Critical design and poetry.

Our last project of the year was related with Critical Design.

Wikipedia-like-simple explanation: Is a concept created at the end of the 90’s by Anthony Dunne and Fiona Raby. They criticize the current design because is too engaged with the economical/social  system and is only another piece to reinforce it. In opposition to this,  they want to create a more experimental way of design that can make people think and question the world. So critical design take some of the function traditionally associated with art and link them with design because, according to them, current art is too far away from people’s life to be meaningful for them.

Tagged like “Critical Design” I’m going to post some thoughts and citations that I found interesting.

The frist one is about user friendly and object. Citation found in Hertzian Tales by Anthony Dune. (P35 2005 edition)

Un user-friendliness does not have to mean user-hostility. Constructive user-undfriendliness already exists in poetry:

“Everyday language is usually informative and instrumental. There is no call for either the speaker/writer or the hearer/reader to dwell on the form of what is said/written since if a piece of information has been successfully passed or some action successfully instigated. The words by which this has been managed can count as “transparent” With the poetic function comes a certain opacity, for the writer is no longer passing information nor seeking to instigate action. There may also come an intentional ambiguity” Sturrock, J. 1986 Structuralism. P(109-110)”

So, we can enjoy poetry, where the information to transmit could be less important than the way it is transmitted.  Can we enjoy in the same way an electronic object where the function is hidden, or is ambiguous? How do we enjoy things that are not completely efficient? Do we feel more about objects with “usability fails” like a book or a turntable?