in your dreams, girls

I hope I'm in some kind of dream or time warp and what I witnessed on the video is not a true reflection but rather, some antediluvian nightmare and not the real state of industrial design as practiced today.
The most obvious, glaring omission throughout the whole process of "designing the dream machines" is.... women. Russell Lloyd, Dick Powell, Nick Talbot, Neil Hurst, Adrian Caroen, David Fisher, Richard Seymour are the 7 directors of Seymour Powell. Why are there no women involved. They don't exist? They don't consume? They definitely don't design! So where are they? Throughout the entire process women are absent. The exception being at a brainstorming session where, the idea of a multi functional base for kitchen equipment was suggested by a woman and, adopted as one of the ideas to be pitched to their client, Tefal. Thereafter not a women in the place: not designing, not model making, not pitching, not anywhere. What does this tell us about industrial design? Who is it for? What is it about? The design process should, I think, be an inclusive, explorative, holistic experience. One through which the designer gains insight and inspiration and ultimately produces as complete and successful a product as possible. How can this possibly be the result when the process here is left entirely in the hands of white, middle aged (probably middle class) males? By virtue of their own experience, I suggest, they must simply reflect, reinforce and promote their own values and experiences. It seems to me this is an extraordinarily narrow and limiting path for the designer to follow.
I could suggest a couple of reasons why Tefal probably didn't manufacture the food processor, I could point to a major design factor that the boys didn't mention with reference to the scooter for the Indian market... both rooted in the fact that men and women not only use products differently but also perceive products differently but, I wonder if they are interested my input? I find the absence of the female voice very, very strange, here and now, in the 21st century. Women do represent the other 50% of the market and yet don't seem to have any place in the world of Seymour Powell. Is this simply symptomatic of this particular company or a fair representation of the industry in general? If the design team is either uninterested or unaware of this "other" voice how seriously should I consider their view of design, process and methodology etc. They apparently fail to see value in a fully integrated, non gender/ethnic specif design team? A failure which I think necessarily diminishes the quality of their products. (and depresses me beyond words ....)
Id Sketching makes this point oh, so well... It's the boys idea of a joke... They know they are stereotyping in the worst possible way but that's OK because we're "just kidding".... Guess what, harm done ... I know, heres' a good idea... lets all sit around and tell racist jokes then, tell the people it's aimed at THEY don't have a sense of humour because we think it's funny .... IT'S NOT OK it's never OK.... So we'll see the WOMENS sketching sometime soon, just not yet...

In an industry being so dominated by men, it is interesting to get the point of view from some of the lovely women who work with us. It is estimated that the females make up aproximately 20 percent of the industrial design professionals. Many of these women in the industrial design community have unique perspectives and experiences that allow them to excel in situations where some of the rest of us (testosterone-fueled beastly males) have no clue. We hope to include the ladies here on the site and we definitely know many of them have some great sketching skills to share!

Look for an interview and sketch samples dropping soon from a veteran female designer!

UPDATE: just in case…take no offense with Barbie. I know she is the super-skinny doll that has been blamed for little girls’ insecurity about their image (which in turn leads to eating disorders) but no harm intended.

signs of life

For this project I decided to give a fun present. One which would arouse curiosity and create on-going interest for both adults and children alike.
The object of the present is to bring something green and living into an otherwise very ordinary idea.
A flat A4 piece of pre-cut, perforated and painted polypropylene is folded into a box with an opening back flap. An image is attached to the top. Holes are punched through the image using the pre-drilled perforation pattern on the box top. The holes can therefore be placed anywhere on the design. Perhaps along the edge of a photograph creating a border or, as in this case, amongst the foliage in the image.
The sign, slogan or photograph is now, quite literally, brought to life by the utilization of a very simple idea. The "ordinary" is given a new dimension one that, I hope, enhances the original concept.
The seeds, which are supplied in a convenient easy to insert "seed bar", will germinate in approx 3-5 days after they have been watered in the damp dark environment provided by the interior of the box. The resulting seedlings will grow towards the light. By punching holes through the image on the box top, the small green shoots will pop out through the holes and become an integral part of the design, changing it on a daily basis. Every day is a new experience for the viewer.
The idea can be expanded from the tiny box as show 5cm x 8cm, up to billboard size. There is really no limit to the size of the project or restriction as to the subject matter.

bad design

Stuff up

OK... How much truth can you take?
If you want the really ugly truth about our planet, it's resources, our use and abuse of it and, our seemingly inevitable annihilation Read this Book; A blue print for survival. Penguin books. Published in 1972. Only 144 pages get it, read it.
It really tells you how it is (without the up beat playschool approach that Annie for some reason, seems to think appropriate)
An extract from it is below: REMEBER this was written in 1972!!!!

This document has been drawn up by a small team of people, all of whom, in different capacities, are professionally involved in the study of global environmental problems.

Four considerations have prompted us to do this:

1. An examination of the relevant information available has impressed upon us the extreme gravity of the global situation today. For, if current trends are allowed to persist, the breakdown of society and the irreversible disruption of the life-support systems on this planet, possibly by the end of the century, certainly within the lifetimes of our children, are inevitable.
2. Governments, and ours is no exception, are either refusing to face the relevant facts, or are briefing their scientists in such a way that their seriousness is played down. Whatever the reasons, no corrective measures of any consequence are being undertaken.
3. This situation has already prompted the formation of the Club of Rome, a group of scientists and industrialists from many countries, which is currently trying to persuade governments, industrial leaders and trade unions throughout the world to face these facts and to take appropriate action while there is yet time. It must now give rise to a national movement to act at a national level, and if need be to assume political status and contest the next general election. It is hoped that such an example will be emulated in other countries, thereby giving rise to an international movement, complementing the invaluable work being done by the Club of Rome.
4. Such a movement cannot hope to succeed unless it has previously formulated a new philosophy of life, whose goals can be achieved without destroying the environment, and a precise and comprehensive programme for bringing about the sort of society in which it can be implemented.

This we have tried to do, and our Blueprint for Survival heralds the formation of the Movement for Survival and, it is hoped, the dawn of a new age in which Man will learn to live with the rest of Nature rather than against it.
The Ecologist
Edward Goldsmith, Robert Allen, Michael Allaby, John Davoll, Sam Lawrence.

If you want to know how governments and big business work the system to their benefit read this book (or any book) by Vance Packard The Waste Makers. Published in 1960 ...and guess what he said way back then "advertising is turning North Americans into emotional infants who expect instant gratification of all their desires" Annie is confirming this sentiment 50 years later. The media is controlling/driving our expectations and desires.

SO what to do about it? Well, make it personal. Take responsibility for your own actions and decisions. ie don't buy from the $2 dollar stores. You know that when you purchase an item for $2 someone somewhere is paying the real price... slave labour, indentured labour, sweats shops, a child some where in the world is going blind making tiny, pretty, delicate thing for you to buy cheaply when actually, you can easily afford the real price. Maybe always ask this question before you buy "WHAT IS THE COST AND WHO PAYS THE PRICE?" No more maybe, to misquote Nike who, by the way, are guilty of worker exploitation in their third world factories. "just don't do it" It's a start.

The Silver Screen

The phrase "The silver screen" instantly transports me to the Cinema. My most vivid image is that of the the ghostly silver/blue glow of the big screen as it casts it's shadows and flickering light across the audience as they enter the auditorium. The screen is at all times the the focus of attention and yet it is only the back drop to the real event.




This is how I view my product. It offers the viewer choices, in so far as, it can be viewed in one of two ways. That is; it can be either the main event or the back drop. As a kind of art "installation" piece, which can be viewed in the round and has, I hope, an interesting dynamic from all sides. Catching and reflecting light and images in ways that recall the light from the cinema screen. It can also be used in a purely functional way as an interesting piece of furniture acting as a room divider.

The material is recycled stainless steel. It is, in fact, the tray that remains after laser cutting. The objects have been removed and the metal lattice work is left behind. Using post industrial waste in this way adds a kind of cool urban aesthetic to the product. To hold onto the feeling of "urban cool' I had to get away from the conventional hinging together of flat room dividers so I created self supporting modules that could be clipped together to form a 3 dimensional screen.
The clipping pegs (made of recycled raw plug) allow the screen to be constructed and deconstructed to any number of configurations.
It offers the user flexibility of height, width and control of the overall shape and design. This makes it suitable for many different spaces. Primarily aimed at the funky loft/warehouse-dweller. It would be a suitable accompaniment to their life style.


peer comments
susanna Li
glenaldy janto
maria park
nick walker
jennifer widjaja

Redefining the future of design?

I foresee the future...
And the future is... a raging, bloody battle between the Bauhaus minimalists and the Lovegrove Organicists.



Ross Lovegrove is adamant that the only direction relevant design will be heading, in the future, is his way. The way of the organic form. Referring and deferring to the superiority of nature over man's imagination and ingenuity, as the sovereign designer. He has postulated a theory / view that good design is spare design, entirely stripped of all unnecessary elements, outside of the organic form. If they do not have an organic expression then, according to his precepts, they are (must be) redundant. Certainly the organic form, for the most part, is spectacular and by definition has a unity and "oneness" that designers seek. However, to maintain this position without leaving any space for other opinions leads, I think, to the de-democratising of design. In the same way as the wholehearted, unremitting embrace of Bauhaus' hard edge minimalism has lead to a kind of minimalist meltdown/overload. Everywhere and everything is minimal. Culminating in, I think, an unspoken but acknowledged presumption in the design world (particularly in Architecture) that, if it's not minimal then some how it's poor design. In my opinion not true of course. However, I have a feeling that there may be a similar result if we allow the singular rise of the "organic only" credo. We must ensure all voices are heard in the future debate about design supremacy.
I look forward to the forthcoming battle between, what I imagine will be seen as the "old school, fuddy-duddy" Minimalists vs New kids on the block Organicists. It will be interesting to see who sides with who in the future debate.

More than skins deep

You know, finally, I like Yves... more and more.
On first acquaintance I didn't understand what he was about. However, the more frequently I listened, the more I came to appreciate what I think he's saying. It's not necessarily about individual objects telling stories or about bringing one's own values to each design, per se. It seems to me to be more about understanding the nature and effect of design in it's entirety. Products and therefore design have consequences. Producing an end product is not the final and only objective. I think he's suggesting that "the sum of the whole is greater than its individual parts" so to speak. When each individual value/ideal coalesce they MAY reach critical mass and ultimately have a global or holistic effect. They may create a chain reaction effecting everything; from the very act of designing through to receiving and using the finished product. Everything might take on a new aesthetic... what we create, how we create, how we use and how we dispose... creating the desired ”new relationship with the world”, (which lets face it, is an absolute necessity if we wish to continue as a species.)
It's a nice idea (it could become a reality) and maybe we can change the world... one design(er) at a time.
Perhaps not with the worlds fastest electric motor bike though... On the other hand, why not, who knows?!?!?