PIVOT COLLECTIVEA MANIFESTO

Mission statement: To establish global balance by promoting the questioning andunderstanding of individual balances with all designs and by all as designers. (Thackara, 2005)We believe global design has reached a tipping point. A Pivot point. There are two optionsavailable to us- to continue producing, designing, living as we are or to reconsider, evaluateand change the ways we design and think about design.Sustainability, and an environmental consideration are at the core of our beliefs, theyare not a trendy facade. We believe there is a way we can sustain our qualities of life,continuing to design, create, as well as bettering the world.We have established a series of balances, pairs to consider when approaching design- be itas the creator or the consumer. Each side has a value, and it is about discovering the pointwithin each, and with relevance to your design, where these balance- for the good of thedesign and the greater good of the world.Our logo embodies this sense of a critical point, as well as a sense for the evolution andgrowth of design. The circle represents the world we are all in; the triangles balanced andconverging represent the information and considerations within the design (central point)and again expanding as the user imparts themselves upon the design and the design uponthe world.

REVOLUTIONARY / EVOLUTIONARY

The history of design shows numerous examples of design revolutions such asMinimilism, postmodernism, Dada and sub genres such as Steampunk and Slowfoodmovements. As society grows accustomed to each new style of design it inevitably beginsto become overwhelmed by it and at some point will fight against it in favour of opposingstyles, thus creating a new design revolution and a continuing curve of design (Coffin, 2008).This can be seen in post-modernist designer, Robert Venturi’s quote, “less is a bore” adirect reaction of the style that preceded it exemplified by Ludwig Mies Van der Rohe’sfamous modernist statement, “less is more.” (Goldberger, 1971)

A design must be as powerful as a revolution but as constant and multi-directional as anevolutionary process. It is not only possible to be both but it is a necessity to be both.Current climate change theories point to a global tipping point, it is at the tip of this pointwe have the opportunity to change an is some ways force design to become evolutionary inan revolutionary way. This is an opportunity we as a species cannot afford to miss.

ANSWERING / QUESTIONING

Dunne and Raby’s work into highly critical and conceptual design is exemplary of the waysin which design can be used to ask questions (Dunne & Raby, 2001). As designers we muststrive to better our understand of people, objects and systems, we can only truly achievethis through constantly formulating and asking questions. Perhaps the most poignantquestion of all is “why”? A designer should be able to justify every decision in a relevantcontext; justified questions can then begin create relevant answers and in turn justifieddesigns.

Using design to answer questions should not imply a final answer and should encourageothers to continue to question not only the design itself but the context within which it lies.In this way a continuous cycle of questioning and answering is achieved. Answers cannotexist without questions, while this is a very simple concept it is often forgotten. This conceptis not always true in reverse and indeed the most provocative questions are those for whichno answer exists. (Meyer, 1988)

Too often is design initiated and orientated around solving one problem, sacrificing vitalopportunities for questioning. As a society we must position ourselves in a mind set that isfocused on questioning as well as answering.

GLOBAL / LOCAL

The world is at a point now where we need to consider where and how the things weconsume are made. (Cameron & Elliot, 1994) Sustainability has become a key word of thetimes, and holds particular relevance to design. The balance needs to be found betweenthinking global, and acting local. (Aldersey-Williams, 1992)

We can balance and compare the two when thinking about travel. Raw materials oftentravel 1000’s of kilometres to get here (this is especially the case with electronics, allcontaining very specific minerals), and whilst this allows us greater diversity in our materialchoices, it comes at a high environmental cost. Local materials cost less to transport,economically and environmentally, and provide a) a cultural point of relevance andfamiliarity and b) employment and economic ‘joy’ to the community’s designs are producedand used in (Chen, Goupers, Kouner, & Lerver, 2009).

