#milanuncut : A few thoughts
#milanuncut
Billed as being an “… experimental, collaborative journalism project that aims to lift the lid on the design world to coincide with next week’s Milan furniture fair.” #milanuncut appears to have come down to an article in the Guardian by Justin McGuirk and a side discussion about unpaid interns.
Sadly.
Because there is without question an urgent need for a more open discussion about the “design” industry.
However what #milanuncut does beautifully prove is that before the discussion can take place the participants must be prepared to question the state of the “design” industry as a whole.
Do we need so many design students? Do we need so many designers? Do we need so many products? So many interns, paid or otherwise?
Of course we don’t.
However the majority of those involved in the #milanuncut twitter discussion seem to be predominantly interested in a new organisation of the profits within the existing industry structure rather than in the value of fundamentally reorganising the “design” industry so that it becomes something useful and proactive.
We know. We know. Behind us stands a company that sells designer furniture. At a profit.
But that doesn’t mean we want new chairs, new tables, new lamps ad nauseum.
We want good, sensible products that offer us something new and fulfill a function besides the purely economic.
In his Guardian article Justin McGuirk mentions Tip Ton Chair by Barber Osgerby for Vitra. A good, sensible product that does something new, interesting and useful.
He doesn’t mention L’Oiseau by the Bouroullecs for Vitra. Because it isn’t.
Last year in Milan Ronan Bouroullec told us they wanted to do less but better. The disappointment in the (smow)blog office as we saw the first L’Oiseau photos was audible.
For us the biggest failing of #milanuncut, however, is the lack of suggestions as to how one could guarantee sensible incomes for designers within an economicaly sustainable industry.
Fewer designers who produce less and so can make more pro design?
We know. We know. As if crazy idealists like us still have a place in our superficial, navel-gazing, bearded world.
#milanuncut has an App! We don’t even own a device on which we could use that!
And so, and assuming that everyone who wants to call themselves a designer is allowed to release as many new products as they want, how can we guarantee good incomes for all?
Established designers have to stop pimping their wares so widely.
In our experience there are two types of producers. Those who are genuinely interested in building long term relationships with a designer. And those who need established “star” designer’s names for their marketing. Established designers have to learn to spot the difference, stop accepting everything that comes their way and so stop encouraging the flood of senseless products released every year. Work for several producers by all means – just do it for the right reasons.
And when we have less marketing generated products from the same few big names, younger designers will have more of a chance, as Jason Miller from Roll and Hill eloquently put it “…to have their work manufactured in a real way”
Producers have to invest more in new and less in old.
In his article Justin McGuirk says that in the current industry climate Giulio Cappellini can’t launch careers like he once did with the Bouroullecs, Jasper Morrison or Marc Newson.
Nonsense, of course he can.
The Cappellini show in Milan was littered with works from interesting, talented young design studios who Cappellini could take under his wing and promote.
And a couple of very, very tired looking pieces from Jasper Morrison.
Even a company such as Cappellini must question the sense of using Jasper Morrison to fill a hole in their programme.
Accept the hole and invest the money in helping a young designer to develop interesting projects.
Which also frees Jasper Morrison to develop new ideas and concepts.
Take a few tips from the record and publishing worlds.
The advance may not be the most universally loved model – but works.
Euro 80,000 for a three chair deal ? Euro 10,000 for a lamp ?
The idea obviously isn’t new, but with such a model where the producer pays up front and then recoups, the financial risks involved would automatically reduce the number of new products to manageable levels.
We hear the detractors cries of “Yes, but then we’ll only have sterile and safe products”.
As if Milan 2011 was wall to wall edge of your chair high risk innovation and new aesthetics!
L’Oiseau! Be still our beating hearts!
Talented designers, like talented authors or musicians will always rise to the surface because they have something to say and know how to say it.
Justin McGuirk writes for the Guardian. We don’t.
Certainly there are, and always will be, producers who only produce what they imagine the market wants, normally based on some ridiculous “trend research”. They don’t help anyone other than themselves.
However there are also producers who look deeper and realise the long-term benefits of innovation and who are prepared to take risks. Well-calculated risks, but risks.
Ultimately if we can limit the number of products and designers, those designers that remain can be properly paid.
And the rest can do something else professionally, and design in their spare time if they want to.
Sorry. No one said life was fair.
For us the idea behind #milanuncut is interesting and important.
Just next year, please make sure in advance that a few more good people are on board, and please moderate the discussion a little better.
Marcus Fairs made a few brave attempts at changing the direction with his talk of business courses at design schools – a regular feature of our (smow)introducing interviews and in our opinion an important failing in design education. But the public just wanted to discuss unpaid internships.
Unpaid internships are without question bad regardless of in design, journalism, IT or wherever employers think they can get away with it.
But the argument is unrelated to the the issue that was meant to be discussed.
And that’s a shame. Because it is important.
Maybe next year.
