Ti

1. Do you see a merge between politics and design? In Denmark? If so, why is it successful?

I think that Anne Marie Summerhayes summed it up best within the title of her article "Design, is an integral part of the Danish," inferring that Danish society is so integrated with Danish design that the two are incomplete without each other. Overtime many Danish designers have prided themselves on being "Social Artists," in that they design with the people of a large demographic in mind. A society, while shaped by design, cannot stand alone without a well functioning political system. It would be interesting to debate, with a culture that has so cohesively integrated design into her people, whether it is the design that has shaped the political system, or whether the political system constituted the significance of good design within a society.

It seems that politically here in Denmark the idea is to consume less, to help the people, what is better for the people is also better and more respectful for the land. The liberalism of this political system has given the people many choices on a personal level while intricately lacing the political system with enforced energy and environmentally friendly intensives. While in the United States people may  not care about running a lot of water, it's because it is taken for granted how inexpensive it is, thus seems dispensable. Conservative water usage is just one example of how the Danish society has been shaped by governmental intensive. Give the option, one can waste as much hot water as they want in their flat, but why would they if they know they'll be charged up the ying-yang for doing so...Still however they are liberated by being given that choice.

Due to governmental and political incentives designers have also had to succumb to this decision making process. No architecture firm, or furniture producer is going to waste water within their design, if they will also be charged for it. These obstacles have not only encouraged creative innovative thinking within in the Danish economy but within the Danish people. I think it is a very successful way of constituting the amount of waste a society can eliminate. To me it seems foolish every country doesn't run under this sort of political system. When given the freedom of choice, most often then not, people are going to do what benefits them, whether because of money incentive or healthy, usually the option that is best for me, is also you and more importantly the world and society in which we live. It's a very smart way of forcing cooperation without strict in your face enforcement.

2. Choose something that you have bought here in Denmark. Is it well designed? Why did you buy it? Is it a product of democratic design? (Consider topics from the lecture such as functionalism, style confusion, availability, minimalism, name brands, tradition and renewal).

This week I bought tape at Tiger. I needed scotch tape to put things on my walls. Thus far my Tiger brand tape has been holding up just as well as any Scotch tape would do. I mention Scotch Tape because it is the name brand version of all scotch tapes. While one might feel more assured that Scotch tape will work better then scotch tape it is important to remember that the function of this Scotch tape verse scotch tape will not differ greatly. My Tiger scotch tape was 3 rolls for 10kr. For the USD I think a roll of Scotch tape is at least 3 dollars, so I double my money by buying Tiger's scotch instead.

We determined in class that money will always be an issue of debate when discussing Democratic Design. In my mind tape should be something that is very inexpensive to purchase. I know that tape is very inexpensive to create, so therefore it shouldn't be expensive in stores. A company such as target sets their price point more accurately to that of the production cost, whereas name brand companies jack up the prices because given their title or name, people will chose to spend more status. So when buying Scotch tape over Tiger scotch tape, maybe it's not an appropriate example, someone might choose Scotch tape because it is reliable and well known. The money we spend is for the name and status. They extra dollar or two, or two thousand is because people feel a need to establish themselves within their given society. We all, without recognizing so, have fallen to this social system in which the status we achieve is indirectly who we are. In the manner of Tiger scotch tape over Scotch tape I feel the democratic decision to make is personal. Isn't that what democracy is about? Choice? I think in a society with products and designs ranging from low price points to high, in all varieties of style and aesthetic we are given many choices as to what we want and need. If there weren't differences in designed items, and there was only one choice of scotch tape purchasing it wouldn't be democratic at all.