Tales

Hertzian
Experience'
Aesthetic
Products,
Electronic
andCriticalDesign

AnthonyDunne

TheMIT Press
Massachusetts
Cambridge,
England
London,

O 2 0 0 1 M a s s a c h u s e t t sI n s t i t u t e o f T e c h n o l o g y
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprocluced in any lorm by any electronic or mechanical means (inclrrdrng photocopying, recorcling, or information storage
ancl retrievtrl) without permission in writing from the publisher.
MIT Press books may be purchased at special quantity discounts for business or sales
p r o m o t i o n a l u s e .F o r i n f b r m a t i o n , p l e a s ee m a i l s p e c i a l _ s a l e s ( a r m i t p r e s s . m i t . e dour w r i t e
to Special Sales Department, The MIT

Press, 11 Haywarcl Street, Cambridge, MA

02112.
This book was set in Bell Gothic and Garamond 3 by Graphic Composition, Inc
P r i n t e d a n d b o u n c l i n t h e U n i t e d S t a t e so f A m e r i c a .
L i b r a r y o f C o n g r e s sC a t a l o g i n g - i n - P u b l i c a t i o n D a t a
Dunne, Anthony.
Hertzian tales : electronic prodr-tcts,aesthetic experience, and critical d e s i g n / A n t h o n y
I)r-rnne.-[Rev. ed.]
P. cm.
Includes bibliographical referencesancl index.
ISBN 0-262-04232-0 (hc : alk. paper)
l E l e c t r o n i c a p p a r a t l l sa n c l a p p l r a n c e s - D e s r g n a n d c o n s t r u c t i o n . I Title.

62r38I-4c22

TK7B70 D86 2(X)6

1 0 9 1 13 6 t 1

20050t2222

Para-functionality:
TheAesthetics
of Use

This chapter reviews projects from art, architecture, and design that exemplify
"para-functionality."
the functional estrangement I call
The term means here a
form ofdesign where function is used ro encourage reflection on how electronrc
"para-"
products condition our behavior. The prefix
suggests that such design is
within the realms of utility but artempts to go beyond conventional definitions
offunctionalism to include the ooetic.

Eccentric
0bjects:Para-functionality
andNon-design
Some naive, curious, or eccentric objects, outside the world ofconventional design, unintentionally embody provocative or poetic qualities rhat most product
designs, even those intended to provoke, seldom achieve. Although industrial
designers play a part in designing instruments of death (weapons) and pleasure
(sex aids) these extreme areasof marerial culture rarely enter design discourse.
Yet Jack Kevorkian's SuicideMachine. a powerful "unofhcial" design that materializes complex issuesof law, ethics, and self-determination, shows how an industrial invention can be a form ofcriticism (figure 3. 1). Critical ofa legal sysrem
that outlaws euthanasia, Kevorkian has his machine ro overcome this. Its ambiguous status between protorype and product makes it more disturbing than
pure artworks by blurring boundaries between the everydaynessof indusrrial
production and the fictional world ofideas. It suggests a role for design objects
as discourse where functionality can be used to criticize the iimirs that products
impose on our actions.

: ljrffi
:1

Figure 3.1

J a c l <l ( e v o r k i a n ' sS u i c i d eM a c h i n ei s a p o w e r f u lp i e c eo f , . u n o f f i c i a l ,d, e s r g na n o

s h o w sh o w a n i n d u s t r i a lo b j e c tc a n e m b o d yc o m p l e xi d e a st h r o u g h i n v e n t i o na s a f o r m o f s o c i a l
criticism.

C h a p t e r3

At the other exrreme is the world of antique walking sticks. A drinking cane,
designedfor an alcohol merchanr who must spend much of his time visiting rhe
bars of his cusromers,discretely siphons off his drink while his host is not looking; a trigger later releasesthe drink into a gutter (igure 3.2). lt satisfiesetiquette and exploits the walking stick's inherent potential for connection ro other
objects and contexrs:hand, bar, glass,and gutter.
\Talking sticks that become a card rable or sear(rigures 3.3_ 3.4) show how
simple porrable props can transform architectural spaces. They conceptually
colonize the functional possibilities of preexisting spaces.The user becomes a
protagonist in a new narrative where a lobby or park becomes a casino.r
A third device, used by derectives in the 1940s for protecting fingerprinrs on
a steering wheel, is beautifully absurd and surreal (figure 3.5). Sigmund Freud
(1996,13) cites G. Heymans'sexplanation that a joke works through bewilderme nt succeeded by illumination. The word that is the vehicle of a joke often
appearsar {irst ro be wrongly consrructed, unintelligible, incomprehensible, or
puzzling. In this double steering.wheeia similar unintelligibility is evident: rrs
comic effect is produced by solving this bewilderment by understanding irs
function. This is also the casewith "chindogu" (ligure 3.6). Their individual
elements are recogmzable, but the reason for combining them is at {irst bewildering. The meaning behind the object is derived from "sense-fiction":the objects make functional sense,bur are srill useless..

