I’ve been thinking a lot about the the author is dead argument and the anti-intentionalist critical bent since it came up in the Lamarque reading.

I take it for granted that the critical theory we read in this class — even when it isn’t geared toward interaction design per se — has much to contribute to our fluctuating sense of identity as designers because, as designers, we are also necessarily design critics. We criticize our own work and we criticize others’ work

Last semester in Foundations we discussed the importance of taking a normative approach to design, and we can’t do this unless we’re critics (both by being critical of the approaches we don’t take and by being self-reflective critics throughout the design process).

So, in order to take a normative approach to design we must be critics. We must also, insofar as it is possible to do so, know ourselves. We must know who we are and what we believe relative to the thing we’re criticizing.

As designer/critics aren’t we obligated to reject the anti-intentionalist critical bent on the grounds that intent/intention is so essential to the design process? If we adhere to the the author is dead line of thinking, then what implications does this adherence have for our sense of identity as designers?

Advertisements