
bruno latour on design
February 20, 2009it’s been a bit quiet on sparkthinking recently thanks to a holiday I’m nearly at the end of in Los Angeles. What a place! I’m not sure I like it very much – very taken aback (naively so, I suspect) at the reliance on cars, the extent of huge shopping malls – all lit up and air conditioned, the sheer weight of expectations to consume of the place – so despite marvellous company and a fun week, I haven’t been converted to LA life. in fact if anything it has given even more solidity to a sense I’ve had for a while that I want to simplify life and pare things right down to what’s actually important when I get home. watch this space on that front…
anyway, I’ve spent a bit of time here thinking through what’s going to go into the pamphlet I’m doing with the RSA on social design, service design and the future of design education, and as part of that I’ve been reading a fairly impenetrable piece by sociologist and anthropologist Bruno Latour. It’s a paper he gave to a design research conference last year, and for me it brings out two key themes that will feature in my own pamphlet.
First, the need for design ethics these days. As Latour says
By expanding design so that it is relevant everywhere, designers take up the mantle of morality as well
This is certainly a theme that has come up in my interviews with design tutors and some of the students: if designers are serious about applying their skills to social challenges then they have to accept that there are ethical and moral dimensions to this work, and that their own activity has impacts that they should think through carefully in advance. Yet design courses have little to say about ethics currently – all the more striking when you compare design to other disciplines interested in achieving social change – in subjects such as psychology, or anthropology, or even political sciences, ethics features heavily and is taken very seriously.
The second theme that I thought Latour’s piece brought out well was about representations and communication of design work. Latour is interested in how design can do more to represent the complexity of real life, rather than objects in a vacuum:
Design practice has done a marvellous job of inventing practical skills for drawing objects… but what has always been missing from these marvellous drawings… are an impression of the controversies and the many contradicting stakeholders that are born within these.
Many of the students I’ve interviewed raise this question of how to represent complex social or service-based design work. We don’t yet have a language that’s developed enough in this sphere and it seems to me that it’s a prime area for further development in design research.
Sophia,
I think that you are right to point out that design and designers need to grapple both with ethics and language. I’m not sure I think that the ethical responsibilities of designers are so very different from those of other professions.
The need to develop a language of design is what ought to be one of the subjects of what could properly be called design thinking.
Hugh Dubberley and my colleague Paul Pangaro both worry about and work on these questions.
http://www.dubberly.com/
http://www.pangaro.com/
See this article which focuses specifically on a language for behavior-focused design
http://www.dubberly.com/articles/cybernetics-and-service-craft.html
I have also been working on a project which, in part, attempts to discern an emergent vocabulary and “ontology” of design
http://unfinished.torchiswicked.com/
I supervised a student dissertation on ethics in design and we hit upon the idea of doing a “mock” longitudinal survey to see how attitudes change as designers move from being students to being professionals and then progressing up the career ladder.
Some of the interviews were quite depressing – the attitude that you can’t teach ethics came out very strongly, especially from people in industry. (Interestingly, I find that there’s a similar rejection of the idea that you can teach creativity, so go figure!).
There seemed to be a confusion between the idea of ethics as “what to believe” (which it shouldn’t be) and ethics as “how to develop a set of beliefs” (which is what it should be). The former is political and leads to resistance. The latter is about conscience.
Even among students there is a strong rejection of the idea of ethics and in my own research I put this down to what I call “filters” – some students reject any aspect of the curriculum that does not match preconceptions, or seem aligned to the idea of getting a job.
Take a look at page 11 of this recent publication for a summary of interesting work going on at Plymouth:
http://www.adm.heacademy.ac.uk/library/files/newsletters/networks6-s.pdf
It has an interesting model for embedding sustainability in the curriculum.
It may also apply to the wider issue of ethics in general.
At Dundee we’ve been trying hard to address ethical issues and move them away from the obligatory “theory lecture” (usually given by me) to something more embedded. That’s resulted in the establishment of an extra-curricular sustainability forum and, recently, a student-led session for staff on what they want to be done about sustainability. There are two interesting blog posts on that event here:
http://unboxdesign.blogspot.com/2009/02/students-sustainablity.html
http://unboxdesign.blogspot.com/2009/02/my-8-sustainability-issues.html
The former is from a “convert” who just happened to come along to the session.
What came out of the session was that while some staff wanted to take things slowly, others and many students wanted a revolution. Sustainability should be a criterion for assessment in every project, not just one or two. There should be a move away from excessive use of paper and printing, environmentally damaging dyes etc.
And on a broader front, students who design textiles or products need to be aware of the conditions those things will be manufactured under (see my student-oriented blog for a story about how this was done recently at Northumbria http://design-cultures.blogspot.com/2009/02/fashion-students-sweat-it-out-for-real.html)
There are interesting things going on at the University of Illinois (http://illinois.edu/) led by Eric Benson (he showcased his ethical design module in London last summer), and at RMIT in Australia, led by Russell Kerr. Along with Savannah College (who are hoping to host an event on design, ethics/sustainability and the curriculum later this year), and us at Dundee, they’re forming a shared vision of how to embed ethics in the design curriculum.
Going back to the student dissertation, it was interesting that as designers moved towards the end of their careers they appeared to be less anti-ethics. It seems that financial independence, or lack of worry about where the next pay check is coming from, lead to less resistance. Plotted as a graph over time, I expect resistance to ethics is a sad curve, a frown. We need to turn the frown upside down – or get rid of the curve altogether.