Art and Design

As industrial designers, our education so far has been heavily based on the design side of the spectrum. We are taught to draw perfectly straight lines without a straight edge, and perfect perspective. We are given all of the tools and information we need to be able to design. My design education may have formally started my sophomore year in industrial design, however the building blocks we there since I was a kid. My parents would take me to art museums, and science museums. As well my everyday interaction with objects was an education of objects. I remember when I was a child I was curious as to how the mechanism of my mini stapler worked. During math class I would open it up, take out the spring and disassemble it to the best of my ability. My curiosities as to how things work and what makes one object easier to use compared to the next of the same kind has led me to Industrial design.

It is in solving these problems of design which I find delight. Art and design heavily rely on each other. As designers, we are most defiantly influence by art. The Merriam Webster Dictionary defines art as “the conscious use of skill and creative imagination especially in the production of aesthetic objects.” As designers we use our imagination daily to come up with aesthetically pleasing, or aesthetically provoking objects on a daily basis. I personally would say that design is particular branch of art which seeks to solve human based issues in a constructive way.

Art and design are not separate and cannot be separate by nature, although some designs are more directly influenced by art. By using art as an influence we can often come up with unusual ways to solve a functional problem. Max Le Chinois, a stainless steel and brass colander by Philippe Starck, Is noted for its style. By its self it has become an art object, beautiful enough to stand in the fanciest of kitchens. As my book Antiques of The Future states “Philippe Starck transformed a utilitarian colander into an art object…Most notably, it looks stylish just sitting on the counter doing nothing” (p166.) The regular colander of the time was also very beautiful and a metal one can still be bought for under $20 where as the $330 dollar price tag of Starck’s makes in inaccessible to all but a tiny percentage of the population. Starck’s design changes are not improving upon the functionality of the object which is where the design falls apart. By doubling the height of the colander it makes it less likely to fit under many kitchen sink faucets. This makes it unusable for its original purpose of washing greens and other vegetables.

In my mind the most successful design objects are those that incorporate design and art, without compromising functionality and are yet are widely accessible. We are taught as designers not engineers so we are taught to keep the aesthetics and functionality of items in mind when designing. The key is not to let one’s idea of functionality hinder the artistic vision and reversely not let one’s artistic vision hinder the functionality of design.