Projects
Writing
Information
- Introduction
- The Capacity of Form
- Designed Form as Furniture
- The Relational Field of Form
- The Reconciliation of Form and Function
- Complex Form in Harmonization
- Restraint and Richness
Complex Form in Harmonization: Continued - Discerning Proportion
- Reflection on Contemporary Design
2023-2025
- What is Design?
- Problematic Design of Contemporary Era
- The Timeless Good Design
- Reflection on the Role of Design in our Historic Moment
-2023
Design is the process of human thought and reflection on various existent entities, and it usually carries intentionality. In other words, ideas leads to design. Since design is guided by human thoughts, it is inherently subjective. Individuals with different level of subjectivity will receive and respond to different subjective designs, generating connections. The diversity of designs showcased in the world constantly reflects people’s subjective ideas about their surroundings, stemming from various aspects such as race, religion, politics, society, and culture.
It is essential to note that the concepts of objectivity and subjectivity can be easily confused. Objectivity is a product of subjective thinking; even the most “objective” thoughts are ultimately influenced by personal or collective subjectivity. Taking design as an example, contemporary Japan is renowned for its objective design, while Italy is known for its subjective design. The distinction in their designs can be complexly traced back to the origins of their respective nations, but it can also be simply summarized as the difference in subjective tendencies among their people. A significant reason for the abundance of diverse designs in today’s society is the subjectivity present in various designs. Famous designs exhibit varying levels of subjectivity.
Considering Japan and Italy as examples, Japanese designs in the constructed environment, such as architecture and products, often embody neutral color tones, simplicity, tranquility, and a connection with nature. The material usage and style behind the works of Japanese architect Tadao Ando complement the sensory experience of buildings like the Church of the Light. Japanese industrial designer Naoto Fukasawa’s philosophy of unconscious design and his personal design style have given birth to classic designs for Japanese company Muji and around the world. These examples represent Japan’s design subjectivity to a certain extent, a subjective degree within objectivity (No Design - Design), which means relative objectivity in design subjectivity. On the other side of the scale lies Italy, showcasing a different design subjectivity. The Italian design style, in terms of color, form, materials, and more, seems to communicate Italians’ feelings towards the world. The bold use of saturated, vivid colors, the strong subjectivity in shaping, and the daring experimentation and application of materials have made “Italian design” a significant presence worldwide. The design philosophy of the Italian product design company Alessi, exemplified by Philippe Starck’s Alessi Juicy Salif Citrus Squeezer, and the countless applications of glass by the Italian company Glas Italia, reflect their strong subjective design subjectivity. As expressed in this chapter, Italian design represents its design subjectivity within its domain through its strong individualistic attitude, showcasing a pronounced level of subjective design subjectivity.
Of course, there are countless designs in the world. In this exploration and understanding of design subjectivity, the different designs arising from different subjectivities are what I aim to comprehend. As a designer, I need the insight to discern various subjectivities and create designs with different subjective perspectives.
Discussion of Associative Ways in Design
Ideology, Technology, Appearance, and Function are four equally important elements that should be considered in the design process.
Ideology is the designer’s unique concept or vision for the design. Here, the concept is broad and encompasses but is not limited to: philosophical, sociological, psychological, sensational factors. The mentioned Ideology can be associated with a single mode of thinking or a blend of multiple concepts, depending on the designer’s choices based on different design requirements. Ideology may not necessarily be explicitly showcased to users or viewers, but it must exist within the design. Different concepts can enrich the design on a spiritual level, rather than being a hollow creation with mere superficial aesthetics. If the ideology can be subtly expressed to users through the designer’s presentation, then such a design is considered successful.
Technology is the crucial consideration for designers concerning the application and production methods related to their designs. This includes, but is not limited to: materiality, production method, digital computing. Technology is a tool in the creative process of design, stemming from the accumulated knowledge and achievements of previous generations. Particularly in fields like industrial design(ID), which rely on real-world materials, it is impossible to exceed the boundaries of technological development. Moreover, many designs heavily depend on the applications and production methods enabled by technological advancements. Designers should keenly perceive the new possibilities brought about by technology to advance the ways in which designs are applied.
