Visual Advocacy: Week 7 Discussion
The readings this week, for me, were sort of geared to strategy and how to provide/design the greatest solution for a given problem.
With the first reading, Jeffrey Sachs, he talked a lot about the financial support behind problems. Ho countries aren't donating enough and how physical support might be a better solution than just writing a check.
Giving others money, in african countries, where is it going and how are they solving the problem with that money? Its almost going back to our previous discussion of how giving homeless people money might only result in them using it for alcohol, so we just don't give. But the same applies when we're spending this same money on the exact luxuries that they are.
So whether its planned ignorance to the cause, or unknowing, we must get others motivated by whatever means possible.I think that Jeffrey's cause here is making people aware and advocating/leading his flock of sheep through the receptivity gradient. The greatest thing we can accomplish is getting people out of the first stage; the more awareness = the more action towards the cause.
It seems that whatever the 'cause' may be, we have a tendency to provide a solution instead of facilitating a solution. It goes back to the whole "teach a man to fish" idea, where you put the means and the tools into the hands of the effected. Only then, can we create a sustainable cycle of self-reliance and production. Nancy Padian talked a lot about this, and how cross disciplinary research of utilizing current resources that you didn't know were resources at all. Give the people ownership and then we can focus on the same cycle of other or more pressing causes.
It reminds me, like we discussed in class, of design systems class, you must give them a motivated product that inspires others to make that brand work and tangible. At the end of the day, your project is impacting real people.
I also had a "whoa/aha" moment when we brought up the question "what if my project only effects one person?" I think even it only effects one person, then it was a success, however not as successful as it could have been. I think its okay to build off of one persons response, but we must weigh and consider that this person might not be a qualified candidate to represent the group as a whole; so in the end, I think I will just be really careful with how i utilize my research. I don't think this reading/library campaign will reach everyone, but it might put enough motivation and creative tools to sustain itself within the community long after this semester.
This consideration of others and their dignity offers a problem, yet opportunity to facilitate our solutions and giving communities the realization that they can solve their own problems, give them confidence, and sustain healthy lifestyles. This is the greatest thing I've pulled from Richard Buchanan. New design thinking, and embracing function and using the content and form as communication tools for user centered and human-centered design. Creating this opportunity and outlet for others to create whatever they want using assets they already have, we build a new element of making whatever we want whether natural or a harmonizing emulation to nature by serving the greatest good. John Maeda, in his Manifesto, focused on this aspect, which makes me think how long will it be before we have the "apple iHeart, that bluetooth sincs with your adobe right-hemisphere brain that you just bought.
There are only two designers, god and man, if god didn't design it then man did. So building our own worlds makes me think of infinite possibilities, yet focuses the appropriate solutions to something as simple as a book exchange system for a small community in kansas.