The balance we have to consider in this case is the diversity in ideas that globalism brings .Open source thinking, different cultural perspectives. With the technology existing today,we can remain connected to the global ideas pool, thinking globally, and designing andproducing for those around us, acting locally. (Diehl, 2006)

HOMOGENOUS/ DIVERSE

Evolution is diversity. (Delanda, 2004) The base of this point is that diversity in naturesurvive, a homogenous community does not. Consider this- if there’s a large group ofthe same animal/ organism hunting the same food source, competition will be high andeventually the food source will be consumed and the group left to starve. This is why,when thinking about natural eco systems, there is who diversity, a lot of creatures sharingdifferent food sources. In the design world this applies (Thackara, 2005). The manufacturer

or the design is the predator, the main group, the audience is the food source. If the marketis flooded with all the same, consumption will drop. Diversity brings commercial prosperity,and also interest. The flip side to this is production costs. Homogeneity and mass productiongo hand in hand. If you’re producing a lot of the same thing your machine fitting costsdecrease, the opposite applying to a diverse production range. Diversity brings interest, anda high production cost. Homogeneity brings economically more sustainable production, buta less interesting and commercially sustainable consuming environment.

SOLITARY / SOCIAL

‘The designer,’ a term that is used frequently throughout design theory and literature.This term encourages us as designers to think, create, and produce design as an individual.(Goldschmidt, 1995) How can we find a balance to work collectively as designers so thatwe can share knowledge and information to enable design to shift from being exclusive todesign in a more holistic way it the very definition lends itself to a solitary ideology? Wemust redefine society’s preconception around the term ‘designer’ and begin to celebrate itas a social process.

Just as the seed contains hereditary information of it’s ancestors each new design contains avast collection of references to designs and other influences that have come before it. JohnThackara’s concept of us all being “In the bubble” helps us to visualise and understandthat we need to consider all stages of design as we all live in this world together. (Thackara,2005)

RESTRICT / ENABLE

Though it may seem obvious that design should enable, we must ask ourselves how designcan restrict, and why? Indeed many people argue that design should never restrict weconsider some level of restriction to be beneficial (Bekker, Johnson, Johnson, & Wilson,1997). We believe for restrictive design to exist if must maintain a justified reason examplescould be for the users safety, economic reasons, to challenge an idea or even challengethe user of the product. One such project that demonstrates this is Handschuhfinger byRebecca Horn in 1972. This project featured beautifully crafted white "extended" fingersor fingernails each several feet in length, as the user interacted with objects and spacesthe ‘fingers’ creating a unique restrictive experience. (Horn, 1977)

Often through restriction of one particular element or idea of a project we can open upother areas to be explored and experienced. At first glance restriction and enabling seem tobe complete contradictions, projects from designers and artists such as Rebecca’s show thatin fact the two actually complement one another.

PERFECTION / IMPERFECTION

Achieving beauty, both aesthetic and conceptual, is a dream for us all as designers. Westrive to find balance between form and function, expression, efficiency and purpose.However we must realize that what we judge as perfect is subjective. No designed artefactthat surrounds us is perfect. From a drinking glass that is heavy, vulnerable to breaking andmust be down-cycled to less pure material if it makes it that far...to the personal computerthat consumes too much electricity, crashes just before you save and comes to rest as highlytoxic waste. (McDonough & Braungart, 2002)

Natalia Ilyin sees this as a fear of uncertainty as a direct result of the world war (one) thatdirectly preceded the International style movement and gave definition to modernist designas it still exists today (Ilyin, 2006). Within imperfections of each artefact lie possibilitiesfor.... opportunities for adaptation to its environment. Perfection must come in the form ofperfectly fitting not perfectly finished.

EXCLUSIVE / HOLISTIC

We see evidence of holistically structured designs from organisations such as IDEO whoutilise a method based upon in-depth research into every aspect of a product’s relatingelements - from the people and other products the design interacts throughout its entirelife cycle. (Stoddard, 2010) In essence they treat each product as a social entity and explorethe complex relationships in order to drive the design process. They consider, beforedesigning, where, who, what, how and why. They do not consider only the product itself,but understand that this product forms part of a service and exists in a wider community (ofusers as well as designs). This approach holds its merits in its relevance to the user, and in itsconsiderations beyond the product user interactions, strengthening the design.

