The Intrinsic Problems of Design for Mass Production

Antonio Cicchetti

Kristina Ljubanovic

02 February 2021

BDES 1201

Eva Zeisel’s “Design for Industry” presents a very compelling counter argument to the notion that mass production is in no way related or involved with the art of craft. In this article we explore the clay industry as the example to explain the differences between production and hand craftsman ship, the obvious differences are explored initial with the explanation of the very intimate and organic relationship that comes with spending a large amount of time to create one object with the emphasis on the pleasure in the work and the production of the item as secondary as it is stated in the article with a quote from John Ruskin “Art is the expression of man’s pleasure in labor.” Zeisel goes on to illustrate that this in fact is not true and for designers the pride of creation is shared all the same despite the medium in which production takes place. Zeisel then discusses the design process and the pride felt seeing his designs out amongst the world. One of the major differences in the design process from handcrafting illustrated in this article is the restraints a designer must conform to when designing a project as the production and mass manufacturing such as certain difficulties to produce in the objects design considering it is to be produce and reproduced many of times.

Looking at Dieter Rams “Omit the Unimportant” we begin to learn of an argument within the design community more concerned with what makes good design and the setbacks of over design. To start Rams states that people buy specifically for functionality and that design must try its best to conform to this goal. In line with Rams initial statement Rams goes on to describe what makes for good design and iterates the title by describing good design as “as little design as possible” (Rams, 111). Rams suggests that design should communicate the use or function of a product and goes on further to denounce the over stimulating and aggressive design of today’s world.

Between both Zeisel’s and Ram’s articles a common theme they both share is the form of design for mass production and overall displaying function. Although rather briefly, Zeisel describes the limitations designers may have when designing for mass production and describes the optimization mindset that goes into design specifically “…form does not follow function, nor does form follow a production process…” (Zeisel, 25). This idea of form and functionality is heavily shared within Rams article who believes that simplistic design in shedding what is unimportant is harder then “sensation” design. These ideas relate back to the focus on usability and in designing products that illustrate functionality rather than a focus on attracting our attention. The question I think for most is that can expression and sensation be present in minimal and functional based design, which also leads me to the question of when does design become a function of production if the main goal is simply function?