David Roedl

This week in Design Theory there was some interesting reading and discussion about the relationship between design and craft. Here are a couple open-ended questions that were brought to my mind:

1) In his book, Design Methods, John Chris Jones describes how in traditional craftsmanship, small incremental changes are made over long periods of time based upon successes and failures of use. This results in extremely well-adapted artifacts, refined to specific conditions of use and to the environment. In contrast, the modern design process is characterized by a separation among design, production, and use, as well as a rapid rate of innovation. In this context, I wonder, is it still possible to produce technology that is well-adapted and does no harm?

2) Uday Gajendar makes a strong case for how striving for craft can elevate quality and improve the user experience of an interaction design. I believe it is implied in this statement that interaction designers should be involved in the production of, for example, graphics, code, or interaction hardware. There are many complex skills involved in the production of interactive systems. How should a designer balance these production skills with all of the other skills need in design?

3) The notion of craftsmanship has connotations of an intimate, tangible relationship between the craftsperson and their material. The craftsperson works in an intensive hands-on way in the creation of each artifact and as a result, each artifact is unique and has an aura of authenticity. Is such possible when the material is digital? As mentioned above I think designers can experience an intimate, semi-tangible relationship with their creations, especially by participating in production. The “tangibleness” of this might grow as we increase the materiality of interactive experiences. But can interaction designers ever achieve an aura of authenticity when their works can be perfectly and infinitely reproduced without cost?