Conference PaperPDF Available

Yes, And (+), Maybe: cloTHING(s) as conversation

Authors:

Abstract

CloTHING(s) as conversation is an interdisciplinary research initiative that seeks to disrupt contemporary expectations of clothing. Our work questions longstanding tendencies to characterize garments as forums for creating statements linked to who we wish to be, what we do, who we are, and where we feel we belong. We are exploring clothing as mechanisms that encompass notions of meaningful interchange and dialogue. One of the key artefacts in our work is a plus(+) form template that we use to create clothing. The plus(+) has been manipulated into hundreds of garment forms. It is an idea artefact. It helps us to negotiate and construct active critical conversations concerning Design for Sustainability, Fashion, Distributed Manufacture and Wearable technology. The plus(+) has been consistently reconfigured by draping and folding and by using fastener objects (found and made). It has been placed in the built and natural environment and observed along the West coast of North America, the Canadian Prairies, Paris France, Venice Italy. It has been made, worn and observed by numerous participants over extended periods of time. Embodied experiences, documentation of actions, conversations, and other residual designed artefacts are all acting to expand perspectives and generate new models pertaining to how clothing is designed, produced and used.
1
1
Yes, And (+), Maybe: cloTHING(s) as conversation
Hélène Day Fraser, Keith Doyle,
Nicolene McKenzie, Mia Daniels, Natalie Tillen
Abstract
CloTHING(s) as conversation is an interdisciplinary research initiative that seeks to
disrupt contemporary expectations of clothing. Our work questions longstanding
tendencies to characterize garments as forums for creating statements linked to who we
wish to be, what we do, who we are, and where we feel we belong. We are exploring
clothing as mechanisms that encompass notions of meaningful interchange and
dialogue.
One of the key artefacts in our work is a plus(+) form template that we use to create
clothing. The plus(+) has been manipulated into hundreds of garment forms. It is an
idea artefact. It helps us to negotiate and construct active critical conversations
concerning Design for Sustainability, Fashion, Distributed Manufacture and Wearable
technology.
The plus(+) has been consistently reconfigured by draping and folding and by using
fastener objects (found and made). It has been placed in the built and natural
environment and observed along the West coast of North America, the Canadian
Prairies, Paris France, Venice Italy. It has been made, worn and observed by numerous
participants over extended periods of time. Embodied experiences, documentation of
actions, conversations, and other residual designed artefacts are all acting to expand
perspectives and generate new models pertaining to how clothing is designed, produced
and used.
Key words:
clothing, conversation, dialogic templates, contemplation, embodiment, sustainability,
wearable technology, fashion, open source, additive manufacture, making, heuristic
inquiry, Critical Use
2
2
Introduction
The cloTHING(s) as conversation project is focused on the discovery of new knowledge through the
application of practical skills, product service systems and residual artefacts that enable novel pathways in
sustainable design, production and the critical use of clothing. Our research is committed to questioning and
identifying how technology fits into this equation. We are seeking generative protocols and affordances
intended to facilitate individual and collective capacities to deal with the unpredictable unknowns implicit in
climate change. An abstract form, a plus(+), acts as baseline and means for our explorations.
This paper will reflect on and discuss the Researchers’ (faculty and students) recent experiences and
insights connected to the utilization of the plus(+) form template. It will detail research methods and
approaches to inquiry that align with our own creative practices. It will reflect on thematically linked
experiences through; uni+form, Traveling/Pitching Plus(+) and describe pathways of inquiry that have
informed further interventions. It will move on to detail the format and objectives of: oneplus7days (a worn
study taken on by four members of the research team) and the subsequent untitled, one month worn
exploration taken on by the Lead Researcher. Insights from these cumulative experiences will be discussed
along with a forecast of the framework that is in development for our next stage of inquiry and exploration.
