue to exert strong influence within the design community today –often without the conscious awareness of designers. The concepts of each philosophy have been modified by ongoing debate and applied in new ways to contemporary circumstances. But the fundamental directions for exploration remain surprisingly intact. Indeed there is a sense in which the contemporary design community continues to play out the possibilities discovered earlier in the twentieth century, without radical departures. What seems to be radically new is too often, upon examination, only a repackaging or a slightly different orientation of earlier ideas.

Yet there is a significant change in the environment of contemporary design thinking. In the course of the twentieth century, design has changed from being a trade activity to a segmented profession to a field for technical research to what is now an integrative discipline of thoughtful production in technological culture. With this progression has come greater awareness of the diversity of useful ideas about design and the need for greater reflection on the nature and practice of design.

Design stands on the brink of a new maturity that will give it a stronger voice in relation to engineering and marketing as well as the traditional arts and sciences. But this requires greater sophistication than in the past. Designers should articulate their positions wiht more care and greater clarity. They should speak not only to each other but to the wider community of intelligent individuals working in commerce and the arts and sciences. And they should be motivated by a greater degree of concern for objective value rather than by concern for public relations image and self-promotion. The design community will have to encourage differences of perspective and, at the same time, direct attention toward identifying and addressing common problems.

In this regard it should always be remembered that both the Bauhaus and HfG Ulm were continually racked by internal disagreements. These disagreements were, in essence, philosophic, although they were most often discussed in terms of the practical consequences of philosophic differences rather than in terms of philosophy itself. Design culture lacked the seasoned maturity of other disciplines that would enable it to tolerate rather than seek to efface fundamental differences. As a result, disputes too often broke down into professional warfare in which all parties were weakened. It is a challenge to contemporary design to avoid doctrinal divisions in favor of exploring themes of inquiry.

The possibilities for creative expression have increased significantly for the contemporary designer, in the sense that designers have more confidence in their discipline and have a greater awareness of the diversity of ideas available in contemporary culture.

However, there are several factors that may limit the actual achievement of designers in the present and near future. One factor is the environment of commerce. Unless designers use intelligence and care in working with their clients in manufacturing and industry, design will lose its current level of access to commercial decision making. Some designers may wish to cultivate an air of magic or mystery about their work, but they must learn to work cooperatively with colleagues in marketing and engineering. Persuasive communication has never been needed more in the design professions than today.

Another factor that may limit the achievement of designers is ignorance and superficiality in dealing with the natural and social sciences and with advances in technology. There is a tendency among designers, in the immediate urgency of their work, to remain content with superficial understanding of concepts and methods drawn from other disciplines. Designers do not have to be experts in these areas, but they must be able to explore them with intelligence and, most important, with an eye toward useful integrations.

This suggests a significant task for the discipline of design studies in forming a bridge for the exchange of ideas between designers and experts in other fields. It also suggests an important task for design education that is seldom met in contemporary design schools: to provide students with a general or liberal education that will enable them to move more easily among the ideas and methods of other fields. A trade school or industrial arts approach to design education is no longer adequate to the needs of the professions of design.

It is neither possible nor desirable to imagine that design takes place without conditioning influences.

The conditions of design are found ambiguously in (1) material circumstances, (2) social and professional environment, (3) prevailing cultural values, and (4) individual vision and creative ability. I say «ambiguously,» because there is a significant sense in which designers create the conditions for their work. The conditions of design are not entirely determinate. There is a degree of indeterminacy in most circumstances -accounting for what I have elsewhere called the «wicked problems» that lie at the core of all design thinking. The genius of design lies in the ability to assess and shape conditions and, then, to use those conditions to suggest new possibilities for exploration. The question is, what does each designer conceive the conditions of design to be? The conceptions will be diverse, revealing the fundamental pluralism of design thinking.

JULI CAPELLA-QUIM LARREA

Sí, totalmente de acuerdo, y fue un hecho muy positivo que a través de una cierta disciplina obligó a apretar el intelecto: intelectus apretatus discurrit. Fue una sana búsqueda de los científico y lo absoluto que incentivó una línea de creación que logró grandes avances.

El diseñador sabía cómo debía actuar.

Evidentemente la situación debía cambiar porque todo está en constante evolución y cambio, hay que entender que cada escalón permite llegar al siguiente. En otras palabras, y aunque no está de moda, el avance dialéctico es un hecho irreversible.

Los condicionamientos de hoy son la flojera filosófica, el papanatismo de los divos, el auge de hiperestética de baratillo (porque atender a la estética en si nunca fue malo), la falta de objetivos sociales, el alejamiento del ser humano como medida y fin de cualquier otra actividad, etc., es decir, los condicionamientos que padece la sociedad entera.

El diseño tal vez tenga, además, otros condicionamientos específicos -pero no por ello más importantes- como son la especial coyuntura del «boom» en nuestro país, la falta de crítica, el caos educativo y otros.

Ni más ni menos, diferentes, y aunque parezca lógico pensar que a medida que se tiene más experiencia, más historia y más medios técnicos se deban hacer creaciones mejores, la cruda realidad nos indica que no por tener más posibilidades expresivas, uno las aprovecha mejor.

Lo cierto es que hoy por hoy cada uno puede hacer lo que le dé la gana sin tener sentimiento de descarriado o anatema.

Si esta libertad de expresión genera mayor calidad no lo sabemos, pero lo que está claro es que es irremediable el derecho a decir lo que uno desee.

Como reflexión anexa: si se restringe el espectro expresivo, seguramente se alcance mayor intensidad en la onda elegida.

Pregunta absurda (con perdón), pero los condicionamientos son la salsa del diseño. Sin éstos no hay avances, y sin leyes no hay tansgresión.

