The ‘networked object’ is a concept that resonates with the notion of the operation of virtual collections within mobile fluids and flows of culture outside and beyond the specific museum context concerns of traditional documentation systems. It acts as a mediator between the museum world and public culture, as it circulates between these spaces, and in various cultural, social, political and technological formations, consumed in many different and unexpected ways. The context in which the networked object now circulates and interacts is what cultural theorist Mike Featherstone (2000, pp.166-67) described as ‘global variability, global connectivity and global intercommunication’. This chapter interrogates what happens when the networked object re-connects with public culture in an uncertain, complex and globalising world and how this process intersects with, challenges and re-works the ‘authoritative’ position of heritage institutions.
Actually, in terms of understandingIoT and networked object, These are not difficult to figure out, but for me, critical andpata-physical are quite hard to find a proper project. Here is a good explanation of critical design. I found it from Anthony Dunne & Fiona Raby’s homepage. They said…
1. What is Critical Design?
Critical Design uses speculative design proposals to challenge narrow assumptions, preconceptions and givens about the role products play in everyday life. It is more of an attitude than anything else, a position rather than a method. There are many people doing this who have never heard of the term critical design and who have their own way of describing what they do. Naming it Critical Design is simply a useful way of making this activity more visible and subject to discussion and debate.
Its opposite is affirmative design: design that reinforces the status quo.
2. Where did it come from?
Design as critique has existed before under several guises. Italian Radical Design of the 1970s was highly critical of prevailing social values and design ideologies, critical design builds on this attitude and extends it into today’s world.
During the 1990s there was a general move towards conceptual design which made it easier for noncommercial forms of design like critical design to exist, this happened mainly in the furniture world, product design is still conservative and closely linked to the mass market.
The term Critical Design was first used in Anthony Dunne’s book Hertzian Tales (1999) and later in Design Noir (2001). Since then many other people have developed their own variations.
3. Who does it?
Dunne & Raby and their graduate students from the Royal College of Art (RCA) such as James Auger, Elio Caccavale and Noam Toran, are probably the most well known, but there are other designers working in a similar way who would not describe what they do as critical design: Krzysztof Wodiczko, Natalie Jeremijenko, Jurgen Bey, Marti Guixe …
4. What is it for?
Mainly to make us think. But also raising awareness, exposing assumptions, provoking action, sparking debate, even entertaining in an intellectual sort of way, like literature or film.
5. Why is it happening now?
The world we live in today is incredibly complex, our social relations, desires, fantasies, hopes and fears are very different from those at the beginning of the 20c. Yet many key ideas informing mainstream design stem form the early 20c.
Society has moved on but design has not, Critical Design is one of many mutations design is undergoing in an effort to remain relevant to the complex technological, political, economic and social changes we are experiencing at the beginning of the 21c.
6. What role does humour play?
Humour is important but often misused. Satire is the goal. But often only parody and pastiche are achieved. These reduce the effectiveness in a number of ways. They are lazy and borrow existing formats, and they signal too clearly that it is ironic and so relieve some burden from the viewer. The viewer should experience a dilemma, is it serious or not? Real or not? For Critical design to be successful they need to make up their own mind.
Also, it would be very easy to preach, a skilful use of satire and irony can engage the audience in a more constructive away by appealing to its imagination as well as engaging the intellect. Good political comedians achieve this well. Deadpan and black humour work best.
7. Is it a movement?
No. It’s not really a field that can be neatly defined. It’s more about values and an attitude, a way of looking at design and imagining its possibilities beyond the narrow definitions of what is presented through media and in the shops.
8. What are its main relatives?
9. What are the biggest misconceptions?
That it is negative and anti-everything.
That it is only commentary and cannot change anything
That it is jokey
That it is not concerned with aesthetics
That it is against mass-production
That it is pessimistic
That it is not real
That it is art
10. But isn’t it art?
It is definitely not art. It might borrow heavily from art in terms of methods and approaches but that’s it. We expect art to be shocking and extreme. Critical Design needs to be closer to the everyday, that’s where its power to disturb comes from. Too weird and it will be dismissed as art, too normal and it will be effortlessly assimilated. If it is regarded as art it is easier to deal with, but if it remains as design it is more disturbing, it suggests that the everyday as we know it could be different, that things could change.
11. Isn?t it a bit dark?
Yes, but not for the sake of it. Dark, complex emotions are ignored in design, nearly every other area of culture accepts people are complex, contradictory and even neurotic, but not design, we view people as obedient and predictable users and consumers.