Method
For several years we have been intent on developing new sets of relationships with clothing interested in
affording more expansive synergies with worn artefacts and the experienced world. As Designers, we pull on
participatory research methods such as cultural probes (Gaver et al. 1999) and co-creation (Sanders &
Stappers 2010), critical design approaches (Dunne & Raby 2013; Babke & Walker 2013) and material
practice regularly as a means to inform new potentials and possibilities. Qualitative practices of Heuristic
and Mindful Inquiry also informs the way we are currently working (Hiles 2001; Bentz &Shapiro 1998). As
design researchers addressing the sustainable design, production and use of clothing we find that our own
personal (self) experiences and perspectives are implicit and ever present (ed. Given 2008). Aspects of
phenomenology, hermeneutics, critical social theory, and Buddhism also permeate our work (Hiles 2001;
Bentz &Shapiro 1998). We apply self-dialogue, tacit knowing, intuition, indwelling, focusing, and the
identification / application of internal frames of reference as a means of better understanding current lived
experience (ed. Given 2008). We regularly seek out practices for comparison and phenomenological
engagement (Hiles 2001). This is facilitated through the consideration of familiar clothing practices and
subsequent acts of making, observing and wearing an unfamiliar and unusual textile form the plus(+).
Interventions using the plus(+) serve as a means of exploring and discerning new experiences. The
documentation of these experiences and collection of residual artefacts offer up insight - a way to identify
significant points of meaning making and emergent themes a means to formulate new directions. It has
allowed us to move into our current stage of inquiry that is seeking further iterative insight by sharing with
others (Hiles 2001).
3
3
Also key to our research process are transpositional moves that connect insight from our social construct
interventions and our material practice (Day Fraser & Doyle 2015; Braidotti 2006). Intuitive response and
reaction play a significant role in the process. In the studio, designers not engaging directly with the plus(+)
form regularly design in response to it. Proximity and accessibility to the experiences connected to the
plus(+) have triggered new sets of form explorations pertaining to fastener development and novel
applications of technology via re-purposed hardware from a “hacked” flatbed scanner.
insert figure 1 here
Informing
Uni+form
In 2013 cloTHING(s) as conversation made it’s first foray into using the plus(+) as a mechanism for insight.
Uni+form, was conducted as a one day study. Eight individuals wore the plus(+) in a self directed manner.
The experience was documented through individual journals and a before and after interview process.
Through acts of wearing, the constraints and possibilities implicit to this unusual clothing form became
apparent. We realized that the plus(+) functioned more easily as an accessory or expressive article of
clothing. We identified areas for further design development and noted improvisational and structured
approaches for dealing with its ambiguous nature. What began as an artefact-centred approach shifted to an
experience-use centred one (Day Fraser et al. 2014).
Travel/Pitch Plus (+)
The shift to an experience-use perspective has led to more expansive investigations. Travel/Pitch Plus(+)
was initiated as an alternate means of consideration. The plus(+) form was moved 'off-the-body' as means
to explore shape language, proximity and context, self and the collective. Abstraction, Experiential Learning
and Reconsideration of the 2-Dimensional plus(+) form, have offered the research team the opportunity to
reflect on the self in relation to environment, community, and connectivity. It has allowed us to consider the
plus(+)’s potential as a site for locating us ‘in-the-moment’. Since February 2015 the plus(+) has been
placed and observed (it has been pitched) in the built and natural environment in a wide range of locations.
It has traveled along the West coast of North America (from Tofino to the Baja and back), to Paris France,
Venice Italy, and the Canadian Prairies.
insert figure 2 here
Poetic records (images and words) have tracked the artefact’s course and sites of intervention. Through it’s
travels the plus(+) has served repeatedly as a facilitator: a protector from the sun, a place to sit, a means to
collect and carry. Each time the plus(+) has been pitched we have taken notice of the surfaces it has rested
on. The pitchers of the plus(+) have inadvertently been reoriented to water - cracked mud seen and
considered “When was the last rain?” (M. Daniels, 2016 pers.comm., 11 January) - and air - “it’s heat,
movement rhythm, confounds simple actions . . . I was unable to lay my plus(+) down - flat” ( H. Day Fraser
2015, pers.comm., 24 July). We have taken notice of possibility (a cactus that the plus(+) was swung up and
on to) and proximity (birds seen and listed: “Hawk, Pelican, Cormorant, 2 types of Gulls, Grey doves,
Tijeras, Vultures(M. Daniels 2016, pers.comm., 11 January). The plus(+)has served as a focal point as we
consider relations between humans, between humans and other beings. It has also been a means to
4
4
observe local acts (hunting/gathering crabs, communing over coffee). Habits, social maneuvers, acts of
consciences behaviour and adaptation have all been noted.