Es necesario que el diseñador tenga límites y también que de vez en cuando se los salte, pero además ¿hay alguien capaz de imaginar cómo diseñar una silla sin condicionamientos? ¿sin conocer el material ni el proceso constructivo? ¿sin saber las medidas humanas? ¿sin atender al uso «sentarse»? ¿sin determinar dimensiones?, etc.. Hasta el diseñador más irreverente y atrevido debe actuar bajo condicionamientos para obtener una solución, sea la que sea.

YVES DEFORCE

Una premiere precision concerne la definition du design {ce qui engage la question des designers).

A rUnivcrsité de Technologie de Compiègne il s'agit d'unc «double formation»: ingénieurs et designers.

L'ingénieur est l'agent de la fonction d'usage.

Le designer est l'agent de la fonction du signe

L'ingénieur-designcr doit combiner dans ses pro-duits la double fonction, d'usage et de signe.

Ce qui pose una question fundaméntale: cclle des supports entre determinisme et liberté.

L'ingénieur conçoít dans le cadre du determinisme (physique, technique, économique) que lui dicte le «eahier des charges». D'òn la position «functionalis-te»: un produit bien conçu répond à sa fonction d'usage: il est fonctionnel et sa fonction est celle de la fonction d'usage.

Le designer ne peut rien faire de plus, face à ce rai-sonnement, s'il n'a pas de liberté. Sans liberté le design ne peut étre que majorité du fonctionalisme: c'est de l'habillage ou de la decoration.

Comment restituerde la liberté au concepteur(ingé-nieur-designer)?

- En minimisant les modeles

- En utilisant toute la puissance de l'informalique (cf. mon livre: L'oeuvre et le produit).

2 i 3

Le designer, s'il a la liberté de s'exprimer, doit savoir à qu'il doit en faire.

L'ingénicrer-designer doit étre guide par une idee directrice.

C'est ce que j'ai appelé une ideologic (esthétique ou morale). Pour moi, cette ideologic doit étre économique. Ce qui est traduit pour l'éco-design et le techno-éthique.

L'éco-design conduit à concevoir les produits ecològiques: durables, recuperables, combinables, etc. (Cf. mon livre: L'oeuvre et le produit et l'article «Pour un design écologique».)

Le mouvement doit étre sostenu per une attitude responsable et exigente des citoyens. Ce qui milite en faveur d'unc formation genérale ¡ncluant una preparation à la «maitrise sociàle de la technique».

Tout produit devrait ètre accompagné d'un «bilan énergétique» ou d'un «bilan environnemental» qui donne des elements de jugement et de dialogue entre le concepteur et l'utilisateur.

(Cf. l'article «La culture technique pour tous».)

KIMBERLY GEORGE DOVEY

The designer's activity has always been strongly conditioned in my view. Under «functionalism» it became overtly conditioned by function but this was as much an aesthetic ideology as it was a rational conditioning force.

The strongest conditioning forces at present are those of social and aesthetic ideology on the one hand, and the imperatives of capital accumulation on the other. However, design has always been conditioned by the imperatives of livability, which is something much deeper than the reductionism of «functionalism».

There is a paradox in that the expressive possibilities in design have both increased and diminished. Certainly the dead and cold hand of modernist uniformity has lifted and been replaced with a postmodern pluralism. Yet paradoxically, this «freedom» comes at a time of increased economic rationalism and postmodernism may be the same wolf in new clothes. The irony is that the designer's creative contribution has become more highly valued as it becomes reduced to a function on an account sheet.

Design with no conditioning forces is neither desirable nor possible.

ALESSANDRO MENDINI

VISIONE COME PROGETTO: La crisi del progctlo di tipo canónico si sviluppa al crepuscolo di un periodo storico che ha visto il piü catastrófico intervento dell'uomo sulla crosta del planeta. II margine lase ¡ato alFarchitettura e al design nella definizione física del rapporto fra l'uomo c il suo ambiente e i suoi oggetti, è mínimo. Sembra patética l'insistenza della cultura archi-tettonica nelTarrogarsi la capacita di controllo e di definizione dei processi di trasformazione in atto.

E'possibile ritencre che la mediazione progettuale per immagini, un genere introverso di ricerca, un progetto che riflette su se stesso per opera di non adetti ai lavori, liben una serie di energie secondo prassi e forme impre-vedibili.

ARTE E RESPONSABILITÀ: II centro, vero e pulsante, dell'esistenza di oggi sono la scienza e la política; e l'arte messa ai margini, diventa un fenómeno super-fiuo. Mantiene il suo splendore c il suo stato di necessità solo se resta fedele al suo problema astratto, quello della sua «stilcmatica».

Bisogna emettere immagini e non ideologia: in questa restrizione disciplinare è la salvezza dell'arte di oggi. Destra e sinistra, ricchi e poveri, violenza c bontà, stan-no fuori dal rígido laboratorio delTartista, perché egli sa che un rapporto diretto e iconográfico con la realtà della política, della religionc o dell'ideologia si traduce oggi in demagogia. Egli sa che verra giudicato soltanto per la qualitá del proprio línguaggio.

NEOMODERNISMO: II progettista oggi non è stret-tamente un architetto, non un designer, ma piuttosto un operatore infra-disciplínare, in grado di collegare Ira loro varié tematiche: il suo approccio ad esse, infatti, non é sostanziale ma sov-ra-strutUirale, il método è este-tico e figurativo, oppure esistenziale. non técnico e tipológico. L'impegno lingüístico precede quello funzionale, l'architettura e i) design sono nuova seultura e nuova pit-tura.. Cosi ome coincide con il design, l'architettura neo-moderna coincide con la seultura e la pittura; ma non motívala dall'idca di síntesi presente nell'arte anti-ca, e nemmeno dalla visione unitaria dei maestri del Movimento Moderno.

