Build a man a fire, and he’ll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he’ll be warm for the rest of his life.
Terry Pratchett

The New Idea

Science fiction and design have always been interlinked, once the latest blockbuster comes out there are stories and articles everywhere on whether this new, futuristic concept is possible. This has already been developed in some areas where we can see products that have taken inspiration from sci fi.

Early sci fi really sparked everyones imagination and lead to a general feeling that anything was possible and the future was exciting. With time this vision seemed to disappear, either because the future wasn’t progressing as people imagined it would or because the limitless possabilities became limited. There was also growing concern for the future of the planet, people were worried about global warming and running out of fossil fuels. Sci fi movies became disaster movies, and design became retro. A return to a time when the future was limitless and exciting, not filled with doubt and uncertainty.

LOST is less complicated and annoying

Since we doung than my dissertation outline was a little vague and didnt have any real argument in it i’ve been looking into trying to specify exactally what it is that i want the dissertation to be about. My mind started to wander, i started thinkin about changing the topic all together, started thinking about, sci fi movies and design, mainly how people talk about how cool the automatic doors in star trek were and now that we see them in everyday life we don’t appriciate that novelty as much, but thats why its a novelty and all novelties wear off. i tried thinking of other arguments within this topic but kept running into walls and couldn’t coem up with an argument.

i started reading through random articles on the internet about loads of random ballox and had a few various ideas all of them shit, many cups of tea later got thinking about neccessity in design. how much of what we have do we really need, and on what level of existance do we live at that dictates this neccessity, eg. the rich kid that just cant live without the latest fashion accesserary, to the impoverished child that actually will not survive with out water and aid. thats obviously an extreme contrast but there is room for argument to do with what we really need, a look at wheather all these things accesseries and applications that are there to make life easier actually make it slightly more complicated or is it that life is just getting more and more complicated and these things realy can help? another way to look at this, or incorperate into the same idea would be a look at what is seen as a neccessity depending on where you live. eg. cars are not a neccessity living and working in edinburgh but back in ireland they are more so because the public transport isn’t as good. i would look at this on a much larger scale, across continents more than just across tiny streches of water.

this got me back to my origional idea, sort of, and after reading the article on long tail, got thinkin bout doing something about whether this wide range of choice, that according to that article, physical distrabution, TV, shops, cinema, can’t support. This could argue whether this was the end for those outlets of media or will the experience keep them alive, do we watch tv to see something specific or just to flick mindlessly between channels, although it doesnt sound like much its an experience that internet viewing doesnt provide, there you search for a list and select something that you want. so, again theres room for thought here too i just can’t seem to settle on one and its pissing me off.

I will settle on a topic by the end of tomorrow night and post the brief out line and details of the arguement as i did before.

Plan, sort of

• Investigate globally successful designs and choose some to use as case studies.

Within each case study investigate:

Location – pick at least 2 to compare

Consumer – differ from location to location? Investigate      lifestyles and demographics.

Product – does it differ in any way between locations?  Is it used in different ways?  Do consumers have different opinions of the product depending on location?

• Use info gathered to build argument.  State good and bad points of each side. Remain objective at this point.

• Further case studies by obtaining user feedback and thoughts from consumers.  Interviews and questionnaires depending on location.
• Interview designers (where possible, questionnaire when not) referencing case studies and argument to gain a better view for analysis.  Research designers before choosing them, using a number of designers that use different styles, techniques, famous/unheard, and have different views, of to try and give an input to both sides of the argument.
• Analyse info collected, build on argument referencing earlier points.  State both sides and compare the thoughts of designers to the research gathered from consumers.
• Conclude with overview of all relevant points made.  Restate the argument showing both sides referencing info gathered from case studies, consumer and designer feedback while comparing and analysing differences, if any.
• Finish with analysis of argument and conclusions, if  any.   (state how the investigation could have been improved that sort of thing? unsure if this is required.)

Outline of argument

First idea

Well designed products can be found in the pockets of most people, inside their homes or outside, but are these the same products owned by people classed in the same demographic half way across the world? Do good designs, used globally, detract from our individuality?

The popularity of a design is a testament to it’s quality and most designers are keen to produce quality, but if a designer creates such a design is it “selling out” or just being good at their job? Do designers have a moral obligation to diversify products so difference and originality can be found across the globe?

Worldwide distrabution of products is easily attained through internet sales and through various companies. This allows products to be available to a much larger market than before. The problem could be that, with everyone able to buy the same products will everyone become similar? will the differences in trends and lifestyle, seen across the world today, disappear and leave a planet with “a starbucks on every corner” or an iPod in every pocket?

Is this such a bad thing? Market domination is the goal od any company and the sucess of any product is a testament to the quality of its design. With this in mind, do designers have some sort of moral obligation to try and diversify their designs? Is having a successful design, such as the iPod, “selling out” or just being good at your job? Is homoginisation of the world evil or just good business?

Title for Dissertation

Good Design or Soul Selling for Sucess?

its a work in progress