||||| Trigology, Portfolio de Nathalie Dubé b.a., Designer, Montreal, Quebec, Canada ||||

Design?
This text has been presented as an essay in the course DES-6820 "Theory and practice of design II", presented to Maurice Amiel, from University of Quebec in Montreal, 1995. My mark was an "A" for this work. This is a casual translation from French.

Revolted about the bad quality and ugliness, if not meaningless, deaf to my need for personal expression, power less in front of the new problem of the environment, it is my frustration which drives me to try to improve it and influenced my application to study design in University of Quebec in Montreal.

Here is my definition that I do not have, personally, finished to conceptualize. Because I hesitate to affirm an idea (which I saw confirmed in "Design discourse" by Cheryl Buckley) Marxist-feminist who would like that the craft industry (craft) would be built-in in the history of the design. Because she denounces the methods of selection of the items which form part of these books, that's are introduced like models and the designers like stars. Its side line, capitalism like privileged model of production and leading to success.

Personally, it is especially what is described as " Kitsch " or " non-professional " that I think who would have his place: like the manifestation of the individual expression and social identity. The designer being an individual of this society who has decided to express himself, in this manner, and because it is its work, it has more chance to be diffused. I think actively of the question... but it is my current position.

The choice of the consummers: free?

In the market, I do not think that the consumer is so free. I take myself as example; when I have the idea for a piece of clothing and that I shop, I seldom find what I wish. When I decide to make it, I do not always find the fabrics (colors, patterns, trimming) that I had imagined to manufacture it. When I have a frustration as consumer, I take for granted that I am not the only one with it. Why could I not have to order this clothing made to my measure, without it being manufactured by a dressmaker and cost me $300.00? If there were a shop equipped like this, I would be the first customer... Computerization make these operations affordable and I would have my beautiful clothing, one week later, with what 10%, 20% more expensive?

Personalization | (Preamble and sociological analysis)

For the rich countries, in this end of century, the democratization of the access of the goods and services increased. What was formerly superficial became essential. Manufacturing allowed more people to obtain the comfort that would have been inaccessible. The middle class was born. The search of the minimal cost of production had often contributed to decrease quality of the psychological value (signification) or memory (of the past) in the production masse goods, (production representing, in the broad sense all scales of the design; at X time and the Y place). Did this known as, freedom of movement and accessibility for the goods, return the individuals free of certain social obligations, of the mutual aid which was formerly necessary to the survival of the collectivity. Thus, partially released, people (women?) could become aware of their psychological personals needs.
The theory of the needs, the pyramid according to Maslow, place the basic needs and the security at the bottom and the needs for recognitions and personal expressions at the top; show the individual aspiring to go up towards the top. The cut with the History presents itself when the existence of the individual had becomes a term of evolution. Its small history, in this context, is becoming the principal History. The overall vision requests an effort on behalf of the observer-participant. A better motivation, a personal satisfaction and a quality of life improved would be the resultant of this way of life. In background of those perspectives, it is the improvement of the productions power that is with the advance of sciences made evolve our thought and ways towards individualism.

Personalization II (Power)

The power can take these general forms, the rough force, money and knowledge (Tofler). At each time, various protagonists used what was accessible for them. The power is reflected in the design. That one thinks of the cathedrals of the Middle Ages which were build by pursuing its sky, where the religion held the power, or with recent constructions which require such investments that only a couple of individuals can afford them. Within the continuum of the history, people who had the power are those which left their traces or which allowed others to do so. The one who hold the power to model our environment. What would be interesting, since each one aspires to express them more, it would be to have a greater part in what make with their space, with its things. To offers, when it is possible, a "grid " of possible combinations and an overall vision, to ensure coherence. In this new chain that would be created, each individual could be more creative. What will support this new attitude, new ways of productions which are applied more and more, which requires a sharing of the decision-making power and responsibilities (the inverted pyramid) requiring more and more of competences, and versatility, of achievement and creativity of the individuals. The today's techniques make it possible to manufacture, add on the chain of production, personalized. A company in the US manufactures cellular telephones according to specifications of its customers, desired functions and forms. Some manufacturers of cars offer to you to choose a personalized color for your vehicle and so if desired... the whole being realized with the same the chain assembly as regular. It began already. I do not think that the designers have the monopoly of the good taste or originality; admittedly, our academic training privilege to us to criticize, advise and our culture to create the links, but we do not always hold the monopoly of imagination.

The personal expression: expression of an individual in the society
or expression of a society by an individual?

As an individual forming a part of a society, as a product resulting from this society, I believe that if I convey a message, it belongs to it in a certain manner. I think that my first responsibility as individual is to follow my inner way; it will be my best contribution. For me, to follow my inner way, it is to do what direction it tells that I must do. There is absolutely nothing rational, nor justifiable. It is what I came from there to think, after a certain time, considering what I had produced for three years. About anything of what I did, really not satisfy me. I acted in order to try to please external criteria (often), while neglecting to define mine. " What is significant for me? ", " What do I find interesting? ". I heard people criticize what others (at the school or elsewhere) had produced and I did not feel always so critical. It was able to me to be awakened by what other people had done (here or elsewhere, professional designer or not), without seeking why and to find legitimates this production, for this reason. I believe that if I manage to define my criteria, to follow them; my contribution will be honest and true. If I do what I like, there are chances that others like it too. I do not wish any more to try de to make things that all will like, it is impossible! And that returns to be an impossible life to me...

