POST 7: Mapping’s how we do it


James Meland-Proctor

Working in a group on a related topic has made the research and creative process a whole lot easier and more interesting. It seems finicky and time consuming at first to map so extensively on very minute nuances in issues, when some are so closely related. Although it is the long winded path of critical thinking that thoughts take shape and ideas can start to latch onto tangible objects and bodies which we can tweak in the real world with our unique skill sets.

Co-creation of maps is useful as I was working with people whose issues were not very related to mine. However when looking at things like stakeholders, ect. We start to pull at common threads. The issues at hand are highly political and contentious.

We touched on some really interesting stakeholders and reasons for injustices in our issues and how larger entities such as the media and education really had an affect on the lack of control we have over them. It seems that the larger the entitity, the less liability there is; despite being inherently so heavily human organised and structured.

14233280_10154386786296093_307571155_o copy.jpg

We found there was a binary between institutions as well, with women and men occupying different sectors of society and trans and young people being on the fringes. While it is hard not to view every one as accountable or at fault for something, I found that design practice is more pragmatic in pondering ideas and creation of work around existing systems.

14215661_10154386786401093_554455473_o copy.jpg

More interesting was the closer look at actors is an issue and analysing their role in a scenario could potentially lead to good designerly change. This was a good methodical insight into how we might approach design led changes to truly make a difference. In conducting design practice this way, it truly feels like what was once the practice of purposeful aesthetics is now more encompassing of purposeful change.


%d bloggers like this: