26-07-2012, 03:29 PM
DESIGN CRITERIA BASED ON AESTHETIC CONSIDERATIONS
Design_Criteria_Based_on_Aesthetic_Considerations.pdf (Size: 145.86 KB / Downloads: 92)
Abstract
Aesthetic criteria for designs are often debated in a very subjective manner which makes it difficult to
reach consensus. In order to have a more rational and transparent process, in particular in industrial
design, we propose a procedure based on Baumgarten’s aesthetic considerations and Thommesen’s
dividing of a form into form elements. The procedure has been tested in student projects.
Introduction
In science contexts, it is a problem that argument for aesthetic qualities of products is unclear since
science is traditionally based on clear or explicit statements. Particularly, in integrated design processes
with a systematic selection of solutions based on statements about quantity and quality, it is unfortunate
that the statements about product aesthetics are unclear [1]. When the aesthetics is made the focus of
design, many students have a hard time structuring the process. In order to solve this problem, we have
experimented with a procedure based Baumgarten’s aesthetic considerations and Thommesens’
dividing of a form into form elements.
Practical design requires craftsmanship and whether it relies on manual and / or digital tools is
important for the outcome [2], but not for design responsibility. This will be discussed in the following,
where we search for a clarification of two issues: Firstly, using aesthetic considerations which are
analogous to engineering rules and secondly, using methodical approaches to formgiving just as those
methods used in ergonomics, manufacturing and technical construction in the integrated design
process. The creative and intuitive approaches are common to the problem-oriented process [3], but
outside of this study which focuses on the following two related problems:
How can designers formulate aesthetic considerations which communicate a clear message to
professionals?
How can single coherent forms be developed methodically in an interaction between practice-based
creation and testing of shape variations driven by selection through aesthetic considerations?
Relevant aesthetic considerations in this study relates to three-dimensional forms with a physical
representation in space (artefact). Baumgarten’s considerations are a combination of guidelines to
advanced aesthetics and general rules about what is more aesthetic than something else. As pointed out
by the design researcher Peter Dorm, aesthetic considerations are developed through the creative
process [4]. Whether it is the aesthetic considerations which are under continuous clarification in
general, if it is the individual designer, who achieves a deeper awareness of the considerations content,
or if it is the number of considerations which grows, this study does not give the answer, because it is
based on student projects. These questions deserve further study.
Background and Related Work
The study is rooted in the aesthetic considerations of the modern aesthetics founder, Alexander Gottlieb
Baumgarten. In his dissertation ‘Meditationes Philosophicae de Nonnullis ad Poema Pertinentibus'
from 1735 where he worked out an aesthetics, he focusing on the poem. With the unfinished work
'Aesthetica’ I-II' from 1750 -1758 Baumgarten extended these considerations to cover all the arts [5].
We have found that these considerations are recognized and are still in use among artists and designers
[6]. Bases on Gerd Bloxham Zettersten’s conclusion to Peter Dorm’s studies, we expected that today's
artists and designers could expand or complement the considerations included in our study. This was
not the case, which might be because all those who participated in the study had a practical approach to
sculpturing and were not trained as an art historian in giving their opinion about other people’s work.
Baumgarten expresses that aesthetics (beauty) is a harmony of expression, structure and content.
Probably a statement which is identical to what an artist expresses when saying that a work must have a
clear leading feature: a main idea (theme), a structure (structural principles) and a content (which
provide a work’s richness and evidences power and life) [5, p.74]. Our methodical approach to
formgiving rooted in aesthetics is based on this leading feature, although the contents of the three
components are only partially resolved in relation to the design of artefacts. The methodical approach
allows progression in the students' experience in formgiving, as they have worked with the
architectural main impact as methodical approach since the first semester. The main impact expresses
the project whole, sustaining idea, central principle or its spirit, usually presented on a postcard in the
shape of a drawing [7].
The single coherent form is particularly difficult to describe and assess because of the fluid transitions
between the form elements which sculptor Erik Thommesen [8] have chosen to divide his sculptures in.
First and foremost Thommesen uses theoretical dividing of a form into form elements when balancing
the form into a harmonious whole by scaling and shifting each form element. Other effects such as
rhythm, contrast, and activation of space can be processed in the same way [9]. The theoretical division
of the form sometimes trigger a physical division. The following jointing of the form elements often
involves implementation of new material in the joining zone. Breakdown of the form into the form
elements which suggests boundary areas with recognizable features as a basis for analysis of design is
introduced by Cheryl Akner-Koler [10]. The division of form elements is central to the way the
students work with the leading feature as an approach to formgiving.
The Problem and a Solution
The initiating problem is unstructured design processes and vague descriptions of the form problems in
the students’ critique of each other's product proposals, and very vague presentations of the product's
aesthetic qualities in their reports. The problem must be seen in relation to the fact that the majority of
the students can express themselves clearly in engineering fields and that design methodology is based
on technical parameters.
Our idea is to obtain a structured design process and better articulation of the form and accentuation of
its aesthetic qualities by encouraging the students to use systematic clarification of the leading feature
on the basis of the form element method, to continuously support selection of the best variant as the
basis for the next step in the process using Baumgarten’s aesthetic considerations, and finally to
encourage the students to use the same principles in their documentation for achieved aesthetic quality.
This methodical approach is consistent with Baumgarten’s bright method which is reflected in
considerations no § LXXI which actually describes the leading feature the application as a method in
relation to formgiving: form expressions should follow immediately after each other so that the theme
gradually becomes clearer. Since the theme should be made sensitive, this is the way extensive clarity
is sought.
We assume that the designer works as an artist and can use the leading feature as a guideline, can
identify the form elements, and use Baumgarten’s aesthetic considerations. The problem consequently
is
What should designers understand as leading features?
Does the procedure lead to a structured formgiving process?
Does the procedure contributes to clear articulation of forms and their aesthetic qualities?
The Experiment
The leading feature may be considered as a description model and as a method in formgiving with
demands on documentation and clarification of the methodical approach. Some of the students have
previously completed a project 'Experienced architectural quality' where they were introduces to the
leading feature as a method for selecting a sustaining idea, a structural principle (such as a building
consisting of serial plans of increasing - decreasing patterns) and a content (atelier + primitive housing
expressed by its space program). As a minimum the architectural qualities in that project should be
shown in the solutions and preferably be put into words.