L'operatore progettuale neomoderno si muove da una speciality alTaltra, dalla moda, aU'archítcttura, alia performance, alia pittura, perché di esse gli interessa il loro mínimo comune denominatore, che è il linguaggio, la stilematica. Perciò, ncl modo assembiato degli oggetti di qualsiasi dimcnsione e genere, egli iavora a una specie di pitturazione globalc dell'universo, inteso come sistema di merci dall'aspetto decorativo.

PROGETTO AMORALE: La coscienza dell'im-pos-sibiütà di una ipotesi estética estesa alia fola conduce alia formulazione dell'ipotesi speculare quella antiestética. Cosi la progettazione báñale e la amoralità stilistica danno luogo a una radicale inversione di tendenza nel concepire il bello. Esse rappresentano l'accettazione coraggiosa e contraddittoria delle condizioni concrete de I la rea lia.

J. M. MONTANER

Interpretant que totes quatre qüestions giren entorn al tema de la relació entre els mètodes de disseny i la llibertat de creació, presento una resposta única. I en la mesura en què l'únic procés de disseny que conec directament és el de l'arquitectura, la meva opinió es referirà, doncs, al disseny arquitectònic.

Certament, al menys des d'un punt de vista teòric, sota la influència del racionalisme i del funcionalisme, es considerava que la forma era el resultat d'uns condicionaments funcionals i materials. Hem d'assenyalar aquí que racionalisme i funcionalisme són criteris matitzadament diferents. Racionalisme no ha de ser necessàriament un mètode que obligui a començar de nou sense tenir en compte la tradició. També hi ha un possible racionalisme aplicat a l'anàlisi de la tradició històrica de l'arquitectura i del disseny. En canvi, funcionalisme comporta una metodologia per la qual la funció és primordial, defineix la raó de tot procés o forma. De tota manera el funcionalisme també pot tenir diverses interpretacions, des de les més restrictives com la de la «nova objectivitat alemanya», fins a les més obertes com l'organicisme, el qual, en últim terme, és una altra, mena de funcionalisme.

És ben cert que al llarg de les últimes dècades la situació ha canviat i a la base de la majoria de posicions arquitectòniques predominen els criteris formalistes per sobre dels funcionalistes. En aquest sentit les propostes de Louis Kahn, Aldo Rossi o Peter Eisenman són marcadament antifuncionalistes.

Com a conseqüència de la desinhibició postmoderna i de la possibilitat d'una relació directa i sense prejudicis amb qualsevol periode històric, el dissenyador i l'arquitecte poden escollir qualsevol referència i gaudeixen, per tant, de les més altes possibilitats expressives. A això col·labora també la gran disponibilitat de materials, especialment, amb l'ampli camp que han obert les al·leacions metàl·liques i els plàstics.

En el camp del disseny arquitectònic, és implantejable que no hi hagin condicionaments. En això el disseny industrial ha disposat d'una major relativitat, sempre fins un cert punt, ja que tot objecte ha de ser produïble i comercialitzable. Així i tot, hi ha hagut des dels anys seixanta un bescanvi fort entre el món dels objectes artístics i el dels dissenys singulars.

L'arquitectura, en canvi, ve marcada en la seva pròpia essencialitat i tradició per una gran complexitat de condicionaments: ordenances urbanes, trama de la ciutat, necessitats dels usuaris, escala humana, possibilitats materials, pressupostos disponibles, llenguatges establerts, etc.

Malgrat això, sempre van apareixent nous mitjans expressius en el camp de la creació de les formes. En aquest sentit és enormement suggerent el que planteja Ezio Manzini en el seu llibre La matèria de la invenció; la possibilitat d'un mètode projectual «astut» en el que es combinin la raó i la ciència amb la intuició, el sentit comú i l'atzar.

CHARLES L. OWEN

Over the last twenty years, much has been said about style, styling, expression, functionalism, post-modernism- and the role of formalism, generally, in design. As we begin the last decade of the century, it is easier to see in retrospect what was useful and what was distracting. It is also important to move on to identify the forces that are forming the issues for design now and in the next decades.

Functionalism

Modernism emerged from the turmoil of the 19th century. With it, Horatio Greenough's inmortal directive of the early 1800's became edict: Form follows Function.* Considering the times, that charge was a call to arms. Style at the turn of the century was complex and ornate, the product of centuries of craft refinements used for embellishment. The forceful emergence in the 19th century of the new ideas of industrialization and the new values of a growing middle class called for rethinking almost everything.

The decimations of World War I and the subsequent economic chaos in continental Europe, particularly Germany, cleared the way for an extensive replacement of values. Ready with new visual principles forged in the turn-of-the-century years, was a host of architects, artists and a new category of «form givers»: designers. Their reductionist vision advocated replacement of visual complexity with refined simplicity, ostensibly better suited to the new forms of production.

The international style, as it came to be called, dictated the look of things from the 1930's until the «postmodern» movements of the 1970's. There were variations, of course. Styling -an almost quintessential American aberration- produced visual paradigms such as «streamline» design and excesses of form for its own sake along the way that culminated in the styling of automobiles such as the 1959 Cadillac. But, for the main stream, the general guidelines for formal interpretation remained functional or, at least, functionalist.

For the thoughtful, this meant that the form of the product should be functional, that is, should relate to the product's function -should help to convey how the product should be used, should be easy to produce with the manufacturer's equipment, should fit into the user's environment as a tool rather than an art piece, and should contribute symbolically to the user's self image.

