Forty minutes into a mountain in Taipei, Taiwan there is a private elementary school called “Seedling”. Every morning the students would meet up at the station at the bottom of the mountain and waiting to be picked up by the school bus. As it slowly roaming uphill into the mountain, the scenery gradually changes from skyscrapers to trees and rocks. The urban traffic noise diminishes as the sound is replaced by the flowing streams. After a dark tunnel and a bridge, a waterfall where students often dive and swim in would soon appear in view, which is located right behind the school.
Unlike the traditional educational system in Taiwan, students in Seedling are not restricted under a preset curriculum. Instead they are given freedom to choose classes according to their interests. Other than the required math and Chinese, students are allowed to choose untraditional classes such as outdoor survival, acting, cooking, and much more. Even though there is no minimum limit on the amount of classes the students must take, the classes were interesting enough for everyone to register for a full schedule.
In the school students are given almost complete freedom under little adult guidance. They are able to put their ideas into reality. One year I felt that the school lacked vending machines, so I started a “convenience table” where a few of my friends and I set up a station for the rest of the student body to buy food from. We were responsible for everything that our “business” required including setting up, splitting profits, supplies, etc. At end of every semester there is also a talent show for classes to present what they have learned. The performance was hosted by students where they may come up with their own script and program.
Moreover, there is a court system where the judges are students elected by the student body. Whenever a conflict surfaced, anyone is able to file a “court examination” request. The judges would check the request box every day at noon and call people to trial, a discussion session that is opened for everyone to witness. After the prosecution, the judges and one faculty member would then gather and discuss whether the defendant was guilty and deserves the appropriate punishment.
The school was originally designed by a group of parents whose children were told that they do not fit in with the national educational system. In contrary the parents believed that their children were able to learn much better if learning was not forced. When the school was first established many parents were worried about their children falling behind on their studies since program gives the children the freedom of choice about their studies. It turned out that almost all the students who graduated from the school successfully adapted to middle school and even performed better than average because they knew clearly the things they wanted to do and what they needed to do to get there.
In Seedling the students feel a sense of belonging as a part of the community. It is a great example of a system where the users were not only willingly involved but enjoyed its activities. The wide variety of class choices provided its users the feeling of freedom while the flexible structure allowed the students to improvise the current status and changing it according to their best interest. The system succeeded at allowing itself to evolve and at the same time keeping its core idea: for children to learn under their own desire.
--
At the age of twenty-two I still think back often at what I have experienced at Seedling, which is for everyone to remain curious and go after their interest rather than being told what they should do only because everyone else is doing it. In Seedling each child is a unique character, and everyone shares their knowledge with others and cooperate to accomplish what they feel is important or necessary. I believe this thinking fits perfectly as my role as an industrial designer today. I do not wish to follow the current but would like to think more in advance, and to remain motivated at going after my goal: finding simple solutions to improve human everyday lives.
Saturday, November 29, 2008
Sunday, November 23, 2008
Art Versus Design
When industrial design first began, it was targeted towards mass-manufactured products heavily emphasizing usability and functionality. In contrary, art is the process or product of deliberately and creatively arranging elements in a way that appeals to the senses or emotions. In recent years however, as design continues to evolve, many designers have begun to create emotional provoking objects that are highly visual and sometimes are limited produced.
During class on Wednesday we were shown many works of contemporary designers. Rather than emphasizing on functionality, these works have either deliver personal expressions or provoked emotions. One that especially intrigued me was the work of Tokujin Yoshioka.
Many of Yoshioka’s works involved experimental processes and often portray elements in nature. Clouds, for example, was an installation that established by countless numbers of fibers hanging from the ceiling over the entire exhibition space. The transparent fibers created a cloudy atmosphere and are the imitation of a natural phenomenon.
Yoshioka’s Venus Chair is another example where a chair is created by first making a skeleton using a sponge-like polymer elastomer then soaking the entire piece in a tank full of solution for crystals to form on. The crystals will grow according to the law of nature, and therefore each chair is unique on its own and cannot be reproduced.
