Resistance, then, was understood by the CCCS as the obvious reaction of young people to their social positioning. But were these rituals what the young people actually did, or were they representations of what the young people did as seen through the eyes of social scientists? Questions like these were rarely asked, let along answered.I'm feeling quite off track... what are we suppose to be doing with these capstones again?
- Ben Malbon, in Clubbing: dancing, ecstasy and vitality
Saturday, January 23, 2010
Lost
I'm somewhere lost between Antonio Gramsci's theory of cultural hegemony & a self-identity crisis brought on by skimming parts of Research Youth by Andy Bennett, Mark Cieslik, Steven Miles.
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
Articulation
This afternoon, I met with my new mentor, Joseph, who is working on business development at TeachStreet. He talked about what he does, I talked about what I'm studying.
"Business and design," I say.
"Oh what concentration?" he asked.
"Marketing," I reply.
He nods.
"What do you study in design?" he asks.
I always dread this question. Most people assume I'm studying fashion, for some reason. Interior design is a close second. Graphics, a third.
Each time I attempt to explain what "design studies" is, I come up with something different. So I plunge into another explanation, throwing around words like "interdisciplinary" and "process." He pokes and prods at my explanation, determined to understand what I was trying to explain.
I pull up thoughts from August's class last quarter: The simple questions, have the most complex answers. The complex questions, have simple answers.
He wonders about it in relation to the UX design, which is what he's encountered at his startup. I struggle to explain how all design should be addressing a problem, in some form or another.
"It's about problem-finding," I explain.
And he gets it. "Never thought about design that way before," he tells me, "but it makes sense."
Finally. It makes sense to me too. Sort of.
This role of manager as designer is hardly mentioned in the literature, and barely acknowledged in business practice. ...Managers practice "silent design"...the many decisions taken by non-designers who enter directly into the design process, no matter how unaware they or others may be of their impact.
— Angela Dumas and Henry Mintzberg, Managing the Form, Function, and Fit of Design, 1991
"Business and design," I say.
"Oh what concentration?" he asked.
"Marketing," I reply.
He nods.
"What do you study in design?" he asks.
I always dread this question. Most people assume I'm studying fashion, for some reason. Interior design is a close second. Graphics, a third.
Each time I attempt to explain what "design studies" is, I come up with something different. So I plunge into another explanation, throwing around words like "interdisciplinary" and "process." He pokes and prods at my explanation, determined to understand what I was trying to explain.
I pull up thoughts from August's class last quarter: The simple questions, have the most complex answers. The complex questions, have simple answers.
He wonders about it in relation to the UX design, which is what he's encountered at his startup. I struggle to explain how all design should be addressing a problem, in some form or another.
"It's about problem-finding," I explain.
And he gets it. "Never thought about design that way before," he tells me, "but it makes sense."
Finally. It makes sense to me too. Sort of.
This role of manager as designer is hardly mentioned in the literature, and barely acknowledged in business practice. ...Managers practice "silent design"...the many decisions taken by non-designers who enter directly into the design process, no matter how unaware they or others may be of their impact.
— Angela Dumas and Henry Mintzberg, Managing the Form, Function, and Fit of Design, 1991
Thursday, January 14, 2010
ethics of research
I brought up an interesting research question yesterday, "how to go legal yet stay legit?" in the space of underground/above ground music & arts communities.
I think this topic, although interesting, brings up all sorts of problems in terms of scope and ethics. Summer of 2008, I spent a month in Amsterdam doing research on the traces and current subcultural identity of the squatting movement within Amsterdam. Squatting, at it's broadest, is the act of occupying and utilization a space which is otherwise unoccupied, and although not common in the states, was a movement that was especially strong in parts of Europe, such as the Netherlands, during recent history. While some forms of squatting was legalized, and a couple squatted venues were eventually bought and legalized, the squatting movement was active both underground and aboveground. In the 2000s, the Dutch government was slowly putting the pressure on to evict squatters and squash the movement. As both a participant and as a researcher, I was hesitant to expose all that I have uncovered. What was my ethical obligations as a researcher to "do no harm?" Through various discussions with my professors, and the people at UW's Human Subjects Division Office (since all research projects must be approved by the Institutional Review Board), I was approved to conduct research following a set of guidelines.
But then there was this issue of what I was personally comfortable with sharing. Could disclosure of certain knowledge negatively impact the people I've talked within the movement, or could it negatively impact myself and my ability to move through these spaces? These issues were probably the most difficult things to grapple with during my project. And I think similar parallels can be drawn to doing a project about a scene that spans both the underground and the aboveground.
For example, there are several music/art spaces within Seattle that I know do make their location public information. Places such as the Josephine, The Black Lodge, or HTFC, do advertising their existence and events, but not their location. Is it difficult to get a hold of this info? Probably not, but for some reason it's not just out there. So in doing a project that examines the change from legal status from underground and potentially illegal status, which spaces should even be research? By limiting the scope of the project to spaces that are already legal and therefore no problem publishing all about them, it leaves an entire half of the equation unaddress, except from a historial lookback at now-legal spaces. What are the allowable boundaries? the ethical ones? and to what scope am I comfortable with examining some things that are probably best left underground?
