Distributed design¶
”…and then my diy gmo potato that produces grain-like flour will start undermining the nation-state…” - an unhinged version of myself, achieved through mushroom modeling
In this seminar, we engaged with the concept and practice of distributed design. Reading about both in the This is Distributed Design book was a significant factor in my decision to apply to MDEF, so I was especially excited about this course.
After each session, we were asked to reflect on the way we engaged with the content and the colleagues which were part of our group (in the group activity). Here is how I experienced it.
first session (mushroom model)¶
The activity consisted in using a mushroom model (an iteration on the iceberg).
learning skills¶
The skills I needed for this activity include:
- leaving space for others to speak while expressing my own thoughts
- imagining supply chains, historical continuities, and power dynamics
- synthesizing disparate understandings of a topic
dynamics¶
The dynamic of the group felt very collaborative and constructive. We built upon one another’s thoughts and contributions and managed to get a relatively deep understanding of our topic (bread), given the time we had.
interactions¶
I had the opportunity to try to communicate my group’s reflections to participants from other groups (who came to our table), as well as to the class. Partly because I got really into the topic, I may have presented a version slightly biased towards my own thoughts. It was very interesting to talk to different people and get their perspective. However, due to my somewhat exhuberant enthusiasm, I may have missed some of the subtleties of their thought process. In a similar activity in the future, I would try to focus even more on listening.
second session (reflection tree)¶
In this session, the main activity was to go through the distributed design platform reflection tree, applying it to our own projects.
learning skills¶
In this activity, I needed to be patient and open-minded. There were quite a few different aspects of the reflection tree to go through, and some of the topics were not framed in a way that was intuitive to me, but nonetheless useful.
dynamics¶
I vibed with a lot of the material, but had issues with the value column. It seemed to me that survival aspects (monetisation or otherwise surviving in our capitalist world as a project) were being conflated with a critique of the way monetary value has replaced other ways of valuing, and how that could be extended. I have my seperate issues with the framing of the latter critique but mostly was a bit confused about the first aspect. However, this really helped me clarify in my own mind some of theses issues.
interactions¶
The first part, while done in groups, was mostly an individual activity. it was interesting to seek in the second part (where we presented what we had done) to see the diverging ways people had engaged with the reflection tree. This shows the value of leaving some things deliberately vague.
third session (a value)¶
In this session, we looked at a particular value (not necessarily listed in the distributed design values). My group focused on curiosity and inclusion.
learning skills¶
This was very much a collaborative exercise. It required the ability to listen and leave space to others while giving one’s own contributions. It also required creativity and imagination.
dynamics¶
The group hummed along, our conversations were wide-ranging but not superficial. I really enjoyed the ‘yes-and’ dynamic we had, as well as the playful nature of painting with coffee and writing cadavres exquis.
interactions¶
It felt like building a temporary collective intelligence in a playful manner. Together, we uncovered the multi-faceted nature of curiosity and came to a rough consensus on inclusion and the interaction between the two.