Ch 1-3
In reading John Heskett's first three chapters of Design- A very short introduction many things that he mentioned struck me.
From his words I understood that while Design is commonly known, but not as commonly understood. Like many problems addressed in design, design in itself is not well defined enough to fit in one category or type of definition. Design is encompassing and affects the ways in which humans interact with their world and whether that interaction is successful, or not.
Design unlike other terms isn't related to a particular field (like engineering) which may lend itself to even more confusion. I find it pretty amusing that almost anyone could apply a designer to their job title, and it evokes a bit more credibility and qualifications.
I especially like the quote on pg 5 (" Design, stripped to its essence, can be defined as the human capacity to shape and make our environment in ways without precedent in nature, to serve our needs and give meaning to our lives")-- whoa, that's deep.
Beyond providing meaning to our lives, design builds upon what exists to make things better, a constantly changing and iterating process.
As technology has changed, design has developed to keep up. Heskett mentions the simple farming tools used and how each generation of them improved upon the last,
Beyond the more universal early designs, other designs have evolved within different cultures much like language, where something is otherwise meaningless, but is given meaning by its society.
Craftsmen, guilds were also responsible for the crafts that would emerge from cultures.
When craftsmen were not able to keep up with the demand, more automated and less artistic products were produced.
What came later were designers as consultants and their 'art'/designs were muted for production purposes.
As I came to know what design was, I always imagine is as the marriage between form and function, where they each live independently, but they form something even better together. And even things as insignificant as toothpicks can have different forms and functions as exhibited by the Jordan and Japanese varieties.
When Heskett talked about the many names/products/campaigns that get lost in translation, I recall hearing about a car from a company that decided to market their successful car to latin-america/south-america where the predominant language is spanish. They wondered why their sales of this car that was otherwise successful in their other markets was doing so poorly in this spanish speaking market. Not many would like to buy a car whose name means 'doesn't go' (Nova, 'no-va'). ;)
Designers work hard to synthesize all factors when creating a successful product: the meaning/significance/what the product evokes, the form, and the function. A tough task, especially when marketing globally.
I never realized that Coca cola meant 'bite the wax tadpole... ;)
Something I learned when I visited the Eastman-Kodak house in Rochester, NY: When Eastman was picking out names for his company, he chose Kodak, because those sounds would be recognizable/they existed in all languages.
If this book says anything its that Design is everywhere, and is universally important. My 7th grade math teacher tried to tell us that math was everywhere, but really, design is!
(also if this doesn't prove I read, then i have no idea what will ;)