Through this process the pitchers of the plus(+) have recognized a new relationship with the textile/worn
artefact that involves embracing impermanence, and spontaneity. Acts of accessible improvisation
connected to:
actions (performative)
engagement with surfaces (built + natural)
relations with changing weather (airflow, wind, water)
found associations (beach-combing, discarded remnants of culture)
contemplation (of foreign culture, religion)
Back in Vancouver, the collection and transmission of these insights to the rest of the research team led to:
storytelling (speculative fictions), acts of illustration, the development of archetype/persona and detailed use
scenarios. We began to consider how we might co-locate and connect with the colleague, peer, or the friend
away on a walkabout - how the form of the plus(+) augmented by technology might allow for a different
understanding of the subtle experiences of the pitcher of the plus(+) and facilitate a means of transposed
experience (Braidotti 2006).
We noticed that in each location our marker - the plus (+) - augmented experiences. It allowed to us to
reconsider and change up our assumptions of both the known and unknown. It facilitated reflection on the
part of the pitcher/documenter and the design team in the studio. These notations and observations (holding
of thoughts) were shared and used a means of continuing the conversation about the experience with one
another in the present and at later dates. It became clear to us that the plus(+) acted not only as an
aggregate prop and marker of experience but also as instigator. That the act of pitching plus(+) became “a
conceptual model to enable more multi-faceted relationships with our community and environment” ( M.
Daniels 2016, pers.comm., 11 January).
Oneplus(+)7days
Oneplus(+)7days was an exploration into the possibilities of acceptance of the plus(+) form as an everyday
expressive garment. As with previous interventions the plus(+) was applied as a strategic, interrogative
platform - this time serving as a means to reconsider and be attentive to acts of making, observing and
wearing. Oneplus(+)7days built off earlier insights from uni+form. It aimed to apply form and fastener
development from 2013 2015, and insights derived from the Traveling/Pitch Plus (+). While the
Traveling/Pitch Plus (+)’ was designed to consider environment and place from an observational
perspective, ‘off-the-body’, in unfamiliar territories, Oneplus(+)7days sought to engage individual participants
in an embodied ‘on-the-body’ experience, situated in the ordinary everyday.
A set of mutually agreed, conditions were applied to the study. The (+) plus form would be taken on by
individual research team members who would make, pitch, and then wear their plus(+) for seven
consecutive days, Final decisions on scale, openings, finishing, types of fabric were determined by each
5
5
participant. Observations connected to their experiences, would reflect on individual (body), collective
(social), and environmental (natural) relations. Journaling through photo documentation, diary, sketchbook,
or blog notation, and poetry/prose would be used to archive the personal experience - serving as a means of
knowledge transfer to the other research team members.
The study was primarily located in and around Emily Carr University in Vancouver, but also took place in
rural British Columbia and extended into lived experiences outside of the research studio. The plus(+) was
worn in a range of everyday settings: from professional to social, formal to casual. We were interested in
the daily experience of translating the flat plus(+) form into 3 Dimensional worn artefacts. We were
interested in knowing to what extent instinct might play a role in informing this unusual act and mode of
dress. We were seeking to uncover clues (mechanisms, triggers) that would inform us. We saw this
intervention as a means of creating affordances for accessible wear - for mapping ‘how to' assembly
scenarios for future wearers of the plus(+). In addition to the pragmatics of getting dressed, we also wanted
to investigate to what extent this simple (yet complex/puzzling and at times abstract) plus(+) form could be
integrated into our regular social and spatial contexts. As designers we saw this as an opportunity to gain
insight and inspiration in patterning for the unexpected - in facilitating and making acts of improvisation
accessible and synonymous with clothing. We were interested to see if a new relationship with plus(+) as a
worn artefact might take shape and potentially expand the action/observation potential of the garment.
