Readings 10.12.11

Power and Poverty:
Americans are selfish. Individually and theoretically, everyone can be generous and would give everything we have to benefit others. Like what the article says, we need to stop focusing on war and start focusing on providing resources for 3rd world countries to make them better.  Citizens assume what we give to the government goes towards the help but the US gives the least out of all the other major countries. So I think that we need to change ourselves before we can help/change others. We should stop giving to the government and look towards more independent organizations whom we know will direct the money to the right country. Women and girls should also be educated. If they were more knowledgeable, then we have a starting point to change something. To me, it also seems like we are putting females at fault. Why can't we educate males as well? Why does it have to evolve around the women and make it their responsibilities? I'm sure it's no one's choice to get raped or depend on the man the survive so both sexes should be educated.

Human Dignity and Human Rights:

• "Form and content" - not the rejection of function, but a recognition that unless designers grasp the significant content of the products they create, their work will come to little consequence or may even lead to harm in our complex world. 
• Design is fundamentally grounded in human dignity and human rights. 
• Human-centered design.

Even though we design for users, we should also think about morals and ethics of our culture and create something that is human-centered. The Holocaust was a good example of human-centered design although it was a bad thing. Our designs should keep human rights and dignity in mind and it should reflect what we believe and how it could affect the public. The article was quite straightforward in terms of what everything meant.

Icon Manifestos:
This reading was so confusing. I think the manifesto that made the most sense to me was Sagmeister's and Thackara. Actually, I think it made more sense the more I kept reading. At first I wasn't sure what everything was about but then it registered that it was each designer's philosophy about life and design. I think it would've helped if sections weren't cut off as well. Overall, this was a good wrap up of all of our readings in the semester so far. Designers should be open, stop complaining and start doing, and we should aim to change the world with design as best as we can. We need to be humans and design for humans. We need to be caring and understanding. We need to live life and do what we love and love what we do. -insert general life lessons-.

Readings 09.28.11

Economy, Ecology, and Equity:
In order for something to be vital, it has to have growth, a free form of energy, and an open system of chemicals. Materials should be able to produce and reproduce itself without hurting the environment. We aim to doing the right thing, not doing something less bad. That means we have to design with positivity. All the articles for today was linked together in so many ways. A couple of articles used the quote, "If brute force isn't working, you are not using enough of it." We as designers need to push ourselves to create ways of being eco-efficient but still send our message. One thing I liked about this article was when he talked about cradle-to-cradle cycling where you reuse things for other things. I was looking at ways to create gardening tools using old household items like milk cartons and yogurt cartons. It's not as world changing as using milk jugs to make a park bench but it's a start.

Sustainable Business:
This was an interesting article to see how different companies are trying to become more eco-friendly. The Natural Step is a huge company that educates other companies. It's good that they are across the world tackling issues specific to that country. Reading about them working with big corporations like Home Depot, Nike, and McDonald's and really changing the way these companies produce and manufacture their products. I want an organic McDonald's here. In general, it took a lot of research to get things to change and that's something that we have to do too. Research, research, research.

Eco-effectiveness:
Thinking about different ways a book could be was a good opening to this article. Technology has advanced enough where there are things like the Kindle and the iPad where you can travel with an electronic book. This reduces the effect books has on our environment but it doesn't solve the problem. Not just with books but with other things, how can we rethink what things are made of and the relationship it has with nature? Can it be both good for us and the environment? This ties back to the first article and eco-efficiency. I liked the example of ants because they use everything they found and recycles it back into nature. This is something we should try to achieve and even through our designs, it could be possible.

Why Being Less Bad is No Good:
Being less bad is still being bad and being bad isn't being good, so we aim to just be good. This idea goes back to the first article as well with the idea of being 100% good. I thought it was interesting when the article kind of contradicted all the other three by saying that eco-efficiency isn't the strategy for success over long term. It can only take us so far before it stops being influential. We need to think of something to keep what we have right now the way it is but still have our resources. Our goal is to have zero waste, zero emissions, and zero footprints. This won't be achieved in years but if we start now, it will be possible in the very future.

