Written by Klaus Krippendorff, recognized designer and distinguished scholar of communication and language use, the book builds an epistemological bridge between language/communication theory and human-centered conceptions of contemporary artifacts. Clarifying how the semantic turn goes beyond product semantics and differs from other approaches to meaning, Krippendorff develops four new theories of how artifacts make sense and presents a series of meaning-sensitive design methods, illustrated by examples, and evaluative techniques that radically depart from the functionalist and technology-centered tradition in design.
An indispensable guide for the future of the design profession, this book outlines not only a science for design that encourages asking and answering new kinds of questions, it also provides concepts and a vocabulary that enables designers to better partner with the more traditional disciplines of engineering, ergonomics, ecology, cognitive science, information technology, management, and marketing.
The Semantic Turn is a book by Klaus Krippendorff (2006), a design researcher now working at the University of Pennsylvania.
Krippendorff takes an encompassing view of the science of design, centering it on the concept of Meaning. Since "Humans do not see and act on the physical qualities of things, but on what they mean to them" (book, pp. 47), his approach establishes a distance from some industrial design practices, that often focus on Form and Function rather than on meaning.
The semantic turn represents an evolution from Product Semantics by Krippendorff and Butter (1989), that had been defined as "A systematic inquiry into how people attribute meanings to artifacts and interact with them accordingly" and "a vocabulary and methodology for designing artifacts in view of the meanings they could acquire for their users and the communities of their stakeholders". While retaining this emphasis on meaning and on the importance of both theory and practice, the semantic turn extends the concerns of designers first to the new challenges of design, including the design of ever more intangible artifacts such as services, identities, interfaces, multiuser systems, projects and discourses; and second, to consider the meaning of artifacts in use, in language, in the whole life cycle of the artifact, and in an ecology of artifacts.
Design "brings forth what would not come naturally (...); proposes realizable artifacts to others (...) must support the lives of ideally large communitites (...) and must make sense to most, ideally to those that have a stake on them" (pp. 25-26). Design thus in intimatelly involved with the meaning stakeholders attribute to artifacts. Designers "consider possible futures (...) evaluate their desirability (...) and create and work out realistic paths from the present towards desirable futures, and propose them to those that can bring a design to fruition" (pp. 28-29). Human-centered design is distinguished from technology-centered design by this emphasis on the meaning stakeholders attribute to artifacts.
Attributing meaning to something follows from sensing it, and is a prelude to action. "One always acts according to the meaning of whatever one faces" (pp. 58). Meanings are always someone's construction and depend on context and culture. The same artifact may invoke different meanings in different times and places and for different stakeholders. Designers as a consequence need to get involved into second order understanding: understand each stakeholder understanding of artifacts in order to design artifacts successfully. Since meanings of others cannot be observed directly, designers need to carefully observe actions that imply certain meanings; involve themselves in dialog with stakeholders; and invite them to participate in the design process.
People understand artifacts by their interfaces; not only computer system interfaces but whatever the artifact presents to the user as an indication of its affordances – whatever the artifact affords the user to do with it. Thus scissors and coffee cups have an interface as well as interactive computer systems. The meaning of an artifact in use is then "the range of imaginable senses and actions that users can expect" (pp. 83). Interfaces need to be designed, producing "an intrinsically motivating interaction between human actors and their artifacts" (pp. 83).
Artifacts must be designed to afford initial recognition, exploration and finally reliance, the later when the artifact is so incorporated into the user's world that he hardly notices it or its functioning. Recognition depends on the user's categorization of artifact –how close it is to its ideal type. Exploration is facilitated by informatives such as state indicators, progress reports, confirmations of actions and readiness, alarm signals, close correlations between actions and their expected effects, maps of possibilities, instructions, error messages and feedback. Reliance is enhanced by the degree the artifact is able to invoke intrinsic motivation in the user and provide an operation free of disruptions. A meaningful interface enables effective recognition and exploration and leads to reliance; designers need to involve themselves in second-order understanding of all this.
"The fate of all artifacts is decided in language" (pp.148) , says Krippedorff. Indeed, designers must pay attention to the names that may be used to categorize an artifact as soon as it hits the market; to the adjectives that may be attached to it (is it a fast car? a graceless cell phone? a high class dress?); and to the narratives and stories and judgements that may be told about it. In particular with interfaces, Krippendorff proposes that artifacts should be designed so that their interfaces are [easily] narratable" (pp. 174, emphasis added)
The character of an artifact --the set of adjectives attached to it--, might be assessed using product prototypes by means of semantic differential scales: seven point scales between extreme attributes such as elegant---graceless; or by categorizing free associations made by users upon first seeing or after using an artifact; by examining the content of stories and judgments; or by comparisons against similar artifacts.
Language permeates the life of an artifact even before it is built, in the narratives designers use to influence other stakeholders. And stories are even told nowadays about artifacts defunct years ago. "The meanings that artifacts acquire in use are largely framed in language" (pp.147), as language use directs attention and frames perception.
Here Kippendorff invites designers to consider artifacts in their whole life cycle. In the case of industrial products, the life cycle might start with an initial idea, then followed by design, engineering, production, sales, use, storage, maintenance and finally retirement as waste. Well, not "finally" really; designers will then learn about the product's performance and consequences in order to then design new, better products --design never ends. In each phase of the life cycle, the artifact will have to present different meaningful interfaces to varying communities of stakeholder networks that enable it to succeed in one stage and go on to the next: "no artifact can be realized within a culture without being meaningful to those who can move it through its various definitions" (p.186).
Ecology is usually understood nowadays as involving interacting natural species. Humans, however, have created perhaps even more species of artifacts than Nature alone. These artificial species are equally born, evolve, diversify into other species, adapt to market niches and eventually disappear -just as the natural ones. Artifacts may compete, cooperate or be parasitic with other artifacts; for an example of the later, consider spam, which thrives in the Email ecosystem. Whereas natural species interact with one another, species of artifacts usually interact through human agency. People can arrange artifacts together at home, or have them communicate over long distances as is the case with distributed computer systems.
In an ecology of artifacts, the meaning of one must include consideration of its possible interaction with other artifacts, artificial or natural; for instance, roads and gas stations interact with automobiles, and cars interact with the rest or nature through waste and CO2 emissions. "Designers who can handle the ecological meaning of their proposals have a better chance of keeping their designs alive" (pp. 202)
Com início em 2000, o evento de design conta já com a sua IX edição consecutiva, constituindo um percurso de sucesso e prestígio.
O Concurso de Design, Export Home.09, integrado no Evento de Design, IX Edição visa reconhecer a importância do design em Portugal, aliando designers/empresas do sector do mobiliário, iluminação e têxtil.
A AEParedes, AEPF, APCM, AIPI, APIMA e AIMMP, dão continuidade e credibilidade a este Evento, de forma a poder intensificar a colaboração de profissionais de design com a indústria portuguesa e assim reforçar a inovação nestes sectores.
In March 2008 Paola Antonelli curated MoMA's critically acclaimed exhibit, "Design and the Elastic Mind." The show, which Seed had the honor of helping to catalyze, explored the myriad ways in which design has become an essential tool for visualizing, understanding, and manipulating the natural world, from the micro to the macro. In our desire to see that conversation evolve, to follow the ideas that emerge from it, and to showcase their application around the world, Seed introduces here a new column by Paola Antonelli on design and science.
Editorialists, journalists, designers, art historians - all agree that design is a young sector. Is this correct ? Although the design sector may be characterised by young industries, is design really that young ? Looking back at the Crystal Palace exhibition, many people would agree that design is about 150 years old. Again, is this true? Is design the oldest activity of all ?
If we look at the main design domains –product design, communication design, environment design and fashion design– can we tell that design dates from 1851? Human beings made tools and objects well before that date. Can we ignore the fact that they wore clothes, built houses or communicated hundreds and thousands of years before the industrial revolution? The drawings in the Lascaux caves also tell us that man began to think about communication thousands of years ago.
Our ancestors did not call themselves designers but they were acting more or less as designers. The shift that happened at various points in history is that designing became a conscious activity. It became more and more sophisticated, along with technology, market constraints and other developments. Can design be related to a production process – industrialisation – in an age where sustainable development is leading us to a smaller, regional, on-demand scale of production? And, production processes that we consider today as ‘craft’ were at some point at the cutting edge of technology.
So, design activity is probably one of the oldest activities of mankind. The fact that we still consider it as a young profession is merely a sign that design is not yet a mature sector, economically speaking. Although it is exciting to be in a profession that has discovered eternal youth, this brings challenges for designers. It also generates difficulties for career development and one simply cannot make a living from a passion. These are challenges that educators should address and integrate into their programmes.
No próximo dia 17 de Fevereiro, às 17h00, no ISEC, em Lisboa, decorrerá uma conferência com o designer argentino Norberto Chaves, organizada pela Unidade Cientifico Pedagógica de Design e Artes Gráficas.
As designers and uppermost as citizens, we witness the rising tautness in the current economic, politic and environmental situation. In our jobs, and in our lives, we long to do more. Particularly as designers, we intuit our strategic placing in the larger capitalist logic we work with/for (some against, or about - but one would have to agree there is always some degree of relation) should grant us great opportunities to bring about positive change. Are we seizing that momentum?
All this, is about social engagement, and that can only happen through critical observation and thinking. This blog aims to be a space for just that.
Kate and Joana, who met while collaborating for the SocialDesignSite, firstly initiated this blog. The SocialDesignSite is a not-for-profit organization that aims to foster and facilitate a discourse on social design by establishing a unique interactive online platform. They present a vast array of innovative projects that help develop and sharpen our common understanding of social design both in context as in practice.
This blog shares with the SocialDesignSite the aim to create awareness and promote reflection towards how we could do things differently, how do we bring about positive change, and why we have chosen to organize ourselves the ways we have.
If the SocialDesignSite has earned its place as a reference for exhibiting and categorizing exemplary social design projects from a variety of fields, this blog will complement that by a deeper problematization on the issues those projects address.
To achieve that, thinkers, writers, critics, scholars and theoreticians of all backgrounds will be called to contribute. Hopefully, this will enhance the tranformation of all the available online knowledge into evaluation and inquiry. This discussion of the developing concept of social design, and the gain of perspective and understanding about models, methods and instruments available, aims to evaluate the impact on the social world and explore the possibilities of what we could do differently.
This blog is a place to ask questions, debate the multitude of answers, and bring completely new perspectives to the table.
The SocialDesignBlog writers and contributors,
November 2008
