something is impressive about the use of design in
political events, such as the RNC stage-design which
was often referred to as a 'theatre-in-the-round' with its
seemingly neoclassical (yet original, it is wondered)
adaptation to television remote-viewing of this stage.
the stairs all around, it was an interesting design yet
its function was, in practice, quiet solitary, unlike the
ship theme of the earlier convention by the .US DNC.
each used videoscreens to convey short films, even
live televised appearances from remote locations,
and to amplify certain imagery, sights, and sounds.
the reality of the space would appear to be located
somewhere between live internet-blogs, newspaper
and television networks broadcasting events, and
internal events and speeches for those inside of the
venues, and those in their own home theatres via
big-screen television and computer and radio, etc.
there is an aspect of the offline-online connection
that the GOP has got down-pat, that is a designed
coordination and sequencing of events. the last
election there were religious evangelists who went
around the block ringing doorbells, with bibles in
hand, asking people about God on voting day, and
if they wanted to talk (not sure about voting). a day
or so after the recent Republican convention the
online component was met by a telemarketing call
by a recording of George Bush talking about his
efforts and to send in an absentee ballot to vote
early for him and Cheney. it was odd to listen to
the President of the .US on an answering machine
making a pitch for absentee voting of residents of
a country (not outside the borders), in a virtual
realm of recorded telephone political sales pitches
(good pitches at that, as designed) -- in this virtual
realm of electronics, still, the phone call was most
likely all done by computers, no humans needed
except to set up the machinery to do political work.
all good and innovative and noble one might say.
and sure enough, within a day or two, the postal
system delivers a big heavy-stock glossy color
brochure adorned with the american flag, which
says it is for absentee ballots. it was a strange
device to see, confusing, as why would so much
money be spent on a mailing of this sort, this high-
design, high-style, flash and pomp and patriotism
for the utilitarianism of a public ballot. upon closer
inspection the answer was made clear, the stealth
design had a return address of Bush-Cheney and
was for filling out and voting in advance, sending
a ballot for voting under cover of patriotic design.
who can be mad about such a thing? is there any
reason not to acknowledge the cunning and good
wit of it all, especially those susceptible to tactics
in which 'the vote' is decided, the stress relieved,
people have a ballot in their hand and all they need
to do is fill it out, months early, so they know they will
be safe from terrorists, home-grown and abroad, by
doing their democratic right and voting for the right
choice to lead a country-- it is all there, the packet,
the telemarketing call, the below-radar operations,
and the opinion polls which rise to show confidence
in the way things are going, to reassure that other
people, too, believe the belief, and make a choice
by matter and manner of faith, to hell with reason.
or, voting days, early November is pre-empted by
some two months by such cunning ballot design,
and no word from the mass media audiovisualist
about this nor earlier such tactics, which do win
elections it seems to be, one way or another. at
first it was thought this may be illegal, like other
such incidents of private groups posing as public
and committing fraud by deceiving people into
acts unknowingly, but then again, this could be
just called politics of persuading pavlov's people.
what's that saying? on the internet, no one knows
you're a dog. off the internet no one would know
this way, either. you send in your vote, do your
duty to shore up the homeland political defense,
ignore straight shots and design political terrors.
it is an interesting machination, this architectural
approach. as if holding onto a throne of power,
invested and inherited by the same innovations.
while the press and others are self-congratulated
on blog-success, this guerilla media tactic is to
win the vote, even before the vote, by design. it
is applying an idea in many forms, in stage-sets,
in television sets, in press releases, in protests
and signs, in news stories, in commercials, in
phone messages, in mass mailings, and even
in custom voter ballots (an issue, it seems, in
the last election it was thought) -- by design.
curious how this is not mentioned. maybe only
certain houses get calls, like independents. it is
not known. but it seems to be fair-game to design
such an approach for a political campaign, how-
ever one may feel about the outcome, which is
likely more complex than where language and
ideas are with the same issues as they are now
reverberated around the systems of circulation.
vote democracy. that is a sign that was thought
could also be designed, about what democracy
may be about to a person, and to do that, how-
ever one may justify that- it seems that it what
the election is about-- to win or lose democracy.
no matter the candidate who wins-- it is a risk
in either case, and if democracy by design was
a shared platform, maybe today's (in need of
redesign) democratic system would not have
one party implying another is a terrorist so as
to win an election-- what public could it possibly
represent, and which of the dead 1,000+ soldiers
and unknown others are on the right side of the
privatized .US government by new ideologues?
