Response.

Ramia Mazé and Johan Redström point out the subtle difference between Anti-Design and Critical Design. The way that designers will look into the problems within design “Outside-in” or they look into the problems in the world, “Inside-Out.” I find so much value in the “Inside-Out” by simplifying and bringing attention to problems that would not normally be a problem attacked by traditional design. The processes reflect different ideas that other methods would not represent as clearly.

“Critical design is related to haute couture, concept cars, design propaganda, and visions of the future, but its purpose is not to present the dreams of industry, attract new business, anticipate new trends or test the market. Its purpose is to stimulate discussion and debate amongst designers, industry and the public about the aesthetic quality of our electronically mediated existence”

Ramia Mazé and Johan Redström look into this difference between “Problem-solving and Problem-finding.”  A traditional designer have very specific problems, usually linking back to the goal of the market. They utilize “problem-solving” to try and make a selling product or to attract people to a company. But this new idea to use design for “problem-solving” takes the useful practices of design (and design process) to make questions. The visual and invasive methods of design makes design so beneficial for these applications of research.

Avoiding the “Self-reflective and hermetic autonomy” nature of design.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s