Forhidden
Emotions:Para-functionality
and Design
In a review of an exhibition of work by Intermediate Unit 3, objects in the
Landscape, at London's Architectural Association, Irje (I99)
contrasts the
"electronic
devices essential ro contemporary urban existence," the means
"information,
whereby
entertainment and fantasy are promoted-ancl
con"virus-like
"invade
trolled," with the unit's
prorotypes" rhar
and disrupt such
networks, and propel minds and bodies into a hectically deregulated world of
fragments-fragments

of ideals, of illusions, of sensory impressions." The use

of strange inventions by architects is nor uncommon and, although they have
lost much of rheir porency through overuse,their deployment in this instance
"bizarre
as
monsrers," designed to challenge the banal reality supported by consumer dr-rrables,emphasizes the need to identify how electronic products can
offer alternarive expressionsof their own functional logic. In a held where
"product
design is rhoroughly integrated in capitalist production, [and] berefr

P a r a f u n c t i o n a l i t yT: h e A e s t h e t i c so f U s e

Figure3'2

T h i s d r i n k i n gc a n ef r o m t h e S a i n t - E t i e n n em a i l - o r d e rc a t a l o g u eo f l 9 l 0 o p e r a t e s
i n a c o n t e x tw h e r ee t i q u e t t ea s s u m e s u c hi m p o r t a n c et h a t t h e o b j e c tm u s t b e m a d et o m a i n t a i n
i t i n a " s o c i a ll y d a n g e r o u s "s i t u a t i o n .

C h a p t e r3

WW

',ilii;
:t:ii::
:l:.

Figures3.3-3.4 Thetablecane,patented
in England
in 1891,andthe"low seatcane"areexpropscantransform
amples
of howsimpleportable
anarchitectural
space.

ofan independent critical tradition on which to basean alternative,"r only a few

designers use the function of products as criticism.
"use
For example, Penny Sparke (1982) cites Gaetano Pesce:his
ofdistorrion
'absurd'
and exaggeration [are]
devices for commenting upon his observatrons.
Rather than turning to alternative media, Pesceuses the language of design ro
make its own self-commentary" (52), but his objects do not incorporate functionality asa primary componenr (figure 3.7). When functionality doesenter, rr
is often jokey and closer to the playful one-off multiples created by Fluxus. During the 1980s Denis Santachiara and Philip Garner developed approaches that
merit a closer look. Santachiara,who developed a distincrive approach over many
years,aims to raise the aesthetic qualiry ofmass-produced everyday objects such

Para-functi o n a l i t y :T h e A e s t h eitc s o f U s e

F i g u r e 3 . 5 A s t e e r i n gw h e e l ,u s e db y d e t e c t i v e sd u r i n gt h e l 9 4 O s t o d r i v e r e c o v e r e dv e h i c l e s
b a c kt o t h e p o l i c es t a t i o nw i t h o u t s m u d g i n gt h e t h i e f , sf i n g e r p r i n t s .

as domestic appliances by developing their possibiliries of animation. This

could be seenas little more than a desire ro use rechnology to give objects a personality by making rhem more expressiveand quirky (figure 3.8). But his concern is with an aesthericsof use which give objects a distinctive identity from
the linguistics ofconstruction and manufacture. Santachiara subverts technical
knowledge, redirects it rowards provocative ends, provides more than enriched
interactivity, and raises the complex issues of what Baudrillard has called the
"crisis
of functionalism.'
Baudrillard (1981) argues that the accepranceof funcrionalism as an arbitrary but dominanr rationaiity gave rise to an irrational counter-discourse that
moves between the two poles of kitsch and surrealism:
The surrealistobject emergesat rhe sameepochas the functional object,as its derision
and transgression.
Although they areovertly dys- or para-functional,thesephantasmic
objectsnevertheless
presuppose-albeit in a contradictorysense-ths advent of functionality asthe universalmoral law ofthe object,and the adventofthis object itself, separated,autonomousand dedicatedto the transparency
ofits function. \fhen oneponders

