I've found with most of the lectures in this module, that when it comes to writing about them, invariably, there is such a wealth of information, that the blogs I am producing are far longer than the maximum stipulated by the module guidelines - in fact, in the 4 or 5 blogs that I have so far covered at length, rather than the approximately 200 words necessary to fulfil the brief, I've found myself writing upwards of 800 per blog! I've also found it completely unnecessary to refer to the list of quotes we were given - some have come up naturally, as I have been writing, but otherwise, for the most part I've found plenty (maybe too much? ) to say without using them as a prompt.
So - a chat with Marisse, and she informs me that the quotes are not essential, that its fine to select just a few of the lectures to write about in depth, rather than cover every single one, and that the 2000 word final figure for all the blogs is merely a guideline - and its OK to go quite a bit over that - WHEW!
So - I have chosen to write in detail only about those lectures where the content and/or presentation left me feeling like I would enjoy 'getting my teeth' into writing about them in depth, afterwards. However, also think that I need to write briefly about those lectures that I didn't enjoy as much, and say why.
Visual Music 17thNovember 2011.
Yvonne talked about linking colour with sound, this idea going back to Ancient Greece, with Pythagorous putting forward the idea that every colour can be linked to a particular sound or note . She used the term 'Synaesthesia', its meaning being that the subjective interaction of multiple sensory perceptions underpins the whole idea of 'visual music' .
Synaesthesia is a term I have come across before, but I undertand it to be a neurological condition where those who have the condition have to deal with the fact that stimulation of one sense can lead directly to experiencing the stimulation of another sense - for example, some people can experience actual involuntary 'tastes' in their mouth when they hear sounds; some can 'touch' an object/person and hear specific noises; and some hear a sound (not necessarily just a musical note) and it causes them to 'see' colours - or any combination of one sense causing an involuntary stimulation of another that you can think of. It is recorded that some who suffer from the condition claim it heightens artistic capability and creation, but in rare, extreme cases, it can be an incredibly debilitating condition, causing those that experience it to the extreme having to isolate themselves, in order to avoid intolerable sensory overload.
So maybe, the fact that I know this condition as potentially being a debilitating one, helped to influence my feelings towards this lecture . It occured to me that the whole idea of it being a 'design' concept was possibly rooted in the actual condition, but I found it strange that this wasn't touched upon in the lecture .
The lecture moved on to a series of artists and musicians creating instruments that produced a colour when played, thereby creating 'artwork' - I couldn't honestly say, however, that by looking at any piece of this 'artwork' that I would have known the 'theory and process' behind them without having prior knowledge - they could just have easily been created from imagination. And given that it emerged that the different artists and musicians that produced this art work often failed to agree which colour matched which note, and vice versa, then attributing meaning and interpretation to a piece seemed to me to be so individualistic as to render any discussion about it completely 'meaningless'
The idea of also linking movement and shape to sound and colour seemed to me to be also rather too dependent on an individuals own personal interpretations, though I could see that in the same way as cetain symbols are recognisable to everyone as having the same meaning, repeated use through the media of film could mean that certain sounds have come to denote certain movements/actions (the slide trombone being used to denote someone sliding or slipping harks back to the silent, slapstick genre, movie for example).
I found it hard to attached any relevance to this lecture in terms of my studying, and found the presentation to contain a lot of 'design language' that occasionally made it difficult to follow, unfortunately. Most of the lectures in this series seemd to have a comon link - they all touched upon the moral, ethical and ecological aspects of design, though in different manners - from the question of does mainstream success mean 'selling out' in 'Beautiful Losers', through to considering the moral questions raised by technology design in 'Innovations', through to ecological impacts and our responsibility, considered in both Marisse and Dave Gills lectures. This lecture seemed totally out of step with the rest of them, and this added to the feeling of lack of relevance.
The Sustainable Lie - 1st December 2011 - Dave Gill.
This lecture covered the impact of designers and their creations, in terms of the damage/harm that can be done. It covered several area's, firstly the issue of 'Greenwash' - the fact that more money can be spent by a government or company in advertising their 'greeness', than is actually spent on investing in environmentally sound practices.
He also discussed that the fact that a world population of 6 - 8million was completely unsustainable if everybody had the same standards of consumption as the western world. Currently, only 20% of the population have the 'western standards' - should the remaining 80% attain the same level, it would create an ecological disaster - but if they didn't it would create a sociological disaster.
Dave went on to say that 80% of the environmental damage of a product or concept, is created at the design stage, by the decisions that designers make. The far reaching implications of every aspect of a design need to be looked at perhaps in greater detail than currently happens - using paper, rather than plastic may seem to be more ecologically sound, for example, but things like transport costs, manufacturing pollution output, and a whole host of other environmental costs need to be examined as they could prove to be more detrimental in the long run.