To date four women have participated. Ranging in age from early 20’s to mid 40’s, they have marked out
and created forms indicative of their experiences, expectations and point in life. Tight fitting sundress forms,
loose shawls, baggy pants, asymmetric constructed forms, informal outfits and formal attire have all been
explored/worn. Metrics for personality have emerged through the varied approaches to the exercise: forms
constructed (acts of making), fabric choices, finishing details, fasteners used, and additional adapted
attachments.
insert figure 3 here
Untitled: one month with the plus(+)
For the Lead Researcher the cumulative experience of the plus(+) through; make, pitch, and wear, catalyzed
a tacit understanding of the form. Both opportunities and details that remained to be worked out in order to
facilitate accessibility for others became apparent. Based on this new understanding and insights, the Lead
Researcher committed to making, pitching and wearing a second plus(+) for the entire month of August
2015. This longer period of activity allowed for an ongoing conversation with two other Research Assistants
(RA’s) on the project. The first of these RA’s was enlisted to prototype fasteners that could address
functional garment stability requirements, and encourage improvisation (through appropriation of existing
and available fasteners such as bulldog clips and bobby pins) and have the capacity to act as placeholders
for technology. Dialogue with a second RA working on exploring ways to 3D print silicon directly onto fabric
also led to alternate mechanisms for connection. Plug, hinge and pocket prototypes were produced in
response to the Lead Researcher’s daily wear.
insert figure 4 here
6
6
Insights and discussion
The information that was documented from the two sets of worn studies was colour coded (by participant)
and collated into different categories based on key observations. Emerging categories were: deterrents,
expectations, configuration, responses/reactions from others, direct compliments pertaining to the plus(+)
form, care, wear, accidents, skill, personal preferences, questions, thoughts on design, choices and
decisions made. This section will detail and discuss key insights from several of these categories. It will
reflect on the experiences of wear that have informed and provoked the design research team.
expectations and deterrents
As an unusual piece of clothing situated outside of the norm, the plus(+) compels a negotiation of comfort
levels and perceived social acceptance. At the onset of this project, concerns about expectations of others
(having to deal with expressed and imagined responses to the worn plus(+)) led to different approaches.
The prospect of having to take on conversations and answer questions, along with the fear of looking slightly
odd - of being a spectacle - gave cause for pause. Considered choices were made about how best to
approach and start the experience. Some of us avoided public places, others depended on familiar, safe
environments, others applied ‘copy cat’ tactics as a conscious means for manoeuvring into the unfamiliar.
Site tactics aside, it became apparent that all of the participants took to mimicry and camouflage of their
plus(+) forms as a main means of adaptation. Forms that “looked like”, hoods, sleeves, cuffs, etc. were
created throughout the experience. Physical affordances such as ‘pocket like” spaces ‘to locate hands’ or
‘put things into’ were devised. Lapel-like features served as a means of acceptance in more professional
contexts. The format and balance of different plus(+) configurations (symmetrical verses asymmetrical)
were the implicit implications of these observations. Repeatedly, decisions pointed to a desire to normalize
the scenario - to self situate as closely as possible to existing social conventions. Linked to this inclination
for predictability was the concerted efforts to create stable configurations on the body. The plus(+) often
defied this, however, and could be repeatedly depended on to do the antithesis - to slip.
Connected to the sought after qualities noted above, were expectations of the plus(+) form in relation to
other items of clothing. Participants intentionally tried to create garment forms that could ‘work/look good’
and/or be worn with others. Pragmatic approaches to navigating both the functional and the social led to the
formation of options that could easily be removed in specific situations in order to go: swimming, get through
security at airports, etc. Unsurprisingly, observations about practical decisions connected to perceived
needs of being warm or keeping cool were ever present.
Throughout the study there were moments when all of the participants expressed a lack of enthusiasm for
having to wear it yet “again”. Repetition became a burden. Once each of the participants continued past this
initial reaction (usually in day four or five), however, things picked up and additional insights were
uncovered. For the Lead Researcher who chose to continue for another month, and subsequently for three
to four days/week thereafter (in an informal context), the cumulative experience has led to a new degree of
comfort. Attempting and succeeding to wear the plus(+) in high pressure environments (public talks, airport
security, dinners with new social contacts) has helped establish a growing comfort with the unstable clothing
7
7
form. Anxieties about looking peculiar have receded.
configuration
Approaches to assembly of our daily wear have shifted through the experience with the plus(+) and varied
from person to person. Some of us began by finding a detail or point of entry and then assembling the
plus(+) from there. In other cases we took on configuration ahead of timeexploring possibilities and
making decisions the night before ‘in preparation’ (N. Tillen 2015, pers.comm., 26 July). Garments were
clasped strategically and hung up on hangers ready to go. When solutions did not appear easily some of us
slept on it letting dreams unravel the issue waking the next morning knowing what to do. When things
got tricky, when time was short, all of the study’s participant researchers reverted to wearing previous
garment configurations. For the Lead Researcher the tactic of referring to earlier photo documentation and
notes was also useful. The need to improvise, changing forms as required, throughout the day was
experienced by everyone. Taking detours to private spaces in order to try and sort out sections of the
plus(+) that had inadvertently released and gone array was a common occurrence - a matter of course in
regard to wearing the plus(+).