For the not-so-thoughtful, the best products produced under these design principles became formal models for functionalist styling, in the natural course of events, the truly elegant examples of modern design were buried under a worldwide avalanche of «international-styled» products borrowing trivially from their betters.

* Tuckerman. Henry T. Memorial of Horatio Greenough. New York: G.R Putnam, 1853.

Post-modernism

The devitalization and degradation of the international style inevitably produced a cycle of reaction: the counter-revolution of post-modernism. Some say that this was simply a resurgence and continuation of the modern movement with its fundamental mechanism of rejection of authority. Either way, a re-energization of formalism took place in the 1970's with the publication of the work of the Italian Memphis movement.

In a twinkling of an eye, closet formalists around the world emerged, proclaiming an end to the tired reductionist simplicity of functionalism. Products and communications were art once again, to be valued for their expressive statement, not their functional performance. Color and composition were in. Experiment and shock were applauded. Frog Design announced, «Form Follows E-motion»!

As always, the new movement was not out of context. Dramatic improvements in the ability of industrial production systems -and increasingly, new post-industrial systems- had virtually abolished earlier design limitations that dictated simple forms and color schemes. Non-geometric forms could be produced almost as efficiently as geometric ones; new plasties, coatings and colorants put color choice in the hands of the designer, not the technologist. And -very important- market segmentation and niche marketing meant that new products could be produced in lower volumes, in greater variety -at less financial risk.

Some consequences

The release of post-modernism has had two profound effects on design. On the good side, it has reopened the art/design dialogue. Released from the fetters of «international style», designers have engaged in extensive experimentation with color and form. In the process, sophistication in the understanding of color palettes and the purposes of formal composition has grown exponentially in a very short time. What would have been daring and technically intimidating only a decade ago is now almost routine for designers and design students.

On the bad side, the celebration of permissive expression has had serious repercussions on design professionalism. Buried under the bombastic rhetoric of the formalists was the rest of what designers do. Born in the desire to «beautify» industrial products, design has always had to dance precariously between appearance, perfomance and human factors requirements. The realization that designers had much more to offer than beautification came almost with the invention of the design disciplines. But the holistic nature of design has been very difficult to communicate, partly because the visual contribution is so compelling, and partly because designers themselves continue to advertise single-valued aesthetic expertise.

In the United States, the problem has been most apparent. The tendency to treat design as fashion and cosmetic styling has been almost overwhelming from the beginning. It is still common in U.S. companies for the «product» to mean what the engineers do (the working part), and the «package» to be what is done by the stylists (the visible part). It is also clear that the product is the serious part -the package is the «pretty» part.

Memphis and its imitators confirmed what many in business had always suspected: designers are industrial fashion mavens -to be tolerated (even courted) because their incomprehensible art somehow contributes to sales- but to be kept out of the serious business of designing (i.e., engineering) the product.

It is arguable that the post-modern decades of denouncement set the design professions back two decades. Solid but slow progress in convincing industry and society that design could contribute to higher productivity, better function and improved quality of life was eclipsed almost overnight by the image of designers as whimsical artisans. The omnipresent TV images of designer jeans and designer accessories were now buttressed by products across the spectrum that obviously were designed to be seen, but not used.

Toward new forms

If the forces of rationalism, functionalism and modernism produced the international style, the forces of postmodernism produced the style of whimsy. Like it or not, both tangibly record periods of taste; and taste, for better or worse, is an important issue for design.

It is not the only issue, however, and it is now high time that we re-balance our concerns. Design, like all human endeavors, is neither context-free nor single-valued. Many forces act to condition its objectives and principles. These forces have impact on formal tastes, but they also affect other facets of design expertise, and these facets have been all but ignored in the recent rush to theoretical and philosophical debate on issues wholly related to appearance design.

In the broadest sense, design is responsible for the appearance, human factors and performance of artifacts and institutions. Because different design specialities deal with different aspects of the design, different degrees of emphasis may be accorded the three. There may also be significant overlap among the design disciplines, depending on the subject at hand. Nevertheless, all three facets of expertise are required for good design.

If we are to regard these even-handedly in looking for the forces that should be conditioning design, we must examine two fundamental outcomes of human activity: emerging technologies and evolving needs/desires.

A by no means exhaustive list of insights derived from such an examination would include:

Post-industrial production technology is making it possible to produce individually tailored products and messages for very small markets, even individuals.
Communications technology is linking individuals and groups wherever they are around the world.
Political/economic changes are promoting open competition in a global market.
Medical and biological sciences are extending human lifetimes and improving quality of life for young and old.
Population growth is continuing unabated -the world's population has doubled in the last 40 years and will double again in a shorter time.
Global warming is accelerating, and the Earth's ozone layer is disintegrating.
Computer technology, through dramatic improvements annually in computer hardware and software, is making radically improved services possible for individuals as well as institutions.
World energy use is still increasing exponentially. Energy needs in the next forty years will probably increase three-fold.
Population growth is widening the differences between the industrialized and non-industrialized countries. The gap between the poor and the rich is growing, with the poor becoming increasingly more numerous.
Fast and low-cost transportation technology is making it possible for many to learn about other cultures through the personal experience of travel.
Computer, electronic and electro-mechanical technologies are making adaptivity feasible for every day products at home and work.
Environmental degradation is progressing at an alarming rate -land and sea ecosystems are being destroyed by human encroachment.
Information technology is providing personal access to vast libraries of information around the world.
Science and mathematics are finding new ways to describe and control order, disorder, simplicity and complexity through chaos theory.
Changing social relationships in the family and workplace are challenging time-honored societal structures.
The life sciences are using genetic techniques to «engineer» plant and animal organisms for special needs. Etc.

