I believe their thesis is that designs need to make money and be branded. Designers believe they are more makers than they are thinkers. Culture of design is about branded culture. Students should just study design and focus on that, no other subjects.
I agree with Helfand when she says that “many student design projects are based off of previous knowledge” because I know most people like to explore materials and method they already know how to use or a known subject. It is both faster and easier and you know it will turn out good in the end. I do the same thing except for materials since I do not currently know how to work with many materials. I have been trying to explore and use new materials. I still do base my ideas off of previous knowledge though and also off of things I enjoy. If you are using previous knowledge you have the extra time to advance your ideas in order to make them better.
Select one specific statement that you disagree with, and explain why.
I disagree with the statement made by Helfand saying “designers are not expected to study other basic classes like science or math; writing; history or anthropology; economics; music theory or literature,” because I think students should expand their knowledge. Students need to learn math, science, writing, and history to have a basic understanding of culture and also because design involves research and these topics. For example, learning math helps with measurements and computer programs, science helps with materials, writing helps with presentations, and history helps students understand some culture and past ideas/products.
How do you think Drenttel & Helfand would define 'innovation'?
I think Drenttel and Helfand would define innovation as replacing the “thing” before
No comments:
Post a Comment