Design, by nature, will always reflect choice. Limitations often dictate the construction of my projects over any kind of capability. These limitations usually take the form of time constraints, or constraints imposed upon my work. These are rarely a bad thing; even the looming deadline always hides the gift completion (and hopefully satisfaction). However, I rarely see limitations of the philosophical sort which I hope to consider today. Plainly: what role should desire and satisfaction be considered in a design?
Desire transparently plays a critical role in design, both the process and the result. A successful advertisement inspires purchase much the same way a successful speech inspires political action. The design process usually begins out of a need by the designer which they hope the design will fulfill. Objects usually exist and continue to exist because people want them to. Desire drives the entire capitalist process of production even though it can be obscured through numerous complexities.
Principle 2.6 directly contradicts desire in design: “Technology should create calm.” Calm, as an emotion is hard for me to directly stick a pin in but I believe it can be aptly described as a “lack of desire or complete satisfaction, however momentary.” Calmness reflects comfort and happiness not just relating to the object, but to the world as a whole. I wonder if calm is perhaps the noblest purpose of design? I have found it easy to create things that inspire desire (in myself at least) but hard to create that sense of satisfaction. Artful design also suggests that we should consider the process as well; is it possible to design from a place of calm, rather than desire? We are so often taught to make ourselves wanted by others, to inspire desire in them; what if instead we were taught to make others feel calm?
One could also equally consider inspiring desire as an equally noble purpose of design. If we seek change in the world, why should we not allow ourselves to be understood? Desire itself is neither good nor bad; video games are popular in part because they generate desire in players that otherwise would not exist by (hopefully) creating satisfying events where those desires are fulfilled. At this point, I am still asking myself what I want to attempt to do with my design, calm or desire. I wonder if it is possible to create moments of both desire and calm through design?
Reading Response #2
Design, by nature, will always reflect choice. Limitations often dictate the construction of my projects over any kind of capability. These limitations usually take the form of time constraints, or constraints imposed upon my work. These are rarely a bad thing; even the looming deadline always hides the gift completion (and hopefully satisfaction). However, I rarely see limitations of the philosophical sort which I hope to consider today. Plainly: what role should desire and satisfaction be considered in a design?
Desire transparently plays a critical role in design, both the process and the result. A successful advertisement inspires purchase much the same way a successful speech inspires political action. The design process usually begins out of a need by the designer which they hope the design will fulfill. Objects usually exist and continue to exist because people want them to. Desire drives the entire capitalist process of production even though it can be obscured through numerous complexities.
Principle 2.6 directly contradicts desire in design: “Technology should create calm.” Calm, as an emotion is hard for me to directly stick a pin in but I believe it can be aptly described as a “lack of desire or complete satisfaction, however momentary.” Calmness reflects comfort and happiness not just relating to the object, but to the world as a whole. I wonder if calm is perhaps the noblest purpose of design? I have found it easy to create things that inspire desire (in myself at least) but hard to create that sense of satisfaction. Artful design also suggests that we should consider the process as well; is it possible to design from a place of calm, rather than desire? We are so often taught to make ourselves wanted by others, to inspire desire in them; what if instead we were taught to make others feel calm?
One could also equally consider inspiring desire as an equally noble purpose of design. If we seek change in the world, why should we not allow ourselves to be understood? Desire itself is neither good nor bad; video games are popular in part because they generate desire in players that otherwise would not exist by (hopefully) creating satisfying events where those desires are fulfilled. At this point, I am still asking myself what I want to attempt to do with my design, calm or desire. I wonder if it is possible to create moments of both desire and calm through design?