change week 8
01/06
LOTTE VAN HULST
LAURENS STUDIO 17
In my experience as an aspiring designer, I have benefited greatly from discussions with users or people who are a little further removed from the design process. Being a designer, you have a lot of power and the danger is that you base your work on data that is either biased in its nature (like the gender data gap) or that is dependent on your personal insight and expectations. If you don't look beyond the obvious, you risk putting things out into the world that might have unwanted effects or create structures that influence people's agency when that was not your intention. Design that is not inclusive confirms stereotypes and alienates the people within the stereotype, or desired identity, of the diversity and variety of people outside the stereotype. These people are at least equally important members of society but they are unable to participate as the legitimised majority can. In the past year, for example, I was given the assignment to redesign a fast-delivery system into a more sustainable one. The course was directed towards reducing the ecological footprint through design changes in packaging, transport or making the delivery process more efficient. I felt that the system worked fine as it was and already was plenty fast and efficient. You can replace plastic packaging with glass jugs or biodegradable paper but that does not change the social effects of the increasing standardisation of such service systems in society. Through research I found that society is individualising and that the isolating effects of the pandemic did not do that development any good. Being able to order anything to be delivered at your house within ten minutes only isolates people further from participating in society. So, I looked how to redesign the system in such a way that it not only serves the basic need of food but also the basic need of social contact and engagement in communities. A good designer is an inquisitive one When wanting to inflict change as a designer it is important to be aware of the tipping point of hubris. Designers must continue to ask themselves where their data comes from and what it is based on. They must have a non-essentialist attitude towards concepts or groups or communities. It is important to do extensive research into history so as not to contribute to disruptive innovation by questioning impact throughout capitals, hierarchies, evaluative- and descriptive concepts. When we design we ask questions of How? Or What? But we need to question the Why? to inspire a new How? A good designer is an inquisitive one. To design for the future, as the faculty of Industrial Design propagates, I think we must learn to accept inconvenience and design accordingly. At the moment, individual agency is prefered over collective convenience. Historically, this ideology is a logical outcome in the 20th century when you think of the Cold War and its Red Scare. We inherited the 20th century idea of what is a good life. Now, designers must question: What is and what does a good life in the 21st century entail? And, is agency possible without exploitation?