Chapter3

Figure3.6 Theindividuar
erements
of a ',chindogu,,
arerecognizabrein thiscase,a crothes
dryerandgolfcrub,butthereason
for theircombination
isat firstbewirderino.

it' there is something unrearand armostsurreal

in the fact ofreducing an object to its
function: and it sufficesto push this principle
of functionality to the rimit to make its
absurdityemerfle.This is evident in the case
of the toaster,iron or,,undiscoverabre
ob_
jects"of Carelman.(192-191)
Santachiara'swork is often closer to kitsch
than that of Garner, whose is croser
to surrealism and the absurd. Garner's proposals
for products are a form of industrial design that raps inro the srrange
psychorogical and social narrarives
arising from rhe objects themserves and interacti.n
with and through them in
a consumer-orienredsociety. Arrhor-rgh rheir
overtry satiricar and whimsicar

P a r a f u n c t i o n a l i t yT
: h e A e s i h e t i c so f U s e

Figure3.7 Gaetano
Pesce's
furniture
for cassina
duringtheearly1960susesthe language
of
design
to communicate
hisobservation
that people
will alwaysbealienated
fromobjects
as long
asconsumption
istheprimaryreason
for an object's
existence.

character,often simply visual puns or jokes, undermines the viewer's suspenslon

of disbelief (hgure 3.9), they demonstrate the power of mock-ups, scenarios,and
fictitious narrative over working prototypes as a way ofpresenting this kind of
liction. The successof both his books confirms that people understand and relate to the narrative behind the work wirhout having to use the ob jects.
Santachiara and Garner operare within the realm ofthe gadger, the opposire
"gadget"
ofthe well-designed object. The term
here denotes a curious, originai
and witty accessoryof no real use, as opposed to the "gimmick," which is too
transparent in its effort to impress and attract attention. Giulio Ceppi remarks
"probably
that
the gadget has never been considered, by official design culture,
as the result ofa design effort, an industrial product capable ofrevealing interesting technical featuresor ofinfluencing peoples behaviour" and that "the mosr
important phenomenon causedby the gadget is, however, a psycho-behavioural
factor: wonder. . . . The fact that wonder and surprise are two variables that
rarely enter inro the design of industriai objects has induced the development
of a clandestine niche in which such forbidden emotions can be found" (Ceppi

r99r, rt).
Heterotopian
Gadgets:
Para-functionality
andArt 0bjects
For examplesthat explore the aestheticsofthis "clandesrineniche" offorbidden
emotions it is necessaryagain to move away from industrial design, and begin

C h a p t e r3

Figure3'8 DenisSantachia
(r989),whichsparks
ra's portare
whenit is passed
through,ls an
example
of hisconcern
withanaesthetics
of usewhereinvention
is usedto giveobjects
a distinctiveidentity
that moves
awayfromthe ringuistics
of constructron
andmanufacture.

P a r a - f u n c t i o n a l i t yT:h e A e s t h e t i c so f U s e

- ?tH I

r"q"*t

Figure3.7 Gaetano
Pesce's
furniture
for Cassina
duringtheearly1960susesthe language
of
design
to communicate
hisobservation
that people
will alwaysbealienated
fromobjects
aslong
asconsumption
istheprimaryreason
for an object,s
existence.

character,often simply visual puns or jokes, undermines the viewer's suspension

of disbelief (ligure 3.9), they demonstrate the power of mock-ups, scenarios,and
frctitious narrative over working protorypes as a way of presenting rhis kind of
liction. The successof borh his books confirms that people understand and relate to the narrative behind the work withour having to use the objects.
Santachiara and Garner operare within the realm ofthe gadget, the opposite
ofthe well-designed object. The term "gadget" here denotes a curious, original
and witty accessoryof no real use, as opposed to the "gimmick," which rs too
transparenr in its effort to impress and attract attention. Giulio Ceppi remarks
"probably
that
the gadget has never been considered, by official design culture,
as the result ofa design effort, an industrial producr capabie ofrevealing interesting technical featuresor ofinlluencing peoples behaviour" and that "the most
important phenomenon causedby the gadget is, however, a psycho-behavioural
factor: wonder. . . . The fact that wonder and surprise are rwo variables that
rarely enter into the design of industrial objects has induced the development
of a clandesrineniche in which such forbidden emotions can be found" (Ceppi

