Design Research Now Essays And Selected Projects Board Of International Research In Design 1st Edition Ralf Michel

Design Research Now Essays And Selected Projects
Board Of International Research In Design 1st
Edition Ralf Michel download
https://ebookbell.com/product/design-research-now-essays-and-
selected-projects-board-of-international-research-in-design-1st-
edition-ralf-michel-2027898
Explore and download more ebooks at ebookbell.com

Here are some recommended products that we believe you will be
interested in. You can click the link to download.
Design Research Now Essays And Selected Projects
https://ebookbell.com/product/design-research-now-essays-and-selected-
projects-51928964
Design Thinking Research Innovation Insight Then And Now Christoph
Meinel
https://ebookbell.com/product/design-thinking-research-innovation-
insight-then-and-now-christoph-meinel-52407558
Design Research Brenda Laurel
https://ebookbell.com/product/design-research-brenda-laurel-47306612
Design Research The Sociotechnical Aspects Of Quality Creativity And
Innovation 3rd Edition Dorian Marjanovi
https://ebookbell.com/product/design-research-the-sociotechnical-
aspects-of-quality-creativity-and-innovation-3rd-edition-dorian-
marjanovi-58186748

Design Research In Information Systems Theory And Practice Hevner
https://ebookbell.com/product/design-research-in-information-systems-
theory-and-practice-hevner-22035846
Design Research Through Practice Ilpo Koskinen John Zimmerman Thomas
Binder Johan Redstrom Stephan Wensveen Koskinen
https://ebookbell.com/product/design-research-through-practice-ilpo-
koskinen-john-zimmerman-thomas-binder-johan-redstrom-stephan-wensveen-
koskinen-23400194
Design Research Theories Methodologies And Product Modelling Iced V 1
1st Edition S Culley
https://ebookbell.com/product/design-research-theories-methodologies-
and-product-modelling-iced-v-1-1st-edition-s-culley-2403412
Design Research Synergies From Interdisciplinary Perspectives 1st
Edition Jesper Simonsen
https://ebookbell.com/product/design-research-synergies-from-
interdisciplinary-perspectives-1st-edition-jesper-simonsen-2470288
Design Research Through Practice From The Lab Field And Showroom 1st
Edition Ilpo Koskinen
https://ebookbell.com/product/design-research-through-practice-from-
the-lab-field-and-showroom-1st-edition-ilpo-koskinen-2518348

3
Design Research Now
Essays and Selected Projects

5
Board of
International
Research in
Design, BIRD
Klaus Thomas Edelmann
Michael Erlhoff
Simon Grand
Wolfgang Jonas
Ralf Michel
Beat Schneider

Ralf Michel
(ed.)
Essays and Selected Projects
Design
Research
Now
Birkhäuser
Basel·Boston·Berlin

Editor, concept and editorial: Ralf Michel, Zurich
Concept and editorial: Janine Schiller, Zurich
Graphic Design: Formal, Christian Riis Ruggaber & Dorian Minnig, Zurich
TranslationfromGermanintoEnglish(“DesignasPractice,ScienceandResearch”,
“The Uneasy Relationship between Design and Design Research”, “Introduction” and
“Foreword”, and the biographies of R. Michel and B. Schneider): Robin Benson, Berlin
Printer: Kösel GmbH & Co. KG, Altusried-Krugzell
Paper: MunkenPrint white, paper volume 1.5, 100g/m
2
; LuxoArt silk, 115g/m
2
Typeface: Akkurat Light, Arnhem Blond
Library of Congress Control Number: 2007931249
BibliographicinformationpublishedbytheGermanNationalLibrary
TheGermanNationalLibraryliststhispublicationintheDeutscheNationalbibliogra-
ﬁe;detailedbibliographicdataareavailableontheInternetathttp://dnb.d-nb.de.
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved, whether the whole or part of
the material is concerned, speciﬁcally the rights of translation, reprinting, re-use of
illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microﬁlms or in other ways,
and storage in data bases. For any kind of use, permission of the copyright owner
mustbeobtained.
©2007BirkhäuserVerlagAG
Basel·Boston·Berlin
P.O.Box133,CH-4010Basel,Switzerland
Part of Springer Science+Business Media
Printed on acid-free paper produced from chlorine-free pulp. TCF∞
Printed in Germany
ISBN: 978-3-7643-8471-5
987654321
www.birkhauser.ch
Colophon
8

9
Preface BIRD p. 13
Introduction Ralf Michel p. 15
Essays I The Uneasy Relationship between Design and Design Research p. 25
Gui Bonsiepe
From a Design Science to a Design Discipline: Understanding Designerlyp. 41
Ways of Knowing and Thinking
Nigel Cross
Strategies of Design Research: Productive Science and Rhetorical Inquiryp. 55
Richard Buchanan
Design Research, an Oxymoron? p. 67
Klaus Krippendorff
DoingDesignasaPartofDoingResearch p. 81
Pieter Jan Stappers
Research Shape of Things to Come p. 99
Paul Chamberlain, Peter Gardner, Rebecca Lawton
ForInspirationOnly p. 119
Ianus Keller
ResearchthroughDesign:aCameraCaseStudy p. 135
Joep Frens
Emerging User Demands for Sustainable Solutions, EMUDE p. 157
Ezio Manzini, Anna Meroni
Essays II Design Research and its Meaning to the Methodological Development p. 187
of the Discipline
Wolfgang Jonas
Design as Practice, Science and Research p. 207
Beat Schneider
Design Semiotics – Institutional Experiences and an Initiative for p. 219
a Semiotic Theory of Form
Susann Vihma
Design Research for Sustainable Social Innovation p. 233
Ezio Manzini
Biographies Authors p. 251

''

Fh[\WY[ 8?H: 8eWhZe\?dj[hdWj_edWbH[i[WhY^_d:[i_]d f$')
?djheZkYj_ed HWb\C_Y^[b f$'+

13
Ifinternationaldesignresearchistocontinuetodevelop,weneed
tohavefundamentaldiscussions,notonlyonwhatweunderstanddesignresearchtobe,but
alsoonthemostimportantquestionsandissues,onexemplarydesignprojects,andonthe
most promising subject areas now and in the future. Rather than asserting unilaterally that a
particularconceptionofresearchistheonlyvalidone,orthatasingletypeofapproachis
exemplary, however, our aim should be to present a diversity of viewpoints and research pro-
jects to a wider audience of design researchers, introducing speciﬁc research areas and giving
reference points for more extensive debate onthe focus, issues, objectives, approaches and
methods of design research.
The signiﬁcance ofDesign Research Nowby Ralf Michel in this context it is that it col-
lects together a number of positions that have come to prominence over the past few years and
are now repeatedly cited in discussions of design research. At the same time, it has the cour-
agetopresentexemplaryprojectsthatareparticularlyexcitingforcontemporarydiscussion
ofdesignresearch.TheselectionhereresultedfromanevaluationprocedureinwhichRalf
Michel compiled key positions on design research according to his own assessment of the
researchcommunity.Thiscompilation,then,isdeﬁnitelynotrepresentativeofBIRD’sindivid-
ualpreferencesbutratheranattempttoshowthestateofdesignresearchtoday.
BIRD’s various publication projects help to make the central positions in design research
available to others by presenting interesting projects appropriately, publishing key reference
booksandanthologiesintheoriginallanguageand/orintranslation,andcompilingasetof
referencepointsandmaterialsthatarevitalforinternationaldesignresearch.Theaimisto
illustratetheenormousheterogeneityofthesekeypositions,toconveyenideaofthevigor-
ous and controversial research debate, and to encourage and stimulate further discussion.
Preface
BIRD BoardofInternationalResearchinDesign

15
For over forty years, design research has been considered an essen-
tial element in the emerging academic discipline of design. In the last decade in particular, it
hasbeenconductedmorebroadlythaneverbefore.Atthecoreofmost,ifnotall,conceptsof
designresearchistherealisationthat,inanageofincreasinglycomplexconditionsforprac-
tising and studying design, there are almost no systematic bases for the continued development
ofdesignasanacademicdiscipline;systematicinthesenseofscientiﬁcandthusindependent-
ly arguable. Many people have come to realise that if design is to have a future as a socially,
culturally or economically relevant discipline, it cannot dispense with the academic tools of the
discipline’s cognitive force and agency.
TheteachingandresearchactivitiesattheHochschulefürGestaltunginUlm(hfgulm)
areanimportantpointofdepartureintheevolutionofdesignintoanacademicallygrounded
discipline supported by theoreticians, teachers and former students. Their number includes
Tomás Maldonado, Gui Bonsiepe and Klaus Krippendorff, whose concepts and theories inﬂu-
encedesigndiscoursetothisday.Inhisessay,‘TheUneasyRelationshipbetweenDesignand
Design Research’, Gui Bonsiepe explicitly introduces the German termEntwurfas an alternat-
ivetoDesign(thecurrentpopularityofwhichhas,inhisopinion,rendereditmisleading).This
makes translation problematic because English, unlike the Romance languages, has no exact
equivalent toEntwurf.Inhisessay,Bonsiepenotesthatitisnolongerpossibletodesigninthe
samewayaspeopledidoneortwogenerationsago.Hethereforeconcludesthatitisequally
impossibletodoresearchaspeopledidoneortwogenerationsago,‘i.e.orientingthemselves
primarily or exclusively on texts.’ Bonsiepe summarises this approach in the phrase ‘from dis-
coursestoviscourses.’Inhispostscript,heexpressestheneedforadebatebetweendesign
anddesignresearchontheonehand,andtheveryrealexclusiveprocessesofaglobalised
economy on the other.
At the end of the present publication, Ezio Manzini returns to this theme and broadens
theconcepttoinclude‘DesignResearchforSustainableSocialInnovation.’Manziniobserves
that in sustainable development, the role of the user changes, and that of the designer changes
decisively.Thisprocess,heargues,mustlogicallyresultinnewdesignprocessesandhave
far-reaching consequences both for how design deﬁnes itself as a discipline and for design
research too.
From the late 1960s to the present, the driving forces of design research have come
from the English-speaking countries, especially the UK, and from colleges that encouraged
and offered doctorates in design research, and whose exponents still engage in the debate
on the development of independent positions within design science. In 2006, Nigel Cross’s
‘Designerly Ways of Knowing’
01 |
wasrepublishedinextendedformasabook,whichwillbe
published jointly by BIRD and Birkhäuser this year as a reprint. In the essay included here,
Introduction
01 |
Ralf Michel
01 |
See de Vries, Cross and Grant
[18]

