Uncreative Design

Questions 10/9

Barthes’ argument implies that the author cannot be present to defend his/her work, therefore his/her intentions are inconsequential and the viewer’s experience is what creates meaning. What then is the role of plaques at museums?

“The meaning of his [Alfred Hitchcock’s] work is not in the story but in the storytelling.” We learn in MAKING MEANING to travel “bottom-up” – starting from a concept or idea, followed by analysis and discussion and then fleshing out the form. Do we lose the value of intuitive making through this process? Do we lose a sense of wonder and otherworldliness of design? Does analysis and interpretation tie design down to the real world, rather than have it keep its sense of wonder and mystery?

Design, unlike “art”, cannot be misunderstood. How can the designer’s voice then come into play?

Theory is essentially what validates art/design/literature etc. We cannot get rid of it, but what sort of modes of discussion can be adopted to keep the interpretation less narrow? A eloquent description of form, perhaps?