vote democracy. it would be to restore the idea
of democracy versus the fear of democracy, to
bring order back from the chaos which is now
artificially used to manipulate emotions, nerves,
to make things occur by reflect, and unthinking
obedience to the false logic of rhetorical terror.
unhinged, if only. to vote for democracy, a dream
that is not of fictional design in the .US constitution
nor in those who seek to improve upon its working.
yet, it is under threat from without and within, and
the inability to critique this design is proving to be
a critical error, a state which cannot see itself, and
refuses to do so. which, by design, brings up a very
simple and chilling scenario. whatever transpires
in regard to terrorism, will it ever be considered in
terms of where the design moneys have gone to
date, versus the threat that will arrive-- and will it
be a good defense, or an illusion of defense, and
the threat greater still than is imagined, because
of the battling of ideologies and not the opening
of questions about ideas, about what is new to be
faced, what is different, why things are changed--
say, a nuclear weapon goes off. or a nuclear plant
gets hit, or something that is a defensive design-
position. and may or may not be ignored. versus,
putting all eggs in some other (NMD) basket, say,
versus threats on the ground, real, and not ideal.
if one considers it in terms of architecture nothing
much has changed. the issue is still tall buildings.
steel workers will always have work, and to die
for a building by a world-class architect today is
questionable, in terms of its importance as some
unique achievement. yet the memorial trade show
on television documenting the WTC spat between
Childs and Libeskind makes it curious, if not in the
field of architecture, what can change in terms of
design if not this, in terms of thinking, thought, of
action. beyond any sympathy vote for designed-
class objects d'art, (sic) -- it is as if architecture is
in an alternative universe, as is much of the .US,
it is a surreal blend which is so far from real it is
hard to accept in the present as being possible.
it is satire as lived out, original, the caricature of
earlier ideas and ideals becoming cultural laws
of achievement, success, ego, aesthetics, value.
bizarre in its irrelevance though its aspect as the
cathedral for the flying buttress of politics or vice-
versa is hard to ignore. it enables the illusions--
and by architects remains unacknowledged to
a large enough degree to actually change it.
there is thus a culpability in silence, which is to
continue the charade which has consequences
which reach far beyond architecture, into culture.
after hearing and listening to the political tracts
of the fashionable professorial crowds, it is odd
the silence that times like these bring by the same.
where are the radical form-makers when content
is at issue? where will the next ex-skeletal theory
bring its full weight to bear upon cultural fidelity?
what protest song doth sing through shattered
software filters on design machine rendering?
it is wondered aloud. no answers here though
a speculation. the only thing that seems clear
is 'vote for democracy' - and maybe that is a
design-issue that is the right of those who live
in such a place governed by such laws, or in
such a place where such government may be
in jeopardy unless it is the reason for the vote.
to ensure the rights, the reason, the truth over
the sheer use and abuse of unfettered power.
from a design standpoint, terrorism is a question,
it would seem. why is it so successful? why is it
able to defeat designed systems so well, and why?
by better design, by chance? by exploiting weak-
nesses in the designs that exist? and what does
it mean for the designers to ignore this life-and-
death critique (by way of mass destruction), to
go about life as if business-as-usual, and to not
question design in relation to such a real context?
the ivory tower may be replaced now by a silicon
network, heads permanently stuck in the clouds
unless, like the offline design, democracy finds
its place in designs, public representations as
with private rights, safety in buildings and built
ideas, and questioning of these-- beyond ease
of censoring the ships that seek to sail this way,
towards changes, changing all such dynamics
in ways larger and smaller, related to who and
how many take up the task to question what is
uniquely a design question-- to open up ideas
to questions, the future to the past, the past to
the future, and seek a continuum in the present.
brian
--
The Design-L list for art and architecture, since 1992...
To subscribe, send mailto:design-l-subscribe-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To signoff, send mailto:design-l-unsubscribe-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.
Visit archives: http://lists.psu.edu/archives/design-l.html
(by the way, as climate change ravages Earth it
seems more and more (in hot days) that clothes
of Arab and middle-east nations would be of an
improved design on many days, though not all
(though Eskimos may have better on those) and
it will be interesting if such changes also occur.)
--
The Design-L list for art and architecture, since 1992...
To subscribe, send mailto:design-l-subscribe-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To signoff, send mailto:design-l-unsubscribe-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.
Visit archives: http://lists.psu.edu/archives/design-l.html