Among other things

Its an interactive wall that spreads apart like fish gills based on sensor input. The authors' original intention was to use CO2 sensors to control the modulation but their prototype uses infra-red sensors instead. I originally thought that the CO2 sensors were for an ecological purpose but I now think that they were actually intending a completely different purpose... breathing on them. It makes sense to me that when a person's face was close enough, their breath would read on the sensors, which would then actuate the wall.

The construction is pretty interesting. The author's decided to use shape memory wire that is molded into silicone panels. The result has a nice effect. I also appreciate their documentation and the use of sequential "decks" to explain their process as well as the simple and clear research objectives that they use to present the project.

  On the "stakeholder panel" was Sanjit (Bunker) Roy, founder of the Barefoot College in Tilonia, India, Bruce Nussbaum, Associate Editor of Business Week, and Dr. Vishakha Desai who is the current president of the Asia Society.  All were introduced as "non-designers" who represented concerns that somehow reflected the concerns for Design as it relates to India.  The moderator of the panel was Mary McBride, chair of the Design Management Graduate Program at Pratt and the keynote speaker was Neelam Deo, Consul General of India, who delivered an opening statement on the importance of collaboration with the global community in innovation, business, and (of course) design.  See the Design With India website for more information on the panelists and the "resource orchestra", which was a group of design professionals from around the world representing a broad variety of disciplines.

Although I felt that there were many interesting and valid ideas offered, there was neither coordination of values nor of meanings with reference to Design.  Some advocated for a kind of Design only relevant to the people of rural India, others queried the opportunities for business collaboration with "Design" as the meeting point, still others were advocating for the India that looms large in the various technology industries... still Design but with a very different flavor.

There were so many interesting people in attendance who came to share their views and there just wasn't time for all of them to speak in one massive session and threads of discussion didn't last long enough to dig very deeply.  This is common, of course, at an event with a high profile, but the billing of the event as a 'strategy session' seemed to imply some breakdown of the audience into smaller components.  I had in mind that I'd be part of a breakout group around some topic at least part of the time.  This unfortunately didn't happen in favor of the "10,000 foot" statements that kept the conversation spiraling outward.  [I hope that some documentation of these ideas will be published.]

As I listened to comments about sustainability, technology, culture, architecture, engineering, products, markets, and needs some chose "design for India" and others chose "design in India" but it was clarified in the course of discussion that what is important is
a kind of participatory design that included anyone who wants it, and
that incorporates all of the values that signify India.  Design WITH India.

I thought... "what does it mean to design with an
entire country?  For that matter, what does it mean to design with a
culture?" I ask with reference, not only to India (or rather the people of India), but what of America?  Can we design with America?  Is it even possible to incorporate the values, the goals, and perhaps most importantly the identity of so many with so much difference between them?

When the opportunity to ask questions was offered to the general audience I asked...



"What are we talking about when we say 'Design'?"  (my comment/question was longer... but that's the gist)

• Consul General Deo defined Design as "Art, plus
  culture, plus commerce" in her keynote address.  Assuming that there is
  some universal notion of what THOSE three terms mean (which I don't
  believe there is), their intersection does not necessarily imply Design
  and furthermore, the equation doesn't really help us understand the
  particularity of Design WITH/IN/FOR India.  The comments of other
  members of the audience made it clear that we all didn't have the same
  idea of culture, art, or commerce either.
  
  

• Bruce Nussbaum took the question head on, qualifying Design as
  the output of more general "Design Methods" , which, according to
  Nussbaum, can play the same role in business that it plays in fashion,
  architecture, and product design.  Nussbaum's description seemed to
  suggested a kind of generalization across disciplines that could help
  professionals find accord. 

As the event continued at least one thing became clear; design with India is going to be complicated. 
The country has incredibly disparate economic, cultural, social, and
physical characteristics.  So disparate, I think, that we can only design with part of India at a time and hope that we'll be conscious of, and careful with, the rest as we do so.

powered by performancing firefox