Mapping D―Generation——Attitudes and Approaches of Young Design

Lorenzo Imbesi Tans. by Zheng Hui

When exploring and outlining the most recent generational developments in design research, the main problem compared to past movements is establishing a general pattern for the characteristics of form, the ideas, the areas of research, the debates, the favoured locations, the key gatherings, and even the anthropological features that would help us to present this D-Generation. The subject of our study is multifaceted. It is made up of mobile and disjointed groups that have numerous, unstable forms and above all it does not describe itself with rigid classif i cations but instead refers to boundaries,crossovers and dif f erences. In other words, it is diffi cult to provide a general overview of the young generation’s output. This means that only a partial outline can be mapped out, one that encompasses the overlapping and the conf i nes crossed, the networks and connections,the paths and strategies.

Rather than establishing a structural order with classes and concise typological categories that permanently designate a single and irreversible temporal identity, perhaps it is more useful, as is occurring more and more frequently, to sketch out a sort of operational atlas of the area in which the new generation moves,with instability and plurality as a constituent part. This is the methodological and critical approach most in tune with young design, which is often inherently ‘undisciplined’ and actually considers true innovation to mean breaking the rules, so much so that it often becomes standard procedure and a research method.First and foremost, it is important to point out that in sociological terms, the category of youth as an independent consumer group came into being in the 1950s. This situation was brought about by a combination of schooling for all, the spread of the mass media(cinema, radio and music) and new urban scenarios. However, while initially it marked the passage from education to employment, it is now continually expanding, thus breaking down the traditional age limits.immediately before it, a glance at the contemporary design scenario reveals the greater pluralism of languages. These forms of expression favour eclecticism, mixing, shared presences, contradiction, diversity,crossovers and hybrids. The younger generations take a very similar ethical and methodological approach to hackers and DJs, preferring to span various styles and genres through repetition and sampling, as often happens in f i lm or literary cut-ups, thus going beyond the traditional categories. What emerges is a sort of supermarket of styles, or even of indif f erence, the result of rearranging and remixing. Similarly, fashion studies theorist Ted Polhemus states ‘as in pop music, the predominant tendency in appearance style today relies upon sampling and mixing diverse, eclectic, often contradictory elements into a unique, personal statement. Celebrating the confusion and diversity of our age, we surf through both history and geography to f i nd our own reality - in the mix.’

Can we still speak of the avant-garde? What aesthetics can embody contemporary complexity and diversity?

While formalism has now taken on a negative meaning due to its dogmatic self-referencing, the aesthetic issue is not resolved in style,but rather in the complex relationship between language, behaviour,technology, creativity, research and social environment. A dynamic and lively scenario emerges, showing provocative and radical aspects in places. It is dedicated to more emotional and visionary forms,including play, chance, uselessness, complexity and ugliness. It often takes a leading role in conceptual activities which at times border on the absurd and on gratuitous Dadaism, genuine political declarations to spotlight its unyielding refusal of recognized canons.

The ‘inevitable ornaments‘ shown at Droog such as interactive wallpaper (Simon Heijdens), decorative radiators (Joris Laarman),switches with f l oral motifs (Mina Wu), sticky tape to create unique frames (Martí Guixé), and even furniture and walls decorated by insects or rats (Front), contrast with the minimal and functional modernist tradition of Northern design, and even with the manifesto of the Dutch brand itself, which promotes clean-cut design with no frills. The new decorativism that we are witnessing has left behind superf i cially-applied false imitation and moved on to create new hybrid forms of expression.To go back to the def i nitions of De Saussure, the D_Generation would favour, rather than the establishment of a new language,the development of numerous dif f erent idioms, obtained through dynamically processing materials that already exist and are freed from their initial context in order to be transformed through contact with new environments or unprecedented combinations. This can be taken to the point of hybridization and corruption of genres and languages,similar to the new dialects that develop among emigrant populations in big cities (such as Spanglish, the variant of English used by Hispanics,or Englog, which is spoken in the Philippines).

Rather than creating new forms, they are reworking those that already exist. It is therefore a dynamic movement closely related to the times and those who modify the contents. It asserts itself by changing and transforming everyday reality.

The Practice of Everyday Life

Halfway through the 1970s, a French sociologist named Michel De Certau, whilst observing everyday life ‘from street level’, noted a reaction to the dynamics of production. Consumption was inf i ltrated by actions that were dispersed but intelligent, invisible yet creative.They were able to adapt the forms and structures imposed ‘from above’.

The scholar highlighted the value of active experience in consumer behaviour together with the extremely creative hidden capacity shown in ordinary use: everyday gestures can lead to potential adaption of goods which is not covered by the instructions, using new ideas that can give them new meaning.

‘The Practice of Everyday Life’ by De Certau ref l ects on a recurring theme in contemporary production by young people, identifying a tendency to experiment with behaviour and discover extraordinary aspects in ordinary things, playing with the elements of our everyday environments. This pattern is widely displayed across Italy in the generation of designers who have been involved with OPOS (to name just a few: Paolo Ulian, Enrico Azzimonti, Joe Velluto and Donata Paruccini). Over the years this project has continually promoted forms of design which are not constrained by market logic.

Design is becoming a diagram of relationships which sketches out behaviours, rather than ref l ecting practical functions in structural authenticity. Genuine behavioural items are produced through careful observation of consumption, allowing the new forms that are hidden there to be identif i ed. Fingerbiscuit imitates the act of dipping a f i nger in a jar of Nutella; Pagina encourages people to graffi ti the walls in public toilets; Mat Walk is perfect for moving across the bathroom f l oor (Paolo Ulian). As is shown by the Design alla Coop experience in Italy, the interest of the young design generation in the habits and the smallest gestures in the world around us is brought to life through focusing on a few small objects which we do not see because they are concealed by their ordinary simplicity, but which make up our physical environment and our collective abstract imagery. Intelligibility of everyday life is a form of knowledge that often lacks rules. It must be carefully studied for a full grasp of all the hidden and complex meanings.

Ethnographic observation, behaviour, consumption, design and production are almost blended together, displaying playful attitudes,chance, unpredictableness, research and avant-garde gestures which are however purged of the ideology of the historical movements and instead incorporate eclectic pluralism and the complexity of contemporary languages. Somewhere between situationist provocation and crossover confrontation, critical ref l ections are made on the historicized tradition of industrial design.

Items do not just do things; they make sure things get done. They provoke actions on the part of consumers, who go from being passive receivers to active participants in the creative modif i cation of forms,mapping out new stories for objects.

Playful tricks

A means of introducing play into design is through allegory in the form of objects, as well as the magical enchantment of symbols which can recreate the attraction and af f ection of an emotional relationship in the home. Using a form of animism of objects, which in turn are turned into simulacra, leads to the creation of the symbolic power which is part of the magical landscape of the imagination that allows things to be seen with new eyes and the construction of cultural connections. This kind of work revolves around observation.

Another method is to interpret games as playful activities which bring the lives of adults closer to the growth and experimentation experienced by children. Johan Huizinga (1938) distinguishes between the structured and competitive game, with its standardized patterns, and play, which involves experimenting with behaviour and the discipline, along with the f i elds of intervention, the tools, the preparation process and even the f i nal results.

More than twenty years ago, computers were essentially seen as professional equipment, except when they became games machines in the hands of teenage IT geeks. They have now spread into every aspect of our everyday lives – as well as at work, we also use them at home, at school and in our free time. This has brought about a re-evaluation of their usability by a broader range of people, who are closer to the role of consumers than that of experts in the f i eld.Initially Human-Centred Design, Human-Computer Interaction,interface design, and then experience design, ubiquitous computing and social networking have placed humans at the heart of projects in order to seek out the most natural forms of interaction and accept the challenge posed by the dematerialization processes af f ecting contemporary products. Design research focuses on immaterial models, in other words establishing which forms are able to concretely express behaviour and experiences. They do this by studying the aesthetics of the new information technologies, which have transformed behaviour and living habits. We have gone from usability to sociality (Bill Moggridge).

From a hard reading of technology, with an appearance which highlights the cultural break and its dif f erences with the objects to which we were accustomed, a soft form of research has developed.Technology is no longer displayed as a carefully positioned item of value, but hidden inside the objects with which we interact in everyday life, in order to make it familiar. In 2004’s ‘This is today’exhibition at Milan’s Trienniale, the young students from the Interaction Design Institute in Ivrea presented extremely ‘friendly’digital technology which was combined with products from the mechanical era. There was an Olivetti ‘Lettera 22’ typewriter that could send emails, a classic Fiat 500 able to download MP3s when it was being f i lled up with petrol, and interactive wallpaper that displayed incoming text messages. The experience of the school from Ivrea was only a brief one, but it created a group of young people who would combine creativity and technological innovation in new products and would be scattered across the globe, working in advanced environments such as the MIT or IDEO, or going into business on their own.

Similarly, the research carried out in the Design Interactions department at London’s Royal College of Art aims to focus on the new roles, contexts and approaches to design taking into account the social, cultural and ethical impact of emerging and existing technology, in order to investigate options for their presentation and appearance in normal life and everyday environments. In addition to experimenting with the communication and expressive potential of digital means, the school is also keen to broaden its horizons by looking into biotechnology and nanotechnology, which are now moving out of the research laboratory and into everyday life. As is shown by the Eden ADN exhibition in St. Etienne in 2006 and the more recent Design and the Elastic Mind at MoMA in New York, the interests of design research are moving into the living world, reworking nature’s forms by modifying their appearance and function.

Bees are used to diagnose illnesses (BEE’S, New Organs of Perception, Susana Soares), bodies are modif i ed to respond to new genetic challenges (The Race, Michael Burton; Body Modif i cation for Love project, Michiko Nitta; Genetic Trace, Susana Soares) and biojewels made from bone tissue produced with donated cells help to unite couples (Biojewellery, Kerridge/Stott/Thompson). Humans as a biological entity are seen as subjects for design projects and bodies are viewed as materials to work on. By incorporating foreign tissues such as genetically modif i ed organisms, designers broaden the biological catalogue and present possible future scenarios with great visionary fantasy, thus raising inevitable questions about ethics and the limits of the creative process.

Critical actions

In the late 1990s, twenty-year-old Ora Ito faked commissions from famous international brands and published virtual designs for products on his website, breaking every possible rule on counterfeiting and international copyright law. Paradoxically, though,his irreverent actions as a design hacker brought him a number of genuine commissions from the same brands, rather than lawsuits for forgery.

This freelancer now enjoys great fame. The thinking behind his work gained it a place in the ‘Société du spectacle’, whose rules he has learnt, and through it he is able to transform this society’s shared meanings. With goods now dif f used throughout all forms of social expression, in which the spectacular nature is a measure of their appeal, young designers have become fully aware of their fundamental role and move in the same areas as the market,building up critical know-how through crossovers, deformation and alteration, which can uncover the interlaying independent factors and break down their organization in an unprecedented manner. Just as tricksters play with stealth and subterfuge that can develop on the spot, the D_Generation knows and works to its own advantage all of the opportunities and tools provided by the mass media, marketing and communication, often challenging their meaning and f i nding new ways to reappropriate, or even expropriate, their connotations and ideas.

The subvertising produced by Adbusters takes on an even more political meaning by exercising the right to free speech and by fi ghting the manipulation and excessive nature of consumerism.

Their acts of cultural sabotage directly attack the semiotic systems of information providers and television broadcasters, ironically modifying advertising from big international corporations through a situationist rereading of the original message which highlights its social, cultural and ecological values. Through alienation and détournement, this culture jamming aims to deconstruct texts,images and meanings dif f used by the media industry in order to distort their ideological and advertising functions and bring about new critical awareness in consumers.