16Introduction Ralf Michel
hedescribes‘UnderstandingDesignerlyWaysofKnowingandThinking’inthecontextofa
shiftfromadesignsciencetoadesigndiscipline.
More recently, the ‘Research through Design’
02 |
approach has gained special
epistemologicalsigniﬁcance.In1993ChristopherFraylingproposedtheintegrationofsub-
jective experience-, activity- and image-based designer-artistic knowledge into the process
of intersubjectively veriﬁable knowledge production. His position has far-reaching conse-
quences:ontheonehand,itopensupperspectivesforindependentdesignresearch,thus
simultaneously provoking rigorous debates on the ‘academic’ signiﬁcance of that approach.
Ontheotherhand,‘researchthroughdesign’isusuallypursuedintheformofapplication-
orientedresearch.Assuch,itisexpectedtoproduceuseful–i.e.applicable–knowledge,in
line with the growing signiﬁcance of practice-oriented and application-related knowledge for
science and society.
03 |
In his essay, ‘Design and its Meaning to the Methodological Development of the Disci-
pline,’ Wolfgang Jonas illustrates how research through design provides the epistemological
concepts for the development of a genuine design research paradigm, which he considers a
prerequisite for methodological development. His text compares inter alia the positions of
Christopher Frayling and Alain Findeli
04 |
onthesigniﬁcanceof‘researchthroughde-
sign;’ his own deﬁnition sides with Findeli, before concluding that: ‘The Scientiﬁc Paradigm
has to be embedded into the Design Paradigm…’
Richard Buchanan focuses in his essay on the strategy of design inquiry and its closely
related branches of productive science and rhetorical inquiry, in order to demonstrate viable
alternativestothestrategiesofdesignscienceanddialectics.
KlausKrippendorffaskswhethertheexpression‘designresearch’isnot,infact,anoxy-
moron.Heconcludesmoreconstructivelythatatanymoment,theviabilityofadesigndepends
on its stakeholders’ conceptions, commitments and resources, which can be studied in order
toinformdesigndecisions.Inhisopinion,thisiswhattheinvestigationofdesignneedstodo.
Finally, Pieter Jan Stappers reports extensively on his experience with the theory and
researchofdesignengineering.Hebelievesthatitispossiblefordesignresearchtomake
optimaluseofdesigners’skillsratherthanforcingthemintoexistingmodesofdisciplinary
research. This approach lays greater emphasis on the appreciation of generative types of
research.Hisessayisthereforeentitled‘DoingDesignasaPartofDoingResearch.’
Susann Vihma advocates a ‘semiotic Theory of Form’ and examines current positions
(such as Klaus Krippendorff’s ‘Semantic turn’, 2006). She presents her thoughts in the institu-
tionalcontextoftheSchoolofVisualCulture,UniversityofArtandDesignHelsinki,which
drawsonawealthofexperienceinresearch-orienteddoctoralthesesondesign.
02 |
03 |
02 |
Frayling C (1993)Research in Art and Design.RoyalCollegeofArtResearchPapers
1(1): 1–5
03 |
GibbonsM,LimogesC,NowotnyH,SchwartzmanS,ScottP,TrowM(1994)
The New Production of Knowledge:The Dynamics of Science and Research in
Contemporary Societies
. Sage, London
04 |
FindeliA(1998)AQuestforCredibility:DoctoralEducationandResearchinDesign
at the University of Montreal.
DoctoralEducationinDesign, Ohio, 8–11 October 1998

17
FromhisexperienceinsettinguptheScientiﬁcCommunityofDesignResearchinSwitzer-
land, Beat Schneider presents his views on design research in the context of an emerging
academic discipline, and reveals design as differentiated practice, science and research.
Thisﬁrstvolumeondesignresearchattemptstodisplaythesigniﬁcantpositionswithin
designresearch,placingselectedresearchprojectsslightlytooneside;theystandaloneand
are not included as illustrations of the essays.
Aglanceatthetableofcontentsaloneshowsthatthebookcontainsfarmore(nine)
essays on design research than reports on ﬁnished research projects (four). There are several
reasonsforthis.Thetwomostimportantare:
— Currentresearchprojectsoften(still)donotsatisfythequalitystandardsproposed
bythepioneersofdesignresearch.
— BIRD–theBirkhäuserBoardofInternationalResearchinDesign–isstillinanearly
stage of development. It is therefore possible that not enough relevant research pro-
jects were submitted (more than 80 proposals have arrived from Europe, North America,
Asia,New Zealand and Australia).
The proposals received were ﬁrst examined by experts. We then invited the best candi-
datestosubmitanarticle;thisunderwentdouble-blindpeerreviewbyinternationalexperts
who then prepared a written report on it. We had decided in advance to publish only those arti-
clesthatwereacceptedbytheexpertswithnooronlyminorrevision.Thecriteriaforexamin-
ing and reporting on the articles were the research topic’s design autonomy, the quality and
originalityofthereportedresearchproject,thesignificanceofthetopicandthevisualpre-
sentation of the results.
ArticlesbyAnnaMeroniondesignandsustainability,JoepFrensonaresearch-
through-design project, Paul Chamberlain’s ‘Shape of Things to Come,’ and Ianus Keller’s
researchondesignerinteractionwithinformalcollectionsofvisualmaterial,madethegrade
andarepublishedinthisbook.
ThebookdoesnotcontainanyresearchprojectsorcontributionsfromAsiaandScandi-
navia. However, in places where design research is a normal part of the development of de-
signeducationalcoursesandthedesigndiscipline,hundredsofpeoplearenowdoingresearch
ontopicalquestions.IhopethatthenextvolumeofDesign Research Nowwillﬁllthisgap.
Introduction Ralf Michel

'/
?i^ekbZÒhije\Wbbb_a[jej^Wda@Wd_d[IY^_bb[h"m_j^ekjm^ei[WYW#
Z[c_Y[nf[h_[dY[WdZj_h[b[iimehaj^_iXeeamekbZdej^Wl[X[[dfeii_Xb[$?Wbiem_i^jej^Wda
8[WjIY^d[_Z[h\ehj^[cWdoZ_iYkii_edim[^WZedYedjhel[hi_Wbjef_Yi"WdZ\ehWZlWdY_d]
j^[YWki[e\Z[i_]dh[i[WhY^_dIm_jp[hbWdZ$?mekbZb_a[je[nj[dZcoj^Wdaije=k_8edi_[f[
\eh^_iYedijWdjikffehjWdZ\eh[dYekhW]_d]c[jefkXb_i^$7dZ?mWdjje[nfh[iico]hWj_j#
kZ[jecoYebb[W]k[ied8?H:"j^[8_ha^ki[h8eWhZe\?dj[hdWj_edWbH[i[WhY^_d:[i_]d"\eh
j^[_ha_dZWii_ijWdY[WdZ\ehj^[_hYh_j_YWbikffehjm^_b[?mWifh[fWh_d]j^[YedY[fj$Co
j^WdaiWbie]ejej^[fkXb_i^[hi\ehfhel_Z_d]"m_j^_dj^[\hWc[mehae\8?H:"W\ehkc\ehZ_i#
Ykii_ededZ[i_]dh[i[WhY^$
?j^Wda:eh_WdC_dd_]WdZ9^h_ij_WdH__iHk]]WX[he\<ehcWb\ehj^[]hWf^_YZ[i_]d"WdZ
ÒdWbbo"j^[[Z_jeh"Lƒhed_gk[>_bÒa[h"m^ei[fWj_[dY[m[e\j[djWn[Z"\ehikY^WÒd[fheZkYj_ed$
BWijXkjdejb[Wij"?i^ekbZb_a[jej^Wdaj^[Wkj^ehi"m_j^ekjm^ecj^_imehamekbZ
d[l[h^Wl[X[[dfeii_Xb["\ehj^[_h]h[WjYecc_jc[dj"WdZj^[[nf[hjim^efWhj_Y_fWj[Z_d
j^[h[l_[mfheY[ii$

7Yademb[Z][c[dji

HWb\C_Y^[b

23
Essays I The Uneasy Relationship between Design and Design Research p. 25
Gui Bonsiepe
From a Design Science to a Design Discipline: Understanding Designerlyp. 41
Ways of Knowing and Thinking
Nigel Cross
Strategies of Design Research: Productive Science and Rhetorical Inquiryp. 55
Richard Buchanan
Design Research, an Oxymoron? p. 67
Klaus Krippendorff
DoingDesignasaPartofDoingResearch p. 81
Pieter Jan Stappers

25
Themes:
— Theunsubstantiatedbasisofdesignscience
— Thedebasementoftheword‘design’
— Theindispensabilityofdesignresearchinourpresenttime
— The part played by science in design
— Design as reﬂective practice
— A misinterpretation of design
— A map of design research
— Changes in the design discourse
— The characteristics of innovation in the ﬁelds of industrial design and
graphic design
— Theunansweredquestionaboutthefoundationsofdesign
— The iconic turn in the sciences
— Postscript on design practice in the age of globalisation
On the limits of design science
In1848,athinbookappearedwiththeprovocative-sounding
title:Die Wertlosigkeit der Jurisprudenz als Wissenschaft[The worthlessness of jurispru-
dence as a science]. The author was the well-known lawyer Julius Hermann von Kirch-
mann.
[01]
In this work, he analysed the part played by jurisprudence in improving the
practiceoflawandarrivedataconclusionthatdidnotgodownverywellwithlawyers.
Inordertoallayanysuspicionsthathewastryingtostartafutiledispute,hebeganhis
expositionwiththefollowingsentence:‘Thesubjectofmypapertodaymighteasilylead
sometosuspectthatIamonlyinterestedinapiquantsentence,withnoconcernforthe
deepertruthofthematter.’
[01]
Heexplainstheambiguityofthetitle,whichmaymeanthatjurisprudenceisin-
deedascience,albeitonewithoutanyinﬂuenceoneverydayactivity.Or,conversely,it
maymeanthatjurisprudenceisnotascience,since–ashewrites–itdoesnot‘fulﬁlthe
requirementsofatrueconceptofascience.’
Essay
01 |
Gui Bonsiepe
TheUneasyRelationshipbetweenDesignand
DesignResearch
01 |
01 |
RevisedversionofapapergivenatthesymposiumoftheSwissDesignNetwork,
Basel, 13–14 May 2004

26Essay Gui Bonsiepe
Whythisreferencetojurisprudenceandlegalpractice?Whatdotheseconceptshave
todowiththedialecticsofdesign,andtherelatedquestionofdesignresearch,whichareat
issue here? For all their difference in content, parallels can be drawn. The conceptual mod-
el in Kirchmann’s comment may, when transferred to design, mean that although design
science is a genuine science, it has no inﬂuence on design practice; or that design science is
notasciencebecause(asthephilosophersputit)itdoesnotfulﬁltherequirementsofa
trueconceptofthelatter.Itisthetaskofscienceto‘understanditssubject,discoverits
laws,withtheaimofcreatingconcepts,ofidentifyingtherelationshipandconnections
betweenthevariousphenomenaand,ﬁnally,ofassemblingitsknowledgeinasimple
system’,
[01]
p. 12.
We shall leave aside the question as to whether today’s scientists (and this includes
design researchers too) would accept so unreservedly the goal of amassing their discove-
riesinasimplesystem.Here,theﬁrstgoalistocreatefreespaceforreﬂectionandthus
avoidmakingprematurecharacterisationsofwhatdesignresearchunddesignscience
areandwhattheyoughttobedoing.Inthissituation,aﬂuidphysicalstateispreferableto
a solid one.
‘Designing’ and projecting
TheEnglishterm‘design’doesnotallowforthedifferentiation,
made in German, between design andEntwurf(project). Consequently, it is difﬁcult to
graspthisdistinctionintheEnglishlanguage.Itmayevenseemincomprehensiblethat
theterm‘design’(incontrastto‘project’)isusedinthiscontextwithacertaindegreeof
detachment. However, there are reasons why the term ‘design’ should be used carefully
inbothlanguages.Thepopularisationoftheterm‘design’duringthepastdecade–not
onlyinEnglish-speakingregions–anditsmoreorlessinﬂationaryusagehaveturnedthe
worddesignintoacommonplacetermthathasfreeditselffromthecategoryofproject-
ing and has now attained a sort of autonomous existence. Everyone is entitled to call
him-orherselfadesigner,especiallyaspeoplegenerallyequatedesignwiththethings
theyseeinlifestylemagazines.Noteveryonewouldsuddenlycallhim/herselfapro-
ject-maker (in Daniel Defoe’s sense of the term
[02]
)becausethiscarriesanovertoneof
professionalismthattheworddesignhaslost.Asanalternative,wecouldusetheGerman
expressionGestaltung.Theonlyproblemis,ofcourse,thatithasnoequivalentinother
languages.Foralthoughitreferstodesign,itdoessoprimarilyfromtheperspectiveof
perception (Gestalt psychology) and aesthetics. However, the German termGestaltung
hastakenafewblows,fromwhichithasnotyetrecovered.
Ifweexaminetherelationshipbetweendesigneducationunddesignscience,itbe-
comesapparentthattheyappearedalmostsimultaneouslyinthe1920s:intheDutchDe
StijlmovementandattheBauhaus.AftertheSecondWorldWar,designresearchgradu-
allybegantoestablishitself.Therearevariousreasonswhythishappened;thesewillbe
considered later.

