objectified

Proj 2 Harrington Mary objectified



Our relationship with objects

Objects have always aided our survival from tools to shelter to mechanisms to make fire or food or bring water to habitat, as well as clothing and decoration.



Unfortunately through the effects of advertising and the pervasiveness of the media, increasingly objects have gained powerful sub textual meaning such as the perceived ability to bestow status; membership rites in certain groups; or the identification of certain traits. For instance driving a certain car may be said to endow the owner with wealth, power and other signifiers. There is a pretty nasty connection between certain objects or brands and identity.



Certain products such as those made by apple are believed by certain groups –that they denote that the owner is clever, techno savvy, and a card carrying member of the future as defined by now, and connected both in an internet connectivity sense and connected to other owners of that product, and status as belonging to this privileged group. But to a certain extent their intelligent design and their powerful marketing may be taking away some autonomy and decision making ability, and instead creating a kind or irresistible addiction to brands and objects.



To a certain extent the power relationship between people and objects has changed.



We have a genuine need for and desire for objects that is complex and needs to be well thought about, examined and analysed. The current exploitation of young people with long expensive mobile phone contracts and difficulty with insurance and Telco companies when things go wrong, and the predominance of brands to define our identity, is maybe not such a great thing. Our almost total reliance on screens of one kind or another is both dangerous to health and limiting in our experience.



Gary Hustvuit in Objectified asks

“Is there some way we can engage with people’s creativity and adaptability”

I’m thinking of this question in regards to being a designer in industrial design. How can I include the opportunity for someone who is willing to buy my product to have a genuine engagement and input into the product I have designed to make it something lasting that has genuine meaning and enjoyment for them? For me this is worth exploring and trying to achieve in my work. I like the idea of being able to produce work that is within people’s reach by price and using mass manufacturing technologies but also trying to individualise it and make it unique in some way maybe by incorporating craft techniques. He also said

“The value of design will be measured more and more and aid in our survival.”

This is why I chose to do this design course. I believe that good design is one of the few ways to seriously begin to address the impacts of climate change and the other big issues we are facing such as resource depletion.

I also like Marc Newson’s laid back approach and his philosophy that

“Play = Design”

I really wish there was more play in this course. It is great to hold new materials in your hand or go to a manufacturer and see a craftsman spinning metal or casting a perfect ingot. There is something that happens in your mind that draws amazing connections and produces something that is outside you. It is exciting and rewarding to make things, and yet we hardly make anything except blue foam that goes straight to landfill and exudes dangerous dust.

He also said

“Anger and dissatisfaction motivate you”

This is also true – if you use a product that doesn’t work or hurts your hand or breaks after one use, you often feel like you want to design something better. Marc Newson is “trying to offer products that you want to keep yourself, and hopefully won’t date.” I think that is a pretty good ambition for an industrial designer.

Karim Rashid made me think of the products that I like and reflecting the technology and the manufacturing capabilities we have today in ways of designing. He hates period furniture and objects that are copies of archetypes in the past and said that 70% of the world is impractical and uncomfortable. I can really relate to that sitting on these crap studio chairs that give everyone a bad back within 20 minutes. And there is no excuse for it. I like the fact that he has really thought about what our era is and he makes furniture that reflects that in incredible materials. He says “he speaks of a techno – organic world in his forms” I really think he achieves this beautifully, it his own interpretation of design in the digital age. Design can have an amazing affect on people’s lives, but there is always a need to be mindful of the products we produce and the effects of the processing and production we use and the ethics behind that production, such as pollution and trade and labour practices.

Tim brown form IDEO says “most of what you design ends up in landfill – you have to think of it” and Naoto Fatasawa says that sustainability is the biggest single issue facing designers’. I believe that ever action we do has consequences. Personally I will attempt to look at every process of the design continuum form material use, to energy consumption, transport, design for disassembly, minimising component parts, and cradle to cradle responsible design. This small documentary certainly gives you a lot to think about.

environmental footprint