The Naive

The Naive, it is the most ordinary customer. It is often to him that the design addresses (except for specialized products). As a professional, I see things differently. I can appreciate certain details that the Naive one will perhaps not perceive. My vision and my register of code is wider, I have a distance (intellectual) to compare the work.
The Naive one likes or does not like; it seldom knows why, it happens to me too sometimes. If the general aspect comes out of the usual codes, it could be uncomfortable, even if one is opened, its have limited comprehension. I trust who I was before receiving my training, which I hope not to forget too much, in a concern of keeping the possible communication, without forgetting that I am my first customer. I have a user to understand and satisfy. I do not say that one never should innovate, not to disturb it. On the opposite, it is a pleasure to appreciate an original design, appropriate and elegant. But if what we do does not say anything to him, we do not do it well. If I compose a poem, which is so fuzzy that, nobody understands it with what I do refer, what will I have brought to humanity? Another dada. I must make a digression here. The humanity has very beautiful dada which are sometimes in the category "arts"; who exist for the pleasure that they give. And it is very well. Is the Eiffel tower, the largest dada of the history? Is it the most famous?
If I make a conference, I must take account of the audience to which I address myself and popularize my contents to be understood; with its side line: to lose a little substance. The ideal would be, in my opinion, being able to use the adapted register, according to the intention behind the project and the group to whom it is addressed. Innovating, easing the communication with the naive one, surprising, all is allowed, but not claiming the opposite. Not claiming to address itself to all, whereas the vocabulary used is complex, and state: " Look at the kind of nono, they understand nothing... ". If we are so fine... is with us to find the means of joining the audience. If not, let us assume the part of incommunicability, in certain connections, of the project.

The conditionings

The fashion conditions us. Qualified as innovative, I would say that it creates more homogeneity than differentiation. It gives to the environment certain stability in the change, in the short and medium term. I think that this phenomenon is so significant that it deserves a better examination before being pushed back reverse of the hand. The fashion meets a need more than mercantile in our society. It is an artificial order, a balance between the need for stability and the need for change. Artificial? The artifice always has been part of humanity (among materialization of beliefs, the symbolic system, the ritual; its objects, its places). What under is heard of negative in this qualifier, it is the overuse of the artifice, that which is meaningless; and the impoverishment which it generates; (effect of the mercantile attitude? what to say about the origin of trade? social classes?
The perverse selection that eliminates other forms of expression, it is the imbalance of the forces between those who impose and those who are imposed to? It conditions. We bathe inside, or with aside. Our environment is a material demonstration of the dominant ideology. It conditions us in our deep roots (1) it convinces of its superiority. One cannot claim to dissociate from. One can however criticize it. A new idea draws its source from the preceding one...
My position toward fashion is to recognize the phenomenon, not to deny it, to compose with it or not from a conscious point of view. To make what seems appropriate to the situation and not to follow blindly according to rules of success dictated in advance. I put forward the "virtues" of the variety. That could even be a new fashion...

The environment

It is recognized more and more that certain modes of productions and consumption contribute to deteriorate the environment. For our survival, we have to change our attitude. The three R: to reduce, re-use and recycle will affect us in the process of designing products. For example: to ease disassembling a produces complex including several materials, the choice of this last according to: the demand for energy, the pollution generated with its production, the recycling and its costs (by thinking that manufacturing it is responsible to take back its product). Coding of the plastic materials for the sorting (2) New products simplifying the sorting at the source, design makes possible re-use, to work with recycled materials, to make reparable and more durable products and of better quality in general. The built projects in progress such as: ecological house built from materials which give off less harmful materials, recover energy and which consist of systems of heating with water, more comfortable, solar, etc. have all my support.

Conclusion

I cannot dissociate: production and personal goal. In the same way, I think that I can never claim neutrality. The unconscious (barriers, desires, hopes etc.) always comes to appear such a recurring spot and invading in each project... as if the fact of having learned how to justify things had blocked my capacity of feeling them before... There is a duality in my approach: the designer which arrives with a very hot solution and which smells well for a group (developing) and me that call in question of this role " of single all-powerful discoverer of solution ". What I try to say, it is that it is a question of scale. What is adapted for one is necessarily for the others. The main quality of a designer is its flexibility and its ability to listen and observe.

Reactions? Comments? Do not hesitate to contact me or in joining in the discussion groups.

Note:
(1) How about a book title I saw recently "The body, this beautiful machine" ,addressed to children. We are not machine... We are sacred live. This is how modernity has convinced us

(2) It was not done at the time