With a focus on promoting the value of public spaces and design culture in the city, the young Milanese collective Esterni puts together initiatives and events, which can be shared horizontally outside the spaces offi cially designated for design culture, such as during the Salone del Mobile in Milan. Taking an open source approach, the socializing potential of urban living is rediscovered through temporary collective reappropriation of public places and the creation of an artistic environment with a social dimension.Over the last ten years, a movement of young people has been challenging the idea that the sole aim of design and its products should be the manufacture of goods for the market and the consumer society. Critical design (A. Dunne) revolves around the role that

译文：

和过去相比，如果要探索和概述设计研究最新的发展，主要的问题是为形式、思想、研究领域、最受青睐的位置，甚至人类学特征的特点建立一个通用模式，这个通用模式将有助于我们呈现“D世代”。我们研究的主题是多方面，研究由移动的，不连贯的各个部分组成。换句话说，为年轻一代给出大体的概述是一件非常困难的事情，这意味着只能绘制部分的轮廓。与其建立一个明确的秩序结构，罗列出简明的类别，用来永久标出单一不可逆的暂时特性，还不如简要地出描绘新一代设计发展的战略地图。这种做法也许更有用，也会越来越频繁地出现。不稳定和多元化是其一组成部分。这种方法学和批判性的方式最适合年轻设计师，通常不按常理出牌，认为真正的创新在于打破常规，如此一来往往成为标准的程序和研究方法。

在设计领域里出现的新类别，一定会受到评估，通过看标志着其发展和后续演变的共同元素。

和新媒体的扩散，无处不在的互动沟通和文化形象，科技提供的无限可能，以及被看作是一种自然资源的人造工具一起，新类别不断发展壮大，新的心理结构和模式形成。国际金融和服务业的蓬勃发展和工业资本主义的衰落都决定了工业不再是生产和设计的核心。新一代的设计师已经目睹了去工业化过程和服务行业的兴起，然而他们的前辈们在生产流水线上发挥了重要的作用。前辈们可以和制造过程近距离接触，相应地生产制造可以为设计师们提供目标和动力。现在的设计师们意识到他们在创新上处在服务和战略性的地位。然而,新的艺术形式的出现与电子媒体领域里的创新息息相关，如平面造型设计、视频、通讯、产品设计的新材料、造型软件、电子音乐等等。这些创造出的新的表达形式很难追溯到设计的传统界限。生产的产品是与大众传媒和消费社会密切相关的设施、配件和瞬态图像。这一直接的结果是在世界范围内学校的数量成指数型增加。这些学校使新的一群人了解技术、科学、方法和过程，最终将这群数量已经达到饱和的学生培养成为国际设计研究团体的一部分。一方面，这种现象进一步巩固了设计作为独立学科的地位，但是又打破了设计的范畴，完全分散了设计所需要的技能。大量的年轻人从事设计这项职业，使得作为设计专业人士和创造本身的光环消失了，也带走了设计师们作为精英的社会地位。过去，伟大的举世闻名的设计大师的人数少，他们的杰作在设计年鉴里永久地占有一席之位，他们也能不断地创作出新的作品，以至于他们被视为某个设计流派的创始人。然而，D世代似乎以具有大量的小人物为特色。这些小设计师们往往只有很短的但生产力很强的创作时间，短暂的个人职业生涯让人们想到了转瞬即逝的视频剪辑。这些明亮但是昙花一现的设计之星伴随着高速的电子通讯和地域分配，被推向国际市场。

“D世代”这一代的设计师很乐意与他们的创作作品一起出现，这肯定了信息交流的重要性。福特主义工业的产品的设计者通常是匿名的,好像是由制造产品的生产商和购买产品的社会设计的。但是，新一代的设计师在产品生产过程中有很高的参与度，他们好像是产品的制造者，而不是设计者。有时候，设计师的名字可以成为市场营销手段，因为产品的设计师比产品本身更重要。

语言的变异

在研究语言结构学时，语言学家弗迪南•德•索绪尔把语言（langue）和言语（parole）区别开来。语言系统由语法规则和符号体系组成，而言语行为出于个人,创造性的说话方式可以产生习语。沿着这条思路,能否从语法的角度定义新一代的设计语言？设计语言能否算是一种有独立特征的新语言，或者说它只是创造出的习语？当代设计方案展示了设计语言更加多元化的一面。表达方式偏爱折衷主义，混合交叉，矛盾多样。年轻的一代喜欢通过重复和采样的途径交叉多种风格和流派，从而走出传统类别的界限。同样的，时尚研究理论家特德•波尔希默斯指出流行音乐主要趋势在于采样，混合多样的、折衷的、甚至往往对立的元素，来最后形成个人独特的风格。再回到德•索绪尔的定义，相对于创造出一种新的语言，D世代会更倾向于通过动态地处理加工现有的材料，创造出许多不同的习语。通过接触新的环境和前所未有的组合，这些习语将会摆脱原来的语境。这和在移民人口众多的大城里会产生新的方言的情况是类似的，比如西班牙语是西班牙裔使用的英语变种而来的。D世代设计师重新加工现有的材料，不断改变和转化，而不是凭空创造出新的形式。

日常生活实践

在当代生产中反复出现的一个主题反映了米歇尔•德塞都(Michel de Certeau ）的日常生活实践理论：发现普通事物的特殊方面。米歇尔•德塞都强调了消费者行为的积极经验的价值以及隐藏在普通用途背后极大的创造力：日常动作可以改造出潜在的具有说明书以外功能的产品。换一种思路，可以赋予产品新的意义。新一代设计师的兴趣在于重点探究在我们周围，但又被我们视而不见的一些小件物品，因为他们的价值被简单普通的外表所掩盖了，但是这些小物品组成了我们生活的物理环境。对日常生活的理解是一门学问，但通常缺乏规则。如果想全面地掌握隐藏在背后复杂的含义，就必须进行认真仔细的研究。消费者可以对消费形式进行创造性地改造，从被动的接受者转变为积极的参与者，为产品编写新的故事。

玩耍的游戏

将游戏引入设计的方法是将游戏看成能使成年人的生活更贴近儿童的成长和实验的好玩的活动。游戏是孩子们自己设计的，不需要以团队的形式参赛，也不需要遵守预先定下的规则，即使违反规则也不会受到惩罚。这个意义上玩耍的概念很好地表达了当代设计研究中的一个常见的主题。它试图使生活发生天翻地覆的变化，就像孩子那般，通过实践得出经验。当孩子们试图去了解大人的世界时，他们就会把一件物品分解，看看这个东西到底是什么做的，然后根据新的参数重组物品，往往能获得不同于原先形式的新事物。设计也是如此，差异和难以预测性能带来无限的可能性：设计的过程除了包括对材料的运用，还有运气和自发性的成分，提倡即兴创作。在D世代的世界里，设计过程就像孩子的行为——通过探究物体的物理本质来获取经验，发现事物新的含义。比如一个气球能成为一盏灯。另外,通过模仿,产品的其他功能隐藏在官方使用功能背后。比如两个沐浴露的瓶子可以用作健身用的哑铃。设计师的工作可以在设计过程的倒数第二阶段结束,停在设计还不确定的时期。这其实为创造力加入生产的价值链里提供了一个额外的机会。未完成的产品，给消费者留下自己创造的空间。消费者的参与，具有玩的成分，完成了整个生产周期。宜家家居（瑞典公司）的产品也恰好体现了这一点。设计不仅仅要专注于产品本身，还要满足消费者的需求。现在，设计也鼓励玩耍和全程参与，允许消费者在设计过程中扮演一个积极的角色。

伦理冲突

我们的世界只有有限的资源，但是需要满足人类无限的需求。设计师们意识到这日益严重的情况，也意识到他们在实际和概念转化过程中有责任发挥自己的作用。随着时间的推移，设计师们提出了几个聚焦环境可持续发展的战略。因此，在很长的一段时间里，生态设计代表了设计过程的道德一方，环境远比经济效益重要。通过利用手头现有的材料制成产品以及传播“废料美学”，创造性地重新利用消费和工业废料。接着使用可回收的材料以及探索新的工业流程。多年来，有关可持续性设计的争论都是围绕着环境这个主题。而近年来越来越多的社会突发情况，让设计师们不得不正面应对。