In his interview Yoshioka talked about his hope to establish a connection between human memories and the law of nature. Yoshioka believed that in the future design will focus more on designing for emotions rather than for form, and nature will become the essential source for these inspirations.
Consider the uniqueness and the almost un-reproducible nature of his work, Yoshioka seems to be more of an artist than a designer. And in reading the responses of his work people also seems to have this pre-judgment of whether it can be “good enough” to be considered “design” Many commented on the un-realistic factors of his Venus chair, and questioned how this can be called “design” if the product is beautiful but could be extremely painful to sit on? Is design merely an art under the constraint of having to be perfectly functional?
It seems as there is a predetermined distinction between the art and design. People tend to see a piece of art as only to serve an aesthetic purpose. Compare to design art is more conceptual but conveys high quality emotional. While agreeing with such statement, I question whether can design also achieve the same quality while still maintain its functionality. How does one determine whether a work is considered an art or a design?
The boundary between art and design is slowly merging. From the case study and many other recent designs it is obvious to see that both artists and designers creating things from the both spectrum. I believe that soon there should be no more distinction. Rather, it is the matter of determining what can be more useful to the human world. The functionalism and aesthetic values will merge and this collaboration will further our understanding of how things should be. After all, who said emotion design is not functional? Or vise versa?
During class on Wednesday we were shown many works of contemporary designers. Rather than emphasizing on functionality, these works have either deliver personal expressions or provoked emotions. One that especially intrigued me was the work of Tokujin Yoshioka.
Many of Yoshioka’s works involved experimental processes and often portray elements in nature. Clouds, for example, was an installation that established by countless numbers of fibers hanging from the ceiling over the entire exhibition space. The transparent fibers created a cloudy atmosphere and are the imitation of a natural phenomenon.
Yoshioka’s Venus Chair is another example where a chair is created by first making a skeleton using a sponge-like polymer elastomer then soaking the entire piece in a tank full of solution for crystals to form on. The crystals will grow according to the law of nature, and therefore each chair is unique on its own and cannot be reproduced.
In his interview Yoshioka talked about his hope to establish a connection between human memories and the law of nature. Yoshioka believed that in the future design will focus more on designing for emotions rather than for form, and nature will become the essential source for these inspirations.
Consider the uniqueness and the almost un-reproducible nature of his work, Yoshioka seems to be more of an artist than a designer. And in reading the responses of his work people also seems to have this pre-judgment of whether it can be “good enough” to be considered “design” Many commented on the un-realistic factors of his Venus chair, and questioned how this can be called “design” if the product is beautiful but could be extremely painful to sit on? Is design merely an art under the constraint of having to be perfectly functional?
It seems as there is a predetermined distinction between the art and design. People tend to see a piece of art as only to serve an aesthetic purpose. Compare to design art is more conceptual but conveys high quality emotional. While agreeing with such statement, I question whether can design also achieve the same quality while still maintain its functionality. How does one determine whether a work is considered an art or a design?
The boundary between art and design is slowly merging. From the case study and many other recent designs it is obvious to see that both artists and designers creating things from the both spectrum. I believe that soon there should be no more distinction. Rather, it is the matter of determining what can be more useful to the human world. The functionalism and aesthetic values will merge and this collaboration will further our understanding of how things should be. After all, who said emotion design is not functional? Or vise versa?
Sunday, November 16, 2008
Biomimicry: Sharks
Learning from nature, Biomimicry is a new science that studies how different aspects of nature can be applied to design and better our world. Animals, plants, and microbe have survived through ages on earth and have great lessons of survival strategies for the human race.
One of the case studies was a research on shark skin and its possible applications on human products. For decades the shark has marveled us with its high movement efficiency in water. Its skin structure turns out to be a crucial part of this ability. The shark skin is constructed with dermal denticles, or small scales with longitudinal grooves. These small teeth help minimize water turbulence that is created when fast-water moving over smooth surfaces. Furthermore, the grooves on the scales act as a guiding channel for reinforcing the flow direction of water.
Another function of the scale is to prevent the marine organism to contact when they constantly hitting the skin as sharks are moving through water. These micro-organisms can adhere to the skin surface and are hazardous to sharks. With its skin accelerating the water flow, the shark can reduce the contact time, and the skin’s nano-texture also helps to reduce the available contact area for organisms to adhere.
From these findings the shark skin has inspired design in many ways. Today the boat coating surface has emulated the shark skin to limit possible micro-species from attaching on its surface and greatly improves the boat’s energy efficiency. This way it also reduces the use of toxic chemicals which were used to clean the boat surface.
The shark skin has also made other great impacts such as in the swimming industry where the skin texture is applied on swimming suits which helps improving the swimmer’s speed by three percent.
More applications are being developed from this inspiration, and there are much more from the nature for human to learn. For more information, visit the Biomimicry Institute’s website at http://www.biomimicryinstitute.org/
One of the case studies was a research on shark skin and its possible applications on human products. For decades the shark has marveled us with its high movement efficiency in water. Its skin structure turns out to be a crucial part of this ability. The shark skin is constructed with dermal denticles, or small scales with longitudinal grooves. These small teeth help minimize water turbulence that is created when fast-water moving over smooth surfaces. Furthermore, the grooves on the scales act as a guiding channel for reinforcing the flow direction of water.
Another function of the scale is to prevent the marine organism to contact when they constantly hitting the skin as sharks are moving through water. These micro-organisms can adhere to the skin surface and are hazardous to sharks. With its skin accelerating the water flow, the shark can reduce the contact time, and the skin’s nano-texture also helps to reduce the available contact area for organisms to adhere.
From these findings the shark skin has inspired design in many ways. Today the boat coating surface has emulated the shark skin to limit possible micro-species from attaching on its surface and greatly improves the boat’s energy efficiency. This way it also reduces the use of toxic chemicals which were used to clean the boat surface.
The shark skin has also made other great impacts such as in the swimming industry where the skin texture is applied on swimming suits which helps improving the swimmer’s speed by three percent.
More applications are being developed from this inspiration, and there are much more from the nature for human to learn. For more information, visit the Biomimicry Institute’s website at http://www.biomimicryinstitute.org/
Sunday, November 9, 2008
A Closed Cycle Humanitarian System
In his lecture Dr. Becker’s discussed the topic of the fugitive camp and its various issues relating to food, water, sanitation, shelter, and medical care. Since fugitive camps are always a result of an immediate mortality event, it is difficult to pre-design a system with consideration for each camp’s specific needs. Rather, the solution must be thought of as an aftermath.
One of the things that struck me the most during the lecture was when Dr. Becker explained how refugee camps can last a few generations or even a life time. Perhaps it is also for the notion that a refugee camp being a “camp” rather than a “settlement”, that when the general public is thinking about contributing to the refugee camps, most donations were done in consideration that the camp is short term.
For example, as a class we brainstormed the design of the bathroom. Most concepts raised were not meant to be used for a long time such as using a bucket or digging a big hole in the ground, but no one mentioned the idea of establishing a toilet system. Also, even though people donate food to the refugee camps from all over the world, few talks about the possibility of helping the camp to grow or raise their own food.
Another problem that lies within the donation system is that the products that are given to the camps are often items that needed to be disposed, which results in either the product being too fragile, useless, or dangerous to the human body. Some examples were given such as the plastic buckets that are used to carry water in one of the camps. These containers although works but were most likely used to carry gasoline or other dangerous chemicals before they were donated. Many medicines are also donated under the condition of being close to or after its expiring date.
It seems that the refugee camp have always been seen as something that requires constant help and supplies. This also leads itself to become a legit trash disposable system for the people who have too many resources. Being aware of this situation, how can we change this as designers?
