> On 22-Feb-2018, at 9:04 PM, Brian Holmes <bhcontinentaldr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> My sense is that practices responsive to place, and the educational resources 
> that come out of such practices, only stand a chance of being incorporated 
> into the mainstream *after* the predictable breakdowns and disasters of 
> social and ecological balances that we now see in their nascent phases. The 
> position that puts you in today is a complicated one: you have to make your 
> experiments happen in the current prosperous and jaded environment, while at 
> the same time realizing they could only have their real meaning and value in 
> a much more violent and desperate world whose contours are hard to imagine, 
> and whose very existence as a viable context depends on upsurges and 
> social-justice struggles that may never come to pass. What are your thoughts 
> on this Prem?

Hi Brian - so nice to hear from you.  

I think that we, as designers, have to come up with creative responses on how 
we can help.  The problem is less one of unsympathetic clients and more a 
problem internal to the design professions: our training has not provided us 
with either the language or the conceptual frameworks to even begin the 
dialogue or exploration.  There is a line from an old comic strip called Pogo 
which goes “I have met the enemy and he is us!”  We have to recognise this as 
the problem and begin from scratch.

It has been done before - the architects of the late nineteenth century and 
early twentieth century created a new mode of designing that did become the 
mainstream eventually.  Their proposals may have been misplaced, but they did 
what they did from outside the mainstream and without a sympathetic clientele 
as a starting point.  Of course, the situation is very different from what it 
was a century ago, but we have become complacent.  We take modernity for 
granted, whereas that was a generation that was willing to critically reflect 
within a tradition-bound context on what it meant to be modern and fight for 
modernity every day.

A philosophy that defines a solution, which is then applied in practice, is 
likely to remain elusive.  That approach would be a misplaced effort to apply 
linear logic to a non-linear world.  Our conceptual frame should be that of 
non-linear network logic, we should act within our circle of influence, avoid 
being paralysed by the immensity of our circle of concern, commit to the daily 
fight, and take it one day at a time.

That is the best I can offer right now.  Will share more when there is greater 
clarity.  To give you a hint on the direction I wish to pursue, I share some 
recent speculations on sustainable design:


#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:

Reply via email to