水资源、保健、能源、教育、住房和基础设施对于世界上大部分人来说都是至关重要的问题。这些都是实实在在的需要，为了改变和提高人们的生活，必须要把他们放在优先于利润的位置上。在这个框架内采取的一些措施之中，在美国纽约库伯-休伊特国立设计博物馆举行的题为”Design for the other 90%”(为另外90%的人设计)的展览，是一个非常典型的例子。展览包括了30个人道主义设计项目，这些项目无一例外的是关于住所，健康、水、教育、能源和交通的。这些项目都是为每天挣扎求生的大批贫困人群设计的。一个题为“安全”的展览在纽约现代艺术博物馆展出，探究“伦理”这个词在设计领域的另一种含义：着眼于安全和保护生命。年轻的设计师们，忽略了家具设计中如椅子、灯这样的传统类型家具，创造出如地雷探测器、地震防护家具、防手袋被抢配件等新品种。

技术的梦想

不同时代的设计和技术的关系似乎都存在问题，要么完全抵制技术，要么热情地赞颂技术。特别是上世纪八九十年代是由新技术驱动的设计的黄金时代。与信息有关的技术为交互型物件、数字接口、混合架构的创造提供了技术支持。这一波的创新浪潮见证了一出生就有电脑的前卫的一代人，他们接受了信息技术对设计提出的挑战。这也开辟了研究的新天地，它改变了设计对象及设计这个学科的边界。技术不再是为了增加产品价值而被精心安排的项目，为了变得更加令人熟悉，它躲藏在日常生活中我们接触到的物品里。2004年，在米兰展出的题为“This is today”的展览会上，艾芙瑞亚交互设计学院年轻的学生们展示了与机械时代的产品非常友好地结合在一起的数字技术。展览会展出了可以发送电子邮件的好利获得牌Lettera 22打字机，加满汽油后可以下载mp3的经典小车菲亚特500。艾芙瑞亚学校培养出了一批将创意和科技创新结合在一起的年轻设计师，他们将会创造出新产品。他们的身影将会在世界各地出现。同样的，考虑到新兴的和已存在的技术对社会，文化和伦理观念产生的影响，伦敦皇家艺术学院的互动设计部门开展了新的研究，旨在探究设计所扮演的新角色，所处的新环境以及所需采取的新方法。除了对数字技术的交流和表达潜力进行试验，这所学校还热衷于将研究拓展到生物技术和纳米技术的领域。现在生物技术和纳米技术已经走出实验室，在日常生活中得到了应用。从近来的一些展览我们可以看出设计研究的领域正在向生命世界拓展，通过修改事物的外形和功能改变事物的自然形态。比如可以用蜜蜂来诊断疾病，修改身体基因来应对新的遗传挑战。人，作为一个生物实体，已经被看作设计项目的对象，身体也可以作为一种材料来使用。通过使用像转基因生物体的组织，设计师们拓宽了生物材料目录，呈现出未来无限可能的设计前景，从而不可避免地引发了关于创新过程中出现的伦理道德问题以及可容许的范围的争论。

批判式行为

上世纪90年代末，20岁的欧若•依图假装收取了国际著名品牌的佣金，在他的个人网页上发表了设计作品，这违反了当时的伪造品规则和国际版权法。反常的是，他那作为设计黑客玩世不恭的行为竟然真的给他带来了相同品牌的佣金，而不是伪造诉讼。

就像魔术师在现场玩花样一样，D世代知道如何利用大众媒体，市场和通信所提供的机会和工具。在过去的十年里,一场青少年运动对设计的唯一目标是对为市场和消费者社会制造商品的理念发出挑战。安东尼•邓恩提出的批判式设计围绕着产品在日常生活中扮演的角色，引发了关于社会、文化和伦理问题的争论。设计师Yomango设计的配饰是用来破除大商店安全系统的，从而使小偷更容易在商店里行窃。Re-Code是项新的网络服务,旨在创造新的可以粘在商品上的条形码，有了这些条形码可以为大型零售网点的商品制定合理的价格。精英设计师们抵制宜家家居（瑞典公司），反对蓝色和黄色的大商场的霸权（宜家商场的门面的颜色主要是蓝色和黄色）。这些新的乌托邦能建成吗？