Each of these insights potentially conditions some objectives or principles of design. Some insights are positive; some are negative. Some provide guidance for the kinds of products designers ought to develop; some suggest philosophical or theoretical bases for their development.

As an example, consider the ramifications of just the first item above. The capabilities of post-industrial production systems are not yet matched with design processes. If a flexible manufacturing system can produce essentially one-of-a-kind products, why can't the design process describe the products equally flexibly? Design theorists ought to be considering how designs can be described as sets of «rules» that permit variability, but maintain the intention of the designer through new kinds of specification for relationships and limits. When this is done, the goal of «custom» design will be attainable with efficiency.

The important thing, though, is that conditioning forces are multi-dimensional. In the same way that design deals with all the artifacts and institutions human beings construct, these forces collectively address all the demands, opportunities and considerations confronting the designer. Designers must deal with the full range of considerations -how things look and how things work and how things fit people and environment.

Hopefully, the formalistic ferment is over. We have much to do.

ANTY PANSERA

Non credo che l'itinerario progettuale c l'utiüzzo di cena grammatiea e sintassi espressiva da parte dei designer del passato siano state «condizionatc» dal razionalismo e dal funzionalismo. 11 collocarsi nell'ambito di un «movimento» non va letto come una accettazione passiva di un atteggiamento e/o metodologia ma come l'attiva individuazione, in quel momento, di un fare al quale contribuiré con la propria poética e ideologia.

Razionalismo e funzionalismo sono certo due «eti-chette» che ben concrctizzano comunque atteggiamenti metodologici c scelte linguistiche che vanno contcstua-lizzati nell'esperienza storica che li ha generaü. Condi-zionati e condizíonanü cosí come condizionate c condi-zionanti sono certo le bandierc che sono state álzate negli anni successivi c che, ancora una voita, sono altiva risposta alia sempre maggiore complcssità del contemporáneo.

I condizionamenti del designer sono quelli che qua-lunque operatore -e a maggior ragione un progettista- si trova di fronte lavorando nel sociale: utenza c commit-tenza il binomio -umano e all'inscgna del «grande numero»-, con cui rapportarsi in prima ¡stanza.

Le diverse possibilità espressive del designer del decennio Novanta sono da ricercarsi, credo, in piú valenze, dalle straordinarie possibilità offerte dai nuovi materiali, alia miniaturizzazione delle componenti...alla serena acquisizione di una metodologia progettuale e di un ruólo che -negli operatori piú attenti e consapevoli della propria sia pur recente «storia»-, continuerà o dov-rcbbe continuare a porsi come céntrale nei team che ogni azienda costituisce per individuare c mettere in forma i nuovi prodotti.

Impensabile, credo, l'assenza di condizionamenti, considerando lo specifico di questo fare, impliciti, d'altro canto, delToperare nel sociale e in un processo produttivo. Condizionamenti che, è mia opinione, pos-sono e debbono fungere da element i di stimolo.

ANDRÉ RICARD

Sí, en la medida en que el racionalismo define el diseño como una actividad cuya misión es la de resolver los problemas de uso que tienen las cosas que el hombre utiliza. Son, pues, estos problemas los que condicionan la actividad del diseñador, si bien son también, a la vez, los que le dan todo el interés a esta actividad. Creo que el placer que produce cualquier actividad creativa proviene precisamente de la preexistencia de condicionamientos que han de superarse. El placer en el diseño no proviene de una total permisividad sino, por el contrario, de resolver un problema planteado por otros.

Es posible que para un cierto tipo de diseño «lúdico» o «experimental» -que de hecho es una manera de llamar a algo que ya deja de ser diseño- no existan muchos condicionamientos. Para un diseñador que encara su actividad con más rigor, siguen existiendo los mismos.

El hecho de que haya más y más productos que cumplen una misma función, por el contrario, le exige aún más al diseñador. Su tarea, que sigue teniendo los condicionamientos funcionales, consiste ahora en hallar algún resquicio que le permita hacer una aportación realmente creativa en un campo muy trillado. No podemos olvidar que «crear» implica aportar algo nuevo y, con el aluvión de productos reiterativos que existen, es cada vez más difícil ser innovador.

De nuevo depende de lo que entendamos por diseño. En esta sociedad del espectáculo en que estamos metidos, que ya no valora la sensatez de las cosas sino su insolencia, es posible que quienes quieran jugar a ese juego encuentren más libertad expresiva. Para quienes ejercen un diseño más exigente, por el mero hecho de que hay más demanda de diseño, puede decirse que disponen de más ocasiones para expresarse, pero no de mayor libertad de acción. Es en la manera en que logra aportar algo nuevo, asumiendo los condicionamientos que en cada caso existen, que se expresa un diseñador.

No. Como ya he dicho, creo que es obvio que resultaría contraproducente. El interés de un crucigrama, por ejemplo, reside en el reto que nos plantea y la satisfacción nos la proporciona el hecho de haberlo completado sin hacer trampas. Del mismo modo, el interés que encierra un proceso de diseño proviene del hecho de que existen unas pautas impuestas. Es en la medida en que logramos resolver un diseño respetando esas pautas, que nuestra actividad creativa nos satisface. Me atrevería a decir que cuanto más difícil y restrictiva es el área operativa que nos ha acotado, mayor es el placer creativo.

ENRIC SATUÉ

Sí i no, perquè cal distingir dues classes de condicionaments: el que afectava la moral del projecte racionalista (i el dissenyador, conscient que treballava per una causa justa compartida amb artistes, arquitectes, dissenyadors industrials i gràfics, aspirava a transformar la societat començant per millorar-ne la qualitat de vida d'acord amb programes ideològics), i el que afectava la pràctica del projecte funcionalista (el qual pot resumir-se en l'aplicació d'un mètode científic -l'ergonomia-, la servitud al qual condicionà considerablement la forma del projecte).

És clar que abans de la «dictadura» ergonòmica, els objectes eren bonics o lletjos, còmodes o incòmodes, i ho eren per ofici o bé per casualitat. En canvi, en ple racionalisme, i més encara durant el funcionalisme, els objectes eren bonics o lletjos, còmodes o incòmodes, segons l'ús que hom feia de les normes ergonòmiques.

Com la ètica o la moral, l'ergonomia és un element intangible i un cop enllestit el projecte no s'hauria de veure. Si es veu, una de dues: o bé no s'ha aplicat amb prou intel·ligència, o bé la moda ha condicionat d'una manera massa feixuga i arbitrària la llibertat del dissenyador.

Molts dissenyadors s'han trobat còmodes practicant un tipus de disseny superficialment renovador i això empeny el disseny cap a una dinàmica projectual no sempre admirable. Avui, per exemple, podem considerar alguns dels mobles i complements dissenyats, en el seu temps, per l'admirable Joe Colombo, poc més que tributs formals a les lleis de l'ergonomia més gratuïta i efímera.

Ara bé, malgrat aquest aixopluc pels mediocres (els quals, d'altra banda, sempre troben amagatall), l'activitat del dissenyador en el racionalisme i en el funcionalisme estava, afortunadament, fortament condicionada.

És evident que avui, entre els dissenyadors, triomfa l'absentisme: ni cal transformar la societat, ni cal fer un parc objectual més còmode.

En conseqüència, el condicionament més greu és la manca de referències (culturals, ètiques, morals). I si bé és cert que la situació general no ajuda gens ni mica, perquè avui no s'aguanten dempeus les més elementals dialèctiques (occident-orient, dreta-esquerra, burgesia-proletariat, cultura-subcultural, passat-futur), també és veritat que la coherència interna d'un ideal comú proporciona a una part del col·lectiu que el professa (en aquest cas els dissenyadors més mediocres) un model d'actuació formal impune, el qual, un cop desprovist de contingut, es degrada paulatinament.

Així, la integració militant del gruix de dissenyadors anomenats eufemísticament «correctes», fomenta la perpetuació de la tendència expressada amb els «tics» formals més trivials d'un programa ideològic o d'un moviment estètic originalment ambiciós i exigent (per exemple, l'any trenta encara hi havia, a casa nostra, qui feia modernisme!).

Si pensem que, malhauradament, aquests dissenyadors sempre han constituït la immensa majoria en tots els col·lectius de totes les tendències històriques que es fan i es desfan, hem de pensar que sense condicionaments de cap mena la situació empitjoraria per definició,

I si avui no es pot parlar d'un disseny «correcte», perquè no hi ha models ni referències acadèmiques, l'únic condicionament que sobreviu és el talent. I aquest és, probablement, el valor més escàs i individualitzat del gènere humà.

En una situació progressivament especialitzada com la que vivim -també en el camp del disseny- l'expressió lliure dels dissenyadors és una opció perfectament legítima, sens dubte, però fa fredat pensar en les conseqüències devastadores que la mediocritat projectual incontrolada pot ocasionar.

Llevat d'alguns talents indiscutibles, als qui no esquitxa aquesta deplorable banalització, el condicionament més greu d'avui és la inèrcia d'una mediocritat descarrilada que enterra -sense vessar una llàgrima- la transcendència amb la intranscendencia.

El drama rau, precisament, en la franquícia que té avui el dissenyador per expressar-se amb l'estil i la tècnica que vulgui. Sense referències, models, objectius o ideals, el dissenyador té al davant una pàgina en blanc que pot omplir amb tota llibertat, com fan els infants.

Renunciar a la memòria històrica condemna a l'aprenentatge espontani i individual, i com que la ignorància és atrevida, avui passen per bons uns dibuixos gestuals, automàtics i malgirbats que els professors més indulgents de les escoles tradicionals d'Arts i Oficis no haurien tolerat ni en els exàmens d'ingrés.

En canvi, alguns d'aquests dibuixos són exhibits escandalosament en les pàgines culturals dels diaris, en les façanes de les institucions bancàries més solvents (en forma de renovats logotips), en les campanyes publicitàries més aparatoses, en les caràtules dels programes de televisió amb més audiència i en els jocs per a infants dels ordinadors.

Probablement, aquesta llibertat expressiva forma part de la llibertat individual que gaudim en les molt desitjables democràcies contemporànies. Però compte, perquè Allan Bloom diu que Tocqueville va dir -ara fa dos-cents anys- que en les societats democràtiques cada ciutadà està habitualment ocupat en la contemplació d'un objecte extremadament insignificant, que és ell mateix.

Perillosament, aquest egocentrisme fomentat pel sistema -aliat a la més absoluta llibertat expressiva- no fa altra cosa, almenys per ara, que legitimar els disbarats circumdants que constitueixen el disseny de cada dia.

L'acceptació, i fins i tot el reconeixement que del disseny fa la societat benestant i autosatisfeta, no fa més que reblar el clau.

Amb un estil fuetejant. Bloom ens descriu els irreflexius interessos del col·lectiu universitari americà actual d'una manera que ajuda a aclarir el triomf indiscutible d'aquesta «llibertat»:

«Amb la indiferència envers el passat i la pèrdua d'una visió racional del futur, l'únic projecte comú que sedueix la imaginació juvenil és l'exploració de l'espai, el qual, com tothom sap, és buit.»

