Design For The Real World
THE POLITICS OF DESIGN
Today the relationship to what is being built around us is more to do with the architect and the client, rather than the people who will live in or use what is being building. Particularly in government projects designed through private partnerships concerned more about profits than the end user.
So many of our social ills are exacerbated around bad architecture and planning. New housing, like jobs, of any description are held up as worthy civic achievements no mater how badly they are built, nor badly they are paid.
Considering the vast amounts of tax payers money spent on public works, how, we could ask, are the public expected to assess such public building projects in terms of their usefulness to the community.Architecture and design are treated as vocational subjects. Why we want to ask, are design and architecture not treated as social subjects early on at school? In a multi materialistic society the assessment of design quality in building and when purchasing goods, would be of economic and practical use to most people, after all people are born in buildings, and spend most of their life in them. Why do we not teach architecture to children? (Victor Papanek)
The development of our environment is in the control of experts and usually paid for with public money. Some budget should be put aside in order that the public can train their own expert, who would work to inform the community of the social and economical impact of major building works in their areas? We will study these things in our planning and building project. Like many other subjects they only become relevant and alive to us through doing things and connecting them to how we live. This will be our groups approach to community learning.
The City Garden
The Upas Tree