![]() |
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
Student Design Review Winners 2005
Moderated by Tom Vanderbilt As surely as frat parties produce hangovers, judging a student design competition leads to musings about the role of design education. Should schools direct students toward classic models of design work to prepare them for a career? Or should they impose as few real-world constraints as possible so students can produce vaporware that will never be fully realized but might open the door to greatness? There was a strong undercurrent of this debate as jurors Paul Carlos, Scott Henderson, and John Maeda narrowed their selections for Best of Category to a triad: the Caterpillar Scoop, a prudent, logical design from Sweden that helps paramedics transport patients more easily; Metascape, a futuristic exhibition space offering great ideas but not much chance of implementation; and Spin, a gorgeously machined chair that could have been lifted from the window at Moss. Translated into car-show terms, it was a battle among a Volvo, a hydrogen-fueled concept vehicle, and a luxury coupe. Henderson, a veteran product designer, was drawn to the Caterpillar for its unabashed lack of a statement. "A lot of students were trying to use design for opportunities to make social commentary," he said. "But the other side of design is about solving serious problems in equipment that people are forced to use every day. To make a living in design, you have to want to work in that world." At first, he was at odds with Maeda and Carlos, who both initially leaned toward Metascape for the top prize. Referring to the dreamily incandescent science museum, Maeda said, "Many people today are wondering how future spaces will feel. When I look at these pictures, I feel a little better about the future. This paints a fairly detailed picture of how we will interact with information." Carlos agreed: "Is the point of design problem-solving, or is it looking ahead?" Between the poles of practicality and vision (which, one can argue, aren't really so far apart, for doesn't problem-solving in the present raise hopes for the future, and might not idealized design missions nip some problems in the bud?) lay many entries. Several dealt with commonplace concerns, like the Armadillo Backpack or Urban Mobility Jacket; others tackled poignant social issues, like Nyumbani Village; and others were simply provocative or enjoyable. The jurors did notice a few gaps in this spectrum. "I was surprised not to see more green concepts," observed Henderson, particularly since sustainability is much talked about in professional circles. Maeda was struck by the rigorous process accompanying many projects—and how often it obscured the results: "It seems that some of the education programs are pushing data-driven, analysis-driven solutions," he said. "It gets tired after a while. There's a loss of spontaneity—as if you don't have to imagine if you've done all the equations." In the end, the jury chose a Best of Category that was imaginative, yet emerged through rigorous analysis. Perhaps it was a message to all young designers: Think with both sides of your brain. Jurors Paul Carlos Scott Henderson John Maeda Tom Vanderbilt — Moderator |
|
|||||||