Readings 09.21.11

He Might Be Giant: Shepard Fairey:
"The world is full of contradictions." I loved this article. It showed how much design can last if it talks to the public. I thought that writing about art that already exist is extremely helpful and just the way it was written was captivating. I loved reading about the company Black Market Inc. They are doing something different in the advertising world and really changing what the word "advertising" means. They do "guerrilla marketing on a corporate scale," which in itself is awesome. It really changes how I feel going about my own guerrilla idea. The article talked a lot about a striking graphic with just one word. Can I send my message with just an image and no words? That was something I thought about during presentation day last week. That's something I can work on. Another thing I loved was that mass communication can be outside of technology and still work and move a community. Something else I should work more into my idea.

Guerrilla Street Postering:
So much guerrilla readings! On top of my own guerrilla thinking idea. Guerrilla street postering is the most direct, unmediated form of public expression. I love the idea of doing something wrong with the chance of being caught. It might not be lawfully right but it can change so much if people just start noticing. Which is something I've noticed about most guerrilla ads, people need to notice them first to really start changing, which is unfortunate. I also like the idea that they talked about with making art with the intention of changing people's minds about issues. They said it in the context that it is hard to change people's mind but I don't think it's impossible. You might not catch everyone's attention but you will catch SOMEONE's attention, which is a start. Our design solutions in Ivanhoe might not reach the entire community but we could start with just a few people.

Adbuster Interview:
This was a good read to sum up everything. Not sure if I read it in the right order but it was still good. Kalle Lasn talked about designing with the code of true-cost design. This idea means that when we start designing, we should consider the ecological and psychological consequences of what our product will do. There's also two kinds of products. One that sits on the table and one where people interact with everyday like phones, toothbrushes, cars, and so forth. There's a ton of possibilities as soon as we break out of the box. I liked that he thought of our own set of codes to go by, especially with the green movement. It's really up to us to define what "green" means. We shouldn't just make a label but REALLY make our products eco friendly and REALLY define what being green is.

Readings 09.14.11

I decided I should probably try to blog more so here's an attempt to do so.

The Designer as Catalyst:
There are two strategies of a designer, one to sedate customers and one to activate citizens. To sedate customers is to have a client-designer relationship with the design and to activate citizens is to have an agency-catalyst relationship, where the design becomes the agency and us as designers are the catalyst. In the catalyst mindset, the design needs to argue, not just to state. It allows the recipients to talk back, ask questions, and even disagree. I really like the idea of design being invoking. I think that's what we all aim to do with our work. Sometimes it doesn't work out that way but we should aim for it. With the idea of agency/catalyst, we would be able to see so much change in the world just through design, one step at a time.

Now That We Can Do Anything:
"The twentieth century will be chiefly remembered by future generations not as an era of
political conflicts or technical inventions, but as an age in which human society dared to
think of the welfare of the whole human race as a practical objective." - Arnold J. Toynbee.
Love that quote and what a great way to start an article. Design is changing its place in things. It is evolving from a small aspect of businesses to the biggest project. Design is no longer bout "one", it is about being collaborative, plural, and distributed. It is evolving into something bigger than ourselves probably. The term "designer" could be applied in many different areas now and essentially, everyone can become a "designer" if they have a good idea or product of any kind. I feel like this is the time to really differentiate between a learned/taught designer and a self-proclaimed/self-learned designer. It is still our roles to direct them to better designs but we should still be open to their ideas.

Towards Critical Autonomy:
Organizations, companies, businesses, places, and competitions used to be distinct. If they aren't defunct, they can be interchangeable. The critical edge to design has disappeared. With the resources out there today, everyone and anyone can create something and put it out into the world, no matter if it is good or not. This is where graphic design comes in. Graphic design should be seen as a discipline capable of generating meaning out of its resources without reliance on other means. We as designers are responsible for good designs. I don't know if there was an order to read the articles but this one basically contradicts the previous one I read. This one was all about being critical with design and how it is important to have good design made by designers. The previous one was open to all kinds of ideas. Between the two, I like the previous article more.

Quantum Leap:
I think we take design for granted. We see it everyday and interact with it everyday but we never really appreciate the thoughtfulness of the designer when we use it or read it. I love the part of this reading that talked about viewing a thing as a "space" instead of as a "page". With this idea, the world opens up to many design elements. I think that we constrain ourselves to the norm and not really think outside the box when designing artifacts. We should break out of the conventions and really create a memorable piece. I feel like I never really consider white space when I design and I feel like when the writer was talking about it, it plays a big part in the design even if I knew it or not.