199r.r5).
Fi

Heterotopian
Gadgets:
Para-functionality
andArt 0bjects
For examplesrhat explore the aestheticsofthis "clandestineniche" offorbidden
emotions it is necessaryagain to move away from industrial design, and begin

CX

ti'

David Po
poetics ofrc;

Beckerr'sj /_

to complere

contradicrion

it is construc

an exercisern

Beckert u:

and a langual

odds wirh ra<

"an
text,
allca
sistance of s-

names to rher
drawings: tbr

device hor.ers

machines do r

F i g u r e 3 . 9 P h i r i pG a r n e r ' sA r i e n a t u r e( 1 9 8 5 )
d e m o n s t r a t etsh e p o w e ro f m o c k - u p ss, c e n a . o s i
a n d f i c t i t i o u sn a r r a t i v eo v e rw o r k i n gp r o t o t y p e s
a s a w a y o t p r e s e n t i n gt h i s k i n d o f f i c t i o n .

embody alrerr
and the "Para

S7hat happ

come parr oi e

respect as his n
with literature:
writing

nor rhe gadget-ridden

irseif is a gadget in thar it cerebrates the

workings

erotopia described by Michel

might

wodd of science fiction but a world where

Foucault (r97o)

of ranguage. The het-

ilrustrates what a Iiterarygadget

be like:

gadgets of Bnl

uselessmachrn
work (figure i.

and the desrrr

knowledge. anr
utopias afford consolation: although they have
no rear rocarity there is neverthelessa fan_
tastic' untroubled region in which they are
abre to unforcr; they open up cities with vast
avenues' superbly planted gardens, counrries
where life is easy,even though the road to
them is chimerical' Heterotopias are disturbing,
probabry becausethey destroy "synrax,.
in advance, and not only the syntax which
causeswords and things (next to and also one
another) to "hold rogether." This is why
utopias permit fables and discourse: they run
with the very grain of language and are pa*
of the fundamentar dimension of the fabul.us; heterotopias (such as those fbuncl so
often in Borges) desiccate speech, stop words
in their tracks, contest the very possibility
ofgrammar ar lrs source;they dissoiveour
m y t h s a n d s t e r i l i s e t h e l y r i c i s m o f o u r s e n r e n c e s (. x v _ x v r i )

ofrealization. I

successfullr.bcr

also highlight r

aries between rr

The invenro

photographic t I

machines,rorlrr

periments inrcn
era,resulring rn

polarization or'r

understand thcn

C h a p t e3r

David Porush (1985) usesterminology rhar invites comparison

between the
',lsamuer
poetics of real machines and srrange inventions, and rirerary
gadgets:
Beckett's] Lost }nes is a palpable liction which, even as its inventor
arremprs
to compiete the blueprint, collapses into impossible meaninglessness,
selfcontradiction, and absurdity. The fallibility of the cylinder machine
lies in the fact
it is consrructed in words; the author's attempr to describe it precisely
becomes
an exercisein the futility oftrying to describe anything using language" (161).
Beckett uses rwo kinds of language, a precise technical/mathematicar
one,
and a language of "failure, probability and doubt." These two rhetorics
are at
odds with each other and their weaving together provides rhe qualities
of this
"an
text'
allegorical world ofpure fiction" about the "perception ofthe mute
resistance of worldly objects to our vain and inappropriace arrempts
to artach
names to them." Paul Klee seems to have incorporated this sensibility
into his
drawings: for example, Tbe Tu'ittering Machine (figure
3.r0), where a srrange
device hovers in the imaginary space of the drawing, suggests
a realm where
machines do not simply mirror rationaliry through nonsensical functions
bur
embody alternative physical laws ro ours, like Marcel Duchamp's ,,Large
Glass,,
"Pataphysics"
and the
of AlfredJarry.
\what happens when
this sensibility moves from the page and canvas ro become pa. of everyday space?The sculptor panamarenko is interesting
in this
respecras his machines embody the same ambiguity as the literary
and paintedy
gadgets ofBeckett and Klee. \whereasartists likeJean Tinguely
have constructed
uselessmachines that comically mirror rationality, panamarenko,s
objects rarely
work (figure 3. 1 1), provoking the viewer to think about the narure
ofinvenuon
and the desires that motivate it. They are abour {light, desire,
the limits of
knowledge, and the transition from wondering and dreaming to
the dull reality
of realization By denying thar last step and conventionar practice,
they hover
successfully between the imaginary and the real. His scientific theories
on flight
also highlight rhe fictional nature ofscientific knowledge and
blur the boundaries between words and things.
The invenror-artist Steven pippin meditares on photography. He
coats with
photographic chemicals the interior surfacesof everyday objects
like washing
machines, toilets, and bath tubs, turning them into cameras.His
ingenious experiments inrerweave the hosr object's original functionality
with that of a camera' resulting in objects thar occupy a difficult conceptual spaceoutside
the usual
polarization of functionaiism and surrealism. They do produce
sense,and we
understand them, b.r it is hard to say what exactly we understand
about them.

P a r a - f u n c t l o n a l i t yT:h e A e s t h e t i c so f U s e

F i g u r e 3 . 1 0 P a u l l ( l e e ' s T h e T w i t t e r i n gM a c h i n e( 1 9 2 2 ) s h o w sa s t r a n g ed e v i c eh o v e r i n gi n
t h e i m a g i n a r ys p a c eo f t h e d r a w i n g ,s u g g e s t i n ga r e a l m w h e r e m a c h i n e sd o n o t s i m p l y m i r r o r
r a t i o n a l i t yt h r o u g hn o n s e n s i c af ul n c t i o n s .p a u l l ( e e , T h e T w i t t e r i n gM a c h i n e( 1 9 2 2 ) . c o p y r i g h t
D A C S1 9 9 9 .

Chapter3

does
Voyage
to theStars(1979),likemanyof hisotherpieces,
Figure3.11 Panamarenko's
andthedesires
to thinkaboutthenatureof invention
work.Thisprovokes
theviewer
notactually
that motivateit.

They differ from the symbolic machines and devices of Rebecca Horn, where
things do what we expect but the company they keep surprises. Pippin creates
conceptual gadgets that render uselessour expectation ofwhat things ought to
do; they turn knowledge itself into a gadget and allow us to catch glimpses of
how knowledge works and wonder at its beautiful but useiessmechanisms.
The objects produced by the inventor-artist Philippe Ramette occupy a different part of the spacebetween ideas and things. They resemble in atmosphere
the design proposals of Philip Garner but are less ironical in their straightforward presentation offunction through the nostalgic language ofantique scren"prostheses
of the
tific instruments. Meyer Rubinstein (1993) describesthem as
spirit" (100), aids to thought and contemplation. As with many of the objects
described in this chapter, the emphasis on functionality focuses the viewer's
attention on the space between the experience of looking at the work and the
prospect of using it. Here the emphasis is on the body and its relationship
through the sensesto the spacethat contains it. Although fuliy working, many
of Ramette's objects cannot be used becausethey can hurt or worse: for example,

P a r a - f u n c t i o n a l i t yT:h e A e s t h e t i c so f U s e

Figure3,12 Theemphasis
placed
onfunctionality
in philippeRamette,s
)bjectwith whichto
Seethe Worldin Detail(1990)focuses
theviewer's
attention
onthespacebetween
theexperrenceof lookingat theworkandtheprospect
of usingit.

object to Make YourselfBe strack by Ligbtning, or Intolerable object whose lens focusessunlight onto the top ofthe head. But not all his objects are threatening.
In a world of artificial objects shaped almost entirely by funcrionalism, devices
like an objex uith'llthich to seetbe ti{/orld in Detail do not atrempr to escape the
dictates of functionalism bur instead work from within, extending ir to include
the poetic and playfully subversive(figure 3.12).

SocialFictions:
Para-functionality
andCriticism
Although often threatening, Ramerte's objects do not shock. Their critical content is hidden benearh the poetry ofconstruction and the humorous appreciation
of their function. But the work of the artist Andrea Zittel shocks by using the
famrliar conrexrs of the home, and of the sysrem of production and consumption, to concretize alternative values that are outside notions ofthe future or pasr
but sit uncomfortably alongside "now." They suggesr that the way things are
may not be the only possibility. They initiate a questioning and awarenessthar
"one-dimensionality"
helps unravel the
rhat characterizes presenr rimes and
"the
maintains
impossibility of the possible."l zittel's cortfort IJ nits suggesrsan

Chapter3

Figure 3.13

s n unusuaw
l ay ofthinkingabout
A n d r e aZ i t t e l ' s C o m f o r t U n i t s ( 1 9 9 4 ) s u g g e s t a

t h e r o l eo f f u r n i t u r e .H e r e m p h a s i s h i f t sf r o m i s s u e so f s t y l ea n d i m a g et o t h e i r p s y c h o l o g i c auls e
a s t o o l sf o r i n h a b i t a t i o n .

unusual way of thinking about the role of furniture (figure 3.13).Her emphasis
shifts from styie and image to their psychological use as tools for inhabitation.
By clearly favoring the manifestation and fusion of particular functional possibilities over others they remind us, through an extreme but credible form of
functional reductionism, of our dependence on ob1'ectsfor developing new behaviors. In her work it is never quite clear whether her positive-reinforcement
prototypes reflect a genuine beliefthat this is what we need, or are an ironical
play on modernism.
The archirects Kenneth Kaplan and Ted Krueger (K/K Researchand Development) leave no doubt about the status of their assemblagesof found machine
"analogues"
for architectural ideas. Although their
parts (figure 3.14) as ironic
writing is polemical their use of objects to attract the attention of the audience,

P a r a - f u n c t i o n a l i t yT:h e A e s i h e t i c so f U s e

F i gu r e 3 , I 4

l ( / l ( R e s e a r ca
h n d D e v el o p m e nt ' s B u r e a u - di c t o ( 1 9 8 9) i s a n i r on i c " a n a l o g u e "f o r

a r c h i t e c t u r aild e a sc o n s i s t i n go f a n a s s e m b l a goef f o u n d m a c h i n ep a r t s .

Another architectural pracrice, Diller + Scofidio, designs and builds archirectural gadgets that work on a critical level. Para-Site' an atchitectural explofation of rhe impact of electronic media on architectural space' is relevant here
becauseof the equal importance it gives to electronic and conventional media.
Electronic objects such as televisions and video camefas are not repackaged or
redesigned but integrated inro new hybrid obiects (figure 1.16), transforming
these boring and familiar devices into an architectural intervention. Diller +
Scohdiodeploy technology intelligently, using it to reveal,enable,and criticize,
intervening in not only the abstract spaceofthe building buc also its social and
practical use.
Para-Site is one of many critical interventions in public spacesby architecrs
and artists. one of the best known is Krzysztof \Todiczko's large-scale projec"My
socio-aestheticresearchand
rions onro public buildings. He has written:
experiencesdeal with'strategies' for making public art critical, non-official art."
He studied in the graduate progfam of industrial design at the Akademie Sztuk
pieknych in \Tarsaw under a former coliaborator ofLe corbusier,Jetzy Soltan,
"(post)-avant-garde"
stfaregy ofcritical engagement with and
who advocated a
inliltration of, the institutional structures of industry and culture' After graduaring he worked in \Tarsaw as an industrial designer for UNITRA, a manufacturer of electronic products. One of his lirst pieces of art was done in 1959 while
still an industrial designer there'.Persona/Instruments({igure 3.I1). He was assisred in this by technicians from the Experimental Music Studio in \Tarsaw:
The instrument transformsthe soundsof the environment.
The instrument functionsin responseto hand movements.
The instrument reactsto sunlight.
The instrumentis portable.
The instrument can be usedany placeand any time.
The instrument is lor the exclusiveuseof the artist who createdit.
1992'76)
The instrumentpermitshim to attainvirtuosity (\Wodiczko
\Todiczko has said that

"the

instrument's magic silenceis its socio-polirical

message."Although private, ir depends on a public spaceas a source of sound,

and so rhat orhers can gazeat it and imagine how it works. According to \7o"It
was a way to shape a metaphor for the limits to the freedom of the
diczko,
individual Pole , to the ways he could exercisethis freedom, and to his Powef rn

C h a p t e r3

";l,iiF:lH:lilfi:::iil::fl
:**;ru::;nil.T:fi
:ffJi;ff;:::l
Figure3.16 Diller+
Scofid

" t ' P U rL d r r u reo e l e c t r o n i c

m e d i a .E l e c t r o n i co b j e c t s
and conventrona
s u c ha s T \ / c and
" - ; . ,video
,,^^**'
camerasare not repackageo
are intesrated into new
oftedesisned, bul
rror,J;;.::r:

Para-functionality:
T h eA e s t h e t j c so f U s e

Figure3.17 rezvszrof
personar
Wodiczko's
Instrument11969),arthough
private,
depends
on
a publicspace
asa source
of sound,
andsothatotherscangazeat rt andimagine
howit works.