27Essay TheUneasyRelationshipbetweenDesignandDesignResearch
In1981,BruceArcher,whobecamewell-knownthroughthepublicationofhis
Systematic Methods for Designers,characteriseddesignresearchasaformofsystematic
inquiryperformedwiththegoalofgeneratingknowledgeoftheform/embodimentof–or
in–design,composition,structure,purpose,valueandmeaningofhuman-madethings
and systems.
This deﬁnition of design research is clearly tailored to industrial design and does
notthereforetouchoncommunicationdesign.Archerthengoesontoexplainhisdeﬁni-
tion,endingwiththeplausibleconclusionthat:‘Designresearchisasystematicsearch
forandacquisitionofknowledgerelatedtodesignanddesignactivity.’Thereoughttobe
nodisputeaboutthis,especiallyasthestatementcomesclosetobeingtautological.
In English-speaking regions in particular, the main representatives of design re-
search formerly came from the ﬁelds of engineering science and architecture. Interest
correspondinglyfocusedondevelopingrationaldesignmethodsandonproceduresfor
evaluatingbuildingsandproducts.Graphicdesignwasbarelymentioned.Itishardlysur-
prisingthenthatpractisingindustrialandgraphicdesignersviewedeventsdealingwith
design methods and design science as well as anypapers(if they registered the latter at
all)publishedinthiscontextasesotericglass-beadgames,played–withnonoticeable
impactonpractice–onacademic‘reservations’shieldedfromtheconstraintsand
exigenciesofprofessionalpractice.Asaresult,discourseondesignsciencefounditself
cast–rightlyorwrongly–inabadlight,sinceitappearedtohavebeenusurpedbyanet-
workofconceptsirrelevanttodesignpractice.Thismaybedue,inpart,tothefactthat
designresearchwascarriedoutundertheaegisofsystemstheorists,computerscient-
ists,operationsresearchspecialistsandmechanicalengineers,whosecategoricalcon-
ceptualsystemsbypassedindustrialandgraphicdesign.Furthermore,theyoftenhad
noexperience–or,atbest,verylittle–inproductdesignorvisualcommunication.The
autonomisation of method research thus also motivated Christopher Alexander at quite
anearlystagetodistancehimselffromsuchresearchprojectsbecausehefeltthatthey
hadeitherforgottenorlostsightofthegoalofproducingbetterdesigns.
How has the theme of design research/design science come to
assume greater signiﬁcance?
Therearetwopossiblereasonsforthis:
— First, complex design problems can no longer be solved without prior or parallel
research.Itshouldbenotedthatdesignresearchcannotbeequatedwithconsumer
researchorvariationsofitthattaketheformofethno-methodology,i.e.anempir-
ical science that examines the behaviour of consumers in their everyday environ-
mentsandthusrefrainsfromcarryingoutlaboratoryresearch.Whetherornotwe
arepreparedtodesignatesuchactivity(whichaccompaniesdesign)as‘research’is
a question of judgement and depends on which criteria are applied to research. We

28Essay Gui Bonsiepe
cannotruleoutinadvancethepossibilitythatdesignactivitywillraisequestions
that will, in turn, yield new knowledge as a result of the research involved in answer-
ing them.
— Second, the consolidation of design education at universities and colleges creates
pressuretoadapttoacademicstructuresandtraditions.Anyonewhoseekstopur-
sueanacademiccareerisexpectedtoacquiretheappropriatequaliﬁcationsinthe
formofamaster’sdegreeordoctorate.Anyonewhodoesnotpossessthis‘symbolic
capital’(Bourdieu)mayﬁndhim/herselfunabletoﬁllcertainkeypositionsinhier-
archically structured institutions. In Turkey, for example, it is impossible to gain a
professional qualiﬁcation in architecture or industrial design without a doctorate.
Wecanthereforeidentifytworeasonsfortheemergenceofdesignresearch:one
linkedtoprofessionalpracticeandtheothertoacademicactivity.Thetensionbetween
the two can and does lead to controversies and divergences.
Designingisinitiallyafreeandindependentformofactivityunconcernedwiththe
existence of design science. However, this form of design has a provisional character.
Afterall,itisquitepossiblethatthisactivitywillincreasinglycometodependontheexist-
enceofdesignscience:inotherwords,thatdesignsciencewillbecometheprecondition
forpractisingdesign.Thistrendwillobviouslyhavedramaticconsequencesfordesign
courses,especiallyinthecaseofindustrialandcommunicationdesign,aswellasallthe
new ﬁelds of study, such as interaction design and information design, which have arisen
andarearisinginthewakeofdigitisation.
Science and design
Ingeneral,scientiﬁcactivityanddesignactivityare–rightly–
distinguishedfromoneanother,foreachpursuesitsownmundaneinterests.Thedesign-
erobservestheworldwithaneyetoitsdesignability,unlikethescientistwhoregardsit
fromtheperspectiveofcognition.Itisthusaquestionofdivergentpointsofviewwith
different contents in terms of innovation. The scientist and the researcher generate new
knowledge.Thedesignergivespeopleanopportunitytohavenewexperiencesintheir
everydaylivesinsociety,aswellaswithproducts,symbolsandservices;experiencesofan
aestheticcharacter,which,inturn,aresubjecttosocio-culturaldynamics.
Thetensionbetweencognitivelyrelatedactivity(research)andnon-cognitivelyre-
lated activity (designing) becomes apparent here. To avoid any misunderstandings, how-
ever,itshouldbepointedoutherethatdesignactivityisincreasinglypermeatedbycog-
nitive processes. This also raises the issue of mediating between these two areas,
somethingthathasbeendonewithvaryingdegreesofsuccesssincethe1920s.Theun-
avoidablerevisionandupdating,whicharenowontheagenda,oftraditionalstudycours-
esintheﬁeldofdesignandplanning,inevitablyraisesthequestionofhowstudents’

29Essay TheUneasyRelationshipbetweenDesignandDesignResearch
cognitivecompetencecanbeimproved.Andthisalsotouchesontheintimatelylinked
part played by language in the teaching of design, among other things.
Despitethedifferencebetweendesignandscience,thereisalsoahiddenafﬁnity
andstructuralsimilaritybetweentheapproachesoftheinnovativescientistandthe
innovativedesigner:bothareengagedin‘tinkering’,astheAmericanphilosopherKan-
torovich puts it.
[03]
Theybothtrythingsoutinaccordancewiththemotto:let’sseewhat
happenswhenwedothisorthat.Bothproceedexperimentally.
Aglanceatcontemporarydesignproblemsclearlyshowsthatthecognitivedemands
on design have grown. For this reason, neither design studies nor design practice can
ignore the sciences andresearch. One example should make this clear: nowadays, when
an industrial designer is commissioned to design sustainable packaging for a carton of
milkforaclient,sheorhewillneedaccesstoscientiﬁcinformationaboutenergyproﬁles
andecological footprintsand, if necessary, to systematic experiments on material combi-
nations to place design activities on a scientiﬁc footing. It is no longer possible to tackle
ataskofthisnatureintuitively.Asanexamplefromtheﬁeldofcommunicationdesign
shows,itisimpossibletodevelopaninterfaceforcoursewarewithoutengaginginsub-
ject-related research. Anyone who relies on their inner voice and supposed creativity will
go to the dogs.
Reﬂection/theory and design
Withtheintroductionofdesigncoursesatuniversitiesofap-
plied science, education programmes are now expected to stimulate students’ capacity
forreﬂection.Inotherwords,designstudentsmustlearntothink–ademandthatmay
soundtotallynormal,buthasbynomeansbeenfulﬁlled.AsanAmericangraphicdesign-
er wrote: ‘Design has no heritage of or belief in criticism. Design education programs
continuetoemphasisevisualarticulation,notverbalorwritten.Thegoalistosellyour
idea to a client and/or a hypothetical audience. Design in relation to culture and society is
rarely confronted.’
[04]
Reﬂectivebehaviourisdiscursivethinking:thinkingthatmanifestsitselfinlan-
guage.Althoughtheideaofincludinglanguageindesigncoursesgoesbacktothe1950s,
teaching programmes generally have a lot to catch up on when it comes to language and
texts,especiallyintheﬁeldofvisualcommunication.Theanti-discursivetraditionand
predisposition of design education remains powerful. We need to admit and recognise
thatdesign’simagefrequentlyattractsthewrongstudents.Hip-hopandcoolarequali-
tiestowhichdesign–fortunately–cannotbereduced.
Whatisreﬂection?Reﬂectionmeansestablishingdistancetoourownactivities
andthematisingourinterdependencesandcontradictions,especiallythoseofasocial
nature.Theorypointsbeyondwhatexists.Withregardtotheemphasisondesignre-
search, it should be noted that free space must be set aside for theoretical activity in the

30Essay Gui Bonsiepe
future as well: anyone who only considers the direct application of an idea will suffer
from a narrowing of their horizon and the degeneration of their speculative conscious-
ness. InLob der TheorieGadamermentions‘…theclosenessoftheorytotherealmof
pureplay,topurelycontemplatingandmarvelling,farremovedfromallcustomsand
uses and serious business.’ Furthermore, he establishes a relationship between theory
andthose‘things…,thatare“free”fromallthecalculatingattitudesassociatedwith
need and use.’
[05]
Whenwespeakoftheoreticalactivitiesintheﬁeldofdesign,weare
certainlynotissuingakindofcarte blancheforpeopletostartspeculatingaboutdesign-
inganddesigninamannerthatistotallyalientodesign,inwhichspeculationoccasion-
allyservesscientistsasawelcomevehiclefordistinguishingthemselvesacademically
whentheytreatdesignasanobjectofresearch.Suchstrategiesarequitetempting,be-
causethesubjectofdesign,withitscomplexramiﬁcationsandinterconnections,isvir-
ginterritoryforscientiﬁcactivity.Itseemsthatpeopleeasilyforgetthattalkingabouta
subject demands a minimum degree of knowledge about it, and that, no matter how
goodpeople’sintentions,speculativetheoreticalstudiesarenosubstituteforspecialised
knowledge.Hence,whensuchdiscussioncontributionsondesign–whicharefrequently
full of pre-conceived ideas and interpretation models – serve as norms aimed at stand-
ardisingpracticeintheguiseofscientiﬁcdignity,thenitistimetocutthosedisplaying
suchpresumptuousnessdowntosize.
Design as an object of criticism
Formanydecades,designwasnotthematisedinscientiﬁc
discourse. It was a non-issue. Despite its presence in everyday life, it hardly awoke the
interestofscientiﬁcdisciplines.Nowthatdesignhasbecomeamediatopic,however,the
situationhaschangedsomuchthatthereisnolackofcriticaldiscussiononthesubject.
Onepertinentpublicationworthmentioninghereisthelatestworkbythearttheoreti-
cian Hal Foster, entitledDesign and Crime.
[06]
Foster argues from an anti-conservative,
culturallycriticalperspective.ThetitleofFoster’sbookalone,anallusiontoAdolfLoos’
Ornament und Verbrechen,
[07]
whichattainedfamebecauseofitspolemicaltone,speaks
volumes. Foster writes:
‘The old debate (infuse art into the utilitarian object) takes on a new resonance today,
whentheaestheticandtheutilitarianarenotonlyconﬂatedbutallbutsubsumedinthe
commercial, and everything – not only architectural projects and art exhibitions but
everything fromjeans to genes– seems to be regarded as so much design.’ [emphasis in
the original].
[06]
Towhichwecanonlyreply:allofthisisdesign,eventhoughtheauthorhimselfevi-
dently ﬁnds no pleasure in saying this. Foster continues:

31Essay TheUneasyRelationshipbetweenDesignandDesignResearch
‘… the old project to reconnect Art and Life, endorsed in different ways by Art Nouveau, the
Bauhaus and many other movements, was eventually accomplished, but according to the
spectacular dictates of the culture industry,nottheliberatoryambitionsofthe
avant-garde. And a primary form of this perverse reconciliation on our time is design.’
[06]
Hereweﬁndadistinctexampleofamistakenunderstandingofdesign(applied
art).Designhaslongsinceceasedtoinvolvetheaestheticisationofeverydaylife,ifitever
didintheﬁrstplace.Wecanhardlygettotherootsofdesignusingart-theoreticalcon-
cepts. Design is an independent category. Located at the interface of industry, the market,
technology and culture (living practice), design is eminently suited for engaging in cultur-
allycriticalexercisesthatfocusonthesymbolicfunctionofproducts.Fosteruncritically
adoptsatheoremformulatedbyBaudrillardthatassertsthatdesignisbasicallylimited
to the symbolic dimension of objects, to the ‘political economy of symbols’. Design is
thus dematerialised and degraded to asign exchange value.Thoseverypositionsthatview
themselvesasanti-conformistshowaremarkabletendencytopourblanketcriticismon
moderndesignforbeingpureideology.Thereweretimesinwhichavant-gardepositionsin
philosophy (the Vienna circle, for example) and modern design regarded one another with
mutualrespect.Nowadays,suchanattitudeisrareindeed.Today,designservesasthe
compliantstoogeforcriticsofthecommoditysociety:forcriticsofpan-capitalism.
Research in class
Whenandhowshouldstudentsbetaughthowtoreﬂectanddo
research?Sofar,universitiesandcollegeshavefailedtoprovideaunanimousanswerto
this question. Reﬂection and research should not be reserved for students in the more
advancedclassesbutshouldbetaughtandpractisedfromthebeginningoftheﬁrstyear.
Design studies would then no longer be limited to master’s degree courses but encour-
agedandrequiredinbachelorcoursestoo.Thisdoes,ofcourse,alsoentailrisks.Every
designinstructorhasexperiencedstudentswhotrytostealtheirwayoutofdoingdesigns
byperformingrhetoricalacrobaticsandconcealingweaknessesintheﬁeldofdesignwith
theaidofverbalgymnastics.Suchdiscourse,whichisastrategyforavoidingdesign,must
beprevented.Ithasnothingtodowiththekindofcognitivecompetenceenvisagedhere,
whichisanchoredindesign.Teachingprogrammesmusttakeintoaccountcognitive
competence,especiallyifstudentsdisplaytheoreticalintereststhathavehithertobeen
tolerated,atbest,butnotexplicitlyencouraged;forthisdefectisoneofthereasonsforthe
oft-criticisedspeechlessnessofdesigners.
Intheﬁeldofdesign,itispossibletodistinguishbetweentwodifferentapproaches
to research:

32Essay Gui Bonsiepe
1. Endogenousdesignresearch,i.e.researchinitiatedspontaneouslyfromwithinthe
ﬁeldofdesign.Thisprimarilyproceedsfromconcreteexperiencesindesigningand
isfrequentlyintegratedintothedesignprocess,thussignifyingaprimarilyinstru-
mentalinterest.Itmaybehoped,however,thatinthefutureaformofendogenous
design research will be pursued that goes beyond its immediate application in the
designprocess.Thiswouldcreateapoolofknowledgethattheﬁeldofdesignstill
lacks.(Thecomplaintaboutthelackofapoolofknowledgespeciﬁcallyrelatedto
design is well known.) Designers should deﬁnitely be involved in this kind of re-
searchinordertocounteractthedangerofother-directednessindesigndiscourse.
Should the profession fail to address this need, it would put the future of industrial
designersandgraphicdesignersindoubt.Thesetwoprofessionsmightthenﬁnd
themselvesmembersofadyingspecies.
2. Exogenous design research, which views design as an object of research and other
disciplinesasmeta-discourses,sotospeak.Weshouldproceedwithcautionhere,
however:forthefurtherremovedtextsandresearchexogenoustodesignarefrom
concrete experience with the contradictions, paradoxes and the aporia of design,
thegreaterthedangerthattheywillbeatthemercyofsweepingjudgements.The
lastthingthatdesignersneedarescientiﬁchighinquisitorswho,withoneﬁnger
raised,trytodrumnormsintotheirstudents’heads,tellingthemwhattheyshould
andshouldnotdo.
Asfarasthecontentofresearchworkisconcerned,arhizometablecanbedrawnto
illustratethebroadrangeofthemesandarrangetheminadistinctorder.Itgoeswithout
sayingthatthisclassiﬁcation,likeeveryother,containssubjectivemomentsandissub-
ject,aboveall,tocertainplausibilitycriteria.Themapoutlinedhereissubdividedintosix
thematic groups:
— History
— Technology
— Form/structure
— Media
— Design/daily practice
— Globalisation/the market
Eachofthesethemesis,inturn,subdividedintoaseriesofsub-themes.
Withintheframeworkofahistoricalresearchproject,itwouldbepossibletodrawa
timelineofthesubjectsofthediscourseondesignthatshowstheemergenceanddura-
tionofcertainthemesthatappearindesigndiscourse.Thetimelinewouldshowtheups
anddownsofthediscoursetoo.Certainthemesvanishandnewones–whetherunder

The emergence and fading out of certain
designissueswillhavetobegrounded
empirically
Methodology
Productivity
Ergonomics
Functionalism
Product semantics
Alternative technology
Dependency theory
Differentiation
Design management
Pomo debate
Branding
Sustainability
Globalisation
Cultural identity
Virtuality
Cognition
New Media
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000Time
FIG. 01
Hypothetical time line of the designdiscourse (© Gui Bonsiepe 2004 On the Ambiguity of Design
and Design Research)
33
Essay The Uneasy Relationship between Design and Design Research
familiarornovelnames–appear,whileoldonesmayexperiencearevival.(Thiswould
makeafruitfulﬁeldforresearchondesignhistory.)Asfarasdesigneducationiscon-
cerned,itwouldbeveryinterestingtoexaminehowthedominanceofdiscoursesubjects
hasleftitsmarkondiversecurricula.Thefollowingtimelinemerelyservesillustrative
purposes.Itneedstobeveriﬁedbydetailedempiricalanalysis.
Innovation andEntwerfen
Thevariousbranchesofeconomicsdistinguishdifferentstrate-
giesthatacompanycanpursuetoassertitselfincompetitivemarketsare:
1. Technicalinnovation(e.g.anewchip)
2. Quality (reliability, durability, ﬁnish)
3. Rapid delivery
4. Design
Thereis,ofcourse,alsothestrategyofcompetingvialowerprices.However,thisis
likelytoplayanever-smallerrole.Marketsdemandqualityproducts,technicallyadvanced
productsandproductswithhigh-qualitydesigns.

34Essay Gui Bonsiepe
How is innovation manifested in industrial design and communications design?
How does innovation differ in the ﬁelds of engineering science, management and the ap-
plied sciences? In other words, what is design innovation?
How do the results of design activity look in terms of product design and visual
communication,inasmuchasthelatterareintendedtobeinnovative?Beforethisques-
tion can be answered, the main characteristics of design must be outlined, concretised
–fromanintegrationalperspective–withtheaidofnon-propositionalknowledge.The
followinglistshowsareasinwhichinnovativedesignleavesitsmark:
— Innovationintheformofimprovingtheusefulqualityofaproductorinformation
— Innovationintheformofimprovingtheproductionprocessformanufacturing
aproduct
— Innovationintheformofinventingnewaffordances
— Innovationintheformofsustainability
— Innovationintheformoftheaccessibilityofinformationoraproduct(socialand
non-exclusive design)
— Innovationintheformofﬁndingpossibleapplicationsfornewmaterialsand
technologies (solutions looking for a problem)
— Innovationintheformofgreatercomprehensibilityindealingwithinformationor
aproduct
— Innovationintheareaofformalaestheticquality(socio-culturaldynamics)
— Innovation in the sense of strategically extending a company’s product range (for
example,citingamanufacturerofagriculturalmachinerywhohasbroadenedhis
range–aspartofstrategicbranding–toincludeservicesintheformofoptimal
fodder compositions)
From an economic point of view, there is evidently a relationship between an econ-
omy’scompetitivenessanditsdesignrankingataninternationallevel.Asurveybythe
NewZealandInstituteofEconomicResearchrevealsthatthe25countrieswiththe
world’s most competitive economies are also world leaders in design.
[08]
Thesurveyis
quiteinstructive,despitereservationsaboutthemarketingcriteriaunderlyingtherank-
ingsystem.Thesurveycouldbebroadenedtoﬁndoutwhichcountriesareleadersinthe
ﬁeldofdesignresearchandwhetherthereisacorrelationbetweenthisandgeneraleco-
nomic competitiveness.
The foundations of design
Another unanswered question in design education concerns the
foundations of design and related research into the foundations of design. Very divergent
viewsprevailonthismatteramongdesigninstructors.Thereis,forexample,thequestion

35Essay TheUneasyRelationshipbetweenDesignandDesignResearch
astowhatactuallyconstitutesthefoundationsofdesign,and,takingthisastepfurther,
whether design can be said to have foundations in the ﬁrst place, i.e. whether design isn’t
anactivitywithoutfoundations.Toanyonewhosubscribestothisposition,anyinsistence
onfoundationswouldindicatenothingotherthanapious,outmodedandunfounded
wish. In this context, the sciences are often cited for the purpose of comparison, as they
are generally considered to rest on foundations, and are therefore upheld to serve as a
modelandbenchmarkfordesign.
If we consult the sciences, however, we learn otherwise: that the sciences do not rest
onfoundationseither.Inalecturein1941,MaxPlancksaid:
‘…ifwe…subjectthestructureoftheexactsciencestopreciseanalysis,weverysoon
becomeawarethattheediﬁcehasadangerouslyweakspot,andthisspotisthefounda-
tion.…fortheexactsciencesthereisnoprincipleofsuchgeneralvalidityand,atthe
sametime,ofsuchgreatimportancewithrespecttocontentthatitcanservescienceas
anadequatebasis.…Wecan,therefore,reasonablydrawonlyoneconclusionfrom
this, namely, that it is absolutely impossible to place the exact sciences on a general
foundation composed of deﬁnitively conclusive content.’
[09]
Nomatterwhatpositionweadoptregardingwhetherdesignhasfoundationsor
not,itmustbenotedthat,intheﬁeldofdesigneducation,theteachingoffoundations
hasalwaysaimedtosolveanundeniableproblem:providingthestudentswithaformal
aestheticeducationthatseekstocultivatenotonlytheirreceptivedifferentiationskills
butalso,andaboveall,theirgenerativedifferentiationskills.Aglanceatthehistoryof
designeducationrevealsthatheatedcontroversiesragedovertheBauhausbasiccourse,
on which design courses across the globe would subsequently model their identity (dis-
tinguishingthemfromcoursesinotherﬁeldsofstudy).Whenthebasiccoursewasbeing
developed,therewasadebateonwhetherformal-aestheticgenerativecompetence
shouldbeallowedtodevelopindependentlyandasanorganisationalunitwithinthe
curriculum,orwhetherthebasiccourseshouldbesimplyabolishedasarelicfroma
hazy,romanticperiodofdesigneducation.Termssuchas‘basiccourse’and‘basic
designcourse’sometimesirritatepeopleandcausethemtoadoptrigidpositionsthat
block all discussion from the start. Hence it might be advisable to refrain from using
theseterms.Suchamovewouldnotdoawaywiththeproblemofeducatingstudentsto
developformalaestheticcompetence,butitwouldatleastdiffusethesituation.Instead
oftalkingofbasiccoursesandfoundationsofdesign,wecoulduseChristopherAlexan-
der’s termpatterns, which refers to recurring phenomena that exist in a context relatively
free of the inﬂuence of economic factors, production technologyissues etc. This would
makeitpossibletoavoidtheimmanentdangerofacademicisingbasiccoursesand
therebytransformingdesignexercisesintoformalrecipesthatassumetheformof
canonsor‘stylebibles’.

