HILL CCDN

As an emerging designer of whom’s academic career is based on the study of Art History, in particular the works of the Renaissance masters; upon looking at the emergence of a rapidly expanding liberal-arts and the synthesis of political cultures within both design and fine arts, I am left wondering what frameworks and criterion do we use to define art? With pieces such as Marcel Duchamp’s Fountain, Kazimir Malevich’s Black Square, Joseph Beuy’s collection of work and to a greater extend now the pieces produced by the radical feminists within the United States, how do we attribute a conventional understanding of ‘art’ to these pieces? Do these pieces contribute the same intellectual and academic discussion to the creative communities as the work of the Renaissance masters have? The structure of this manifesto will be looking to identify what is the modern perception of how we define ‘art’, how this perception differs to what we had previously thought and identifying modern works of ‘art’ that are highly accredited by critics and curators. This personal manifesto looks to question the expanding liberalism of design, where accolades and praise are attributed to works that, in relation to criticisms by authors such as Tolstoy; would not be conventionally deemed as ‘good art’.

Tolstoy, L. (1960). What is art?. New York: Bobbs-Merrill, Liberal Arts Press.

Tolstoy’s text, in relation to a personal manifesto looks at how the content of art is evaluated and provides a framework for commentating on what is considered “good”. Interestingly enough, due to Tolstoy’s nationality and the period of time that he lived in; there seems to be a dichotomy between the views held between himself and the authors/artists of western Europe. While his initial conception of ‘art’ is both broad and not morally stringent. His own personal bias become evident and is reasonably strict and with morals which are based on the function of art in regards to the development of humanity. Simultaneously, Tolstoy’s text looks into what could be considered the founding of Aesthetic theory, in which Greek philosophy is used to stand as a benchmark in which art is validated against ; and an elevation of an objective “beauty” which is used as a criteria to seperate good art from bad art. Another element of this text which will be used, is Tolstoy’s suggestion of two overarching “…aesthetic definitions of beauty.” (p. 31).

Beuys, J., Harlan, V., Barton, M., & Sacks, S. (2004). What is art?: Conversation with Joseph Beuys. London: Clairview Books.

In order to design and fabricate the prototype presented at the end of this project, I looked to an increasingly popular form of self-sustainable farming that is prominent in the United States of America at the moment; Aquaponics. According the the Trenler (2015) Aquaponics “…is a combination of two agricultural methods to create an altogether superior and environmentally friendly way of growing your own organic food” (p. 10). However, the methods used by eager Aquaponics enthusiasts are entirely unsustainable, and constructed a scale which is almost entirely unfeasible in the modern home or apartment.

As indicated on several blog posts, the modern Aquaponic systems rely on space, and the use of vast quantities of plastic drums and piping. Yet in accordance to what I believe is a founding principle of the Maker Movement, there is always room for improvement design-wise in order to address one of the major issues that is prevalent in most design fields, sustainability and the environment.

I have looked to reduce the scale of what could be considered a ‘stock-standard’ Aquaponics set-up, and looked to use sustainable materials (such as wood and other plant-fibre bases) in order to produce a “Maker’s Solution” that could also be marketed as a major product for hobbyists and those who look for a solution to be able to grow fresh produce at home.

Engaging in this process, I found myself falling into several pit-falls; which was to be expected. Having the finished product as the first thing on my mind when I went to paper saw me failing to consider the intricacies of the product’s function as my attention was focused primarily on the form. These included the predominant use of untreated timber in a system that functions purely on the displacement of water, this lead to several prototypes becoming damaged and forcing myself to use alternative measures. Simultaneously, I have identified key aspects within the prototype I have presented and now understand which minor function-related issues I must polish up before I can invest my time into producing a form aesthetic that matches not only the function, but that of a product that could be sold on the hobbyist market.

Having spent sufficient time looking through the relevant themes in the Maker Culture manifesto, I believe it would be appropriate of me to pass comment on the insights I have made since engaging with this project. As my project is solely based on transitioning one current hobbyist trend into a sustainable and marketable product; there is an essence of entrepreneurship within my working process. However, there is also an element of change that the project wishes to address. As current Aquaponics trends are based on maximum volumes and sizeable scales, the resources and materials used are environmentally unfriendly, and wasteful. Like a true maker, I look to make a means to promote an intervention of these techniques; and promote a solution that will not only embody Maker Culture and also create a product that would appeal to consumers.

MxJ Press. (2014). Manifestos. Digital Publication: lulu.com Manifestos, a collection of prominent design manifestos; provides an insight into the relevance of a design manifestos within a modern design culture, questioning whether or not a perceived “…ideological void” (p. 211) is increasingly reflected within modern design works. Interestingly, Manifestos has collated design manifestos that seemingly reflect an existential crisis; ones that question their own relevance, often suggesting a class divide those who design “…as celebrity, and those who design as labourer.” (p. 211) and criticising the divide between designers and users as a result.

Reborn as the illusive flâneur, spending time pacing through the city, identifying elements of observation and the spatial relationship between those who inhabit this city-space alongside myself and profiling their interactions in an innocent sense of voyeurism; I have identified a relationship between those whom also engage with the city in an implied sense of solemn obsession and the spaces within it that could identified as an oasis. Most prevalent during the evenings as the winter approaches, the few souls who wander the streets; be it business or leisure, will often find themselves within interior spaces that seem familiar to them as the dimly light signage or flickering neon beacons guide them.

More often than not, these interior spaces are the bars and similar hospitality outlets that work tirelessly into the early hours of the morning; offering a sense of ease or sanctuary. Edmund White (2015) suggests that “…like an ascetic animal he roams through unknown neighbourhoods until he collapses, totally exhausted, in the foreign, cold room that awaits him” (p. 48). White’s suggestion seems to dehumanise the flâneur, the individual whom neglects his own bodily needs; as if he exists in a transient state of being.

Having spent time strolling through the city, identifying elements of observation and the spatial relationship between those who inhabit this city-space alongside me and what they interact with; I have identified a relationship between those whom also engage with the city in a kind of solemn obsession and the spaces within it that could identified as an oasis. Most prevalent during the evenings, the few souls who wander the streets; be it business or leisure, will often find themselves within interior spaces that seem familiar to them.

More often than not, these interior spaces are cafés and bars that work tirelessly into the early hours of the morning; offering a sense of ease or sanctuary. Edmund White (2015) suggests that “…like an ascetic animal he roams through unknown neighbourhoods until he collapses, totally exhausted, in the foreign, cold room that awaits him” (p. 48). White’s suggestion seems to dehumanise the flâneur, the individual whom neglects his own bodily needs; as if he exists in a transient state of being.