Abstract:

Anthropologist Tim Ingold (2013) describes making as the emergence of form through a continuous interplay, or itineration, between the flow of consciousness and the flow of active materials. This position runs counter to the hylomorphic perspective that poses the abstract formation of ideas as a priory activity in the design process. It also clarifies why a pedagogical approach centered on ideation (whether in the framing of the initial brief or in the tools and methods employed) tends to maintain students in a state of “eidetic paralysis” (Trottier, 2011) where the formal, spatial, and material implications of ideas are never clearly expressed.

This paper will review how making reactivates the design process by promoting dialogical exchanges between the internal world of ideas and the external conditions within which design must necessarily operate. Referencing projects from recent graduate seminars and design studios it will articulate the discussion around the concept of embodied practice and consider the specific role or materials, tectonics, and technology in supporting reflective practices. Doing so, it will echo Ingold’s position and argue that design can be conceived as a space of appearance where the immanent potentiality of form emerges through the reciprocal dance between maker / designer and the material world.

References:
[1] Ingold, Tim. (2013). Making: Anthropology, Archeology, Art and Architecture. London: Routledge.
[2] Trottier, Jean. (2011). “A Framework for Recording the Design Process”. Design Principles and Practices: An International Journal. Volume 5, Number 3.

Keywords:

Embodied practice, design process, design pedagogy.