36Essay Gui Bonsiepe
From discourses to viscourses
For some years now, there has been talk within the social sci-
encesofaniconic turn . This notion denotes a new epistemological constellation that ends
theprimacyofdiscoursivityastheprivilegeddomainofcognition.Thetermiconicturn
signiﬁestherecognitionofthevisualplaneasacognitivedomainincontrasttothe
centuries-old tradition of verbo-centrism. This turn is determined by technological inno-
vations, especially in digital technology, which have made possible the new processes of
imagegenerationandimageproduction.InthewordsofGünterAbel:‘Here(inthebasic
processing of the images) it is not a question of merely passively, illustratively or graphi-
cally reproducing something that already exists in ﬁnished form, but of an original, active
processofrevealingorshowingsomethingvisually[Ins-Bild-Setzen].’
[10]
It is well known that training the ability to reveal or present an object or an idea
visually is central to graphic design and visual communication courses. Thanks to the
iconic turnin the sciences and to digital technology, it is now possible to explore the cog-
nitivepotentialofvisualdesignandadequatelytocharacterisetheindispensablerole
thatvisualdesignplaysinthecognitiveprocess.Thisopensupafascinatingnewﬁeldof
activityandresearchfortraditionalgraphicdesign.Evenso,itisdifﬁcult–inthebegin-
ningatleast–foramodeofthinkinginwhichthediscursivetraditionhasbeendomi-
nanttoacknowledgethecognitivestatusofimagesand,aboveall,ofvisuality.Thedeep-
lyrootedprejudiceagainstimagesisevidentinthefactthattheyaresooftendowngraded
withtheadjective‘beautiful’,revealingavisceraldistrustofanythingthatbetraysevena
traceofaestheticsensitivity.Theanti-aestheticattitude,oratleasttheindifferenceofa
scientiﬁc tradition that is ﬁxated on language, is sufﬁciently well known. For centuries,
Plato’sallegoryofthecavecontributedtothecontemptforvisualityanditsbeingsitu-
ated outside the mainstream. The epistemological constellation based on enmity
towardspicturesisthecounterparttoadesigntraditionthatadheresexclusivelytoimages
and disdains language. Günter Abel characterises visual knowledge thus:
‘Incontrast,non-linguisticandnon-propositionalknowledgereferstoaformofknowl-
edge that one can possess without having the corresponding linguistic predicates and
conceptsandwithouthavinglearnedthese.’
[10]
Digital technology will bring about far-reaching changes in epistemological tradi-
tionsandindicateanewroleforvisualdesign.Onemediaanalystwroteinthiscontext:
‘Writing and reading will certainly not lose their meaning immediately; however, they
willbecometooccupyaless-centralposition among the broad range of cultural per-
formances.’He went on to say that the claim:‘thatonlyaprintedmonographcanre-
present,forinstance,thestandardofknowledgeachievedbyascientiﬁcdisciplineis
generallyviewedasoneofthe‘mythsofbookculture’thesedays.’
[11]

Norway
United Kingdom
New ZealandAustralia
Austria
Italy
Sweden
Switzerland
Germany
FranceUnited States
10 20 30 40 500
Indexofdesignranking
Competitiveness ranking
Bolivia
Malaysia
China
Korea
Ireland
Netherlands
Denmark
Japan
Finland
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
60 70
FIG. 02
(WEF, NZIER 2002)
80
37Essay TheUneasyRelationshipbetweenDesignandDesignResearch
If it is true that designers can no longer design the way they did one or two genera-
tionsago,thenitmustalsobeacknowledgedthatresearcherscannolongerdoresearch
astheydidoneortwogenerationsago–i.e.orientingthemselvesprimarilyorexclusively
bytexts.Thisnewlyemergingtrendcanbesummarisedinfourwords:fromdiscoursesto
viscourses. Under these circumstances, an iconic turn in the sciences might correspond
to a cognitive turn in the design disciplines. It is still the early stages.
Postscript
Sincethe1980s,whenthetermglobalisationfounditswayinto
the social sciences, design, too, has been called upon to reconsider its role vis-à-vis this
process.However,thetermitselfmustbetreatedwithapinchofsalt,especiallyinviewof
thefactthatthealternativeisnotbetweenglobalisationfundamentalistsandglobalisa-
tionphobics(theexpressionunjustlyusedbycriticsintheconservativemediatostigma-
tise them). In a recent interview, Kenneth Galbraith criticised the naïve use of this term,
which he exposed as a means of camouﬂaging the process in which world economic pol-
icy was subjected to the hegemonic economic interests of the United States of America.
That said, there are purely practical reasons why it will not be so easy to exclude the term
fromdiscourse.Ifweconsidertheadverseimpactsofthisdevelopment,wecannotavoid
seeingatendencytowardssocialexclusionandtheruthlessplunderingofourplanet’s
resources.Consideringdesigninthiscontext,weareentitledtoaskafterdesignpractices
thatopposethistrendandrefusetounthinkinglyfallinlinewithorsubordinatethem-

38Essay Gui Bonsiepe
selvestothisprocess.Ofcourse,noteveryonewantstooccupythemselveswiththese
questions.Howwouldadesignpracticelookthatpresentedanalternativetoaformof
designthatexcludespeople;ifitnolongerrestricteditselftoaddressingamere10or20
percentoftheworld’spopulationinthehighlyindustrialisedcountries,orinenclaves
withinzonesformerlyknownastheThirdWorld?Itseemsthattherehasbeennounan-
imousanswertothisquestionsofar,especiallyasitisahighlyexplosiveissuewithanin-
escapablypoliticalcharacter.Designresearchcouldcertainlyﬁndaveryrelevantsubject
hereifitaimedtoreducethegapbetweenthedifferentsocieties,assuming,ofcourse,
that we consider this at all meaningful and do not dismiss it as the perpetuation of the
statusquoofasocialvaluesystemthathasnofutureandneedstoberadicallyrenewed
andturnedupsidedown.

39
References / Bibliography
[01]
Kirchmann JH von (2000)Die Wertlosigkeit der Jurisprudenz als Wissenschaft.
ManutiusVerlag,Heidelberg
[02]
Maldonado T (2007) Das Zeitalter des Entwurfs und Daniel Defoe. In:Digitale Welt und
Gestaltung,BirkhäuserVerlag,Basel,257–268
[03]
Kantorovich A (1993)Scientific Discovery – Logic and Tinkering. State University of
NewYorkPress,NewYork
[04]
FitzGerald K (2003) Quietude.Emigre64: 15–32
[05]
Gadamer, H-G (1991)Lob der Theorie. Suhrkamp Verlag, Frankfurt
[06]
FosterH(2002)Design and Crime . Verso, London
[07]
LoosA(1982,1908
1
) Ornament und Verbrechen. In:Trotzdem. Gesammelte Schriften
1900–1930. Prachner Verlag, Vienna, new edition 1997, 78–88
[08]
BuildingaCaseforAddedValuethroughDesign.ReporttoIndustryNewZealand
February 2003. New Zealand Institute of Economic Research (NZIER). This report
is based on indicators from the World Economic Forum’s Global Competitiveness
Report.
[09]
PlanckM(1942)Sinn und Grenzen der exakten Wissenschaft. Johann Ambrosius
Barth, Leipzig
[10]
Abel G (2003) Zeichen- und Interpretationsphilosophie der Bilder. In: Bredekamp H,
WernerG(eds):Bildwelten des Wissens. Kunsthistorisches Jahrbuch für Bildkritik .
Vol. 1,1. Akademie Verlag, Berlin, 89–102
[11]
Hartmann F (2003)Mediologie – Ansätze einer Medientheorie der Kulturwissenschaften.
Facultas Verlag, Vienna
Essay TheUneasyRelationshipbetweenDesignandDesignResearch

41
Inthepastcoupleofdecadeswehaveseenasigniﬁcantshiftin
focuswithintheﬁeldofdesignresearch.Itisashiftfromtheaimofcreatinga‘design
science’ to that of creating a ‘design discipline’. The focus is now on understanding the
designprocessthroughanunderstandingofdesigncognition,orthe‘designerly’waysof
knowing and thinking.
Design and science
Adesireto‘scientise’designemergedinthe20th-centuryMod-
ernmovementofdesign.Forexample,intheearly1920s,theDeStijlprotagonistTheovan
Doesburgexpressedthisperceptionofanewspiritinartanddesign:
‘Ourepochishostiletoeverysubjectivespeculationinart,science,technologyetc.The
newspirit,whichalreadygovernsalmostallmodernlife,isopposedtoanimalsponta-
neity, to nature’s domination, to artistic ﬂummery. In order to construct a new object
we need a method, that is to say, an objective system.’
[01]
Alittlelater,thearchitectLeCorbusierwroteaboutthehouseasanobjectivelyde-
signed ‘machine for living’:
‘The use of the house consists of a regular sequence of deﬁnite functions. The regular
sequenceofthesefunctionsisatrafﬁcphenomenon.Torenderthattrafﬁcexact,econom-
icalandrapidisthekeyeffortofmodernarchitecturalscience.’
[02]
Inbothofthesecomments,andthroughoutmuchoftheModernMovement,wesee
adesiretoproduceworksofartanddesignbasedonobjectivityandrationality;thatis,on
the values of science.
Theseaspirationstoscientisedesignsurfacedstronglyagaininthe‘designmethods
movement’ofthe1960s.TheConferenceonDesignMethods,heldinLondoninSeptem-
ber 1962,
[03]
isgenerallyregardedastheeventthatmarkedthelaunchofdesignmethodo-
logy as a subject or ﬁeld of enquiry. The desire of the new movement was even more strongly
thanbeforetobasethedesignprocess(aswellastheproductsofdesign)onobjectivity
Essay
Nigel Cross
FromaDesignSciencetoaDesignDiscipline:
UnderstandingDesignerlyWaysofKnowing
andThinking

42
andrationality.Theoriginsofthisemergenceofnewdesignmethodsinthe1960slayin
the application of novel, scientiﬁc and computational methods to the novel and pressing
problemsoftheSecondWorldWar–fromwhichcameciviliandevelopmentssuchasope-
rations research and management decision-making techniques.
The 1960s was heralded as the ‘design science decade’ by the radical technologist
RichardBuckminsterFuller,whocalledfora‘designsciencerevolution’,basedonscience,
technology and rationalism, to overcome the human and environmental problems that
he believed could not be solved by politics and economics. From this perspective, the dec-
adeculminatedwithHerbertSimon’soutlineof‘thesciencesoftheartiﬁcial’andhisspe-
ciﬁc plea for the development of ‘a science of design’ in the universities: ‘a body of intellec-
tuallytough,analytic,partlyformalisable,partlyempirical,teachabledoctrineaboutthe
design process.’
[04]
However,inthe1970scameabacklashagainstdesignmethodologyandarejection
ofitsunderlyingvalues,notablybysomeoftheearlypioneersofthemovement.Christo-
pherAlexander,whohadoriginatedarationalmethodforarchitectureandplanning,
[05]
now said:
‘I’ve disassociated myself from the ﬁeld... There is so little in what is called “design
methods”thathasanythingusefultosayabouthowtodesignbuildingsthatInever
even read the literature anymore... I would say forget it, forget the whole thing.’
[06]
Another leading pioneer, J. Christopher Jones said:
‘Inthe1970sIreactedagainstdesignmethods.Idislikethemachinelanguage,thebe-
haviourism,thecontinualattempttoﬁxthewholeoflifeintoalogicalframework.’
[07]
ToputthequotationsofAlexanderandJonesintocontextitmaybenecessarytore-
callthesocial/culturalclimateofthelate1960s–thecampusrevolutionsandradicalpoliti-
cal movements, the new liberal humanism and rejection of conservative values. But it also
hastobeacknowledgedthattherehadbeenalackofsuccessintheapplicationof
‘scientiﬁc’ methods to everyday design practice. Fundamental issues were also raised by
RittelandWebber,whocharacteriseddesignandplanningproblemsas‘wicked’problems,
essentially un-amenable to the techniques of science and engineering, which dealt with
‘tame’ problems.
[08]
Nevertheless,designmethodologycontinuedtodevelopstrongly,especiallyinengi-
neering and some branches of industrial design (although there may still have been very
limited evidence of practical applications and results). The fruits of this work emerged in
aseriesofbooksonengineeringdesignmethodsandmethodologyinthe1980s.Tomen-
tion just some English-language ones, these included Tjalve,
[09]
Hubka,
[10]
Pahl and Beitz,
[11]
French
[12]
and Cross.
[13]
Anothersigniﬁcantdevelopmentthroughoutthe1980sandinto
the 1990s was the emergence of new journals of design research, theory and methodology.
Essay Nigel Cross

43
To refer, again, to English-language publications, these includedDesign Studiesin 1979,
Design Issuesin 1984,Research in Engineering Designin 1989, theJournalofEngineering
Designin 1990,Languages of Designin 1993, and theDesign Journalin 1997.
Despitetheapparentscientiﬁcbasis(orbias)ofmuchoftheirwork,designmethodo-
logistsalsosoughtfromtheearliestdaystomakedistinctionsbetweendesignandscience,
asreﬂectedinthefollowingquotations:
Alexander:‘Scientists try to identify the components of existing structures, designers
try to shape the components of new structures.’
[05]
Gregory:‘The scientiﬁc method is a pattern of problem-solving behaviour employed in
ﬁnding out the nature of what exists, whereas the design method is a pattern of behav-
iour employed in inventing things ... which do not yet exist. Science is analytic; design is
constructive.’
[14]
Theremayindeedbeacriticaldistinctiontobemade:methodmaybevitaltothe
practice of science (where it validates the results) but not to the practice of design (where
results do not have to be repeatable, and in most cases mustnotbe repeated, or copied).
The Design Research Society’s 1980 conference ‘Design:Science:Method’ provided an oppor-
tunitytoairmanyoftheseconsiderations.
[15]
Thegeneralfeelingfromthatconference
wasperhapsthatitwastimetomoveonfrommakingsimplisticcomparisonsanddistinc-
tions between science and design; that perhaps there was not so much for design to learn
from science after all, and rather that perhaps science had something to learn from de-
sign. Crosset al.further claimed that the epistemology of science was, in any case, in
disarray, and therefore had little to offer an epistemology of design.
[16]
Glynn later sugges-
ted that ‘it is the epistemology of design that has inherited the task of developing the logic
ofcreativity,hypothesisinnovationorinventionthathasprovedsoelusivetothephiloso-
phers of science.’
[17]
Despite several attempts at clariﬁcation
01 |
there remains some confusion about
thedesign-sciencerelationship.Letusatleasttrytoclarifythreedifferentinterpretations
ofthisconcernwiththerelationshipbetweenscienceanddesign:(a)scientiﬁcdesign,(b)
design science, and (c) a science of design.
Scientiﬁc design
AsInotedabove,theoriginsofdesignmethodslayin‘scientiﬁc’
methods, similar to decision theory and the methods of operational research. The origin-
atorsofthe‘designmethodsmovement’alsorealisedthattherehadbeenachangefrom
01 |
01 |
See de Vries, Cross and Grant
[18]
Essay FromaDesignSciencetoaDesignDiscipline:UnderstandingDesignerlyWaysofKnowingandThinking

44
the craftwork of pre - industrial design to the mechanisation of industrial design –
andperhapssomeevenforesawtheemergenceofapost-industrialdesign.Thereasons
advancedfordevelopingnewmethodswereoftenbasedontheassumptionthatmodern,
industrialdesignhadbecometoocomplexforintuitivemethods.
Theﬁrsthalfofthe20thcenturyhadseentherapidgrowthofscientiﬁcunderpin-
nings in many types of design – e.g. materials science, engineering science, building sci-
ence, behavioural science. One view of the design-science relationship is that, through
this reliance of modern design upon scientiﬁc knowledge, through the application of sci-
entiﬁcknowledgeinpracticaltasks,design‘makessciencevisible’.
[19]
So we might agree thatscientiﬁc designreferstomodern,industrialiseddesign–as
distinct from pre-industrial, craft-oriented design – based on scientiﬁc knowledge but
utilisingamixofbothintuitiveandnon-intuitivedesignmethods.‘Scientiﬁcdesign’is
probably not a controversial concept, but merely a reﬂection of the reality of modern de-
sign practice.
Design science
‘DesignScience’wasatermperhapsﬁrstusedbyBuckminster
Fuller,butitwasadaptedbyGregoryintothecontextofthe1965conferenceon‘TheDesign
Method’.
[14]
The concern to develop a design science thus led to attempts to formulatethe
designmethod–asinglerationalisedmethod,as‘thescientiﬁcmethod’wassupposedto
be.Others,too,havehadthedevelopmentofa‘designscience’astheiraim;forexample,
Hubka and Eder,
[20]
originators of theWorkshop Design Konstruction(WDK)andamajor
series of international conferences on engineering design (ICED), also formed ‘The Inter-
national Society for Design Science’. Earlier, Hansen had stated the aim of design science
as being to ‘recognise laws of design and its activities, and develop rules’.
[21]
This would
seem to be design science constituted simply as ‘systematic design’ – the procedures of
designingorganisedinasystematicway.HubkaandEderregardedthisasanarrowerinter-
pretation of design science than their own, which was:
‘Design science comprises a collection (a system) of logically connected knowledge in
the area of design, and contains concepts of technical information and of design methodo-
logy…Designscienceaddressestheproblemofdetermining and categorising all regular
phenomena of the systems to be designed, and of the design process. Design science is
alsoconcernedwithderivingfromtheappliedknowledgeofthenaturalsciencesappro-
priate information in a form suitable for the designer’s use.’
[20]
This deﬁnition extends beyond ‘scientiﬁc design’, in including systematic knowl-
edge of design process and methodology as well as the scientiﬁc/technological under-
pinnings of the design of artefacts.
Essay Nigel Cross

45
Sowemightconcludethatdesign sciencerefers to an explicitly organised, rational
andwhollysystematicapproachtodesign;notjusttheutilisationofscientiﬁcknowledge
ofartefacts,butdesignbeinginsomesenseascientiﬁcactivityitself.Thisiscertainlyacon-
troversial concept, challenged by many designers and design theorists. As Grant wrote:
‘Most opinion among design methodologists and among designers holds that the act of
designingitselfisnotandwillnoteverbeascientiﬁcactivity;thatis,thatdesigningisitself
a non-scientiﬁc or a-scientiﬁc activity.’
[22]
Science of design
However,Grantalsomadeitclearthat‘thestudyofdesigningmay
beascientiﬁcactivity;thatis,designasanactivitymaybethesubjectofscientiﬁcinvesti-
gation.’ There remains some confusion between concepts of design science and of a sci-
ence of design, since a ‘science of design’ seems to imply (or for some people has an aim of)
the development of a ‘design science’. But the concept of a science of design has been
clearlystatedbyGasparskiandStrzalecki:‘Thescienceofdesign(shouldbe)understood,
just like the science of science, as a federation of subdisciplines having design as the subject
of their cognitive interests’.
[23]
Inthislatterview,therefore,thescienceofdesignisthestudyofdesign–something
similartowhatIhaveelsewheredeﬁnedas‘designmethodology’–thestudyoftheprinci-
ples, practices and procedures of design. For me, design methodology ‘includes the study
ofhowdesignersworkandthink,theestablishmentofappropriatestructuresforthede-
signprocess,thedevelopmentandapplicationofnewdesignmethods,techniquesand
procedures,andreﬂectiononthenatureandextentofdesignknowledgeanditsapplica-
tion to design problems’.
[24]
Thestudyof design leaves open the interpretation of the
natureof design.
Soletusagreeherethatthescience of designrefers to that body of work which a
temptstoimproveourunderstandingofdesignthrough‘scientiﬁc’(i.e.systematic,reli-
able)methodsofinvestigation.Andletusbeclearthata‘scienceofdesign’isnotthe
same as a ‘design science’, and that it opens the way to developing a discipline of design
in its own right.
Design as a discipline
Donald Schön explicitly challenged the positivist doctrine underly-
ingmuchofthe‘designscience’movement,andofferedinsteadaconstructivistpara-
digm.
[25]
HecriticisedSimon’s‘scienceofdesign’forbeingbasedonapproachestosolving
well-formed problems, whereas professional practice throughout design and technology
andelsewherehastofaceanddealwith‘messy,problematicsituations’.Schönproposed
Essay FromaDesignSciencetoaDesignDiscipline:UnderstandingDesignerlyWaysofKnowingandThinking

46
instead to search for ‘an epistemology of practice implicit in the artistic, intuitive processes
whichsomepractitionersdobringtosituationsofuncertainty,instability,uniqueness,
andvalueconﬂict,’andwhichhecharacterisedas‘reﬂectivepractice’.Schönappearedtobe
morepreparedthanhispositivistpredecessorstoputtrustintheabilitiesdisplayedbycom-
petent practitioners, and to try to explicate those competencies rather than to supplant
them.Thisapproachhasbeendevelopedparticularlyintheseriesofworkshopsandcon-
ferencesknownasthe‘DesignThinkingResearchSymposia’,beginningin1991.
[26, 27, 28]
Despitethepositivist,technical-rationalitybasisofTheSciencesoftheArtificial,
Simondidproposethat‘thescienceofdesign’couldformafundamental,commonground
of intellectual endeavour and communication across the arts, sciences and technology.
Whathesuggestedwasthatthestudyofdesigncouldbeaninterdisciplinarystudyaccess-
ibletoallthoseinvolvedinthecreativeactivityofmakingtheartiﬁcialworld(whicheffect-
ivelyincludesallhumankind).Forexample,Simonwrotethat,
‘Few engineers and composers ... can carry on a mutually rewarding conversation about
the content of each other’s professional work. What I am suggesting is that they can carry
on such a conversation about design, can begin to perceive the common creative activity
inwhichtheyarebothengaged,canbegintosharetheirexperiencesofthecreative,pro-
fessional design process.’
[04]
This,itseemstome,isthechallengeforabroadandcatholicapproachtodesign
research–toconstructawayofconversingaboutdesignthatisatthesametimeinterdis-
ciplinaryanddisciplined.Wedonotwantconversationsthatfailtoconnectbetween
sub-disciplines,thatfailtoreachcommonunderstanding,andthatfailtocreatenew
knowledgeandperceptionsofdesign.Itistheparadoxicaltaskofcreatinganinterdisci-
plinary discipline – design as a discipline, rather than design as a science. This discipline
seeks to develop domain-independent approaches to theory and research in design. The
underlying axiom of this discipline is that there are forms of knowledge peculiar to the
awarenessandabilityofadesigner,independentofthedifferentprofessionaldomainsof
design practice. Just as the other intellectual cultures in the sciences and the arts concen-
trateontheunderlyingformsofknowledgepeculiartothescientistortheartist,sowe
must concentrate on the ‘designerly’ ways of knowing, thinking and acting.
Many researchers in the design world have been realising that design practice does
indeedhaveitsownstrongandappropriateintellectualculture,andthatwemustavoid
swampingourdesignresearchwithdifferentculturesimportedfromeitherthesciences
orthearts.Thisdoesnotmeanthatwecompletelyignoretheseothercultures.Onthe
contrary,theyhavemuchstrongerhistoriesofenquiry,scholarshipandresearchthanwe
haveindesign.Weneedtodrawuponthosehistoriesandtraditionswhereappropriate,
whilebuildingourownintellectualculture,acceptableanddefensibleintheworldonits
own terms. We have to be able to demonstrate that standards of rigour in our intellectual
cultureatleastmatchthoseoftheothers.
Essay Nigel Cross