Tags: #milanuncut, Fuorisalone, Milan Design Week
May 5th, 2011 at 7:14 am
While I’m very glad to see the debate continuing, I find a number of your comments disquieting to say the least.
If I understand you correctly, you are advocating limiting the number of students allowed to study design, limiting the number of designers who can practice and limiting the number of products to be released. You would like a Twitter feed to be comprised of the right people and moderated better. And no wooden birds. Can you perhaps expand on who should be be doing all this policing and how it would be implemented democratically?
I’m being a touch facetious of course. I understand the logic of your argument. There’s not enough money to go around so what’s there needs to be shared among fewer designers. However, as you know #Milanuncut is about a highly saturated area of the design world. It is only in this highly part of the industry that it can be said there is too little work to go around. Step outside and there are plenty of companies who may never have worked with a designer but could certainly be persuaded to do so. I have met and done business with some of them. It’s not easy. Nor is it glamorous, but it is paid design work.
Finally, the unpaid internship issue is inextricably linked to the issue of designer’s low pay. One clearly fuels the other. Where’s the harm in recognizing the connection and discussing them together?
May 5th, 2011 at 1:35 pm
Hi Tim,
Almost :)
With twitter et al… we were under the impression that despite the apparent unorganized nature of the debate that a “bigger hand” was guiding it.
We now know that wasn’t the case. And so the twitter comment is superfluous.
But we stand by the belief that when people such as dezeen or The Guardian, who have a lot of influence and reach, decide to support such an “initiative”, that they could be more proactive in getting more colleagues to pen pieces on the subject.
For us that failed. Which is a shame, as such a debate needs, especially at the beginning, a good wide range of voices, opinions and ideas. From which a discussion can then arises.
A load of twitter users retweeting a Guardian article doesn’t bring a debate forward. Just improves the Guardians click through rates.
And yes fewer design students, fewer designers. Furniture designers obviously.
There is lots of “design”. Milan however is theoretically about furniture and we definitely need less furniture and less people producing furniture designs.
We’ll be publishing a post soon about the designers taking part in the EuroDesignExhibition in Düsseldorf. The majority of them don’t live full time from furniture design work. Even some of those who have designs in production can’t afford to.
Which raises the question, is it OK that people are forced to work in various fields – or if it is better to create a structure whereby designers can live solely from their chosen branch. And then work in other branches if they want to.
No one expects a full-time train driver to also have to drive taxis to pay the rent: just because he’s a “driver”
Unpaid internships is an issue, but not just in design. Here in Germany it is almost impossible to get a journalist job until you’ve completed half a dozen unpaid internships. The IT industry is just as abusive.
However the much bigger problem with design is that designers are expected to finance a production ready concept themselves… and then wait for the money to drip in.
And so for us while the question of unpaid internships is important – it is not central. There are more important issues and we just felt the twitter debate was too dominated by interns – when that is not a unique feature of the design industry. But a general problem
In conjunction with DMY Berlin we’ll be publishing a series of interviews on #milanuncut topics.
We’re certainly looking forward to seeing in how far our views are supported or rubbished by the particpants.
We genuinely find the debate important and are thankful that it has been started.
May 5th, 2011 at 3:44 pm
Thanks for the considered response. It is appreciated. I guess what I was trying to draw out with my cheeky questioning about limits was your position on the free-market nature of education, employment and business practice.
“Is it OK that people are forced to work in various fields…” Who exactly is doing this forcing? Furniture design is a glamorous field and the problems we are experiencing have been created, in part, by the fact that designers choose, of their own free will, to try and get involved, despite the hardships it presents. Would you apply the same logic to other cultural endeavours? Should fewer people be writing songs or publishing novels? Surely we should not be putting a cap on who can or can’t try to start a creative business. The focus has to be on the justness of what they are paid for their work.
I also think you’re being a little quick to criticize the institutions behind the journalists involved. The fact is, this was a debate that emerged from genuine grass-roots concern, and not from top-down planning. There is evidence, as we are hearing, that various institutions are now cottoning on and we can expect more structured debate to emerge via organized events.
I will concede that the problem of discussing the free internship issue alongside that of designers pay structures is that fewer designers may come forward to talk.This would be a pity.
Great to hear you are publishing some interviews on the subject. Very much looking forward to reading them.
May 7th, 2011 at 11:50 am
Hi Tim,
I think we can best sum up our position with the term “fewer products”
If producers stop bringing so many new products onto the market so often…..everything else will take care of itself.
In effect the furniture market is oversaturated and there needs to be a correction.
For example, your argument in the second paragraph is perfectly valid – but in our opinion is only an issue because of the current market situation. There will always be people who want to design furniture, write books or perform music. Which is positive. But if entry to the market is hard, only those who are good will make it and the rest will continue, privately, in their spare time.
But at the end of the day its about what the wider community thinks – and so please keep updating your #milanuncut reader
May 7th, 2011 at 3:48 pm
[...] Milan Uncut: A Few Thoughts by Alasdair Thompson on Smow [...]