For the most part, I found myself agreeing with all of the points brought up in the documentary. There were only a few instances of statements that I disagreed with or questioned. The first was a relatively unassuming quote from Karim Rashid: “You imagine, if you design a million chairs to date, or how many chairs have been done in the world, why on Earth would we have an uncomfortable chair? There’s like no excuse, whatsoever.” There’s a plethora of excuses for designing an uncomfortable chair. I believe we discussed in class how chairs are designed for the amount of time you’re intended to sit on them. If you don’t want people to sit on the chair for very long, making it uncomfortable is arguably “good” design in that case. Comfort is also quite difficult to segment, as the concept of ergonomics relates more to tailor-made products than it does mass-produced ones. For simple logistical purposes, chairs are designed with a wide range of people in mind, and can’t please everyone. Another statement from Karim that I questioned was “If the shelf life of a high-tech object is less than eleven months, it should be all 100% disposable.” While I can understand the sentiment behind the claim, and I agree that sustainability is important, I feel as though Karim’s wish is either hyperbolic or unrealistic at the present time. I don’t necessarily disagree with the statement, but I don’t think it’s realistic either.
That being said, this statement, coupled with the statements of some of the other designers in this documentary, prompted me to think quite a bit more about sustainability in everyday design. Karim’s utopian idea of a smartphone made of sugarcane might not be realistic, but it certainly makes one think. Similarly, the story that Thomas Overthun tells about stumbling over his own toothbrush on a beach led me to think more about the space an object occupies both during and after its use, geographically, mentally, and volumetrically. I also found myself thinking more about how design fits into the user’s personal story, how users feel about their own ability to understand a design, and how some designs come about from extensive group planning whilst others are moments of singular inspiration.
Prior to watching this documentary, I’m not sure I had a concrete definition of design, and I’m not sure if I do now having watched it either. Complete or not, the definition of design that I’ve come up with is that design is the act of creating objects or experiences that provide utility. It’s a basic definition, but it’s broad in its interpretation and application. To provide utility is essentially to make an object or experience better in some way. Even if the design is an intentionally uncomfortable chair, that chair is uncomfortable for a reason. It might not make the object or experience better for the user, but it makes it better for the entity it was designed for – for example, urban tourism in the case of defensive design. Price itself allows for a measure of utility. If people are willing to pay for a design, it must have some kind of utility.