So are we meeting at the entrance to the Annenberg IML, or meeting at the ZML and walking over?

Anne Balsamo gave an insightful presentation on Design and Culture, as well as a tour of the Annenberg IML to IMD students at the last seminar. Some of the points that I learned from her talk included a diagram about the Circle of Production (creation, manufacturing, distribution and consumption). While many engineers feel that design happens just in the creation cycle, it really occurs in all places in the circle.
Also the idea that design is the way culture is created is intriguing to me, because of the examples that reflected how it manifests itself in the way we live, express ourselves and the materials we use. Earlier this week in 541b, the first-year students read an article that stated,”People shape technologies for everyday, practical purposes as a means to meet their social obligations.” In Anne’s presentation she said that all technologies are reproductive technologies that fall into 2 categories; replication which is production of an exact duplicate and expression which is a contextual manifestation of original material. My challenge moving forward with my own IM projects is to see how I can push the boundaries of the expressive form of technology and finding out if it has the potential to be used in an everyday, practical purpose.

I encourage anyone who has not had a chance to visit the Annenberg IML to make an appointment to do so. They are doing some fascination research.

The one designed for the museum of Singapore is fascinating. However the cost - over $15,000, is comparatively a limit for marketing, especially when the function of my understanding of merely a "moving index" is not well developed. It seems installations of this kind will never be put mass production, but the challenge how to adapt "simple" technologies to fix certain contents still remains for answers - I mean, what if there are other low-tech, easy ways to do the same, without stainless tracks, accurate gears for movement measurement, mech-electronic adapter, programming...etc with lower cost, which can better realize the same function - not necessarily only the designer's resorts, but also at last, the buyer's.

Anne talked a lot about how technology acquires cultural meaning - it seems to me that on the consumer side this process has sped up in direct correlation to the speed of remote communication. This may be a fairly obvious conclusion, but I was just startled by how quickly the iPod has become an icon as well as a ubiquitous product. I mean at this point it is being referenced by Supreme Court justices and either scoffed at or catered to by radio stations (e.g. "We're better than your iPod" or "We know we can't compete with your iPod, but hopefully we'll give you some new ideas for your playlist"). Is this just the product of a good ad campaign? A good ergonomic design? Great technical execution? Was this all part of a huge comprehensive plan by Apple? Assuming this was all coordinated on the production side, is this successful cultural manipulation on the consumption side a scary idea? Has Apple used its force for good as well as profit?

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

URL:
Remember me? YesNo

Comments: