Use this URL to cite or link to this record in EThOS: http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.659436
Title: Designing debate : the entanglement of speculative design and upstream engagement
Author: Kerridge, Tobie
ISNI:       0000 0004 5360 8685
Awarding Body: Goldsmiths College (University of London)
Current Institution: Goldsmiths College (University of London)
Date of Award: 2015
Availability of Full Text:
Access through EThOS:
Access through Institution:
Abstract:
This thesis offers a critical reflection of a design practice in which a speculative approach to design became entangled with upstream engagement with biotechnology research. Given that both practices claim to enable a public discussion about emergent technology, what is the nature of their mixing, and how should an analytical account of such a design practice be made? I start with separate reviews of the respective features of these two approaches, considering practitioner accounts and histories along with analytical literature where those practices are objects of research. Then I take the case of the public engagement project Material Beliefs to develop an empirical account of their confluence. Initially I discuss labs as sites where designers, scientists, and non-experts come together to discuss and to problematize accounts of biotechnology research. Next, I examine the process of making speculative designs, and here I emphasise the ways in which issues, materials and practices become compiled as exhibitable prototypes. Finally I consider the circulation and reception of these designs in public settings, including exhibitions, workshops, and online formats. I argue that speculative designs’ move on upstream PEST is an imbroglio that goes beyond mixing the formal features of practice, and requires a discussion concerning the actions of the designer in relation to a broader set of accountabilities. Authorship of the processes that lead to design outcomes, the description of design outcomes, and the effects of those outcomes become distributed and negotiated by an extended set of commitments coming from researchers, policymakers, educators, curators and promoters. Ultimately, I contend that this mixing provides an opportunity to foster a reflexive and empirical account of speculative practice, to engage in analysis of the organisations and settings that support a speculative approach, and to provide a critique of upstream engagement.
Supervisor: Not available Sponsor: Not available
Qualification Name: Thesis (Ph.D.) Qualification Level: Doctoral
EThOS ID: uk.bl.ethos.659436  DOI: Not available
Share: