2011年2月18日 星期五

Architectural-based Think Tank + Branding : some thoughts (1)





If everything to make a better life is called design, design is everywhere. And yes, it is everywhere. If we draw a chart with Temporality in the x-axis and Superficiality in the y-axis, then all different types of design industry fall into the diagram and become easier to compair the different characteristics among them (p.s. this is purly personal perspective, no scientific statics supported...). Saying that Superficiality means how much do end users know about/pay attention to the product and Temporality means the lifetime of the product, we can see graphic design and many others fall to the top-right while infrastructure falls to the buttom- left. The truth is those on the top-right had been integrated more or less for a very long time. Comparably new business like Branding, is one stream that coordinates graphics, advertising, industrial designs, etc. and marketing/strategies. Funny thing is that, as "interdisciplinary" as branding companies are, they haven't really touched the field of architecture, even they sometimes do interior designs and the boundary between the both had became weaker and weaker.... But does architecture have no need of branding at all? Is brand something one architect may eventually have but can't pursue by means? What if architecture becomes more and more like industrial products? Why are we eager to sell our products but tend to refuse to think ourselves as businessmen? What if we can do branding for our architectural works? It's not something new, it happened quite often, intentionally or not. But we architects weren't really aware of it's importance(or we think it's good-design that only matters), and we never really push it in a more interdisciplinary way. In other words, we don't really "sell" our products.


To be continued...


如果我們用"使用者意識到或瞭解產品的程度"作為縱軸,"產品平均壽命"作橫軸,我們可以比較容易看出市場上五花八門的設計行業不同的屬性跟取向,這兩項也是我覺得用來劃分設計領域比較有意義的指標(ps. 沒有經過任何統計數字,純粹不嚴謹的個人觀察)。"品牌"這個相對較新的行業是跨領域設計其中一種多半從平面設計起家,除了具備行銷, 市場, 經濟的專業外,跨及廣告產品, 工業設計,甚至室內設計。但有趣的是似乎沒有人真正碰觸到建築設計,也許是因為建築需要太多專業知識,也許因為已經有太多建築設計師,又或許根本建築設計不是他們在考量整體品牌形象時會考量的東西。室內設計與建築設計界線越來越模糊,工業設計尺度大了,也可以定義為建築,凡是可以裝著人的,我們都可以叫建築,來自四面八方的人都開始思考起空間容器,手開始伸探到建築師的口袋裡,建築師們的手放在哪裡? 我們受的訓練優勢在哪裡,我們可以跨得出去嗎? 難到建築設計品牌化只能是大師的專利,可遇不可求?如果建築早就開始商品化呢?如果市場上需要越來越多壽命短而精采的建築"商品"呢?難道一間成功的精品旅館,不需要跨及建築外觀到廣告手冊的整體行銷嗎?為什麼建設公司比總是建築師還在意行銷,我們嫌它們醜卻又畫地自限呢? 難道自詡為設計師,就不能同時是商人嗎? 


新型態的設計團隊,待續。

沒有留言:

張貼留言