As an open source form without the common affordances and constraints of arm, leg, neck placement or
inside/outside, the plus(+) offers up countless configurations. Navigating this is a key part of the
participants’/practitioners’ experience. The best intentions for clothing forms often did not work as
anticipated.
improvisation
Adaptability of intent and improvisation impacted our new relations with the clothing form. As Participants we
noted when we sewed ourselves in (N.McKenzie 2015, pers.commm 2 August). We added things, strings,
ties, and holes as needed and dealt with slippage by improvising; using Bamboo ’twigs’ taped together as a
clip binding (H.Day Fraser 2015, pers.comm., 27 July). We observed and noted additional opportunities in
conventional accessories such as, belts and buttons, and found new ways to secure and pull ourselves
together. We did not hesitate to pick up magnets, cut out cardboard, use paperclips, and attempt methods of
connection suggested to us by others. Through this lived process we innately began to evaluate what was
worth continuing with: insights into mechanisms for fastening, as well as additional details and affordances
provided by straps, tabs, drawstrings and hems became jumping off points for future explorations.
insert figure 5 here
wear/gestures-movement
Adaptability of intent and improvisation also occurred as we navigated our new relations of securing and
adjusting this garment form. New physical gestures were noted as we consciously and subconsciously
oriented ourselves to the boundaries of the form. Old actions were altered. New body movements were
informed by our attempts at avoiding being caught: in doorways, getting out of cars, going up stairways.
Adjustments and ongoing re-alignment to the garment form were frequent/commonplace.
Checking the format of the plus(+) and placement of the fasteners was part of our new wearing experience.
8
8
Alternate tactics were taken when mirrors and reflective surfaces were not available. Gestures were
devised in order to assemble elements of the plus(+) - the ‘collar’, the ‘sleeve’ etc. – and assure they ‘sat
straight’ (H.Day Fraser 2015, pers.comm., 5 August). The comfort levels and willingness to take on acts of
improvisation throughout the day were varied integral in the ability to adjust initial intentions and
expectations but acknowledged as intrinsic to the forms worn. These movements and new garment/body
relations also began to point to new terminology related to details (fasteners, tabs, etc.) located and in
relation to the body.
responses/reactions from others
The plus has encouraged many reactions from others: surprise; curiosity; descriptives of other’s people’s
clothing; things remembered; concern for the wearer’s looks; touching gestures; attempts to deconstruct the
clothing form; concerns about reproduction and ownership; and a repeated request and desire to own/have
one too.
The plus(+) has also inadvertently created a platform for conversation through play, acts of shared dressing
and exploratory dress-up. Initiated by observers these actions have involved individuals taking on and trying
out wearing the plus(+) as a garment. At other times the fasteners used for assembling the plus(+) have
been picked up and reassembled. Manipulated and reconsidered the plus(+) and its mechanisms for
assembly have enabled observers to make connections to other cultural, historical, pop references and
clothing forms (N.McKenzie 2015, pers.comm., 28 July). People have asked about and considered this
project in relation to their own experiences. A case of individual and communal navigation, of speculation
and understanding mediated through form, the plus(+) has repeatedly provoked conversation about what it
could be or how it might function.
Reactions from others have also included positive observations vocalized and directed at the wearers of the
plus(+) by friends, colleagues and others. Taking on the unusual came with unexpected benefits of feeling
‘cool’ in social settings (N. McKenzie 2015, pers.comm., 3 August) and the unfamiliar experience of being
noticed positively and in a familiar way by strangers in large public settings (H. Day Fraser 2015,
pers.comm., 18 August). It also provoked discomfort connected to notions of performance, and of being the
spectacle - attention to self as an act of isolation (M. Daniels 2016, pers.comm., 19 January). Some wearers
questioned the sincerity of compliments while others equated these as a positive “ I have realized something
I really enjoy triggered by things I choose to wear compliments! are wonderful treats” (H. Day Fraser
2015, pers.comm., 2 August). Worth note and consideration is the observation of compliments and
subsequent identification of these perceived commendations as notable motivators of clothing choices
compliments and their role as affordances or deterrents for changed behaviour and sustained sustainable
clothing practices.