One of critical Design’s roles is to question the limited range of emotional and psychological experiences offered through designed products. Design is assumed to only make things nice, it’s as though all designers have taken an unspoken Hippocratic oath, this limits and prevents us from fully engaging with and designing for the complexities of human nature which of course is not always nice. It is more about the positive use of negativity, not negativity for its own sake, but to draw attention to a scary possibility in the form of a cautionary tale.
12. And its future?
A danger for critical design is that it ends up as a form of sophisticated design entertainment: 90% humour 10% critique. It needs to avoid this situation by identifying and engaging with complex and challenging issues. Areas like Future Forecasting would benefit from its more gritty view of human nature and ability to make abstract issues tangible. It could also play a role in public debates about the social, cultural and ethical impact on everyday life of emerging and future technologies.
pata-physical: a philosophy or media theory dedicated to studying what lies beyond the realm of metaphysics. That is to say, it is more of speculative design.
The mantra at Apostrophe is not simply innovation, but pataphysical innovation. This means the philosophy of the absurd, the ecology of hypothetical experience, the science of imaginary solutions. Our authors challenge categories and genre distinctions most often associated with literature and poetry via discourse that intersects philosophy, cultural studies, theory, and, especially, pataphysics. By investigating language and consciousness through conceptual operations, parody & pastiche, Oulipo-like methods, surrealist conceits, and cross-genre experiments, these writers expand potential definitions of literature. The intersection of poetic discourse with pataphysics involves an “anti-metaphysical” trajectory that delights in the uncertain and indeterminate nature of human experience; a kind of postmodern negative capability. Our writers subvert the idea of a “well-crafted” poem by disclosing its own operations and undermining presumptions about what constitutes a poem.
After a short introduction from the editors (Mark Tursi and Richard Greenfield), five APOSTROPHE authors (Tony Trigilio, Joe Milazzo, Catherine Meng, Gina Abelkop and Johannes Göransson) will read their work. A panel discussion with the writers and editors concerning the characteristics of our aesthetic followed by questions from the audience.
This video is a documentary about the Bio Mapping project by Christian Nold. Bio Mapping is a research project which explores new ways that we as individuals can make use of the information we can gather about our own bodies. Instead of security technologies that are designed to control our behaviour, this project envisages new tools that allows people to selectively share and interpret their own bio data. The Bio Mapping tool allows the wearer to record their Galvanic Skin Response (GSR), which is a simple indicator of emotional arousal in conjunction with their geographical location. This can be used to plot a map that highlights point of high and low arousal. By sharing this data, we can construct maps that visualize where we as a community feel stressed and excited.
I think it is associated with technological in interaction pyramid, but it is not connected to social network by providing research object and information.
Money no object
Money No Object is a donations system, exploring the use of wearable technology and human contact through social gestures (such as a handshake or hug), as a method by which visitors can make a financial contribution to cultural organisations like the V&A. At the same time, the novel process of donating will aim to re-engage audiences with the broader value of the Museum, build connections between people, and strengthen social cohesion within the Museum’s visitor community.
This project is a representative object for pata-physical (= poetic futuristic)
Through this project, we can expect futuristic payment and imagine how to pay in the new way.
Heidi Hinder who worked for this project explores the idea of completing financial transactions through physical gestures, such as a hug, handshake, high-five and dance.
By combining craft and technology, Hinder thinks the project could find s alternative to the payment systems in cultural institutions, “reinventing the clear plastic donations box you often see in museum foyers”. There’s potential, she says, for visitors to load up devices with credit at the entrance to spend through out the building, adding emotioanl value to the ways we pay.
Skube is associated with social object.
It provides people to share their music with each other and they enjoy it together by discovering the music.
Rethinking home audio and understanding how and where people share music was the jumping point for creating Skube. We realized that as we are moving more towards a digital and online music listening experience, current portable music players are not adapted for this environment. And sharing music in communal spaces is neither convenient nor easy, especially when we all have such different taste in music.
The result of our exploration is Skube, a music player that allows you to discover and share music and facilitates the decision process of picking tracks when in a communal setting.
There are two modes, Playlist and Discovery. Playlist plays the tracks on your Skube, while Discovery looks for tracks similar to the ones on your Skube so you can discover new music that still fits your taste. When Skubes are connected together, they act as one player that shuffles between all the playlists. You can control the system as a whole using any Skube.
The interface is designed to be intuitive and tangible. Flipping the Skube changes the modes, tapping will play or skip songs and flipping a Skube on its front face will turn it off. The shape informs the user to the ways they are able to connect the music players together. This allows different Skubes to be in either Discovery mode or Playlist mode when connected to other players. When multiple Skubes are connected together,they act as one music player and they contribute to a global playlist that is played on all them.
– See more at: http://www.soundplusdesign.com/?p=5516#sthash.f4UbeeNF.dpuf