Don't have time to reply at length right now (and you know my real name is
Chris Verbose), but if this will help clarify a position I intend to
strongly defend:

I was referring to Old School Design vs Interactive Design, and defining
that difference PRIMARILY in terms of MONOLOGIC Design vs DIALOGIC Design.

Big difference. Massive difference. Makes all the difference in the world.
We still have not even begun realizing all of the implications of what this
mean, esp. given the quick reactions to what I was putting out there.

Horseless carriage-land is not really where we want to be, and doing the
same thing over and over and expecting different results... an interactive
environment demands an interactive design response, and even more than that
(but that latter part is a theory I'm still working out, so it isn't fully
hatched yet).

But monologic design for interactivity is definitely NOT the Design
Capital-T Theory such a program should be teaching. It's a bit like an
oxymoron.

I understand the need to move beyond UCD, but I'm actually headed in the
direction of LESS of a focus on an atomized individual "user" and more on
the social aspects of design. And you can't do social design in a vacuum,
the lonely artist designer laboring in a tower.

Chris

On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 2:00 PM, Uday Gajendar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On Jun 23, 2008, at 10:24 AM, Christine Boese wrote:
>
>> I dunno. I'd never say Design Theory has nothing to do with ethnography or
>> usability. To me, that kind of one-way design thinking approach is what
>> got
>> the design field into the blind alley it currently is stuck in, helpless
>> to
>>
> adapt to precisely what INTERACTIVE design means.
>
> Actually, sorry but Dan's right... Design Theory is focused on the
> philosophical and theoretical foundations of designing: invention,
> creativity, communication, decision-making, to design something, and it's
> cultural/social value and place in the world. There maybe some incidental
> reference to HCI related matters but that's really for a straight-up HCI
> Fundamentals course, going into the HCI related theories per computer
> science, psychology, and sociology and anthro knowledge bases.
>
> Not sure what you mean by "interactive", but the full range of design
> theories and perspectives, with HCI theories combined provide ample (maybe
> too much!) fodder to flexibly design compelling products/services/systems
> for any kind of situation...How to effectively make use those of ideas in
> action, is the real challenge and comes with years of experience, which this
> field is still developing...
>
>
>
> Uday Gajendar
> Sr. Interaction Designer
> Voice Technology Group
> Cisco | San Jose
>
>
________________________________________________________________
Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
To post to this list ....... [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help

Reply via email to