Dave talked about 'Fog Warning' - the fact that some industries deliberately keep a very low profile - such as the cement industry, which produces about 5% of Global Carbon Dioxide emmissions, as opposed to airlines which produce 2 - 4% . The airlines are often thought to be one of the worst culprits - yet cement industries produce so much more. It makes economic sense for them to keep a low profile, though.
As the lecture went on, it seemed that in this day and age, we have already reached the point where we are doomed ! Pratises and changes which the media and others have led us to belive are 'greener' often it seems, just create different and sometimes worse impacts. The possibility of creating a totally ecologically sound design it seems, is actually an impossibility - for example, a completely natural, environmentally anti-bacterial agent exists in the common herb, thyme - but the production of it would mean existing manufacturers of such cleaning products would have to make their current manufacturing plants redundant in order to use it, and even if they could do that, without an econoic, social and environmental impact, packaging the thyme for us to use presents problems in terms of sutiatble materials used as containers for it.
At the end of the lecture, I was left feeling that no matter how hard anyone tried as a designer, we are basically screwed ! The feasibility, in terms of the time and expense, of checking out the ecological impact of every single aspect of a design, from materials, to manufacture, from the impact of marketing and advertising, to whether the waste and impact it creates is balanced out by its 'useful life' (from conception to disposal) seems an impossible task, given the current economic climate in particular. And how do we know that the other industries/manufacturers/suppliers, who we may have to use in order to bring a design to fruition, are telling us the truth about where they source their materials, or what impact their particular processes may have? It seemed to me that so much time and resources would need to be spent investigating so many aspects, that not much designing could happen anyway! Well - perhaps that's the answer .
As one of my fellow students said, after the lecture, you were left feeling like you may as well give up, now!
The final two sessions in this series of lectures were given over to us being shown the film 'Manufactured Landscapes', where photographer Edward Burtynsky travels the world observing changes in landscapes due to industrial work and manufacturing. As CLM students, we had already been shown this film last year, and unfortunately, I had discovered that the way it is filmed triggered an attack of labrynthitus (vertigo) for me and I was unable to sit through it yet again. However, the screening of the second half was cancelled, the following week, and so there were no detailed instructions given about the exact approach we were expected to take in writing about it - whether we were to critique the film techniques, or whether it was to prompt us to take a closer look at the impact of manufacturing on the actual environment or something else entirely? Therefore, its a little difficult to give any sort of response at all. And again, I'll touch on the fact that just being in lecture theatre doesn't turn the watching of a film into a lecture - not unless its accompanied by at least some discussion, debate or directions !
I had a mixed response to this series of lectures. Some, like Dan's lecture, 'Innovation', were immensely entertaining and I really enjoyed the level of discussion it provoked afterwards. 'Design thinking', Marisses' lecture, was probably the most complex and difficult to write about, but it was extremely interesting once you got into it, and the concepts involved I felt, made a huge amount of sense, and I really enjoyed getting 'my teeth into' writing about that subject - though I also think that even given the somewhat lengthy blog I produced for that lecture, I barely scratched the surface, and I hope, thanks to the further links and info that Marrisse supplied me with, that I'll maybe get a chance to return to it in the future.
Personal preferences obviously played a part in my enjoyment and interest - or lack of - too. 'Beautiful Losers' I enjoyed - growing up during the 'punk rock' era, spending weeks hitch hiking round the country following bands and being fully immerced in that particular sub-culture, the questions it raised about holding on to integrity, and remaining true to values and ideals, as a 'sub culture' becomes more popular and accepted into the mainstream culture, appealed and I found really interesting to write about. But, I would have perhaps found it even more interesting had we been presented with at least a short period of discussion or information giving, at the end of it.
Sometimes the delivery of the lectures made it hard to focus on the content - as is I think obvious, the main thing I took away from 'Design and Ethics' was that the lecturer presented certain of his own views on what is ethically acceptable for a designer to be involved in, as facts not to be argued with - any work done for the tobacco industry is morally wrong and ethically unacceptable, end of story - or at least, thats how it came across to me, and several others, judging by the comments I heard afterwards! Now, he has a perfect right to that view, but the repeated re-enforcement of it throughout the lecture meant that the main thing I took for that lecture was the knowledge that the lecturer is incredibly anti smoking, and very dismissive of any other opinion on the subject. More debate was provoked by his stance on that, than was provoked by the actual content of the lecture in general.
Overall, I enjoyed this series of lectures. They nearly all provoked a level of debate and discussion afterwards, and several I found really interesting to write about. Whilst I may have had some reservations about delivery and occasionally content, the point to me of a lecture is to firstly make me think, and secondly, to encourage me to go out there and increase my knowledge base - several of these lectures 'ticked' those boxes for me, and its been an interesting and to a large extent, a thought provoking module.
No comments:
Post a Comment