Transmenu powered by JoomlArt.com - Mambo Joomla Professional Templates Club

The final comprehensive formula “forms follows function” (Sullivan 1896), this “elegant three-word résumé of functionalism or modernism“ (Michl 1995) is over 110 years old. The aim of this essay is to explain the shift in design thinking over the last century, and its meaning for contemporary society. As “today’s ideas become tomorrow’s reality” I primarily argue the future of design should be based on some of today’s tendencies, ideas and values.

Today’s product Aesthetics are direct consequence of the industrial revolution and the capitalist system of consumption. I argue the need for a new environmentally sensitive value system as resources are running low. Any new system has to come with new values to enhance new thinking patterns as this is the engine of design and aesthetics. In my opinion the future of tomorrow’s beauty lies in the rebirth of the relationship between objects and humans, thanks to the educated knowledge of the object’s story - its origin, involved processes, people and sources.

To understand today’s views knowledge of what has affected us in recent history is needed. Two main aesthetic movements appeared in the beginning of 20-th century. At the end of the 19 century, the industrial revolution had already spread through the western world and with it, the socioeconomic and cultural changes. This anti-Victorian cultural reaction has its intellectual background in post-romantic roots of Renaissance and Reformation in Europe and marks the beginning of Modernism. This movement embraced new economic, social and political aspect of the emerging modern world. The goal of modernism was to re-examine every aspect of existence from art to economic to philosophy to adjust them in to new modern thinking of progress. The use of machinery affected the forms of the products designed by no-name designers. Those designs were attempting to simulate forms of hand crafted objects; lately their design separated from old forms and started to promote new materials and technologies as a symbol of progress.

The second main movement in this era operating in direct contradiction of Modern values was the Art and Crafts movement, Art Manufacturing or Aesthetic movement which a celebrated the skills and knowledge of craftsmanship and individual designers. This movement can be seen as rejection of overwhelming rationalism presented by Modernism. “Life without industry is guilt, and industry without art is brutality“ (Ruskin 1870). The Writings of John Ruskin and William Morris were the inspiration for this movement, writing against undignified labour of industrial workers in then contemporary mass production factories. At the extreme Ruskin called for total rejection of machine in the process of production. Ruskin and Morris believed those only handcrafted and handmade products are “honest”. Those designs reflected Arts and Crafts values as well as the belief that there is more linked to the product than just form and function. This movement was also against the social changes caused by the industrial revolution, like artificial working condition. “It can only be met by a right understanding, on the part of all classes, of what kinds of labour are good for men, raising them, and making them happy; by a determined sacrifice of such convenience or beauty, or cheapness as is to be got only by the degradation of the workman; and by equally determined demand for the products and results of healthy and ennobling labour“(Ruskin 1900)

To understand more what determine us, we might have to look closer to the elements of form and function. Aesthetics is a set of human values created by art and beauty .Those values vary on individual basis, but as we all live in society which is determined by interaction and influences, so is today’s aesthetic. Unlike function, which can be scientifically analysed and measured with conclusions and efficiency, the set of standards for aesthetic is hard to obtain. I see an aesthetic to be more than just perceptions of our five senses. “One has to appreciate what is not evident. Marvelous things are going on in dead wood, or underground, or in the dark, or microscopically, or slowly, over time; they are not scenic, but an appreciation of them is aesthetic.” An aesthetic can be also experienced on intellectual level, besides many in poetry or story telling. In the new era a new form of aesthetic might be for sale reflecting values of future times - an aesthetic product which story might be as aesthetic as its form. This could be only achieved through existing knowledge of the customers and their active involvement. A set of commonly shared aesthetic values in time is called style. This term is easier to use and more relevant to us, and is widely used by advertising companies. Even if the aesthetic values of today’s society were similar in majority of population, I would argue, aesthetic is highly individual and very personal. As mass productions is unable to satisfy individualised aesthetics of individual members of society, it is using two strategies to fix this problem. First one is marketing and mass media skills to implement aesthetic values and styles to the consumers, telling the customer to buy and what to buy, before they are aware of such a need by themselves. There has been major shift in my opinion, since industrialization from imagining, dreaming and being involved in designing and making the product to today, when all the imaginable items are already here on the shelves – today’s customers have only one role – to choose and pay. “In old times, men used their powers of painting to show the objects of faith; in later times, they used the objects of faith that they might show their powers of painting.“ (Ruskin 1900) The market strategists are telling us “the customer is deigning by his choice”. In agreement with that I would add: unfortunately they do with the information predominantly supplied by marketing. The second strategy used today to individualise the products of industrial production what can be seen lately as a “customization” or continual change in surface appearance of generic products. This styling by design of otherwise identical object is only a decorating tool of marketing as it is not affecting the essence of the product. Recent car manufacturing might be good example of such process. It is using the mass production methods and the shells design construction methods used with today’s products. Lately this customization is much easier with software products, easily achieving different aesthetics for the user while the core of the product is identical.

Form can give quality to our life directly and instantly and therefore has common value, operating on different, direct level than function. “According to biologists, forms, or rather small incidental modifications in forms always appear first, while function, i.e. the functional exploitation of the modified forms, emerges afterwards - if at all. If architects and designers were to take seriously the modernist exhortation to follow principles found in nature, the mechanism of natural selection would then suggest, paradoxically, the opposite of what the modernists propounded“ (Michl 1995) Function on the other hand seems to have only meaning for us humans; it is a tool which require experience or understanding to be used to bring quality to our lives. And even than the quality have be explained and promoted to become common and valued. „One false theory assumes that if the object in question performs its function in the most efficient way possible, it will ipso facto possess the necessary aesthetic qualities“.(Read 1934)

Function on the other hand is much easier to specify and determine. I believe this is because function is a cultural value reflected, respected and justified only by humans. Function is the essence of culture and the framework upon which most of our reality in hung. Alternatively, “Deep ecology, or biocentrism, is the belief that nature does not exist to serve humans. Rather, humans are part of nature, one species among many. All species have a right to exist for their own sake, regardless of their usefulness to humans. Biocentrism is a law of nature, that exists independently of whether humans recognize it or not. And the failure of modern society to acknowledge this - as we attempt to subordinate all of nature to human use - has led us to the brink of collapse of the earth's life support systems.Biocentrism is profoundly revolutionary, challenging the system to its core.“ A good example of irrationality of function might be the two groups we have artificially created: pests and weeds. Those two groups of plants and animals have a form just like everything else, but to us, humans, have no function, other than a problem. Such a self centred perception of the world spinning around us and for us only, clearly has to lead to distorted conclusions and affect significantly our values.

In my opinion today system is in need of social change. “Cultural systems, institutions, and individuals tend to find today’s rapid evolvement of environment uncomfortable, and will accordingly try to deny the reality of change and cling to previously valid patterns.” Collectively we are slowly acknowledging the need for new ways thinking. This can be heard in political debate and in the political programs most of the parties around Australia. Today’s dictum “contemporary politics always follow voters” might be the symbol of missing leadership and replacing politic with marketing. The need is conscious and wide spread. Recently John Howard’s comment of not signing Kyoto protocol as “not being in the nation interest” is a clear indication of the old way of thinking – separating this nation from the rest of the planet, somehow removing Australia from it’s environment. It is a good example of thinking pattern identical since industrialization. His solution of ecological problem with the recent religion of technology, the tool for all today’s problems, is quite prehistoric.. “We are not unsustainable by accident, we learn not to be sustainable, in all forms of our education both formally through institutions and at home.” If we would to go this path, soon we would see, and we already can see now, the new technology aesthetic around as – wind power stations, hybrid cars, solar cells etc. This is in my opinion an ornamental change, which does not target to our needs of connection and rediscovery of ourselves and exposure of our true values. Contemporary marketing of design uses celebrity designers as a trademark of quality to make a point of difference in the market filled with identical mass produced items. To me, this is clear point to of attempt to rediscover the human nature of “belonging.” Suddenly the customers become part of the “using design items groups” which would distinguish them from the rest. Obviously this separation was not real, but it is working as a marketing strategy of adding value to the products. There are others, more direct and natural ways to re-establish the link than by such strategy. The deliberate lowering our consumption, replacement of quantity for quality, local sourcing of products, but mainly the openness to actively learn about the world around us, without the need to conquer it and redesign it.

In conclusion, I have outlined recent history of aesthetic philosophy, in an attempt to explain the current situation. I also provided vital links between aesthetic, marketing, consumption and social systems. My attempt to understand the future development based on today’s movements of “green thinking” showed the clear dedication of ever increasing proportion of the population to those issues. Today’s conscious thinkers are aware of the sneaky easiness of consumerism. These people acknowledge the real price to pay for unsustainable consumerism, and they are willing to make a difference by choice, conscious diversity, equity and global moderation. A finally I have concluded that this growing shift of thinking will eventually change values, and therefore aesthetic of tomorrow.

Read, H 1934, ‘Introduction’, Art and Industry, Faber and Faber, London.

Ruskin, J 1870, Lectures on Art delivered before the University of Oxford in Hilary Term, 1870, Oxford.

Ruskin, J 1900, The Stones of Venice, [s.n.], Orpington.

Sullivan, L 1896, 'The Tall Office Building Artistically Considered.' Kindergarten Chats and Other Writings, pp. 202-13.