#reading3

[hopeschoolindiretimes]

Read an information pack about a wildlife park and then answer questions

Reading ECCE part3

free ecce practice

[foucaultfoucaultfoucault-blog]

Summary, Reading iii : The New Materiality of Design, Lari, 8.10.2019

“straight cucumbers” 🥒

Some of the topics we had in our discussion when we met at Amelie's place • “Death of God” meaning God created the world but anything is as valuable as god • Design hacks : a sofa that is also / turns into a bicycle • Barbapapa as “The New Materiality of Design” • Stanrdazation vs. biodioversity • Standardization can lead to monopoly (e.g. Apple)—link to dictatorship • Decreasing attention span • “Scenius” • “It’s easier if we give the authority to the user of the object—maybe in this case the author is dead” about Gill Sans • “Even the dreams can’t be original because it’s something you have seen” • “What you make is the product of the environment so the environment is the author” Wrap up : Oxbridge Philosophy - John Cleese & Jonathan Miller

[foucaultfoucaultfoucault-blog]

Summary: The final author?

Summary

Reading III: The New Materiality of Design

Tintin Rosvik 8.10.2019

I want to summarize this reading with the final question of our last discussion. Who is the ultimate author? Even though we left the topic of authorship a few weeks ago, we somehow ended up spiralling back to this question – but with a lot more alternatives than the writer and the reader, and also a lot more insight. So we asked: Is the ultimate author the founder, what we can name as writer, designer and creator? Is it the scene (Brian Eno: “scenius”), the group of people behind the creator? Is it the audience; the readers, viewers and users? Is it the technology at hand? The surrounding environment? The time? In a way we came to an agreement; it is a collaboration effort by all above. Or in other words; everything that exist is a product of time and space – and of course, so also design. Taking OOO into account at this point, we discussed how everything that exist is equal. If you for example imagine yourself to be a potter, you would be of no more value than the pot you have moulded. Yes, you gave it form, and it wouldn’t exist without your hands. But someone gave you form as well, you wouldn’t exist without the occurrences of time and space shaping you into the potter that you now are. Things, nature, animals, ideas – we are all equal products of existence. This philosophy wouldn’t do in a modern world. If everything is equal, everything falls into the same category. How to divide all of this? We discussed how value, meaning and waste is created, both in a modern world and in a world not ruled by the human perspective. Maybe the answer isn’t to divide it all, but to find the connections and interaction in between everything equal.

p.p1 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 6.0px 0.0px; font: 14.0px 'Helvetica Neue'; color: blue; line-height: 1.4em;} p.p2 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 14.0px 'Helvetica Neue'; min-height: 15.0px; color: blue; font-style: oblique; letter-spacing: 0.5px;} p.p3 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 5.0px 0.0px; font: 13.0px 'Helvetica Neue'; min-height: 17.0px;color: blue;text-transform: uppercase; letter-spacing: 0.5px;}

[foucaultfoucaultfoucault-blog]

Summary Reading III (The New Materiality of Design) Kaisa Koisti, 7 Oct 2019  - machinery - stripping down human effect- language-> cultural diversity -> english language effect, more languages dying out - sustainability <> waste, standardization could be a solution for sustainability crisisthe concept of waste can be different for them -vegetables & fruit (the form) (cucumber) -how would non-standardized world work like? -> can lead to monopolies - Barbapapa:) Objects changing- genius : a product of society (charismatic figure) (Brian Eno video) “intelligence is generated by a community” - valuing people, person = work ;-; not working, why would there be a need to value people by their work, it is useless, don’t like to work from that mindset ;-; -> is that the mindset what the society wants us to use? - problematic things about Eric Gill, Woody Allen, Stanley Kubrick -Human characteristics, where they are found, where they are missing : Lion King new version (Tintin’s experience), Hello Kitty missing a mouth  - OOO:Creator is not more important / valuable than the object / subject created (Tintin) God is Dead

[beauxbutterflies-blog]

Summary: Reading 3

The New Materiality of Design

By: Fanni Perälä

7.10.2019

Again, we felt that the source material was introducing the subject of nonhuman objects and materiality from three quite different perspectives and also in styles of text. The concept of standards was the subject we concetrated to the most but also briefly discussed the morality Latour talks about and also anthropocentrism in different areas of study. 

Laws and court system is something where standards and morality meet. Our behavior has been source for making the laws but the laws shape and guide our behavior in a very concrete and tangible way (even if the systems are no immune to abuse by some individuals). It is interesting to see what is the point where laws are changed to fit peoples behavior and morals better and not trying to force it the otherway around, recent examples include the equal marriage law and intitative of consent based definition of rape. We also discussed the use of weapons as an ultimate extension of our morality and how they are perceived in different cultures.

Standardation is a way to understand society and systems and is based on a common agreement of something making it easier to assess something, though sometimes standards might become so strickt that it’s almost ridiculous, such as some EU-directions about the shapes and sizes of fruit and vegetables. Sometimes standards might become hollow performances that we do because we are accustomed to such as some protocols regarding mutual hierarchy of people or certain traditions. Existence of standards also create expectations and if our expentations are not met we might feel confusion or discontent. Assumed gender for example bears certain kinds of standards for ones behavior and looks. 

We agreed that it is very human quality to try classify and standardize things. In that way it is also very prone to loop holes and discontinuity of logical reasoning. 

[edene1023]

Summary — Reading III: The New Materiality of Design

by João Emediato, 7 Oct 2018

In the group meeting we discussed about standardization and how I can bring so much comfort but also so much exclusion. Suddenly I realized that we have actually created a comfort standard from what we consider to be a reasonable way of living, and even that standard might not be sustainable. It's like we become too spoiled by the technological advancements we create. How much effort and time and money have we, as a society, spent in correcting attitudes promoted by technological achievements? For instance, diseases related to cigars, obesity or anxiety related to social media.