reiation to public spaces."It was not

designed for mass producrion nor even for
a iimited edirion "and yet it was intended
for the whoie worrd as a metaphor fbr
community life and the nature of public
spacesin poland,,:
My personalinstrumenr proved to be the point
of departurefbr a'my pubric works. it
wasmy 6rst attempt to provide a metaphorical
def nirion of man,sposition asa .,citizen,,
of a dominatedpublic space.It wasarsothe
iirst time I attempted to hint at the ..strat_
egy" of taking words and using spaceasmedium
in which to speakthem, eventhough
the right to usea privatevoicein space
that wastotalry ,,sociaiized,,
(poiiticized)by the
governmenrwas utterly nonexistenr.I proposed
the technic;ueofspeakingsirently,ret_
icently or by grotesquelyexhalting silence.,,
($fodiczko 1992.j 1\
\Todiczko's public projections and homeress
vehicles continue this research
(figure 3.18). A lesser-known
ob1'ect,Alien staff, shows how industrial
design,
throuS;h conceiving new functions and
their conriguration as ,,accessible,,products' can function criticaily. The staff
houses a small LCD television, while a
small video player, a cB radio or walkie-talkie,
and batteries are in a shoulder

(1988-1989).
Figure3.18 0neof l(rzysztof
Wodiczko's
Homeless
Vehicles

bag. The small size of the display, irs position at eye level, and its proximity to
the alien's face are all important. Once somebody has been attracted, a relationship is perceived between the face within rhe screen and the actual face of the
alien, conceptual barriers are destabilized, and real communication may begin:
"It
is an instrument that gives the individual immigrant a chance to'address' directly anyone in the ciry who may be attracted by the symbolic form of the eclurp'broadcasr'
ment and the character of the
program" (\Todiczko 1992 , 303).
S7odiczko's designs show how simple electronic technologies can challenge
preconceptions, but are at the margins of design. Although I seethem as design
proposals not artworks it seemsthat, ro hold a design view where elecrronic objects function as criticism, one must move closer to the world of fine art because
the design profession linds it difficult to accommodare such research.Objects
stchas Personallnstruntent and Alien Staff, with their use of simple electronics and
their emphasis on invention and social and cultural conrenr, ^re rare examples of
how product design and the electronic object can fuse into criticai design.

Para-functionality: The Aestheti c s o f U s e

E
6r{F-*'L'

Hertzian
Pathologies:
Para-functionality
andElectronic
0bjects
Peoplelike to play lotto and peoplelike to userhe ATM. \7hy don't you make it an option in the ATM to sayput your money in and say,I'll bet a little bit and seeif I canget
a little more out, soyou ask for twenty dollars,and you push the button, and you could
get twenty-fiveor yolr could get fifteen.
-JErr. KrrNrs, "ATM CovprrrrroN"
Another zone ofactivity outside that ofeven rhe exiled designer is "anonymous
design," where alternative conceptual models aiready lind expression through
"Pathological"
electronic artifacts.
gadgets are examples oflife outside the normal conception ofreality; they are design fictions, deviations, and failures and
"impossibility
help to maintain the
of rhe possible."
Many of these devicesconcern communication. Most communication technology is oriented toward the individual; it cannot yer suppom or even encourage more complex social siruations. It is poinr-to-point, one-ro-one, not
place-to-place. Yet most of this narrow form of communication rakes place
within that vasr field of telematic possibility, the electromagnetic spectrum.
The tools and deviceslimir the possibilities, not the medium. Ironically, many
of the more interesting possibilities can be found in "pathological" products
based on paranoia and suspicion. Many are designed ro "open up" one-to-one
channels,transforming privare siruations inro public ones.Scanners,bugs, and
"socialize"
detectors illegally
the world of private telematics. For example, scanners have tuned into wireless baby intercoms enabling "recreational voyeurs"
to listen into intimate bedroom conversation.
The radio scanner6hovers ar the limits of iegality (figure 3.19). In the United
Kingdom it is legal to make and sell it but, like many pieces of surveillance
equipment, not to use it for eavesdropping. It draws artenrion to what Delanda
"policing
has termed the
of the specrum," nor a public space bur a highly policed and militarized state space.It is one thing to be prosecuted for eavesdropping but, if the information is passed on ro a third parry and worse, sold, it
becomes a serious offense. If sensitive frequencies are found srored in the memory, the owner is likely to be prosecuted. That the radio scanner is a powerful object, entangled with the social and legal sysrems ofsociety, has been recognized
by the artist and musician Robin Rimbaud, alias Scanner:"To Scanner,the world
of the personal phone call-an

easily rapped medium, especially if you've been

building your own radio sets since your teens-represents a far more honest

Chapter 3

F i g u r e3 . 1 9

n n dp a r a T h es c a n n e irs a n e x a m p l eo f a " p a t h o l o g i c apl r o d u c t "b a s e do n s u s p i c i o a

c h a n n e l st,r a n s f o r m i n gp r i v a t es i t u a t i o n si n t o p u b l i co n e s .
t o o p e nu p o n e - t o - o n e
n o i ad e s i g n e d

