on authorship, production, and intent within design

graphic authorship:

michael rock questions whether authorship is a useful concept for graphic designers. authorship, being the pre-postmodern (modern?) notion of the author as being truly the single, genius creator of a work, who is the ultimate authority (note the etymology) on the object and outside of whom no further information can be taken about it. postmodern decentering removes the author from the heart of the work, laying ultimate responsibility for interpretation on the reader him or herself, with all the social context they can glean.

he says: "The cult of the author narrows interpretation and replaces the author at center of the work. Foucault noted that the figure of the author is not a particularly liberating one. By transferring the authority of the text back to the author, by focusing on voice, presence becomes a limiting factor, containing and categorizing the work. The author as origin, authority and ultimate owner of the text guards against the free will of the reader."

a more comforting visualization for the design process, and its inherent collaboration, is as poetic translation, which must remain focused on keeping the literal content consistent and yet still recapturing the intangible character at the same time. in the end, though, all he has to offer is that, after all these trying on of concepts, design simply = design.

why is it important for us to define and redefine the work we do? does our definition, or others', change the way we feel about & execute our work?

the designer as producer:

victor margolin asserts that "Until now, users have engaged more flexibly than producers with the product milieu. Now designer/entrepreneurs have the opportunity to create a much more inventive and
spontaneous product culture than we have ever had in the past. They can subvert the near monopolies of large companies in many product sectors and create products for needs that have yet to be met."

in this revitalization of an almost "arts and crafts" movement of alternative makers and alternative products filling niches unfilled by mass production and focusing on ideas like sustainability and user experience.

he proposes a program of master's studies in "design entrepreneurship" for people who want to be "both product innovators and manufacturers."

should this, in fact, be a separate field, specifically tailored to filling these economic niches in high-tech/sustainable thinking? should it be a designer's responsibility to join with this manufacturing, or is there a notable difference between working with a manufacturer and doing it yourself?

design with intent:

robert fabricant describes the turnover from the "disappearing designer" whose user-centered work was so neutral and unquestionable that it was invisible to the user, so seamlessly meshing with behavior; to the active and personal designer whose skillset and ethics lead them into the three emergent direct design categories of persuasion design, catalyst design, and performance design.

these intervention strategies can seem gutsy, but they get results. "As designers, we don’t always have the courage or the opportunity to look honestly at the impact of the decisions we make. Persuasion design allows for that. At its best, this model starts with results and works backward from there."

is a creative way to intervene and solve a problem ever simply enough? how far do you have to take a solution before it is inarguably a design artifact? are the problem solvers themselves "designers" or does it require a visual solution to be considered a designed project?