Per a mi no, perquè un procés de disseny ja es, per ell mateix, un condicionament. Per tant, és impossible renunciar als condicionaments, i fins que el disseny (sobretot el disseny gràfic) no deixi de ser una forma comunicativa no podrà renunciar a determinats condicionaments orgànics. I més en una societat com la nostra, en la qual els serveis de comunicació sol·licitats per un client determinat pateixen, si més no, d'un condicionament inevitable: l'econòmic.

Però com sigui que l'eliminació d'aquest condicionament em sembla improbable, conclouré l'argumentació tornant al que dèiem a propòsit del talent.

Encara Tocqueville, el pensament del qual Bloom considera d'allò més actual, deia que el ciutadà democràtic i igualitari haurà d'evitar l'individualisme i veure's com part integrant d'un passat i d'un futur, enlloc de veure's com un àtom anònim constantment canviant.

Els dissenyadors de talent ja ho entenen així, almenys les obres que fan apunten en aquesta direcció. Però la llibertat és per naturalesa inabastable i el que necessiten els dissenyadors amb talent són, precisament, condicionaments per tal d'acotar cada vegada una part assolible d'aquesta llibertat.

Un disseny sense condicionaments fóra, gairebé per definició, un disseny pobre, banal i mediocre. I de fet, tots els dissenys pobres, banals i mediocres amb els quals convivim estan fets, sospito, sense condicionaments.

En temps del racionalisme i el funcionalisme -i estic segur que gràcies als condicionaments imperants- alguns dels talents dedicats a projectar formes condicionades per la ideologia i la utilitat van quallar en noms d'una categoria exemplar, però el seu record ens queda ja enrera (aquets àtoms anònims constantment canviants hem anat tan lluny!) que amb prou feines avui ens diran res.

Però Mies van der Rohe i Alvar Aalto, per exemple, ham deixat una obra racionalista i funcionalista que aclapararà, ben segur, els talents menys egocèntrics del segle xxi. Una obra sortosament condicionada per la sinergia de la intel·ligència i la sensibilitat, valors que avui han quedat tan enrera com el record d'ambdós genis del disseny.

JONATHAN WOODHAM

I agree, although much depends upon definitions of meaning and period, whether discussing the avant-garde tenets of the modernists of 1920s Weimar Germany, the legacy of what has been termed the «scientific operationalism» of the Hochschule für Gestaltung at Ulm in the years leading up to 1968 or, indeed, the ideological debates in Spain during the later years of Franco's dictatorship at the hands of Oriol Bohigas and the Escuela de Barcelona.

With regard to the German avant-garde of the 1920s, the extent to which the designer's activity was strongly conditioned by «the influence of rationalism and functionalism» is open to a certain amount of interpretation. It was certainly driven in part by the opportunities afforded by municipal patronage, allowing him or her to explore an emphatically twentieth century aesthetic in tune with new materials and modern modes of production, and to ally him- or herself with a sense of wider social purpose and responsibility. Furthermore, an underlying commitment to an «international style», with its clear opposition to the dominating nationalistic and volkisch outlook of the emergent National Socialists, provided a banner under which many could express their design ideology. On another level, it might be argued that in the economically reemergent Germany of the later 1950s designers at the newly-established Hochschule für Gestaltung at Ulm were rejecting any vestiges of the «individual creativity» of the interwar modernists in favour of collaborative and methodical problem-solving, utilising appropriate specialist expertise. The «creative individual» was no longer seen by them as able to resolve the increasing design problems on his or her own. In such a context «functionalism» and «rationalism» took on different connotations.

Thus, in these and many other instances which might be drawn into the discussion, functionalism and rationalism have been strong conditioning factors for the designer's activity, whether in terms of social, political, cultural, technological or aesthetic context.

Before answering this question it is important to attempt to contextualise the manner in which the conditioning forces in Design might be seen to have changed in the recessionary climate of the early 1990s. We have moved, or so we are often told in Britain, away from the materialist consumer climate of the 1980s into a more socially responsible, environmentally-aware and caring decade, one in which the designer still has a significant role to play, A more precisely focussed question might be: «Even if it were true that the prevailing ethos of the 1990s reflects stronger moral values, has the designer any greater opportunity to exercise moral judgments than in the 1980s?»

The materialistic optimism which pervaded British design culture in the 1980s was well-served by a service industry-oriented capitalist society intent on increasing levels of consumption.

The growing number and range of design consultancies, an expanding design press, a considerable amount of television and other mainline media exposure, together with the prevalent institutional celebration of the Star Designer, all fuelled the vivid flames of the Design beacon. In early 1980s Britain, under Mrs Thatcher, the State even sponsored a «Design for Profit» scheme in the hope of resuscitating economically what was left of British industry. Credit Card culture played a more significant part in sustaining the primacy of Design in the real world which existed outside the self-congratulatory pages of the design media or the personality cultism of newspaper colour supplements. Its impact on retailing patterns over the past decade was evident to anybody wandering down the High Street of an average British town, where the insignia of competing credit companies could be seen emblazoned around the entrances of numerous retailing outlets - welcoming signs for appropriate passport-holders of plastic money. But whether or not the character of Bristish design, as manifest in the almost Mafia-like stranglehold exerted by a relatively limited band of design consultancies responsible for the identity, packaging, products and appearance of the majority of the larger, more successful stores (in other words a considerable percentage of the urban landscape), reflected a state of health is open to question. Was the ripple effect of the designing for Terence Conran's Storehouse plc or Next anything more than a movement towards aesthetic conformity, exploring a set of alternative clichés to those of the floral interior fabrics, Wedgwood pottery or Jaguar cars, so often seen formerly as standard-bearers of British design values? The consumer could assert him- or herself by proclaiming «I consume, therefore I am» alongside the
Designer who, in order not to be outflanked, proclaimed «I Design, therefore I am».

