Karim Rashid can have it... I don't want it.

I'm talking about the world. Karim Rashid wrote a book called "I Want to Change the World". When I first heard about him several years ago, I was inspired by the power he saw in design and it's ability to "change the world". After I let it set in for quite some time, and especially after the discussions we've been having in this class, his ideas have come to leave a bad taste in my mouth.

It brings several things to mind. One, I assume Rashid has good intentions for the most part, and being a respectable person I also take assumptions that he isn't intent on destroying the planet or ceating any pain and suffering in his attempts to "change" things.

Also, how does responsibility fit into this kind of endeavor? As designer's aren't we responsible for the work we do and it's kinetic ineteraction with the world? Especially in industrial design and Architecture, which for the most part are purely luxury-oriented and the creation of new, unprecedented necessity driven projects is very low. These fields thrive on making existing things better, ie: new improved knee braces, toilet bowls, computer mice, exciting skyscrapers, new malls, etc [side: I see validity in these things too, but to what extent can we push the envelope of progress vs. the idea that a new product means new income]. It feels so greedy (I don't think Rashid is hiding this feeling) in wanting to effect the human race as one, but I think design can be so much more effective when the generalizations for HUGE audiences don't have to be made. When designers decide to focus their efforts to certain audiences, taking into account the context their work will be viwed/used in and the user's background, true connections can be made between the work( and the designer) and the user. When Rashid makes new neon curvy trashcans and tells the world (with reassurance from trendy publications) that they are inevitably better than *older* metal trashcans, while he is taking some chances (a choice I support) he is also insulting the inteligence of his audience by teling them what is beauty, telling them what kind of objects are in good taste and so on. A choice I don't support.

I think our discussion on Friday about beauty and its effectiveness holds true, and beauty will always be in the eye of the beholder, regardless of what Rashid thinks. As far as personal activity goes, I want to design for small groups of people, making sure that my work appeals to them in the way I want it to/the way {ithey/i} want it to. If Rashid wants to tell the world what good design is, he can sure try. I'll take the people who want beauty for themselves and have the state of mind to make that decision on their own, be it ceramic unicorns or beautifully constructed pieces of furniture or architecture or fucking rubber jar openers. Leave it up to humans to decide. I think we can help, and should, but we have no right to dictate what beauty is. We're just part of the fad anyway.

PS- I don't know how to code html in this thing. sorry for the funny punctuation.