Constructivism

“The Bauhaus pursued a holistic philosophy. It aimed at educating the whole person, with the rationale that only this kind of education would give the student a better grasp of society and an understanding of how the products he or she would design could improve it… the Constructivists felt that a good art environment could promote good individual and communal values.” -Hattula Moholy Nagy

As a follower of Constructivism, Moholy-Nagy taught “design for purpose,” which emphasized the importance of contributing to and improving upon society by way of design. His future-focused social philosophy puts quality of individual life and interpersonal relations over profit, with benefits to come in the long-term.

In order to create something which both satisfies the eye and performs its intended function though, a designer is taught to consult principles of engineering to make their designs come to life. Best design practices consider the phrase, “‘form follows function,’... [which] means that the shape of an object is defined by the work it has to do.” However, it is impossible to design for improvement to society without consideration or awareness of limitations: “the statement ‘form follows function’ has to be supplemented; that is, form also follows–or at least it should follow–existing scientific and technical and artistic developments, including sociology and economy” (33).

Intended Obsolescence

Moholy-Nagy’s writing contains some of the earliest examinations of intended obsolescence that I have seen. It is immensely interesting how his theories shed light on a problem which has since snowballed into normalcy for the United States; A country defined by excess with an ability to produce without consideration for waste. And, with the ever-quickening turnover of shopping seasons, novelty has quickly taken precedence over quality. Moholy-Nagy proposed that at this state, the job of the designer has now become to boost the position of the salesman and advertising agencies. This demand for product “...forces the designer to satisfy only the desire for the sensationally new in the exterior. Thus, ‘design’ today is… usually nothing but an exterior cloak around a product” (34).

So, what is there to be done? Moholy-Nagy proposed that there must be “...a mental adjustment of the people towards this changed world…” This adjustment in attitude must start at the individual level, and while “[this] universal acceptance of new trends in life as well as in design may take time,” it is more likely to be understood through the interpersonal, non-hierarchical language of design: painting, photography, music, poetry, sculpture, architecture, nor of any other fields such as industrial design. They are equally valid departures toward the fusion of function and content in ‘design’... There is design in organization of emotional experiences, in family life, in labor relations, in city planning, in working together as civilized human beings. Ultimately all problems of design merge into one great problem: ‘design for life’”(42).