Has "design" become an activity of, by, and for the 1%?

Interesting tango you’ve proposed here. I’ll only address one angle because it’s what I know best: Has “design” become an activity BY the 1%? In other words, are designers themselves part of the group known as ultra high net worth individuals? Who own at least US$30 million in financial assets?

Short answer: no.

Long answer: I’d be hard pressed to say designers even belong to the high net worth category (US$1 million in financial assets). Most designers I know struggle to make mortgage payments or to pay rent. Whether twenty-, thirty- or fortysomething designers, and whether from Holland, England or the United States. Even Canada. So this is a fairly Western-oriented observation.

Designers may patron Champagne bars and VIP lounges during furniture fairs, but they cannot afford Armand de Brignac. For example, designers I know who graduated in the last decade from the Design Academy Eindhoven, Sandberg Institute Amsterdam or OCAD University in Toronto are still busy refurbishing curb-side waste and hunting for bargains at second-hand shops. They even shop at discount retailers like Ikea.

Designers may be attracted by the optimistic promise of success via explore at Design Miami/Art Basel or Salone Internazionale del Mobile in Milan; and expose they do. But in reality, even masthead-featuring and award-winning designs rarely go into production. There are anomalies, of course, which we hear about in the design press. But most designers rarely see the kind of advances or royalties known by designers from yesteryears.

Well worth reads for those interested in today’s design economy:

Justin McGuirk wrote a fantastic piece about Milan’s PR economy: “Designs for life won’t make you a living” for The Guardian: http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/2011/apr/18/designs-milan-furniture-fair

And, Rick Poynor wrote an interesting piece about the PR nature of the design press: “Designers Need Critics” for Frame magazine: http://www.frameweb.com/news/designers-need-critics-part-one-

We simply no longer live in a post-WWII West with a rising middle class ready to dive into “good modern design.” Rather, we see Western production down. We also see royalty-based and PR-related design incomes fading fast. For better or worse, the result is a field wide open to both strong criticism and new alternatives.

Monday, February 20 at 5:20pm

I think there are some shifts emerging in what has been traditionally a 1% discipline. I’d propose that there are still distinctions between the “activity of”, “activity by” and “activity for” in suggesting such shifts.

When you have access to design education, this allows the possibility that design could be an occupation. Doing design work in Rwanda has reminded me that many would love the chance to be a designer but it hasn’t necessarily been available in the educational system. This would radically shift the activity of and activity by quotient and is the reason why I think the 1% have continued to have the most access and influence.

But to see how the 1% might bring design to the other 99% is an interesting mid-point in this spectrum. I can think of a variety of organizations that are shifting this:
http://http://catapultdesign.org, http://www.projecthdesign.org, http://www.d-rev.org, http://ideo.org, http://architectureforhumanity.org and others are focusing their work on “design for” the other 99%.
Side Bar: My own work in Rwanda has focused on how to design with, rather than for: http://cargocollective.com/karapecknold

What we tend not to hear as much about the activities of and by those outside of the 1%. But I believe it exists! An example of this would be Maker Faire Africa where inventors and innovators are focusing their attention on designs that have impact in the context they are located: http://makerfaireafrica.com

While some of these activities are not as present as the 1% stories we hear more frequently, I sense we are in a time where this has the potential to shift. One area of growth would be the emergence of educational opportunities to open up the design activities “of and by” the 99%. It is exciting to see SVA taking this forward in some capacity: http://dsi.sva.edu/africa

Tuesday, February 21 at 1:51pm

This just in from Core77: Nendo will show a new collection of 1% products at Salone Milan 2012

Wednesday, February 22 at 12:49pm

Reaction to (and, at times, shrill critique) of) the recently opened exhibition at the Museum of Modern Art, “Foreclosed: Rehousing the American Dream,” might suggest that – yes – perhaps designers are better off sticking to the 1% that they know well, given architecture’s repeated historic failures to address complex urban (and suburban) challenges. After all, as Steven Holl apparently said in a 2010 interview, “It’s always about the clients. Without good clients you can’t have good architecture,” (quoted in Nicolai Ouroussoff, “By the Architects, for the People: A Trend for 2010s,” The New York Times, May 3, 2010) and the 99% is a notoriously difficult client. Yet the most innovative architects have and, thankfully, will continue to engage these questions, whether speculatively or with actual “blueprints” rather than just “visions”. OWS and the 99% have been galvanized by mortgage foreclosures, setting up camp at the same time the MoMA teams were first presenting their proposals (nee “visions”) last fall. Any design activity that engages these questions needs to be linked to radical changes in fiscal policy and transit infrastructure as well, however. The announcement that the Obama administration will be unveiling new standards this week for now banks treat the millions of people facing foreclosure may help, therefore, but it’s just a step toward addressing a vast problem that architects and designers alone cannot solve.

Wednesday, February 22 at 6:05pm

we agree to the fact that many people are enjoying the luxuary of the results of design, a tree which gives you tasty fruits like social networking and more. More the number of trees, more the number of tasty fruits and if there are different types of trees then we can expect an enormous market. Like wise, If the design is concentrated on its pre-step of transforming physical object to digital one, I think Its gonna be a break through.. If we are able to transform a physical object directly into A digital one, there is a huge chance for the enormous growth of the trees as well as the tasty fruits.

Friday, March 2 at 4:22am

[ I guess the question then becomes, are designers losing ground in terms of helping to drive a larger cultural conversation? Moreover, since the cultural (& certainly economic) gap between the 1% and most designers themselves (even the most elite & successful) has widened, are we increasingly in a reactive position even in situations where our design work is socially motivated?] fair and honest questions asked in multiple contexts – a VIP lounge in Miami or Rwanda. If design reflects the viewer and not the creator as oscar Wilde suggested – than the key is exposure (and ugh scalability) – one force which drove the American housing for so long- but other factors included the over regulation of a basic human right – to housing- by the 1% who profited. Did designers participate ? You bet from urban to interior. Have new generations of designers been combed to propagate the machine? Yup. But as societies shift again to celebrate good and healthy design in dwelling- the ‘blueprint’ will radically alter. As designers emerge to reflect these shifts – there is hope for the footing.

Friday, March 2 at 2:40pm