Design Thinking

Just as a designer signs his or her name with pride, they should be able to sign their work with integrity. When designing anything, an artist must understand that what they are creating makes an impact on the present and the future. We must defend moral values in the present to ensure that they will be upheld in the future.
A one hundred and fifty dollar monthly salary for the workers who helped build the Birds Nest Stadium was unethical. These laborers helped build a landmark that will be remembered and documented in history, yet they were treated like slaves.
In addition to integrity there are other social responsibilities to consider such as the preservation of history and reality. Both of these aspects were mentioned in the interview with designer Ai Wei Wei. During the set up for the 2008 Olympics, Beijing went through many changes. Because the country wanted to seem like an innovative society, many of the historical sights were demolished. In destroying these aspects of history, the country officials tried to hide parts of the country's past to make it seem like a premiere society. During the Olympics people did not see the ?real? Beijing. What viewers saw was the movement of modernization to impress western countries.
Of the three issues discussed I believe that integrity in the form of human rights is most important. An artist with morals should not feel satisfied with his or her work if others have to suffer in order to create his or her design. Preserving history and reality are also important but both topics can be classified under integrity.

Posted by Jasmine A. Flood on September 17, 2008 at 08:37 PM EDT #

The completion of anything in design requires the designer to take a look not just at what he is designing, but why. Designing something is an act that has responsibility joined to it- some of the best and worst parts of history would have been impossible without great minds to design the tools that made ends meet. The 2008 Olympic games are an excellent example of this. In the games, a great spectacle was made of China and their ostentatious display of not only wealth but artistic creativity and prowess in design. The ornate and amazingly choreographed opening ceremony, the epic Bird's Nest and Aquatic center, each of these was a show to distract the world from the true nature of China. They were deceptive, yes, and without them the world may have seen more of the downtrodden country and citizens that China did so well to hide. Yet the buildings themselves did nothing wrong. They were not, by design, hiding anyone. The use of them by the Chinese government was what led to the true deceit of the rest of the world. They were made a focus, taken advantage of, perhaps, but their mere existence did not overshadow the rest of the nation. Politics did that.
A gun manufacturer does not take into account those killed by firearms or those who are saved by them- he simply creates them and lets the public do with them as they see fit. This is delegation of responsibility. They make their money and supply a useful product- if they chose not to then two new companies would rise to their place and distribute. Not that it means that they are without moral responsibility, at least, but it creates an interesting conundrum. Unless a designer is someone so unique and amazing that they are the only one that is capable of creating a piece, they should not take it upon themselves to hold the moral burden of their work. If they decline a project such as the Bird's nest, someone else will then fill the spot and design it anyway, and the only end difference is who has money in their pockets. In an open market, it is almost guaranteed that someone will take on a project- regardless of implications. Unless the designer is hiring work, they need not concern themselves with how it is being built. Unless they are unveiling it, they need not concern themselves with the attention it will receive. A job is a job, and if you tangle yourself up in each and every piece of the project from concept to completion and use, the number of truly morally ?clean? jobs will be limited and having a successful career will be difficult.
This is not to say someone should accept a project if it is too morally compromising. If a design is for a single purpose- such as a new type of machine that would have only one use and a foul one at that. Creating a new form of war machine, for example, is something that is worse morally than the Bird's Nest- even if the machine was built for fair wages. The reason is that the Bird's Nest is a building with no inherent evil or good purpose, while a war machine has only one: to harm. Even if the Bird's nest is used to worsen the lives of the Chinese more than a produced line of new tanks would, it is a fantastic piece of design and will remain to be so even after countries rise and fall. China could disappear, but if it was built well enough, the building could remain- like the ruins of ancient Rome. Even the great Coliseum, a place of death, is now a celebrated piece of design. It's use was horrible, but the actual structure was not. Had the designer decided against it being built, Rome's history would be poorer for it and we wouldn't have the fantastic piece of design we have today. Architects can take lessons from the Coliseum and make other buildings based off it's design: and these can be put towards good purpose. This quantifies the Coliseum's worth to not only history, but to humanity. This is why designers must comprehend what they are building not just in the present, but also into the future. Great works transcend their original uses and users- denying humanity such works is a kind of moral crime in and of itself.
These points being stated, the morality of any design project is arbitrary. The morals of each person are unique. What someone considers a crime can be a misdemeanor to another, and a holy act to a third. Each designer should take each job as it comes and think for themselves about what compromises their integrity. Still, being a designer, or a producer of any skilled work comes with risks. History has proven that monuments outlive their purpose and their builders. The great mark of them, then, comes not to be one of the original intention, but of the simple elegance and beauty of the work laid bare. This is what a true designer must consider. If they refuse a work, that will not stop it from happening- more designers will do what you will not. Instead, they must gaze to the timeless eons and what their work can accomplish out of the immediate. Simply put, it is every designer's right to want to have their mark on the world: regardless of the fleeting intention of the one who commissioned it. If it's going to be built regardless, why not take it upon yourself to make sure it's amazing for those in the future to enjoy and learn from?

