Objectified was a very intriguing documentary to me. It helped point out things about designing that I have not given a lot of thought to, such as how much design goes into objects and how everything we interact with was designed very specifically to meet the needs of the user. Designers have to think about the majority of people that will be using the objects and design for them and not the individual. While I do believe this is important, I also think sometimes focusing on the individual can help pinpoint problems and can help identify problems that a mass of people are experiencing. This would be like the peeler that is designed in the documentary for arthritis. It can be hard for them to use small and simple objects, but without the husband noticing his wife struggling, it would not have been brought to the attention of designers as a problem that needed a solution.
The documentary also brought up some questions about design that I had not given thought to previously. For example, what will happen to the design, as not everything lasts forever? What happens when it serves it’s purpose? It can be hard to create something that eventually fades from existence, so how do you create something that stands the test of time? This may be related to environmentally friendly materials that will not harm the environment when disposed of, but also should make designers think of it’s usefulness now and whether it will still be needed or it will become obsolete by users. Building things to be permanent was once normal, as disposing of these objects was not thought of as a problem a while back.
I also found it very interesting how the designers personality comes to play. From talking about the first time a designer saw an Apple product and the amount of personality it had, to the authenticity of the product to what it is. This would be like the faces on the cars and how humanistic elements are being handled on inanimate objects. The design should be, as mentioned in the documentary, authentic to what it is, emotionally and functionally.
One thing that really hopped out to me is that the individual character being given to something that is mass produced can be hard, and that’s what designers should be looking for. With art, if you like something or are moved by it, it is affecting you personally because that moment comes to you as you are viewing the art. Designers should strive for that kind of emotional impact on the users, especially because the objects are used so often they become a part of “the family.” People attach memories to objects, and as the one designer mentions, we can hold on to objects longer because of this by remembering them as “the chair dad always sat in,” or “the vase that mom always used.”
I also found it particularly interesting that we design from familiarity as well. It was mentioned that cameras were designed at first due to film, but now, even though that design isn’t necessary, we still use the same shape of cameras for DSLR’s even though it does not necessarily need to be that way. We notice bad design, from poorly designed hotel rooms and chairs, and we are uncomfortable but do not fix it. We do not give much thought to the tools and objects we are using, even though they have been designed for us.
Design is much broader of a topic than I originally thought and this documentary helped bring some of the aspects of design to my attention. I particularly liked the variety of designers and how they all spoke of their own personal ways of designing, but they were all mostly saying the same thing. I love that design is so personalized but at the same time so consistent.