it’s been interesting to follow the responses that everyone has made. and i’m not surprised by the mixed reaction. and it would be interesting for me to know exactly what everyone does because i have a feeling that some areas feel that they are better served than others. orcrucially, think they are better served- architecture, product design and fashion. thought follows function?
the overall impression that i have is that yes there are praiseworthy examples but no publication (meant in the widest definition) that seems to be collating this properly. i’m also noting the comment made about the u.s.a. being a diverse and geographically/culturally stretched nation of disparate communities that are bundled together under the banner of ‘design’.
my thought is this. the web can be a wonderful thing. unlike a paper -based publication or even television it can not only publish the vertical- areas of particular interest but can also cross-link with the horizontal - context.
there is a need, not only in the u.s.a., for this pluralistic approach. i feel that it is important to show to everyone; the professionals, the students and the interested that this is the reality of the situation and in this way become a valuable and much needed reference point for the <disparate communities that are bundled together under the banner of ‘design’>.
the key is in the curation and ironically, in the design (in terms of structure).
with pdf software now being able to contain film isn’t this the way forward?
if, as it has been indicated by some of the panel, that issues are not dealt with or are truncated because of editorial pressure then surely it is down to us to do something about it.
the great thing is that it is accessible to one and all, not only in the u.s.a. but also the world.
the big frustration for me is that there are many people and groups of people who are not specialists but have a wider range of interests and make things purely because they are interested to see what happens. the conventional press have, in my experience, great difficulty within their alloted spaces representing this.
tomato, my group of friends, that happen to be a company, are extremely hard to report for a conventional publication because we have no agenda apart from our curiosity and are extremely unpredictable. if pushed i suspect we would all agree with joseph beuy’s dictum ‘thinking as form’. what is it?- design?, fine art? - who cares?
we all write, draw, take photographs, make films, direct television commercials, make sounds and make music, we publish, enjoy typography and books, and are involved in architectural design, self-authored ‘fine art’ installations, electronic interactive media etc etc. and i am sure, in fact know, that there are similar individuals and groups around the world. so where is this in the press. where is the description where this way of being intersects with the singular, more prescriptive but equally creative practice?
to conclude: if pushed, again, then i guess we would call ourselves ‘sculptors’.
with thinking and conversation as our base material.
does this make sense?
and shouldn’t we be doing something about it?
i believe it is our human duty to share and converse.
to put ideas into the world and to talk about it.
this forum is great. and well done to everyone that made it happen.
but now what?
an electronic ‘black mountain college’ anyone?
all the best