Forest for the Trees
A response to the ‘Design Process’ conversation.
Design school is an exhaustive exercise in forming and utilizing a design process, the output of which is then critiqued in order to spotlight successes and missed opportunities of that process. The process is then refined, reapplied and recritiqued. The intent of this cycle is to produce an efficient, purposeful, and successful tool that will eventually come to define each designer and allow them to intelligently solve problems.
Trouble is this cycle can become easily caught up in a ‘forest for the trees’ state in which both student and critic forget why they are communicating ideas in the first place. Successful design process development and worthwhile critiques rely on an understanding of what the design process is and why critiques are held, in short knowing that the forest exists in the first place.
It is the responsibility of the student to define what their design process is, even in its infancy, and the role that critiques play in helping to develop and refine this process. Through this understanding they are able to more concisely communicate their intent and in turn can receive more valuable feedback.
It is my belief that the goal of a good design process is to solve a problem and that problems by their own definition must have solutions. As students it is the process of reaching our solution that we attempt to communicate, and the successes or missed opportunities presented by our solutions that is then critiqued. Here in lies the immeasurable value of having experienced designers who are willing to thoughtfully critique your work. For this I am grateful.
In response to the conversation regarding bullshit, overly subjective opinions, and off topic commentary…
It is the responsibility of the critic to understand that unfocused comments to novice ears can without warning clog up critiques, misdirect students, and in the short timeframe allotted lead to an uneven discussion or debate of a project. A valuable part of presenting one’s work is learning to defend one’s choices. When criticism focuses purely on the negative, personal, or subjective, students can become confused on what to take away from the experience. The critics that remember the forest and value of concise communication provide insightful and instructive criticism. The clearer the critique, the more time available to discuss the process, project, and solution, and the more the student learns.
In the article “What goes on in design school?” published by the AIGA, Sharon Helmer Poggenpohl defines the role of critiques.
“This process helps students to separate work from self and to acquire the maturity and perspective needed in order to benefit from intelligent criticism. The critique is a basic exercise in critical thinking.”
Students and critics accepting the responsibility for understanding the role and value of a good critique will lead to more informed processes and intent, better designed solutions, and clearer commentary from which to grow. After all as Landscape Architects where would we be without the forest?
Well written- I agree with everything here except that the idea that every problem has a solution. I do believe that every problem can be mitigated, i.e., you can work around a problem, but there isn’t just one direct solution for everything. Which is why it’s frustrating as designers when we are told that our project “fails” or is “wrong”: the assumption being made by the critic is that there is an answer.
I feel that not all solutions have to be direct, permanent, or final. It’s not so much that there is one right answer, more that if a question is asked or problem posed you have choices. One do nothing, two do something. Either way you have made a choice or picked the way you plan on dealing with the problem.