onwards
Our experiences have allowed us to acquire a heightened awareness of clothing; through adjustment +
improvisation, and constraints that are physical social, and ecological. These observations have given us
direct insight and pause for reflection. We have become aware that we seek to create affordances for both
9
9
acceptance and action. We see these as means to augment our connections to the environment through
clothing. Metrics and mechanisms for both stability and change are required. Improvisation has emerged as
both a method and as a design outcome in of itself. It shifts the emphasis from the design of objects
(artefacts) to the design of actions (modes of engagement). The design-object becomes subordinate to
conjunctive relations and empathetic comprehension (Berardi 2014). Artefacts such as our plus(+) become a
mode of conversation. The shared experience with individuals, the collective and the environment - the
actions surrounding them - are a key component and arguably the work itself.
Moving forward, the experiences of making, pitching, and wearing plus(+) form variations and the
experience and application of a critical use - will be shared with others. Individuals located in New Zealand,
Holland, Germany, Spain, England, urban and rural North America alike have expressed interest towards
plus(+) engagement: “can I have one too?”. Through the next iteration of the plus(+) form gifted as
invitation an extension of experience and broadening contribution of perspectives is envisagedone that
facilitates and centers us on possibility and proximity - in the how and now.
Note: All of the participant based research described in this paper has received official Research Ethics
Approval from Emily Carr’s University of Art + Design’s Research Ethics Board.
10
10
figure 1: silicon/ textile explorations via a re-purposed “hacked” flatbed scanner.
figure 2: Travel/Pitch Plus (+) - Tofino to the Baja and back
material embodiment
figure 3
11
11
figure 4
figure 5
12
12
References
Badke, C. and Walker, S., 2013. Design Sleepwalking: Critical Inquiry in Design’, The Handbook of Design
for Sustainability, p.389.
Bentz, V.M. and Shapiro, J.J., 1998. Mindful inquiry in social research. Sage Publications.
Berardi, F., 2014. And. Phenomenology of the end: cognition and sensibility in the transition from
conjunctive to connective mode of social communication.
Braidotti, R., 2006. Transpositions: On nomadic ethics. Polity.
Day Fraser, H., 2011. Community: Artefacts and Actions’, Proceedings of IDSA 2011, Available from: <
http://www.idsa.org/sites/default/files/CreativeCommunity-artifactsactions.pdf>. [20 July 2016].
Day Fraser, H. Doyle, K. Johannessen, S., 2014, ‘ Uni+Form, Paper presented at IDSA 2014: The
Exchange, Austin, USA.
Day Fraser, H. Doyle, K., 2015. Sites of Making Sites of Riposte: cloTHING(s) as conversation.’,in Making
Research, Researching Making. ADAPTr Creative Practice Conference 2015. Aarhus, Denmark.
Dunne, A. and Raby, F., 2013. Speculative everything: design, fiction, and social dreaming. MIT Press.
Donahue, S., 2014. ‘Unmapping’ Design as Future-making.
Yelavich, S. and Adams, B. eds., 2014. Design as Future-making. Bloomsbury Publishing.
Gaver, B., Dunne, T. and Pacenti, E., 1999. Design: cultural probes.interactions, 6(1), pp.21-29.
Given, L.M. ed., 2008. The Sage encyclopedia of qualitative research methods. Sage Publications.
Hiles, D., 2001, October. Heuristic inquiry and transpersonal research. Inannual meeting of the Centre for
Counselling and Psychotherapy Education. Retrieved October (Vol. 25, p. 2007).