Ever since I was a child my father had stressed the importance of helping others. Every Chinese New Year after receiving red packets, we would put together an amount that would generate enough interest to support a child’s monthly expenses. This funding becomes a permanent support for the child until they are able to become independent, then is passed on and continue to support the next child with needs.
The same concept can be applied when we think about the needs of the refugee camps. As the old proverb says, “Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime,” if we can figure out a way to educate the refugees to learn about ways to self sustain, such as growing their own vegetables or how to construct a better tools with their natural resources, the camp would gradually demand less supplies, and those who have become more skilled can also act as an educator and pass on his knowledge to others or even another refugee camp. I believe rather than endlessly giving, creating a closed self-sustainable cycle system would lasts much longer and much more helpful.
One of the things that struck me the most during the lecture was when Dr. Becker explained how refugee camps can last a few generations or even a life time. Perhaps it is also for the notion that a refugee camp being a “camp” rather than a “settlement”, that when the general public is thinking about contributing to the refugee camps, most donations were done in consideration that the camp is short term.
For example, as a class we brainstormed the design of the bathroom. Most concepts raised were not meant to be used for a long time such as using a bucket or digging a big hole in the ground, but no one mentioned the idea of establishing a toilet system. Also, even though people donate food to the refugee camps from all over the world, few talks about the possibility of helping the camp to grow or raise their own food.
Another problem that lies within the donation system is that the products that are given to the camps are often items that needed to be disposed, which results in either the product being too fragile, useless, or dangerous to the human body. Some examples were given such as the plastic buckets that are used to carry water in one of the camps. These containers although works but were most likely used to carry gasoline or other dangerous chemicals before they were donated. Many medicines are also donated under the condition of being close to or after its expiring date.
It seems that the refugee camp have always been seen as something that requires constant help and supplies. This also leads itself to become a legit trash disposable system for the people who have too many resources. Being aware of this situation, how can we change this as designers?
Ever since I was a child my father had stressed the importance of helping others. Every Chinese New Year after receiving red packets, we would put together an amount that would generate enough interest to support a child’s monthly expenses. This funding becomes a permanent support for the child until they are able to become independent, then is passed on and continue to support the next child with needs.
The same concept can be applied when we think about the needs of the refugee camps. As the old proverb says, “Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime,” if we can figure out a way to educate the refugees to learn about ways to self sustain, such as growing their own vegetables or how to construct a better tools with their natural resources, the camp would gradually demand less supplies, and those who have become more skilled can also act as an educator and pass on his knowledge to others or even another refugee camp. I believe rather than endlessly giving, creating a closed self-sustainable cycle system would lasts much longer and much more helpful.
Sunday, November 2, 2008
The Design of Product Image
If a person is being asked to describe what does a businessman look like, what elements may be included? Most likely it would be a mid-age male who holds a briefcase or a wallet, wears a collared shirt with a tie, a suite jacket, a pair of nice pants accompanied with a pair of leather shoes. Products such as tie or wallet become associated with a specific gender role. The history shows how they are embedded with meanings and how design has changed how one can be perceived when using the product.
The earliest example of wearing a piece of cloth around the neck was found in Egypt. The rectangular-shape cloth was very important part of a man’s outfit for it represented a man’s social status. However the tie did not become popular until when the French King Louis XIV took up the trend of neckerchiefs. By the 1980s the wearing of the tie has spread through Europe and to the United States. The popular patterns at the time showed themes of the country of origin and loyalty. The large variety of colors and patterns were also introduced to the product. Tie became a personalized object for men. It became a representation of individuality.
The importance of the tie increased even more in work settings. It became one of the most essential elements to a man’s business uniform and many companies began to include tie as a part of the dress code. Tie became a symbol for professionalism; it transformed from a personal preference to a basic rule of etiquette.
A similar example would be the wallet. The folding pouch was developed in the 1600s when the first paper currency was in use. Men would utilize the product to store not only cash but identification or business cards. A wallet was seen as a convenient alternative for men who did not like to carry bags. When the first credit card was introduced around the 1950s, the wallet became even more ubiquitous. Its compartmentalized structure allowed men to place any credit-card sized object in an organized fashion.
