Many of us pursue design partly because we wanted a life of creativity, and partly because we had our dreams of being a doctor crushed out of us by the first chemistry class in college. That nagging desire to do good in the world doesn’t have to go unfulfilled just because we chose to push around pixels and prototypes for our professional career. These organizations do a good job of helping designers find out how to do the right thing, by connecting them to causes and people in desperate need of a little design. Check them out, then use your creative powers for good.

http://www.designcanchange.org
http://www.design21sdn.com
http://www.themightyodo.com

I’m a few weeks behind but have been letting all I saw at ICFF fully soak in and am finally ready to report. This was an odd year, I thought. Unlike the strong and new themes that emerged last year, 2008’s crop felt a bit more mild-mannered, honest, retrospective. It lacked some of what I interpreted as bleakness last year, and I appreciated the positive, straightforward quality to the work I saw.

Among the things I noticed were:

• A hyperactive take on craft. DIY is far from new, but the – shall we say – enthusiasm with which I saw designers embrace it was notable. Embroidered wood chairs, popsicle stick lamps; it was just shy of a ceramic ashtray to bring home to dad for Father’s Day.

• Wood love. Sure, wood’s been around for a while, but it made quite a showing this year. The wood radio has been a popular and extreme example, but there was also plenty of end grain to be ogled in chairs, headboards, lamps, credenzas, calculators…My favorite was actually a hefty wood coffee table coated in silver. It’s taken a lot of flack for immodesty of concept and price, but my feeling is this is just two years ahead of the curve. They’re so far over wood, it’s metallic.

• Muted colors. That hot pink keeps sticking around, if only to keep Karim from needing a new wardrobe, but the colors that caught my attention were not so eye-popping, namely flat grays, moderate purples and a putty here or there.

• The big reveal. Lots of furniture was unabashed in sharing details of its construction, from leather chairs that took their form from simple perforation patterns, to more literal examples of exposed screws, joints or actual construction materials.

• My long shot is what I’ll call global localism. This is a thin thread, but I have a hunch it’s worth commenting on. When two of the big guys cross brainstorms, something may be happening. Tord Boontje showed Witches Kitchen at Artecnica, a reinterpretation of South American cooking vessels. Meanwhile on the glam side of the aisle, Tom Dixon added to his spectacular repertoire of lighting with a series of beaten copper pendants with a sort of Moroccan mid-century flair. First-world fabu but for me the shapes had that we-love-the-(rest of the)-world vibe of Paul Simon in the 80s. We’ll see what comes of it.

The man who helped so many of us through our awkward teenage years, gave us a creative outlet where we might not have had one, and gave us a chance to enjoy something fun and rewarding with like-minded friends and family, passed away at the age of 69.

If you were affected by this, you already know who I mean. If you weren’t, then the name E. Gary Gygax probably doesn’t mean much to you either.

He didn’t invent a new biomedical process; he didn’t develop a more efficient internal combustion engine; he didn’t help squeeze more transistors onto a silicon wafer. E. Gary Gygax invented Dungeons and Dragons. I don’t want to go on and on about it; either you get what I’m saying already or you aren’t the slightest bit interested. What can’t be denied is that geek culture would not be recognizible today without his contributions.

Rest in Peace, O Grand Dungeon Master.

Both Wired and the New York Times have published great pieces on Gygax’s legacy.

Oh, and if you think I’m not cool because I like Dungeons and Dragons, you couldn’t be more wrong. I’m one of the coolest guys out there – just ask my Mom!

I just can’t stop thinking about American Living.

So Ralph Lauren and JCPenney partnered to create a new brand called American Living. As the web site states, the brand is exclusive to JCPenney and jcp.com (btw, they own jcpenney.com as well, and it redirects to jcp.com, but that is a discussion for another day). What I can’t help thinking about is the brand look and feel. It is very aspirational, which I love, but does it have meaning for this retail audience? The imagery is evocative of the Hampton-set, but targeting individuals more comfortable with Hampton Inn.

I like the move, but will it resonate?

CNN’s take on the new brand:

http://money.cnn.com/2007/08/29/magazines/fortune/Its_Ralphs_World.fortune/index.htm

I love great design and I admire both Steve Jobs and Don Norman. However, when Don is quoted as saying “We need breakthroughs. They don’t come from an experimental process. They come from the mind of a great designer.” in Steve Hamm’s article “Richard Sapper: Fifty Years at the Drawing Board” in the January 10th issue of BusinessWeek, I feel compelled to weigh in further.

The article seems to imply that there is a divide between the process used by “star” designers and studios that apply a more interdisciplinary and collaborative process. I don’t think this is entirely accurate. Great designers like Richard Sapper stand on the shoulders of countless skilled individuals who happen to reside in their client companies. Engineers, market researchers, strategists, etc. do much of the leg work required to identify, develop, and commercialize a great idea. What studios like Continuum do is integrate that process, which doesn’t exclude, but rather facilitates the opportunity for talented designers to address real problems in comprehensive and user-delighting ways. It’s not only about predictable sales results, it’s about doing the right thing, and sometimes the “right thing” doesn’t necessarily generate high profile press or win design awards.

I love my Tizio Lamp and Richard Sapper’s creativity and talent has resulted in a 20th century icon, but today, design problems are more challenging than designing a lamp. The design of a device that may save someone’s life or of a design strategy that may revive or save a company is too complex for a single individual to address. Furthermore, at a time of raised environmental consciousness, we don’t need more iconic stuff, but rather, we need better, more thoughtful solutions where products and services delight people while making a minimal impact on the planet.

Gianfranco Zaccai