Appearance, or the visual factor, is what designers and users immediately perceive. It encompasses but is not limited to: color, material, form, texture, light and shadow. Design is inseparable from the relationship with art because human nature is not satisfied with functional items alone. Therefore, it requires art, which is the support of ideas and aesthetics. Appearance is the most straightforward and direct representation of aesthetics. The beauty of appearance is essential because without aesthetic appeal, design will not attract others, and it will no longer be considered as design but rather be perceived as a mere tool.
Function is the purposeful ability of a design, directly defined by the users or designers. It is typically driven by explicit intentions, encompassing but not limited to: physical, mental, and Interdisciplinary factors like neurological, ergonomic, and visual factors. In ID, most directly defined functions are often geared towards assisting physical abilities, such as ergonomic chairs for comfortable seating or bicycles with self-illuminating red plastic lights for safety. These functions directly benefit specific activities. However, functions are multi-faceted and can also serve as auxiliary capabilities for multiple elements. For example, ergonomic design not only provides physical comfort but also contributes to mental relaxation, highlighting its role as a supportive function for mental well-being. Similarly, the use of vibrant colors, as opposed to monochrome, not only adds visual richness but also stimulates the senses, showcasing its importance in providing a stimulating function on a psychological level. In traditional ID, functions have been primarily associated with tangible, concrete assistance. However, it doesn’t have to be limited to that. Functions can also hold equal value in providing intangible, psychological benefits.
In the history of design, there is often a recurring topic of discussion on how design is presented, that is, what is the starting point of design. Is it triggered by a functional need, or is it born out of a specific style that symbolizes a certain meaning? Different design focuses have led to various creative approaches, and this has inevitably sparked debates. Some believe that functionality is paramount and should be the primary consideration, while others emphasize form over all else. There are also those who view the consquential central value brought by design as the highest priority. This ongoing debate has led to a greater diversity in design. In reality, there is no absolute good or bad design; it depends on the level of acceptance within each individual’s perspective. When a design gains widespread acceptance, it tends to be regarded as “good design.” But does this mean that designs that were not initially recognized as such are inherently bad designs? It might be but might not be. In art and design, there are countless examples showcasing different designers’ emphasis on ideology, technology, appearance, and functionality. However, they all share a common point - there is always a prominent aspect in their expression, or one could say a focal point. This focal point could be ideology, technology, appearance, functionality, or something else that is not explicitly categorized among the four. Initially, the focus is usually on this singular point, but upon deeper examination by its audience, other aspects are also found to be interwoven within it. The process and creative thinking of designers remain a mystery. Did they first conceive functionality and then developed technology, appearance, and ideology? Or did a specific sequence give rise to different designs? The answer is likely different for each design piece. However, as a designer aiming to create thought-provoking works, one should equally value the four major aspects mentioned above: ideology, technology, appearance, and functionality. These four aspects can be presented in different ways, but their consideration should not be lacking in any design, even to the point of being indispensable. At the same time, although these four aspects should be equally considered, the design should stand out in one or two of these points. In other words, the intent of the design needs to be clear. The presentation should reflect three points supporting one, or 2.5 points elevating 1.5 points. This is what a designer should do, but it may not necessarily need to be explicitly conveyed to the user. The best designs can be understood without the need for words, just through intuition.
Discussion of Associative Ways in Design (Continued)
Design should be approached as a holistic unit. The current educational system has isolated the interconnectedness of design, potentially leading learners to focus solely on a single definition of design and overlook other equally important design factors in the environment. If one solely considers designing a product within a given environment but ignores the space it exists in, there may be a sense of disconnection from the overall spatial experience. The same principle applies to architecture, interior design, and graphic design. If a designer is tasked with designing a product, then, in an exaggerated sense, they should also contemplate the various scales and mediums associated with that product. This includes the smaller space attached to the product (graphic design), the space that envelops the product (interior space), and the space that envelops everything and is enveloped by the geographical environment (architecture). Design should be approached as a whole, without imposing disciplinary boundaries; everything we observe is a part of design.