2017
DOI: 10.21606/nordes.2017.040
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Letters South of (Nordic) Design

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
1
1
1

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 0 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In this public-services work, some argue that hearing a range of people's "blue sky" ambitions is a critical step, but that because designers' jobs are to make something happen, only the most pragmatic or "designable" ideas can actually be put forward (Dorst, 2015). Others argue that pragmatism can lead to interventions that solidify harmful practices and structures by failing to take into account the deeply structural nature of a problem (Calderón Salazar & Gutiérrez Borrero, 2017;Greenbaum, 1991). How might designers, and policy-makers and others who are engaging designers in their work, bring histories of what Wilson (2017) has called "carceral architectures," and their contemporary manifestations, forward to undo and unmake common sense proposals around the PIC?…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this public-services work, some argue that hearing a range of people's "blue sky" ambitions is a critical step, but that because designers' jobs are to make something happen, only the most pragmatic or "designable" ideas can actually be put forward (Dorst, 2015). Others argue that pragmatism can lead to interventions that solidify harmful practices and structures by failing to take into account the deeply structural nature of a problem (Calderón Salazar & Gutiérrez Borrero, 2017;Greenbaum, 1991). How might designers, and policy-makers and others who are engaging designers in their work, bring histories of what Wilson (2017) has called "carceral architectures," and their contemporary manifestations, forward to undo and unmake common sense proposals around the PIC?…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%