47
Design research
At the 1980 ‘Design:Science:Method’ conference of the Design Re-
searchSociety,Archergaveasimplebutusefuldeﬁnitionofresearch,whichisthat‘[R]esearch
issystematicenquiry,thegoalofwhichisknowledge’.
[29]
Our concern in design research has
to be the development, articulation and communication of design knowledge. Where do we
lookforthisknowledge?Ibelievethatithasthreesources:people,processesandproducts.
Design knowledge resides ﬁrstly inpeople:indesignersespecially,butalsoinevery-
onetosomeextent.Designingisanaturalhumanability.Otheranimalsdonotdoit,and
machines(sofar)donotdoit.Weoftenoverlookthefactthatpeoplearenaturallyvery
goodatdesign.Weshouldnotunderplayourabilitiesasdesigners:manyofthemostval-
uedachievementsofhumankindareworksofdesign,includinganonymous,vernacular
design as well as the ‘high design’ of professionals.
One immediate subject of design research, therefore, is the investigation of this hu-
manability–ofhowpeopledesign.Thissuggests,forexample,empiricalstudiesofde-
sign behaviour, but it also includes theoretical deliberation and reﬂection on the nature
ofdesignability.Italsorelatesstronglytoconsiderationsofhowpeoplelearntodesign,
tostudiesofthedevelopmentofdesignabilityinindividuals,andhowthatdevelopment
might best be nurtured in design education.
Design knowledge resides secondly inprocesses:inthetacticsandstrategiesof
designing.Amajorareaofdesignresearchismethodology:thestudyoftheprocessesof
design,andthedevelopmentandapplicationoftechniquesthataidthedesigner.Muchof
thisresearchrevolvesaroundthestudyofmodellingfordesignpurposes.Modellingisthe
‘language’ofdesign.Traditionalmodelsarethesketchesanddrawingsofproposedde-
signsolutions,butincontemporarytermstheynowextendto‘virtualreality’models.The
useofcomputershasstimulatedawealthofresearchintodesignprocesses.
Third,wemustnotforgetthatdesignknowledgeresidesinproductsthemselves: in
the forms and materials and ﬁnishes that embody design attributes. Much everyday design
workentailstheuseofprecedentsorpreviousexemplars–notbecauseoflazinessbythe
designerbutbecausetheexemplarsactuallycontainknowledgeofwhattheproduct
shouldbe.Thisiscertainlytrueincraft-baseddesign:traditionalcraftsarebasedonthe
knowledge implicit within the object itself of how best to shape, make and use it. This is
whycraft-madeproductsareusuallycopiedveryliterallyfromoneexampletothenext,
from one generation to the next.
Aswiththedesignknowledgethatresidesinpeople,wewouldbefoolishtodisregard
oroverlookthisinformalproductknowledgesimplybecauseithasnotbeenmadeexplicit
yet–thatisataskfordesignresearch.Sotooisthedevelopmentofmoreformalknowledge
of shape and conﬁguration – theoretical studies of design morphology. These may be con-
cernedasmuchwiththesemanticsaswiththesyntaxofform,ormaybeconcernedwith
prosaic matters of efﬁciency and economy, or with relationships between form and con-
text – whether ergonomics or environment.
Essay FromaDesignSciencetoaDesignDiscipline:UnderstandingDesignerlyWaysofKnowingandThinking

48
My own taxonomy of the ﬁeld of design research would therefore fall into three main
categories,basedonpeople,processandproducts:
Design epistemology– study of designerly ways of knowing
Design praxiology–studyofthepracticesandprocessesofdesign
Design phenomenology–studyoftheformandconﬁgurationofartefacts
Whathasbeenhappeningintheﬁeldofdesignresearchisthattherehasbeena
growingawarenessoftheintrinsicstrengthsandappropriatenessofdesignthinking
within its own context, of the validity of ‘design intelligence’.
[30]
There has been a grow-
ing acceptance of design on its own terms, a growing acknowledgement and articulation
ofdesignasadiscipline.Wehavecometorealisethatwedonothavetoturndesigninto
animitationofscience;neitherdowehavetotreatdesignasamysterious,ineffableart.
We recognise that design has its own distinct intellectual culture.
Butthereisalsosomeconfusionandcontroversyoverthenatureofdesignresearch.
Ibelievethatexamplesof‘bestpractice’indesignresearchhaveincommonthefollowing
characteristics:
The research is:
Purposive– based on identiﬁcation of an issue or problem worthy and capable
of investigation
Inquisitive– seeking to acquire new knowledge
Informed–conductedfromanawarenessofprevious,relatedresearch
Methodical–plannedandcarriedoutinadisciplinedmanner
Communicable–generatingandreportingresultsthataretestableandaccessible
by others
Thesecharacteristicsarenormalfeaturesofgoodresearchinanydiscipline.Ido
not think that such normal criteria inhibit or preclude research that is ‘designerly’ in its
originsandintentions.However,theywouldexcludeworksofso-calledresearchthatfail
tocommunicate,areundisciplinedorill-informed,andthereforeaddnothingtothebody
of knowledge of the discipline.
Wealsoneedtodrawadistinctionbetweenworksofpracticeandworksofresearch.
Idonotseehownormalworksofpracticecanberegardedasworksofresearch.The
whole point of doing research is to extract reliable knowledge from either the natural or
theartiﬁcialworld,andtomakethatknowledgeavailabletoothersinre-usableform.
This does not mean that works of design practice must be wholly excluded from design
research,butitdoesmeanthat,toqualifyasresearch,theremustbereﬂectionbythe
practitioner on the work, and the communication of some re - usable results from that
reﬂection.
Essay Nigel Cross

49
Oneofthedangersinthisnewﬁeldofdesignresearchisthatresearchersfromother,
non-design,disciplineswillimportmethodsandapproachesthatareinappropriateto
developing the understanding of design. Researchers from psychology or computer sci-
ence,forexample,havetendedtoassumethatthereis‘nothingspecial’aboutdesignasan
activityforinvestigation,thatitisjustanotherformof‘problemsolving’or‘information
processing’. However, developments in artiﬁcial intelligence and other computer model-
lingindesignhaveperhapsservedmainlytodemonstratejusthowhigh-levelandcom-
plexisthecognitiveabilityofdesigners,andhowmuchmoreresearchisneededtounder-
standit.Betterprogressseemstobemadebydesigner-researchers,andforthisreasonthe
recentgrowthofconferences,workshopsandsymposia,featuringanewgenerationof
designer-researchers,isprovingextremelyusefulindevelopingthemethodologyofdesign
research.Asdesigngrowsasadisciplinewithitsownresearchbase,sowecanhopethat
there will be a growth in the number of emerging designer-researchers.
Anotherofthedangersisthatresearchersadheretounderlyingparadigmsofwhich
theyareonlyvaguelyaware.Weneedtodevelopthisintellectualawarenesswithinourcom-
munity. An example of developing this awareness is the work of Dorst, in making an explicit
analysisandcomparisonoftheparadigmsunderlyingtheapproachofHerbertSimon,on
the one hand, and Donald Schön on the other.
[31]
Simon’spositivismleadstoaviewofde-
sign as ‘rational problem solving’, and Schön’s constructivism leads to a view of design as
‘reﬂectivepractice’.Thesetwomightappeartobeinconﬂict,butDorst’suseofthetwopara-
digmsinanalysingdesignactivityleadshimtotheviewthatthedifferentparadigmshave
complementary strengths for gaining an overview of the whole range of activities in design.
Wearestillbuildingtheappropriateparadigmfordesignresearch.Ihavemadeit
clear that my personal ‘touchstone’ theory for this paradigm is that there are ‘designerly
ways of knowing’.
[32, 33]
Ibelievethatbuildingsuchaparadigmwillbehelpful,inthelong
run,todesignpracticeanddesigneducation,andtothebroaderdevelopmentoftheintel-
lectual culture of our world of design.
Designerly ways of knowing
Ifthedesignresearchcommunitywishestopursuethecasefor
designasadisciplineofscholarship,researchandpractice,thenitisnecessarytoestablish
asolidbasisfortheclaimsofexpert,designerlywaysofknowing,thinkingandacting.
In the ﬁeld of design epistemology there has been a rapidly growing series of studies
ofdesigncognition.However,manystudiesofdesignerbehaviourarebasedonnovices
(e.g.students)or,atbest,designersofrelativelymodesttalents.Thisisbecauseoftheeasier
availability of such subjects for study. It is difﬁcult to gain access to designers of outstand-
ingability,butstudyingsuchdesignersgivesusdifferentinsightsandunderstandingof
designactivity.Itislikestudyingchessmastersratherthanchessnovicesinordertogain
insightofexpertcognitivestrategiesinchessplaying.
Essay FromaDesignSciencetoaDesignDiscipline:UnderstandingDesignerlyWaysofKnowingandThinking

50
The aim of studying outstanding designers is to gain knowledge of design activity at
thehighestlevelsatwhichitispractised.Thisknowledgemightenableustotransferand
diffuse‘bestpractice’morewidelyacrossthedesignprofessions,thusraisinggeneral
levelsofperformance.Itcouldbeusefulforeducation,inguidingpedagogytowardsthe
developmentofbetter-than-averagedesigners.Itcouldaidthedesignofsupporttools,not
onlyfortheoutstandingdesignersthemselves,butalsoinprovidingenhancedmethodsof
practice for all designers.
Outstandingdesignerscanbeexpectedtoworkandoperateinwaysthatareatthe
boundaries of normal practice. Studying such ‘boundary conditions’ may provide more
signiﬁcantresultsandanextensionofunderstandingthatisnotavailablefromstudying
average designers. Exceptional cases may provide a clearer view on differences between
workingpractices,ratherthantheeverydaycommonalities.
Outstandingindividualsinanyﬁeldcanoftenprovideinsightsthataremoreexten-
sive and informative than those of average-ability individuals. They are therefore a rich
sourceofnewideasandalternativeperspectives.Studyingaverageandnovicedesigners
may well limit our understanding of design activity, holding back progress in design
methodology,andleadingtoweakoreveninappropriatemodelsofdesigncognition.
Studyingoutstandingdesignersfallsintothemoregeneralﬁeldofstudyingexper-
tise. Generic models of expertise generally deﬁne a progressive series of levels of attain-
ment.Insuchmodelsperformingatthelowerlevelsisseenasaprerequisiteformoving
on to the higher levels. Thus the development of expertise within an individual passes
throughdifferentphases.Anoviceundergoestrainingandeducationintheirchosen
ﬁeld,andthenatsomelaterpointbecomesanexpert.Forsomepeople,the‘expert’level
of achievement is where they remain, perhaps with some continued moderate improve-
mentbeforereachingtheirpeakandbeginningtheirdecline.Afewmanagetogobeyond
theleveloftheirpeers,intoafurtherphaseofdevelopment,reachingoutstandinglevels
of achievement and eminence.
Thelevelsofachievementareusuallyseenasplateauxinthetimeversusperform-
ance curve. An important reason for this plateau-plus-increment series of phases is proba-
blybecausetheacquisitionofacertainamountofknowledgeorexperienceenablesin-
sighttoanewwayofoperatingorperceiving.Theacquisitionofskillsseemsgenerallyto
proceedinthisway.Thusthesemodelssuggestthatoperatingathigherlevelsofexpertise
isnotjustamatterofworkingharder,betterorfaster,butofworkingdifferently.Tounder-
stand expertise fully, therefore, we need to study these ‘different’ ways of working at the
highest levels.
Studying outstanding designers is particularly problematic because of their limited
availability as participants. The majority of studies of outstanding designers are based
oninterviews,becausethatseemstheonlywaytogainaccess.However,thistechnique
doeshaveitsadvantages–itgivesa‘richpicture’ratherthanformaliseddata,enables
cross-project comparisons to be discussed, and enables insights to emerge that were not
intheresearcher’spriorassumptions.Shortcomingsoftheinterviewmethodincludebeing
Essay Nigel Cross

