What is the current state of Danish design? How can we take the best from a glorious past and bring it into the future? And how can we devise a new strategy for Danish design in practice, education and research on the basis of what Danish design is – or what it perhaps ought to be? These were some of the questions that were addressed in a three-day dialogue seminar at the Aarhus School of Architecture with the English design professor John Heskett from the School of Design at Hong Kong Polytechnic University.

By Mads Nygaard Folkmann

John Heskett had been invited to Århus as a qualified sparring partner at the seminar Strategies for Danish Design – Practice, Research, and Education. Part One took place on 11 through 13 March 2008 at the Aarhus School of Architecture. Part Two will be held 30 September through 2 October 2008. The seminar is co-funded by the Danish Centre for Design Research.

The English design professor John Heskett from the School of Design at Hong Kong Polytechnic University recently visited the Aarhus School of Architecture in the first of two seminars on “Strategies for Danish design”. Photo: Mads Nygaard Folkmann

A New Vision of Danish design
The seminar unfolded in three stages, where Day One was about mapping the DNA of Danish design, Day Two looked at contrast characters in other countries, particularly in Asia which is where John Heskett works, and Day Three focused on summarising the key points and preparing the ground for the second part of the seminar by asking what frame of reference one might apply to a recasting of Danish design – a recasting, importantly, that can be converted into a strategy for Danish design that might also be implemented by the government.

At the final day of the seminar, three topics dominated in particular. Firstly, there was a focus on the cultural and societal development that fostered Danish design in its golden age, and which continues to play a crucial role today. Secondly, and in extension of this, it was debated how design can best be perceived and defined today; and thirdly, the debate addressed specific implications for design education and research.

The Societal Moorings of Danish Design
On the final day, John Heskett summarised some of the factors that affect Danish design, and which had been debated the previous days. One key issue was the connection between Danish design and the surrounding culture and society, with particular emphasis on the concepts of cultural identity, trust and the welfare society. Other key factors were the Danish design education programmes and the Danish design policy.

John Heskett pointed out that all these elements can be considered internal factors for the development of Danish design; in addition, there are a number of external factors such as globalisation, the EU, in particular EU legislation, as well as supernational development trends such as new technology and new approaches to design and sustainability.

Danish design cannot – especially not today – be viewed as something that developed in a vacuum, free of outside influences, and it is therefore important to consider the interaction of internal and external factors – and not only that: It is also essential to understand the extent and the character of the different factors and their mutual interaction in order to offer the most precise suggestion for the future direction of Danish design. John Heskett mentioned design research as a factor that runs across all the other factors, and which is thus absolutely crucial for the ongoing development of the field.

Working with models. Head of Research Jørgen Rasmussen from the Aarhus School of Architecture expands on the model for the development of Danish design that John Heskett outlined on the final day of the three-day seminar. Photo: Mads Nygaard Folkmann

The strength in this type of approach is that it does not indicate one single way forward; instead, by mapping a number of essential factors, it establishes a useful framework for discussing Danish design. This also illuminates the future latitude available to Danish design. We now face, as one of the two moderators from the Aarhus School of Architecture, associate research professor Thomas Dickson, pointed out, a major challenge in turning this mapping and framework into a new, specific strategy for Danish design.

The Role of Design
In extension of this consideration, the other moderator, Jørgen Rasmussen, head of research and associate professor at the Aarhus School of Architecture, asked how we might move from the abstract issues to the concrete, for example in the form of products and their use. He asked, for example, how trust can be made tangible.

This led to the general and key topic concerning the role that design plays or can play in relation to developments in society. To put it to the point, it is obvious, from a design perspective, that design has played a role in the cultural and social development in Denmark, but from the point of view of society, it is difficult to point to specific contributions made by design.

Round table discussion. Part of the seminar with John Heskett took place as a rather informal discussion, where all the participants were seated around a table and invited to contribute freely. Photo: Mads Nygaard Folkmann

A Broad Definition and Concrete Output
The seminar participants discussed design’s need for promotion. John Heskett’s suggestion was to apply a broad, general definition of design as the active creation of products that serve our needs and give meaning in our lives. This is demanding, however: In acknowledgement of the fact that the world consists of manmade artefacts, we must accept the responsibility for the state of the world. He emphasised the importance of expanding the boundaries of what we can discuss in relation to design and pointed to Herbert Simon’s classic definition of design as the possibility of a shift from an existing state of affairs to a preferred one.

John Heskett warned against adopting too narrow a perception of design as mere product design, since contemporary design can be related to processes, services, communication, identity and surroundings, among other things – possibly as multiple forms blended together and combined into systems.
His point was that we have to operate with a broad, basic definition of design and then consider the various directions and practice forms that it extends into. He also pointed out that powerful examples will enable us to highlight the key contributions and essential outcomes of design. Then, according to John Heskett, we will have to live with the ambiguity in the definition of design as a discipline. 

Design as a Source of Social Transformation?
The possibility of actively using design not just to support but also to promote social development was a recurring issue in the seminar. Heskett offered an outside perspective and put the issue on an overall ideological formula by posing a number of questions: What is the purpose of design? What sort of society do we believe in and hope to promote through design? What is the vision for Danish society? How are we going to pursue it? And how far can we extend this in relation to design? What do we want from design, and what is the role of design in relation to society?

Productive dialogue. Jørgen Rasmussen from the Aarhus School of Architecture in a dialogue with John Heskett. Photo: Mads Nygaard Folkmann

One suggestion that was raised at the seminar was to develop designs that promote the welfare society and its values. This may be in the form of products based on studies of cultural patterns that offer new ideas for, say, the health sector or the care sector. Another proposal was to create products that are competitive, for example, because they use less power or improve accessibility for marginalised groups in society.

Design Education and Design Research
The debate at the seminar addressed the two places where a new development in design might begin: ‘bottom-up’ in the educational institutions with their education and research efforts, and ‘top-down’ through a national design policy.

In relation to design education, much of the debate revolved around the qualities and competencies that future designers acquire through the educational programmes, and what design ‘culture’ is being promoted.
The political level especially concerns how design can be used strategically on a national level, and it becomes clear how crucial it is to have a visionary approach to the development of the design profession. One specific suggestion in this context was ‘government design’, where the government in fact shows the way as an exemplary design user and client.

John Heskett pointed out that Danish design should consider how to position itself in relation to the rest of the world, and that in any case it is not sufficient to think and work within the framework of ‘classic’ Danish design from the golden age in the 1950’s; instead it is necessary to expand the perspective to embrace new fields of design, including, for example, service design and digital design.

Here lies a challenge that requires a general visionary and consistent design policy, which, however, begins at the bottom of the food chain in the educational institutions: Education and research also have productive contributions to make to an overall design policy.
 

The seminar Strategies for Danish Design – Practice, Research, and Education at the Aarhus School of Architecture consists of two parts: - Part One: Danish design – business and culture in the world as we see it today, took place 11 through 13 March 2008. - Part Two: Not defining design – but “Designing Design” takes place 30 September through 2 October 2008. The seminar receives financial support from the Velux Foundation and the Danish Centre for Design Research. John Heskett is Chair Professor of Design in the School of Design at Hong Kong Polytechnic University. He is the author of a number of important books on design, including Industrial Design (1980), Phillips B.V. (1988) and Toothpicks and Logos: Design in Everyday Life (2003). Recently, he published Design: A Very Short Introduction (2005).

 

Mind Design #8, 2008