We talked a bit about “Cargo Cult” and how it presents a connection between religion and technology. When we think about our lives, it is pretty clear how notions of efficiency, speed, productivity are always related to good things. But if we agree with Giorgio Agamben when he argues that capitalism has become our new religion, than efficiency and productivity are its dogmas. How much of what we do is shaped by our mere faith in this system?

Yes, we were a bit lost about the concept behind OOO. So, if all objects are all at the same level, who is conducting the research? What does that mean exactly?

[foucaultfoucaultfoucault-blog]

Introduction, Reading iii : The New Materiality of Design, Lari, 6.10.2019

• • •

Ian Bogost : What is Object-Oriented Ontology? A definition for ordinary folk. (2009) [Wikipedia : Ian Bogost is an American academic and video game designer.] • I have been wanting to look into this “OOO” • Material realism • Non-human (living, non-living, artificial or conceptual) entities are all considered ‘objects’. All these entities experience their own existence by perceiving each other (p. 13, Real-Time-Realist, J-LTF PRESS, 2017) Bruno Latour : “Where Are the Missing Masses? The Sociology of a Few Mundane Artifacts” (2008) [Wikipedia : Bruno Latour is a French philosopher, anthropologist and sociologist.] • The text is set in long lines ~90 characters • Loving this text:D:D the way its written :0) • - - Bruno Latour, explores how artifacts can be deliberately designed to both replace human action and constrain and shape the actions of other humans. His study demonstrates how people can “act at a distance” through the technologies they create and implement and how, from a user’s perspective, a technology can appear to determine or compel certain actions. - - Technologies play such an important role in mediating human relationships, Latour argues, that we cannot understand how societies work without an understanding of how technologies shape our everyday lives. Latour’s study of the relationship between producers, machines, and users demonstrates how certain values and political goals can be achieved through the construction and employment of technologies. (p. 151) - - Of course, I could have put on my seat belt before the light flashed and the car, the law, the police—expected of me. Or else, some devious engineer could have the car, the law, the police—expected of me. (p. 152) - - In spite of the constant weeping of moralists, no human is as relentlessly moral as a machine, especially if it is (she is, he is, they are) as “user friendly” as my Macintosh computer. We have been able to delegate to nonhumans not only force as we have known it for centuries but also values, duties, and ethics. It is because of this morality that we, humans, behave so ethically, no matter how weak and wicked we feel we are. The sum of morality does not only remain stable but increases enormously feel we are. The sum of morality does not only remain stable but increases enormously who focus on isolated socialized humans despair of us—us meaning of course humans and their retinue of nonhumans. (p. 157) Nader Vossoughian : Workers of the World, Conform! (2017) [Wikipedia : Nader Vossoughian is an architectural historian, theorist, and curator whose work focuses on architecture, information, and visual communication in twentieth-century German and European culture.] • - - the advertiser and bibliographer K.W. Bührer gave him a copy of Die Organisierung der geistigen Arbeit durch “Die Brücke” (The Organization of Intellectual Work through “The Bridge”) (1911), - - The book argues that the creation of universal systems for recording and circulating information hinges on the worldwide adoption of standards for the formatting of paper. By eliminating the need to consider paper sizes, fonts, layouts, margin sizes, and so on, standards would free postal workers, scholars, and bank clerks from the burdens of information management. (ch. 1) • - - As Lazzarato and many others have noted, separating intellectual and manual work, both of which are subject to rationalization and automation, is not so simple. (ch. 2) Video : Brian Eno about creative intelligence of a community

[foucaultfoucaultfoucault-blog]

Introduction Reading III (The New Materiality of Design) Kaisa Koisti, 6 Oct 2019 *one sticky-note* The life is a journey to get to know yourself, one could say. I don’t claim to know much about myself, but what I have learned about my personal traits so far, is that I am really bad at memorising any series of numbers. I could bore you by telling numerous examples about this particular flaw of mine. But like every time with a rule, there just has to be an exception. The exception, in this case, is that there is a numeric series that has fought its way to gain a place to stick in my memory, to have a close-knit connection with my so-called designer brain. It is 210(x)297. In other words, could say, that it is the systematisation, that has fought its way to stick in my memory. In my words, I don’t really find the forever-dear A4′s numeric values adding that much meaningful content in my memory stream, not at least on the personal level. I’d rather stick with the (yet-vague) memory fragments bringing me back to the careless state of being a child... finding much amusement of the simplest things... like having the time of my life organising plastic toys representing dinosaurs (ironic, right) in lines, according to the periods they lived in... Ok hold on. Hold on for Gaia’s sake. Is it just me or has my child-self been executing repetitive actions of the systematisation all along? And more remarkably, found some joy for doing so? Anyway, let’s bring back the *width=210 length=297* we started with. Here’s a new A4 artboard, presenting itself as blank as my emotional connection is to it. Despite the such no-feels-generated connection I’ve been having with A4′s numeric values, I cannot deny a fact of some sort, that the 6 numbers in a correct order are bringing some meaning for me (and the printer machines worldwide). In this case, the meaning of the sticking memory hasn’t got anything to do with generating more value for one’s life purpose (I’m only speaking on my behalf, consult the printers for their opinion). In this case the meaning of the sticking memory is something what we are not even looking for, someplace we are not stopping by to dwell in nostalgia with when rushing down the memory lane. In this case the meaning of the sticking memory is something what is primarily generated to serve the purpose of functioning. To close, and about, the entire case (filled with A4s of course), could say that DI Norm 476 has done a pretty good job, to be able to plant something what sticks even in the individual’s mind, who’s role happens to be a bit dysfunctional in this numeric memory game.