I think this topic, although interesting, brings up all sorts of problems in terms of scope and ethics. Summer of 2008, I spent a month in Amsterdam doing research on the traces and current subcultural identity of the squatting movement within Amsterdam. Squatting, at it's broadest, is the act of occupying and utilization a space which is otherwise unoccupied, and although not common in the states, was a movement that was especially strong in parts of Europe, such as the Netherlands, during recent history. While some forms of squatting was legalized, and a couple squatted venues were eventually bought and legalized, the squatting movement was active both underground and aboveground. In the 2000s, the Dutch government was slowly putting the pressure on to evict squatters and squash the movement. As both a participant and as a researcher, I was hesitant to expose all that I have uncovered. What was my ethical obligations as a researcher to "do no harm?" Through various discussions with my professors, and the people at UW's Human Subjects Division Office (since all research projects must be approved by the Institutional Review Board), I was approved to conduct research following a set of guidelines.
But then there was this issue of what I was personally comfortable with sharing. Could disclosure of certain knowledge negatively impact the people I've talked within the movement, or could it negatively impact myself and my ability to move through these spaces? These issues were probably the most difficult things to grapple with during my project. And I think similar parallels can be drawn to doing a project about a scene that spans both the underground and the aboveground.
For example, there are several music/art spaces within Seattle that I know do make their location public information. Places such as the Josephine, The Black Lodge, or HTFC, do advertising their existence and events, but not their location. Is it difficult to get a hold of this info? Probably not, but for some reason it's not just out there. So in doing a project that examines the change from legal status from underground and potentially illegal status, which spaces should even be research? By limiting the scope of the project to spaces that are already legal and therefore no problem publishing all about them, it leaves an entire half of the equation unaddress, except from a historial lookback at now-legal spaces. What are the allowable boundaries? the ethical ones? and to what scope am I comfortable with examining some things that are probably best left underground?
On change & legitimacy
I donated $10 to the Red Cross by texting "Haiti" to 90999.
My first reaction when I heard about this (through a friend via facebook) was to question it's legitimacy. With the proliferation of various scams taking advantage of mass disasters and focus on humanitarian aid, such as those following Katrina, I was a bit hesitant to try this at first. Like most people, when I donate money, I want it to be put to good use. I'm the type of person that researches organizations before I put in my own time &/or money, leafing mission/position statements & occasionally annual reports (as I result I no longer donate to the Salvation Army, or Locks of Love.)
I love this system of donating via texting. Especially when the carriers waiver the messaging costs (I have unlimited text messaging so it doesn't matter to me), it makes donating so convenient and cheap to the consumer. Through some new media channels, it can also update your status automatically (or you can do it yourself) to show that you did donate and to help spread the word to your online network.
While this isn't the first use of collecting money through text messaging for either non-profit causes or commercial purposes, this is the first time I've embraced it and participated myself. There's a few other major organizations you can text donations for Haiti humanitarian efforts to, and I think having the big name backing really does help encourage people to try this new method, which is surely a step towards changing people's behaviors and perceptions.
Sometimes, the best catalyst for change is catastrophe.
UPDATE 1/14/2010:
Haiti text donations to Red Cross hit $4m!
Not too surprising?
Problem-space with huge business potential
My first reaction when I heard about this (through a friend via facebook) was to question it's legitimacy. With the proliferation of various scams taking advantage of mass disasters and focus on humanitarian aid, such as those following Katrina, I was a bit hesitant to try this at first. Like most people, when I donate money, I want it to be put to good use. I'm the type of person that researches organizations before I put in my own time &/or money, leafing mission/position statements & occasionally annual reports (as I result I no longer donate to the Salvation Army, or Locks of Love.)
I love this system of donating via texting. Especially when the carriers waiver the messaging costs (I have unlimited text messaging so it doesn't matter to me), it makes donating so convenient and cheap to the consumer. Through some new media channels, it can also update your status automatically (or you can do it yourself) to show that you did donate and to help spread the word to your online network.
While this isn't the first use of collecting money through text messaging for either non-profit causes or commercial purposes, this is the first time I've embraced it and participated myself. There's a few other major organizations you can text donations for Haiti humanitarian efforts to, and I think having the big name backing really does help encourage people to try this new method, which is surely a step towards changing people's behaviors and perceptions.
Sometimes, the best catalyst for change is catastrophe.
UPDATE 1/14/2010:
Haiti text donations to Red Cross hit $4m!
Not too surprising?
Problem-space with huge business potential
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
Thoughts on DS -> IxD
I wasn't able to make the meeting discussing this but I just read Dominic's email, and despite the seemingly endless frustrations with the DS program, I'm sad to see it go.
Yes, combining all the courses into the IxD track will be great for the design program as a whole, will make life easier for everybody, etc.
