Design is unnecessary and materialistic

In this News Limited story, Philippe Starck says design is dead and his work ‘unnecessary’.

“I was a producer of materiality and I am ashamed of this fact, … Everything I designed was unnecessary.”

All the egoistical self-indulgence aside, this statement does merit a certain level of self-reflection, whether you are a designer or a consumer.

• What does a designer really do anyway?
• How green or sustainable is the practice of design?
• What is “good” design? And from whose perspective?
• Is design still relevant to now and the future? How so? And how to make it so?

Thanks to Bede Tannock for this link.

2 comments on “Design is unnecessary and materialistic”

1. Stilgherrian said:
   

   It’s a shame the word “design” has so many shades of meaning. “I’m designing a new sewer system for London” is a very different activity from “I’m designing new wallpaper for my London town house” — in terms of both the focus on whether it will actually perform some useful task and whether it’s of lasting value to society.

   
   7 May 2008 at 12:08 pm
2. Zern said:
   

   Good point. Design as a structured problem solving and creative thinking process is certainly far from unnecessary.

   
   9 May 2008 at 12:27 am

Leave a Comment

Name (required)

Mail (will not be published) (required)

Website

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail