In our reading this week, “The first machine age in Europe” by David Raizman, we learned that Hannes Meyer, the Swiss-born architect appointed director of the Bauhaus in 1928, argued that design is a product of “function x economy”, aligning design with a scientific model driven by new technologies and manufacturing potential. Considering this week’s lecture and readings respond to the following question (approximately 150-300 words, as needed): Do you agree or disagree with the position that design is a result of “function x economy”? Do you think design today an ‘art’ or a ‘science’? Should it be one or the other, or can it be both?
I agree that design is a result of “function x economy” because buildings or products need to be designed solely for easy and comfortable use. Furthermore the designer should consider how much the consumers can afford and not just how artistic the design is (although that is important too). Sometimes, products or buildings are designed to look ‘good’ but because of this the design can become inconvenient for people to use.
Today’s design has radically changed, mainly due to the development of science and technologies. Now production is faster and there is more variation in materials. However, just because design is now driven by technology does not make it a science. However the Scientific aspects of design are still necessary. Science provides people with new knowledge and information they need to create useful objects. So Science is also considering people’s needs but doesn't actually focus on the emotional effects a work of art can have. Without art we would not have works like those of Leonardo da Vinci, Picasso or Monet. Without Science, products of design would not be very functional, but without art the product would not be very appealing to people. So all in all, Science complements art and design of our age and makes it more practical but has not replaced the fundamentals of design it's self.
No comments:
Post a Comment