Both the tie and the wallet were largely related with male for their related functions in the workforce. These associations have demonstrated how the power of a usage in a specific environment can establish a fix image unto a product. The question is, can design manipulate these factors and affect its meaning once again? The answer is yes. In fact, many design brands saw the opportunity in both tie and wallet as a show-off object. By building another layer of meaning, fashion, on top of the existing, products slowly are transforming to serve a new function.
In recent years the practice of wearing tie has slowly fell out of favor. Many workforces today promote a casual-look which does not require wearing a tie. But with the influence of pop-culture once a symbol for professionalism has grown to become a fashion statement. Even though tie is still predominately a male product, it is beginning to be worn by women during fashion shows and is applied by many female celebrities. Wallet on the other hand has been transformed by design with a different material and compartments that targets female consumers’ needs and has become a widely used product.
From looking at the history both products had large association with the male image and were used only by men. They represented their status and social value. Design however had slowly blurred the gender distinction of usage. It challenged the perception of products and has a power to alter the meaning of products and what they used to represent.
The earliest example of wearing a piece of cloth around the neck was found in Egypt. The rectangular-shape cloth was very important part of a man’s outfit for it represented a man’s social status. However the tie did not become popular until when the French King Louis XIV took up the trend of neckerchiefs. By the 1980s the wearing of the tie has spread through Europe and to the United States. The popular patterns at the time showed themes of the country of origin and loyalty. The large variety of colors and patterns were also introduced to the product. Tie became a personalized object for men. It became a representation of individuality.
The importance of the tie increased even more in work settings. It became one of the most essential elements to a man’s business uniform and many companies began to include tie as a part of the dress code. Tie became a symbol for professionalism; it transformed from a personal preference to a basic rule of etiquette.
A similar example would be the wallet. The folding pouch was developed in the 1600s when the first paper currency was in use. Men would utilize the product to store not only cash but identification or business cards. A wallet was seen as a convenient alternative for men who did not like to carry bags. When the first credit card was introduced around the 1950s, the wallet became even more ubiquitous. Its compartmentalized structure allowed men to place any credit-card sized object in an organized fashion.
Both the tie and the wallet were largely related with male for their related functions in the workforce. These associations have demonstrated how the power of a usage in a specific environment can establish a fix image unto a product. The question is, can design manipulate these factors and affect its meaning once again? The answer is yes. In fact, many design brands saw the opportunity in both tie and wallet as a show-off object. By building another layer of meaning, fashion, on top of the existing, products slowly are transforming to serve a new function.
In recent years the practice of wearing tie has slowly fell out of favor. Many workforces today promote a casual-look which does not require wearing a tie. But with the influence of pop-culture once a symbol for professionalism has grown to become a fashion statement. Even though tie is still predominately a male product, it is beginning to be worn by women during fashion shows and is applied by many female celebrities. Wallet on the other hand has been transformed by design with a different material and compartments that targets female consumers’ needs and has become a widely used product.
From looking at the history both products had large association with the male image and were used only by men. They represented their status and social value. Design however had slowly blurred the gender distinction of usage. It challenged the perception of products and has a power to alter the meaning of products and what they used to represent.
Sunday, October 26, 2008
A Step Closer to the Unknown World
If a person is being asked to describe what a businessman looks like, what are the elements that first pop in our minds? Most likely, it would be a mid-age male who holds a briefcase or a wallet, wears a collared shirt with a tie, a suite jacket, a pair of formal pants accompanied with a pair of nice leather shoes. Products such as ties or wallets are associated with a specific gender role. The history shows how they are embedded with meanings and how design has changed the perception of a product.