P a r af u n c t i o n a l i t yT
: h e A e s t h e t i c so f l l s e

Figure3.20 TheDr.GaussEMF detectorallowsthe ownerto gatherinformation

aboutthe
presence
of harmfulelectromagnetic
fieldssothata complaint
canbemade.

depiction of the world than the outpourings of televisual realrty. And Scanner's
records, packed with a huge collection of telephone 'normality,' are, in turn, far
more real and disturbing than any arty fabrication of reality" (King, n.d., 136).
The radio scanner enables new urban maps ro be made, revealing normally hidden structures ofthe visible and conventional. The scanner is a meta-radio: ir
transcends the many caregories of radio incorporared into commodities, highIighting their commonaliry as parts of an electromagnetic spectrum.
The Dr. Gauss EMF detector is one step further up the evolutionary ladder of
gadgets ({igure 3.20), a low-cost version of a usually expensive piece of equipment, used to measure the magnetic component of possibly harmful electromagnetic fields in the home. The device is simply a black box, but the act of
using it reveals its conceptual power: when it picks up a field it screams,rising
in pitch with the srrength of rhe lield.

C h a p t e r3

E
-^a**.

objects like this allow us ro developnew concepruar

modelsabourour envrronmenr'helpingus ro seeinvisiblesrrucrures
andpatterns.Theyoftenoccupy
the cultural wastelandof in-flighr magazines,
sundaysupplementsand specialist shops,wherealternativeworld views embodied
asmaterial realiry exlsrasa
nonserious
and marginaiphenomena.
But in showroomsthey becomevitar alternarivesro art works and galleries.\fhereas people
srepour ofordinary life
rnro an art gailery,rhe conrenrsof showroomsrerate
direcrly to everydaylife in
the mind of the window shopper.

Between
Rationality
andReality
The most effective examples in this chapter
function as test pieces that, rhrough
their marginahzation, make visible the barriers
limiting poetic experience in
everyday life. The apparent unusability ofmany
ofthese objects crearesa heightened sense.f"disrance."This can be because
the objectsdo not work technically
or, becauserhey are conceptually difficult to assimilate.
To seethar rhey are usable
is to acknowledge that existing notions
offunctionarity have been exrended, a
result of imagining uses for these objects.
They chailenge rhe impossibility of
the possible' It is nor enough to look and
decocletheir visual iconography: they
must be used' Through use,or ar leastby modeling
a scenarioof use in rhe mind,
the observer discovers new ways of conceprual
izing reality.They dismantle conceptual models that limit the way we use artifactual
rearity to extend our scope
l o r a c t i o n .T h e y t h a l l e n g eh o w w e r h i n k
a b o u t e x r e n s i o n st o o u r . , s e r v e s . . iw
na y s
that do not simply magnify but, rather, transform
our perceptron and consclousn e s so f o u r r e l a r i o nt o o u r e n v i r o n m e n r .
They share no coherent theory. They are simply
stories, but stories that allow
complex interactions between reality and imagination.
Driven by poetry, imagrnation, and intuition rather than reason and
lo1;ic, they have their own rarro_
nality, an alternative to our everyday scientific-industriar
rationality. These are
stories about the space between rationality
and reality, which in an indusrriar
society have come ro be synonymous. szhen
these props are rntroduced inro
everyday life as a "virus," subve.ing ir, people
can participate in the srory, exploring the boundaries berween what is
and what might be. This is rhe rore of,
the para-functional as criticism.
By imagining rhe object in use,we become
lost rn a spacebetweendesireand
determinism. \Tithin rhis space lies the brzarre
world of the.,infra-ordrnary,"
the subject of rhe next chapter, which reviews
a number of projecrs in relation
t o b e h a v r o ra n d n a r r a r i v . .

P a r a f u n c t i o n a l i t yT
: h e A e s t h e t i c so f U s e

ttet