| dc.description |
Does memory have a role to play in the production of knowledge utilised in designing? Great twentieth-century architects like Frank Lloyd Wright and Mies van der Rohe have been described as influenced by memories of things learned in their childhood. Architect, Peter Zumthor, described designing as "reassembling impressions and emotions I’ve experienced." Designer of centrifugal pumps, Sam Yedidiah, observed that "engineers have to base many of their decisions not on science alone, but on comparison with... experience [among other things]." Knitwear design involves the adaptation of elements from past designs. Novelists are said to set their stories in real landscapes embedded in their experience. For people who have interacted with artefacts in their past, as many designers have, present choices may be influenced by "artefactual apprenticeship," the effect of cues from the past. The recollection of things from the past seems to feature as an active participant in a variety of design practices. The current paper presents that the intervention of memory is central to the production of knowledge involved in designing.The nature of design discourse demands various conceptualisations of knowledge (e.g. tacit versus explicit; knowledge as understanding; knowledge as answers to "what," "how," etc.) beyond the traditional definition of knowledge as justified and true belief. This paper employs an encompassingdescription of knowledge for designing as applicable insight, generated as a by-product of or in relevance to the design question, that constructively and personally informs the designer about the creation of an effective design solution. Memory plays a fundamental role in the generation of that insight.Conceptualisations of memory have ranged from classical metaphors of memory as a wax tablet that affords registration, storage and retrieval of information to subjects of more recent debates, where memory has been described in terms of a systems view as opposed to a processing view. Both the systems and processing views see memory as more than mere storage. The combination of encoding, storage and retrieval often results in outputs that are not identical to inputs, in essence, leading to the creation of things new in terms of what is known. In effect, memory acts as a complex mechanism that functions as both agent and author of knowledge.Memory is discussed in these two functions through various indicators. Memory is seen as a tool for comprehension through actions such as clarification and enlargement (transcendence of the reductiveness of the design statement). Memory offers a basis for modelling (imaging the solution, clarification, generalisation). It affords abstraction and interpretation. It acts as a tool for exploration (active coupling) and discovery. It is a repository and domain for processing different forms of knowledge (technique, performance, dialectically-evolved solutions, bridge between the new and known, repository for schemata). The fundamental argument is that memory is a dynamic system within whose space new modules of information are generated. To the extent that new information has potential for applicability, it may be considered new knowledge. Memory itself is not knowledge, just as science is not. Memory is, like science, a significant player in the innovation of information and insight, a vital medium for the evolution of knowledge. |
|