The 1990s has seen the disappearance of many design consultancies, severe financial difficulties for the Design Museum. London (flagship of the entrepreneurial design culture of the 1980s), a collapse in the property market and a severe downturn in consumer spending. In such a climate the opportunities for the designer are limited, particularly if s/he is committed to the material improvement of peoples' lives rather than acting as an agent in encouraging consumers to purchase products, commodities and services they neither need nor really want. In a world increasingly dominated by the almost uniform output of multinational corporations, designers are often little more than product differentiators, unless they are working for markets where horizons are considerably enhanced by high levels of disposable income.

The expressive possibilities for the present designer are as great as they were in the 1980s, given the opportunity to exercise a brief with a degree of aesthetic licence. As a result of the richer textural, material, colorific and semantic possibilities opened up in the post-modernist climate of the 1970s and 80s, the designer's opportunities for aesthetic freedom of expression blossomed in the Memphis-driven ransacking of visual cultures right across the world's surface, unfettered by allegiance to any given historical period or style. Whilst it might be conceded that some designers indeed learnt from the Venturis' Las Vegas and enriched their vocabulary with a carefully articulated and comprehensible design syntax, for an increasing majority the perceived «need» for caeselessly titillating the jaded taste-buds of the Design-conscious consumer or patron has led to a playing with forms, finishes and stylistic (mis)quotations as ends in themselves. Rather than adopting the modernist war cry of «form follows function» or Robert Venturi's protesting «less is a bore», many of those exploring present-day «expressive possibilities» in design are concerned with ephemeral visions largely freed from social responsibilities, relevance or meaning.

The question appears to be something of a contradiction, given that the design process is, by its very definition, an activity which involves planning. Divorced from conditioning forces, any notion of planning, contriving or designing ceases to have meaning. Can design have a life independent of aesthetic, cultural, technological, social or economic considerations?

Sobre l'autor

GIORGIO BERSANO

Arquitecte pel Politècnic de Milà, crític d'arquitectura i de disseny industrial, col·laborador a les revistes Domus, Ottagono, Uomo Vogue entre d'altres. És responsable de l’Osservatorio Culturale della Regione Lombardia.

RICHARD BUCHANAN

Doctor en Filosofia. Professor de disseny a diverses universitats dels Estats Units. Autor de Wicked Problems in Design Thinking in Design Issues, Design and Technology in the Second Copernican Revolution i The Journal of the Industrial Designers Society of America.

JULI CAPELLA

Arquitecte, President de Foment de les Arts Decoratives (FAD), Barcelona. Dissenyador industrial, crític de disseny, fundador i codirector de les revistes ARDI i De Diseño, coautor del llibre Diseño de los Arquitectos en los 80.

QUIM LARREA

Dissenyador industrial, crític de disseny, fundador i codirector de les revistes ARDI i De Diseño, coautor del llibre Diseño de los Arquitectos en los 80.

YVES DEFORGES

Doctor en Lletres. Professor de Cultura Tècnica i Grafisme Tècnic a la Universitat Tecnològica de Compiegne, França.

KIMBERLY GEORGE DOVEY

Arquitecte. Professor de diverses matèries d'arquitectura a universitats d'Estats Units i Austràlia. Autor de nombrosos article

ALESSANDRO MENDINI

Arquitecte, Fundador i Director de la revista MODO i Director de DOMUS. Actualment col•laborador del grup Alchimia, Autor de Paesaggio Casalingo,Archittetura. Addio Projeto infelice. Premi Corapaso d'oro i membre del Comitè Científic de Domus Academy.

JOSEP MARIA MONTANER

Doctor arquitecte i cr í tic d'arquitectura i de disseny . Professor titular de Composició de l'Escola d'Arquitectura de Barcelona. És autor nombrosos llibres i publicacions sobre arquitectura i disseny: L'ofici de l’arquitectura, Universitat Politècnica de Barcelona, 1983: [...]

CHARLES L. OWEN

Professor de Disseny al Illinois Institute of Technology de Chicago. Autor de diversos programes informàtics d'aplicacions diverses a empreses i institucions.

ANTY PANSERA

Crítica i professora d'art i d'història del disseny. Autora entre d'altres, dels llibres: L’Italia del design, 1986 i Il design del mobile italiano. 1990.

ANDRÉ RICARD

Dissenyador Industrial. Membre fundador de l'ADI/FAD, President de l’ADI/FAD (1972-74), Vice-president de l’ICSID (1963-1980). Sots-president de la comisió permanent del BCD (Barcelona). Membre del Definition & Doctrine Working Group (1963-1967), cofundador i primer president de l’ADP. Ha [...]

ENRIC SATUÉ

Dissenyador Gràfic. Premi Nacional de Diseny 1988. Autor d' El llibre dels anuncis i Los demiurgos del Diseño Gráfico.

JONATHAN WOODHAM

Professor d'història i teoria del disseny a diverses institucions acadèmiques britàniques. És autor de The Industrial Designer and the Public, 1983 i Twentieth Century ornament, 1990.

Relacionat

08 DISSENY, EINA DE FUTUR, 1993 | articulo
GRUP OCATA
Introducció

[...]

08 DISSENY, EINA DE FUTUR, 1993 | articulo
GRUP OCATA
Enquesta: "El disseny, eina de futur"

[...]

ELISAVA TdD

Seccions

Respostes a l'enquesta: "Disseny i llibertat en el procés de creació de formes"