Lataa ilmaiseksi

More documents

Recommendations

Info

D W E L L I N G W I T H D E S I G N 258 always fluid environments of consumption, practices and meaning. (Shove et al. 2007b 8) I am inclined to add that the domestication of a product does not necessarily come to an end even in less fluid, less changing environments. However, as I have already noted, domestication can rapidly become successful when the household quickly learns that, indeed, the product has survived the imaginary and real trials, has been successfully curated and has become an established part of a household’s understanding of itself and its identity. As anyone who has ever had a difficult time making a decision in a department store can testify, it is not always easy to envision those imaginary trials correctly when it comes to one’s own household. The imaginative and respective evaluation of design becomes all the more difficult when household is less familiar to the evaluator. Not surprisingly, most of the interviewed households pointed towards gifts that they had received when asked about the most hideous items in their home. In a similar vein, although some households were proudly dwelling with inherited items, most also told me about family furniture hidden in the cellars. I admit that I did not quite know what to make of that, or what the unwanted gifts and heirlooms meant to the interviewees – no one was able to or interested in elaborating upon that point other than to make a flat comment that the gifts could not be thrown away, or else they gave a somewhat defensive account of why they had thrown the item away; thus, I settle on drawing two simple notions about the role of gifts in households. First, it seems that, if the traditional gift requires the exchange of further gifts (Mauss 1923), the unwanted gift in a home is a double burden because, in addition to the required exchange of gifts, the very presence of the unwanted gift in the apartment can be seen as a gift given to the gift giver. Second, the unwanted gifts and inherited items no doubt mediate those particular social, if not aesthetic, values that the household wants to respect and take care of. In that case, the design plays an important role in the moral economy of the household because it mediates and even moulds the social relations of the household. In addition to establishing and maintaining social relations, we may guess that those rare givers who manage to find the types of items that the household actually likes, gain some extra esteem since the feat is known to be difficult. In the moral economy of the household, gifts and inherited items cause tensions because they do not fit or contribute to the dwelling practices, but they remain in the apartment nonetheless. Unwanted designs most easily turn into clutter, but they are not the only source of clutter because, I am arguing, any design that does not fit or no longer fit with practices of the hotel, gallery
or museum, becomes clutter. From a household’s point of view, the designed product does not have any actual value or the potential to become valuable. In my discussion, I have called these designs “distant” because the household does not want to have anything to do with them, not even to take the effort to get rid of them. Here, again, I am pointing to the indifference towards both the home and the products, while, at the same time and in the same household and often by the same people, some, perhaps most, aspects of how the household is dwelling are meticulously taken care of and may follow strict moral and aesthetic principles. 7 DOMESTIC ATION OF DESIGN 259
Page 1 and 2:
Heidi Paavilainen Dwelling with des
Page 3 and 4:
Aalto University publication series
Page 5 and 6:
3 DESIGN ENTERS HOME 88 Introductio
Page 7 and 8:
Acknowledgements A C K N O W L E D
Page 9:
9A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S
Page 12 and 13:
D W E L L I N G W I T H D E S I G N
Page 14 and 15:
Page 16 and 17:
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21:
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
Page 50 and 51:
Page 52 and 53:
Page 54 and 55:
Page 56 and 57:
Page 58 and 59:
Page 60 and 61:
Page 62 and 63:
Page 65 and 66:
65 definiNG DESIGN
Page 67 and 68:
Classifying design 2 D E F I N I N
Page 69 and 70:
I furniture (321) II lamps (168) II
Page 71 and 72:
to study how the interviewees talke
Page 73 and 74:
the list does, it reflects how the
Page 75 and 76:
was limited to fun, nice and very h
Page 77 and 78:
During the interviews, 16 household
Page 79 and 80:
M: But it was almost darker than th
Page 81 and 82:
T: This really doesn’t have any p
Page 83 and 84:
Summary 2 D E F I N I N G D E S I G
Page 85:
paradox is also evident in my data.
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104 and 105:
Page 106 and 107:
Page 108 and 109:
Page 110 and 111:
Page 112 and 113:
Page 114 and 115:
Page 116 and 117:
Page 118 and 119:
Page 120 and 121:
Page 122 and 123:
Page 124 and 125:
Page 126 and 127:
Page 128 and 129:
Page 130 and 131:
Page 132 and 133:
Page 134 and 135:
Page 136 and 137:
Page 138 and 139:
Page 140 and 141:
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148 and 149:
Page 150 and 151:
Page 153 and 154:
STORING DESIGN
Page 155 and 156:
165 P 165. Anniina’s shelf 4 S T
Page 157 and 158:
A bit later Janne outlined what had
Page 159 and 160:
to, show off to. As against actual
Page 161 and 162:
168 169 4 S T O R I N G D E S I G N
Page 163 and 164:
colours and sizes. And this is simp
Page 165 and 166:
sizes; there are 2-seaters, comfort
Page 167 and 168:
T: this has been protected like not
Page 169 and 170:
least fondly talked about. The prod
Page 171 and 172:
Other examples are a vintage dress,
Page 173 and 174:
190 191 4 S T O R I N G D E S I G N
Page 175 and 176:
the right spot, once the right spot
Page 177 and 178:
197 198 4 S T O R I N G D E S I G N
Page 179 and 180:
204 P 204. Janne’s sofa 4 S T O R
Page 181 and 182:
205 262 4 S T O R I N G D E S I G N
Page 183 and 184:
H: it’s some sort of aesthetic (p
Page 185 and 186:
to call the latter designs “dista
Page 187:
4 S T O R I N G D E S I G N 187
Page 190 and 191:
Page 192 and 193:
Page 194 and 195:
Page 196 and 197:
Page 198 and 199:
Page 200 and 201:
Page 202 and 203:
Page 204 and 205:
Page 206 and 207:
Page 208 and 209: D W E L L I N G W I T H D E S I G N
Page 231 and 232: DESIGN limbo
Page 233 and 234: Consequently, it started to seem th
Page 235 and 236: 252 253 6 D E S I G N L I M B O 254
Page 237 and 238: 256 P 256. Sanna & Kalevi’s sofa
Page 239 and 240: for now, the study chair which, esp
Page 241 and 242: 259 260 6 D E S I G N L I M B O 241
Page 243 and 244: 261 P 261. Sanna & Kalevi’s livin
Page 245 and 246: example. In 2004, he talked about h
Page 247 and 248: little in the interviewees’ comme
Page 249: design in the household. I have als
Page 302: Dwelling with Design offers a throu
show all

Lataa ilmaiseksi

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?