But considering it from a personal point of view, I don't think I would be in design if I were entering this program a few years down the road. What drew me to DS was the explicit interdiscilpinary nature of it, because the slightly fewer credits allowed for taking on a second major feasible. Not to say that doing a 188 credit design track plus another major is not possible, but I expect it would make it significantly more difficult.
Yes, I understand IxD will be a major in itself and not a "half major" like some people percieve the current DS program to be. Yes, there will be course cirriculum overlaps. But I'm not seeing these changes so much as combining the DS track, as it is getting rid of the DS track. I expect that this IxD track will focus more on IxD topics/issues and I have nothing against IxD. However, my favorite part of the DS track is seeing the interests of my fellow classmates, whether accounting, crafting, guitars, or sustainability. Not to say that IxD can't address these topics, but I suspect that the approaches and the frame of mind that will be indoctrinated will differ than the more free-style whatever-goes of DS.
Although it is frustrating articulating what DS is, that is what makes it so great. It forces each of us to make our own connections from design to the world at large.
Yes, combining all the courses into the IxD track will be great for the design program as a whole, will make life easier for everybody, etc.
But considering it from a personal point of view, I don't think I would be in design if I were entering this program a few years down the road. What drew me to DS was the explicit interdiscilpinary nature of it, because the slightly fewer credits allowed for taking on a second major feasible. Not to say that doing a 188 credit design track plus another major is not possible, but I expect it would make it significantly more difficult.
Yes, I understand IxD will be a major in itself and not a "half major" like some people percieve the current DS program to be. Yes, there will be course cirriculum overlaps. But I'm not seeing these changes so much as combining the DS track, as it is getting rid of the DS track. I expect that this IxD track will focus more on IxD topics/issues and I have nothing against IxD. However, my favorite part of the DS track is seeing the interests of my fellow classmates, whether accounting, crafting, guitars, or sustainability. Not to say that IxD can't address these topics, but I suspect that the approaches and the frame of mind that will be indoctrinated will differ than the more free-style whatever-goes of DS.
Although it is frustrating articulating what DS is, that is what makes it so great. It forces each of us to make our own connections from design to the world at large.
Goal for the week
A post a day: today, tomorrow & Thursday, because I'll be gone over the weekend.
For my pecha kucha tomorrow...
1. Music Communities/Scene (I'll be using those terms interchangeably)
INCLUDE: info from AMP's 2006 publication on findings
DO: See if I can get my hands on AMP's "Manualfesto" tonight when I'm at Vera. They have a sneak preview online, but I'm pretty sure Kevin has a copy.
2. Marketing
TOPICS: Subvertising, guerrilla marketing.
MUSE OVER: http://www.onepagenewsletters.com/PDF/10Commandments.pdf
For my pecha kucha tomorrow...
1. Music Communities/Scene (I'll be using those terms interchangeably)
INCLUDE: info from AMP's 2006 publication on findings
DO: See if I can get my hands on AMP's "Manualfesto" tonight when I'm at Vera. They have a sneak preview online, but I'm pretty sure Kevin has a copy.
2. Marketing
TOPICS: Subvertising, guerrilla marketing.
MUSE OVER: http://www.onepagenewsletters.com/PDF/10Commandments.pdf
Sunday, January 10, 2010
A collection of thoughts on Advertising
What to do about the overload of advertising and how to stand out amongst them? This seemed to be well received on Wednesday's class, so I'm exploring a bit more into the area of advertising in general, and maybe that will lead me somewhere.
I don't buy band shirts. I generally don't buy shirts (although I do own a few) with the brand name splattered all over it. I don't generally want to look like a walking advertisement. Yet I am fascinated with how advertising works, or doesn't.
The various people working in this realm of advertising seems to include a mess of copy-writers, art directors, concept creators, strategists, account managers, project managers designers, producers, and planers. Design firms do ad work. Ad agencies do design work. Who/what/how knows best or does best? Do it matter? Is there strategic differences between them?
I found this chart in an article. Interesting...
Nyilasy G, Reid L. Agency practitioners' meta-theories of advertising. International Journal of Advertising [serial online]. November 2009;28(4):639-668. Available from: Business Source Complete, Ipswich, MA. Accessed January 10, 2010.
I don't buy band shirts. I generally don't buy shirts (although I do own a few) with the brand name splattered all over it. I don't generally want to look like a walking advertisement. Yet I am fascinated with how advertising works, or doesn't.
The various people working in this realm of advertising seems to include a mess of copy-writers, art directors, concept creators, strategists, account managers, project managers designers, producers, and planers. Design firms do ad work. Ad agencies do design work. Who/what/how knows best or does best? Do it matter? Is there strategic differences between them?
I found this chart in an article. Interesting...
Nyilasy G, Reid L. Agency practitioners' meta-theories of advertising. International Journal of Advertising [serial online]. November 2009;28(4):639-668. Available from: Business Source Complete, Ipswich, MA. Accessed January 10, 2010.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)