Writing up the ways in which my essays attempt to subvert normal readings of information design I made another connection to the Dunne and Raby text. D&R write about how critical design provides critique through designs that embody “alternative social, cultural, technical or economic values,” claiming that we should value design that asks “carefully crafted questions and makes us think” as much as pieces that “solve problems or finds answers.” (pp58) In this context the progressive nature of my work is simply that the work refuses to simply convey information or promote an idea. Instead the communication is invested in a transactional, transformative experience that in valuing ambiguity over clarity and complexity over simplicity aims to generate discussion more than proclaim a statement. The provocation in this work does not lie strictly in the formal language of the artifact itself, so much as in the willful resistance of the familiar forms to simply meet standard graphic design objectives. Instead the communication is left incomplete, contingent and unfamiliar…all of which become part of the supposed formula for an unconventional engagement with the artifact.
Robyn Barnacle Says:
July 27th, 2008 at 11:36 pmVisit Robyn Barnacle
It struck me that there is an irony in what you’re proposing re the work refusing to simply convey information and promote an idea, in that you are suggesting the opposite of what communication design, on the face of it, is meant to be about: communication. Its a kind of anti-communication design. Or is it about communicating the uncommunicatable? Either way, the obvious question is why - what’s wrong with straight-forward communication?
You haven’t mentioned the poetic but that’s what I think of when you talk about valuing ambiguity over clarity, or wanting to promote discussion rather than simply proclaim a statement. Is that a useful notion here and to what extent is the notion of the poetic active within com design?
Robyn