Posted by Nicholas Fair on September 17, 2008 at 11:49 PM EDT #

We as designers must come to grasp with our social responsibility adjacent to the ethics and morals of our consciences. One should not sacrifice the peace of his/her conscience in order to make money. Designing great and accomplishing works are pleasant, but this should not be done to be a façade of something that causes others pain and anguish. One should be fully acquainted with their work. One should fully understand the intent on why the client wants that particular project a particular way. If a government agency desires a prison be built with gas and torture chambers, the designer should probably step back and ask why these certain elements need to be added. It is the responsibility of every citizen, no matter occupation or class, to insure the reasonable safety and protection of others. As in the case of China, they were underpaying their workers and endeavoring to hide the slums in which the oppressed citizens abide. It was completely ethical for the architect of the 2008 Olympics Building to say he wanted nothing to do with it any more. It only covered the truth and destroyed the history of the people. It covered the truth of oppression and tyranny that was being forced upon these people. Priceless items were being destroyed that were of great value materialistically and symbolically to the citizens of Beijing.
This exploitation is the greatest threat comes for the demise of our social responsibility. The manipulation of and later coercion of any man that can be avoided is the inevitable responsibility from one man to another. One must always seek the freedom of another because the freedom that is taken from one?s neighbor can be as easily taken from that person. This is superfluous in communist governments. A survivor of the Holocaust accounted how, even though he wasn?t Jewish, he did not stand up for any stereotype of people when persecution from the Nazis came, and when he suffered persecution, there was no one left to defend him. People must stand up for what is right and what they believe in.
Aesthetics, fame, and fortune are all lovely but should not come on the oppressive toil of others. It is a great feat to design something for the government of nation, but one must always remember their social responsibility. As the saying goes, ?You better treat everybody right because you don?t know who will be the one to give your last cup of water.?

Posted by Kameron Elliott on September 21, 2008 at 01:21 AM EDT #

Blog Assignment _ Kirsten Evers

As a designer there is much more to think about than the simple task of designing a product for a client. We as designers must remember for whom we are building, what will the results of our design be now, or in the future? What is the integrity of our design and how is it going to positively or negatively effect the local or even global community? Finally we must remember that our designs are a legacy of ourselves and we cannot attempt to justify our designs by saying that it was just something we made for someone else and that we personally have nothing to do with it.

The social responsibility of a designer can vary. It depends on the designer?s view personally. Some designers do not attach themselves to their work, whereas others see it as a distinct personal reflection. Ultimately it comes down to how that designer will personally feel if he/she designs for a client whose views they don?t agree with.

Personally I feel that the public eye does see the designer?s work as a legacy of the person that they are. If I had a client who wanted me to design something that was going to affect the entire world this would be a huge question in my mind. How am I going to look back on the work I do for this person? How are people going to view my values? Especially in the example of the Beijing Olympics, those designs had an enormous effect on the people of Beijing and were extremely deceitful to the rest of the world. The people may see the designer as someone who supports the terrible labor conditions, or as someone who supports the attempt to hide the true realities of the poverty stricken Chinese culture. To think that you can build something that has such a huge negative impact on the onlookers of the world without feeling morally connected is impossible.

There are different types of social responsibility for designers. I think that the responsibility grows as the designs begin to affect more and more people. If a communist organization came to me asking me to design a poster for a meeting they were going to have I might do it, simply because that poster only effects the immediate people who would be going to the meeting. If that same leader came to me and asked me to build a billboard to hide the poverty stricken areas of his country and build a couple buildings to give the illusion that his country was perfect and clean, the question of whether or not I would do it would immediately become much harder. The building of these building has a much greater effect on the people of the country and the world than does the poster for the small organization. I would not want to be part of a scheme to cover up extremely important issues that the country was struggling with. Social responsibility does not have to be negative. I may get a client who wants me to build something extravagant for a country whose values I agree with and whose people will be positively affected by my design. As the chosen designer I should feel honored to have such a social responsibility for the people of that country.

When it comes to social responsibility designers need to be careful. They should feel that their designs are a legacy of who they are because I think that is how the public eye sees it. Social responsibility becomes extremely important in cases where it is affecting people, whether it is positively or negatively. If it is a positive effect we should be honored to add such a piece to our legacy and if it is negative we should be wary to add such a piece to our legacy. Our legacy grows based on the number of people we are affecting. We cannot forget that these designs will stay with us forever, with our name printed on them in the eyes of the people. We cannot escape the idea that we do affect people with our designs and we must think about how we want to affect these people.

Posted by Kirsten Evers on September 22, 2008 at 12:18 PM EDT #

Social responsibility is one of the many things that designers have to consider when working on a new project. Rather than coming up with the most technologically advanced designs, a designer must consider the social impact that the project will have in the environment. Like stated in the article, the process is just as impacting as the final product. Therefore, when a designer is brainstorming the steps needed to create the final product, he must also consider how the people in the area will be treated and how the project will be completed. By trying to improve the status of a country, the designer might worsen conditions of the residents in that area. The Bird's Nest Olympic Stadium did help create an identity of Beijing that revealed to the world the design progression of the country, but also hid the reality of their lifestyles. A designer has the social responsibility to help build their country through design developments but also has the responsibility to help the residents in the area.
The social responsibility of a designer can be tricky. Although the goal of a designer is to help the progression of his country, the actual aid can be misinterpreted as damaging and masking the reality of the society. Despite all efforts, a designer must consider all possibilities to truly have an impact in their society. Being socially responsible means to take into consideration all the consequences of the design project. A designer can help influence the progression of its country and also improve the lifestyle of its residents through the careful planning of the project.
Ay Wei Wei chose to attack the 2008 Olympic renovations because it created an identity that didn?t reveal the true Beijing. Instead, it attempted to gain approval of other countries while damaging their own country. The residents of Beijing did not gain anything but a couple of hundred dollars a month for their labor. By abusing its residents to create a false identity, not only was the design project not helpful but degrading as well.

Posted by Saul Flores on September 23, 2008 at 01:58 AM EDT #