The earliest example of wearing a piece of cloth around the neck was found in Egypt. The rectangular-shape cloth was an important part of a man’s outfit for its representation of social status. However the tie did not become popular until when the French King Louis XIV took up the trend of neckerchiefs. By the 1980s the wearing of the tie has spread through Europe and to the United States. The popular patterns at the time showed themes of the country of origin and loyalty. The large variety of colors and patterns were also introduced to the product. Tie became a personalized object for men. It became a representation of individuality.
The importance of the tie gradually increased even more when introduced in work settings. It became one of the most essential elements to a man’s business uniform and many companies included tie as a part of their dress code. Tie became a symbol for professionalism; it transformed from a personal preference to a basic rule of etiquette.
Another example is the wallet. The folding pouch was developed in the 1600s when the first paper currency was in use. Men would utilize the product to store not only cash but identification or business cards. A wallet was seen as a convenient alternative for men who did not like to carry bags. When the first credit card was introduced around the 1950s, the wallet became even more ubiquitous. Its compartmentalized structure allowed men to place any credit-card sized object in an organized fashion.
Both the tie and the wallet were largely related with male for their functions in the workforce. These associations have demonstrated how the power of a usage in a specific environment can establish a fixed image onto a product. The question is, can design manipulate these factors and affect its meaning once again? The answer is yes. In fact, many design brands saw the opportunity in both tie and wallet as show-off objects. By building another layer of meaning on top of the existing, fashion, the meaning of the two products transformed and served a new function.
In recent years the practice of wearing tie has slowly fell out of favor in working environments. Many workforces promote a casual-look which does not require wearing a tie. But with the influence of pop-culture the item has grown to become a fashion statement. Even though still being predominately a male product, ties are slowly adapted by women and this is seen during fashion shows. Wallet on the other hand has been transformed by design with a different material and compartments that targets female consumers’ needs and has become a widely used product.
From looking at the history, both products had large association with the male image and were used only by men. They represented their status and social value. Design however has blurred the gender distinction. It challenged the perception of products and has the power of altering the meaning of what a product used to represent.
The earliest example of wearing a piece of cloth around the neck was found in Egypt. The rectangular-shape cloth was an important part of a man’s outfit for its representation of social status. However the tie did not become popular until when the French King Louis XIV took up the trend of neckerchiefs. By the 1980s the wearing of the tie has spread through Europe and to the United States. The popular patterns at the time showed themes of the country of origin and loyalty. The large variety of colors and patterns were also introduced to the product. Tie became a personalized object for men. It became a representation of individuality.
The importance of the tie gradually increased even more when introduced in work settings. It became one of the most essential elements to a man’s business uniform and many companies included tie as a part of their dress code. Tie became a symbol for professionalism; it transformed from a personal preference to a basic rule of etiquette.
Another example is the wallet. The folding pouch was developed in the 1600s when the first paper currency was in use. Men would utilize the product to store not only cash but identification or business cards. A wallet was seen as a convenient alternative for men who did not like to carry bags. When the first credit card was introduced around the 1950s, the wallet became even more ubiquitous. Its compartmentalized structure allowed men to place any credit-card sized object in an organized fashion.
Both the tie and the wallet were largely related with male for their functions in the workforce. These associations have demonstrated how the power of a usage in a specific environment can establish a fixed image onto a product. The question is, can design manipulate these factors and affect its meaning once again? The answer is yes. In fact, many design brands saw the opportunity in both tie and wallet as show-off objects. By building another layer of meaning on top of the existing, fashion, the meaning of the two products transformed and served a new function.
In recent years the practice of wearing tie has slowly fell out of favor in working environments. Many workforces promote a casual-look which does not require wearing a tie. But with the influence of pop-culture the item has grown to become a fashion statement. Even though still being predominately a male product, ties are slowly adapted by women and this is seen during fashion shows. Wallet on the other hand has been transformed by design with a different material and compartments that targets female consumers’ needs and has become a widely used product.
From looking at the history, both products had large association with the male image and were used only by men. They represented their status and social value. Design however has blurred the gender distinction. It challenged the perception of products and has the power of altering the meaning of what a product used to represent.
Saturday, October 11, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