Designing in an exclusive way, however, is not always bad. There are times when we mustrealise that all of us are different, and in this age of personal manufacturing, we are alldesigning exclusively for ourselves. (Heskett, 2002) Two Victoria university graduates havestarted a small company that utilises this exclusivity. Users can design, customise their ownchair and have it manufactured especially for them. (Saul, Lau, Mitami, & Igarashi, 2011) Itis in this way design can become simultaneously both holistic and exclusive.

FINISHED/ PERPERTUAL

Pivot believes that design must never stop. We are beginning to see the short sightednessof industrial design with so many artefacts of our generation coming rest in landfills.(McDonough & Braungart, 2002) It is the final stage for so products but is the completionthe designer envisioned. We do not see this one way process in nature. In nature the endof one life helps to extend that of another, we as designers and as people must adoptcharacteristics from this phenomenon and apply it to our design production ideology.Whether natural or manufactured all processes must become self-perpetuating for can afinalised design every be classified as truly finished and no improvements could ever bemade to it?

Timeless design is a term used far too lightly. (Cid, 2011) Used to describe things that sitoutside the current aesthetic fads or trends. Timelessness in design should mean that theartefact, physically, aesthetically and theoretically is free from a defined beginning andend. The physical form (if one exists) is but one phase in the life of that design, while in thatphase yes it can be said that it is finished but what happens when that phase ends and anew one begins?

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Aldersey-Williams, H. (1992). Aldersey-Williams, H.Nationalism and Globalism in Design. New York: Rizzoli International Publi-cations Ltd.

Bekker, M., Johnson, H., Johnson, P., & Wilson, S. (1997). Helping and Hindering- A Tale of Everyday Design. SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. London: HCI Group, Department of Computer Science, Queen Mary and Westfield Col-lege.

Cameron, R., & Elliot, G. (1994). Consumer Perception of Product Quality and the Country-of-origin Effect. Journal of Internation Marketing , 49- 62.

Chen, H., Goupers, P., Kouner, A., & Lerver, J. (2009). Buy Local? The Geography of Successful and Unsuccessful. Venture Capi-tal Expansion. NBER Working Paper, No. 15102 .

Cid, S. K. (2011). Timeless Design: Beyond Decorating Trends. Bloomington: Balboa Press.

Coffin, S. (2008). Rococo: The Continuing Curve. New York: Cooper-Hewitt Museum.

Delanda, M. (2004, April 9). Deleuze and the Use of the Genetic Algorithm in Architecture. New York: Columbia Uuniversity: Art and Technology Lecture Series.

Diehl, J. (2006). Globilisation and Cross Cultural Product Design. 9th Internationa Design Conference: Design Projects and Pro-cesses, (pp. 503- 510).

Dunne, A., & Raby, F. (2001). Design Noir: The Secret Life of Electronic Objects. Berlin: Birkhäuser.

Goldberger, P. (1971). Less is More—Mies van der Rohe; Less is a Bore—Robert Venturi. New York Times Magazine, October 17 .

Goldschmidt, G. (1995). The designer as a team of one. Design Studies , 16 (2), 189-209.

Heskett, J. (2002). Toothpicks and logos: Design in everyday life. New York: Oxford University press Inc.

Horn, R. (1977). Zeichnungen/Drawings, Objekte/Objects, Video/Video, Filme/Films. Berlin: Haus am Waldsee.

Ilyin, N. (2006). Chasing the Perfect: Thoughts on Modernist Design in Our Time . New York: Bellerophon.

McDonough, W., & Braungart, W. (2002). Cradle to Cradle: Remaking the Way We Make Things. New York: North Point Press.

Meyer, M. (1988). Questions and questioning. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.

Saul, G., Lau, M., Mitami, J., & Igarashi, T. (2011). Sketch Chair: An All-in-one Chair Design System for End Users. Tokyo: JST ERATO IGARASHI.

Stoddard, J. (2010, May 20). Can designers help create better service? [Video]. Gothenburg, Sweden: ADA and Business & Design Lab.

Thackara, J. (2005). In the bubble: designing in a complex world. Massachusetts: MIT Press.

“To establish global balance by promoting the questioning and understanding of Individual balances.”By Richard Clarkson, Tui Harrington, Micah Sargisson and Brooke Bowers