Sanders, E.B.N. and Stappers, P.J., 2008. Co-creation and the new landscapes of design. Co-design, 4(1),
pp.5-18.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Conference Paper
Full-text available
CloTHING(s) as conversation is an interdisciplinary research initiative that seeks to disrupt contemporary expectations of clothing. This work questions our tendency to treat garments as forums for creating statements linked to who we wish to be, what we do, who we are, and where we feel we belong. We are exploring implicit forms of clothing that encompass notions of interchange and dialogue. Since 2012 the cloTHING(s) as conversation research team has sought to challenge a range of worn assumptions-expanding perspectives about how clothing is designed, produced and used. The project is made up of a layered investigation that looks at Design for Sustainability, Fashion, Distributed Manufacture and Wearable technology. The interplay between material practice and sites of social exchange has become a significant driver of our work. Generative research activities have included design-led material explorations and material practice-led textile manipulations. They have resulted in new forms of clothing (using a plus (+) form template), innovative hard-soft connections and 3d printed fasteners. This paper will reflect on open-ended (ad hoc) spaces where conversation, making and the unexpected have come together in order to support our research. Transposition is key to this approach that is inclusive of: material embodiment, acts of mobility and transfer, cross-referencing, discursive artifacts and disruptive actions.
Article
Full-text available
Designers have been moving increasingly closer to the future users of what they design and the next new thing in the changing landscape of design research has become co-designing with your users. But co-designing is actually not new at all, having taken distinctly different paths in the US and in Europe. The evolution in design research from a user-centred approach to co-designing is changing the roles of the designer, the researcher and the person formerly known as the ‘user’. The implications of this shift for the education of designers and researchers are enormous. The evolution in design research from a user-centred approach to co-designing is changing the landscape of design practice as well, creating new domains of collective creativity. It is hoped that this evolution will support a transformation toward more sustainable ways of living in the future.
Chapter
Sustainability has emerged as a central issue for contemporary societies and for the world community as a whole. Furthermore, many of the social and environmental concerns that are embodied in the term ‘sustainability’ are directly or indirectly related to design. Designers help to define our human made environment - how it is produced, how it is used, and how long it endures. Despite some forty years of development and increased awareness of the critical relationships that exist between design decisions and modes of production, energy use, environmental impacts, the nature of work and human exploitation, design for sustainability is still not widely understood or followed. The Handbook of Design for Sustainability presents a comprehensive, state-of-the-art overview of this crucial subject - its development, its methods, its practices and its potential futures. Bringing together leading international scholars and new researchers to provide a substantive insight into the latest thinking and research within the field, The Handbook covers a breadth of historical and theoretical understandings and includes a series of original essays that explore methods and approaches for designers and design educators. The Handbook presents the first systematic overview of the subject that, in addition to methods and examples, includes historical perspectives, philosophical approaches, business analyses, educational insights and emerging thinking. It is an invaluable resource for design researchers and students as well as design practitioners and private and public sector organizations wishing to develop more sustainable directions.
Book
Today designers often focus on making technology easy to use, sexy, and consumable. In "Speculative Everything," Anthony Dunne and Fiona Raby propose a kind of design that is used as a tool to create not only things but ideas. For them, design is a means of speculating about how things could be -- to imagine possible futures. This is not the usual sort of predicting or forecasting, spotting trends and extrapolating; these kinds of predictions have been proven wrong, again and again. Instead, Dunne and Raby pose "what if" questions that are intended to open debate and discussion about the kind of future people want (and do not want). "Speculative Everything" offers a tour through an emerging cultural landscape of design ideas, ideals, and approaches. Dunne and Raby cite examples from their own design and teaching and from other projects from fine art, design, architecture, cinema, and photography. They also draw on futurology, political theory, the philosophy of technology, and literary fiction. They show us, for example, ideas for a solar kitchen restaurant; a flypaper robotic clock; a menstruation machine; a cloud-seeding truck; a phantom-limb sensation recorder; and devices for food foraging that use the tools of synthetic biology. Dunne and Raby contend that if we speculate more -- about everything -- reality will become more malleable. The ideas freed by speculative design increase the odds of achieving desirable futures. © 2013 Massachusetts Institute of Technology. All rights reserved.
Unmapping' Design as Future-making
  • S Donahue
Donahue, S., 2014. 'Unmapping' Design as Future-making.
Community: Artefacts and Actions Available from: < http://www.idsa.org/sites/default/files/CreativeCommunity-artifactsactions.pdf>
  • Day Fraser
Day Fraser, H., 2011. ' Community: Artefacts and Actions', Proceedings of IDSA 2011, Available from: < http://www.idsa.org/sites/default/files/CreativeCommunity-artifactsactions.pdf>. [20 July 2016].
Design as Future-making
  • S Yelavich
Yelavich, S. and Adams, B. eds., 2014. Design as Future-making. Bloomsbury Publishing.