51
verytime-consuming(inpost-interviewtranscription,etc.),alackofstrictcomparability
betweenstudies,andsometimesthereareproblemsofattributabilityandcommercialconﬁ-
dentialityrelatingtothedesignprojectsthatarediscussed.Thepersonalrecollectionsof
theparticipantsaresometimespoorontimesequencesofevents,andmaybeinﬂuenced
byavarietyoffactorsthatmaybeincidentaltotheresearcher’spurposes(e.g.difﬁcult
relationshipswithclients,orﬁnancialproblemsofprojects).Participantsmaypost-ration-
alisetheiraccountsorattempttoﬁtthemtoconventional(oridiosyncratic)wisdomsor
philosophies of design activity.
Lawson
[34]
and Cross,
[35, 36, 37]
amongstafewothers,haveconductedseparatestudies
ofoutstandingdesigners–onesetofstudiesinarchitecture,andtheotherinengineering
andindustrialdesign.HereIattempttobringthesestudiestogether,toformamoregen-
eral overview of design cognition at its highest levels.
Lawsonmadeaseriesofinterviewandobservationalstudiesofoutstandingarchi-
tects.
[34]
Hefoundmanysimilaritiesintheirwaysofworking,andalsosomedifferences.
Forexample,someofthearchitectsprefertogeneratearangeofalternativesolutioncon-
cepts,whileotherswillfocusonanarrowrangeorjustoneconcept.Somethingtheyall
seemtohaveisanabilitytoworkalong‘parallellinesofthought’–thatis,tomaintainan
openness,evenanambiguity,aboutfeaturesandaspectsofthedesignatdifferentlevels
ofdetail,andtoconsidertheselevelssimultaneously,asthedesigningproceeds.One
message that recurred from these studies was the extremely demanding standards set by
thedesignersthemselves–outstandingexpertiseisfuelledbypersonalcommitment.
ManyﬁndingsinLawson’sstudiesofoutstandingarchitectsresonatewiththose
fromstudiesofoutstandingdesignersintheﬁeldsofengineeringandindustrialdesign
by Cross.
[35, 36, 37]
Thesearebasedonprotocolandinterviewstudieswiththreeoutstand-
ingdesigners,anddrawconclusionsonthecommonaspectsofdesignstrategies.First,
allthreedesignerseitherexplicitlyorimplicitlyreliedupon‘ﬁrstprinciples’inboththe
origination of their concepts and in the detailed development of those concepts. Second,
allthreedesignersexploredtheproblemspacefromaparticularperspectiveinorderto
frametheprobleminawaythatstimulatedandpre-structuredtheemergenceofdesign
concepts.Insomecases,thisperspectivewasapersonalonethatthedesignersseemto
bringtomostoftheirdesigning.Finally,itappearedfromthesethreeexamplesthatcrea-
tivedesignsolutionsariseespeciallywhenthereisaconﬂicttoberesolvedbetweenthe
designer’sownhigh-levelproblemgoals(theirpersonalcommitment)andthecriteria
foranacceptablesolutionestablishedbyclientorotherrequirements.Theoutstanding
designersareabletodrawuponahigh-level,ormoresystemicviewoftheproblematicin
which their actions are situated.
ThesecognitivestrategiesidentiﬁedbyCrossoverlapsigniﬁcantlywiththosefea-
turesofexpertiseindesignidentiﬁedbyLawsonastherelianceuponguidingprinciples,
theabilityto‘recognise’situationsinaseeminglyintuitiveway,andthepossessionofare-
pertoire of ‘tricks’ or design gambits.
[38]
Workingatthehighestlevelsofperformancein
design, outstanding designers aim to produce not just satisfactory solutions, but innovative
Essay FromaDesignSciencetoaDesignDiscipline:UnderstandingDesignerlyWaysofKnowingandThinking

52
responsestosituationsthatcould–andwould–betreatedinconventionalwayseven
by‘expert’designers.Outstandingdesignersproduceworkthatgoesbeyondthesolving
ofthe‘given’problem.Theyproducevaluableprecedentuponwhichotherscancome
to depend. They generate new gambits that eventually may become standard or com-
mon practice.
Conventional wisdom about the nature of problem-solving expertise seems often
tobecontradictedbythebehaviourofexpertdesigners.Indesigneducationwemust
thereforebewaryofimportingmodelsofbehaviourfromotherﬁelds.Studiesofdesign
activityhavefrequentlyfound‘intuitive’featuresofdesignbehaviourtobethemosteffect-
iveandrelevanttotheintrinsicnatureofdesign.Westillneedamuchbetterunderstand-
ingofwhatconstitutesexpertiseindesign,andhowwemightassistnovicestudentstogain
that expertise.
It seems possible to conclude that there are enough commonalities in the beha-
viours of outstanding designers to suggest a view of expertise in design that has its own
particularfeatures,withsomedifferencesfromgenericmodelsofexpertise,whichhave
beenmainlydrawnfromstudiesinmoreconventionaltypesofproblemsolving.More
studies of exceptional designers might lead to a more informed consensus about how de-
signskillsareexercisedbyexperts,andonthetruenatureofdesignerlywaysofknowing
and thinking.
Essay Nigel Cross

53Essay FromaDesignSciencetoaDesignDiscipline:UnderstandingDesignerlyWaysofKnowingandThinking
References / Bibliography
[01]
vanDoesbergT(1923)TowardsaCollectiveConstruction. De Stijl(Quoted by Naylor G
in:The BauhausStudio Vista, London, 1968)
[02]
Le Corbusier (1929)CIAM 2nd Congress,Frankfurt
[03]
JonesJC,ThornleyDG(eds)(1963)ConferenceonDesignMethods. Pergamon, Oxford
[04]
SimonHA(1969)The Sciences of the Artificial. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
[05]
Alexander C (1964)Notes on the Synthesis of Form. Harvard University Press,
Cambridge, MA
[06]
AlexanderC(1971)TheStateoftheArtinDesignMethods. DMG Newsletter5(3) 3-7
[07]
Jones JC (1977) How my Thoughts about Design Methods Have Changed during the
Years.Design Methods and Theories11(1) 48-62
[08]
Rittel H, Webber M (1973) Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning.Policy Sciences
4: 155–169
[09]
Tjalve E (1979)A Short Course in Industrial Design. Newnes - Butterworth, London
[10]
Hubka V (1982)Principles of Engineering Design. Butterworth, Guildford
[11]
PahlG,BeitzW(1984)Engineering Design: a Systematic Approach. Springer/Design
Council, London
[12]
French MJ (1985)Conceptual Design for Engineers.DesignCouncil,London
[13]
Cross N (1989)Engineering Design Methods. Wiley, Chichester
[14]
GregorySA(1966)DesignScience.In:GregorySA(ed.):The Design Method.
Butterworth, London
[15]
JacquesR,PowellJ(eds)(1981)Design:Science: Method.Westbury House, Guildford
[16]
CrossN,NaughtonJ,WalkerD(1981)DesignMethodandScientiﬁcMethod.
In: Jacques R, Powell J (eds):Design:Science:Method. Westbury House, Guildford
[17]
GlynnS(1985)ScienceandPerceptionasDesign. Design Studies6(3) 122-133
[18]
de Vries M, Cross N, Grant D (eds) (1993)Design Methodology and Relationships with
Science. Kluwer, Dordrecht
[19]
Willem RA (1990) Design and Science.Design Studies11(1) 43-47
[20]
Hubka V, Eder WE (1987) A Scientiﬁc Approach to Engineering Design.Design Studies
8(3) 123-137
[21]
Hansen F (1974)Konstruktionswissenschaft. Hanser, Munich
[22]
GrantD(1979)DesignMethodologyandDesignMethods. Design Methods and
Theories: Journal of the DMG13(1) 46-47

54
[23]
GasparskiW,StrzaleckiA(1990)ContributionstoDesignScience:Praxeological
Perspective.Design Methods and Theories: Journal of the DMG24(2) 1186-1194
[24]
Cross N (1984)Developments in Design Methodology. Wiley, Chichester
[25]
Schön D (1983)The Reflective Practitioner.Temple - Smith, London
[26]
Cross N, Dorst K, Roozenburg N (eds) (1992)Research in Design Thinking.
Delft University Press, Delft
[27]
Cross N, Christiaans H, Dorst K (eds) (1996)Analysing Design Activity. Wiley, Chichester
[28]
Cross N, Edmonds E (eds) (2003)ExpertiseinDesign. Creativity and Cognition Press,
University of Technology, Sydney, Australia
[29]
Archer B (1981) A View of the Nature of Design Research. In: Jacques R, Powell J
(eds):Design:Science:Method. Westbury House, Guildford
[30]
Cross N (1999) Natural Intelligence in Design.Design Studies20(1) 25-39
[31]
Dorst K, Dijkhuis J (1995) Comparing Paradigms for Describing Design Activity.Design
Studies16(2) 261-274
[32]
Cross N (1982) Designerly Ways of Knowing.Design Studies3(4) 221 - 227
[33]
Cross N (2006)Designerly Ways of Knowing.Springer, London
[34]
LawsonB(1994)Design in Mind.Butterworth - Heinemann, Oxford, UK
[35]
CrossN,ClayburnCrossA(1996)WinningbyDesign:theMethodsofGordonMurray,
Racing Car Designer.Design Studies17(1) 91-107
[36]
Cross N (2001) Achieving Pleasure from Purpose: the Methods of Kenneth Grange,
Product Designer.TheDesignJournal4(1) 48-58
[37]
Cross N (2002) Creative Cognition in Design: Processes of Exceptional Designers. In:
Hewett T, Kavanagh T (eds)Creativity and Cognition. ACM Press, New York, 14–19
[38]
Lawson B (2004) What Designers Know. Elsevier Architectural Press, Oxford, UK
Essay Nigel Cross

55
‘Wemakesubjectmatterstoﬁttheexaminationandresolutionofproblems,and
thesolutionofproblemsbringstoourattentionfurtherconsequentproblems,which
frequently require the setting up and examination of new ﬁelds.’
Richard McKeon, ‘The Uses of Rhetoric in a Technological Age’
[01]
Introduction
Thehistoryofdesignisahistoryofevolvingproblems.Theearli-
est problems were those of practice and production, and the solution of those problems
led to further problems of practice and production, as well as problems of philosophy and
theorythatwereconsequentupontheexistenceofnewproducts.Intheancientworld,
therewaslittleneedtodistinguishdesignfromthemakingofproducts,becausethecrafts-
personandthemaster-buildercarriedwithinthemselvesboththeabilitytoconceive
productsandtheabilitytoembodytheirconceptionsintangibleform.Technicaltreatises
werewrittentosolvetheproblemofeducation,passingonaccumulatedknowledgeof
practiceandproductiontoindividualswhowouldcontinuetheworkofmaking.Even
before such treatises were written, however, there were already theoretical and philo-
sophical speculations on the nature of products and their effects on human life. Those
speculationsweretypicallyembeddedintreatisesonothersubjectsandproblems,but
theyprovidedthedistantfoundationsforwhatisnowregardedastheﬁeldofdesignand
designresearch.Theycharacterisedthesubjectmatterofhuman-madeproductsorthe
artiﬁcial,developedthefundamentalstrategiesofinquiryintothenatureofproducts
andmaking,andexploredpossibleprinciplesofmakingandusethatwouldlaterturn
designfromatradepracticeintoadomainofmanyprofessionsand,subsequently,intoa
ﬁeld of research encompassing history, criticism and theory, supported by empirical re-
searchandfurtherphilosophicspeculation.Thisﬁelddidnotemergeinrecognisable
form until the 20
thcentury, when the problems of design and technology became so com-
plex that their resolution required new thinking. However, the threads of design research
emerged much earlier.
After the Industrial Revolution, when the work of design was effectively distinguished
fromthemannerofproduction,thecumulativeeffectofmassproductionandproductson
human life gained increasing attention. One line of inquiry led into economics, political
theoryandsocialphilosophy,supportedbythediverseemergingsocialsciences.Another
ledintothenaturalsciences,ﬁrstdeepeningtheknowledgeofnaturallawsandtheability
Essay
Richard Buchanan
StrategiesofDesignResearch:ProductiveScience
andRhetoricalInquiry

56Essay Richard Buchanan
tomanipulatenatureinnewproducts,andthen,bythe20thcentury,beginningtoassess
theeffectsofproductsontheenvironment,leadingtoquestionsaboutthesustainability
ofourculturalcommitmenttomassproductionandconsumption.Finally,therewasa
thirdlineofinquiry,directedtowarddesignitself,leadingtotheestablishmentofanew
ﬁeldofinquiry,theﬁeldofdesignpracticeanddesignresearch.
Theearlystepsincreatingtheﬁeldofdesignresearchinthelate19thandearly20th
centurieswerehardlynoticed.Evenatthebeginningofthe21stcentury,therearefew
narrativesthatadequatelyexplaintheearlydevelopmentsinacoherentaccount.Butthe
problems were, again, problems of practice and production, education, and the conse-
quenteffectofproductsonindividual,socialandculturallife.Inthe20thcentury,these
problemsledtohistoriesofdesigntoaddressthepast,variousformsofdesigncriticism
toaddressthepresent,anddiversetheoriesandphilosophiesofdesignanddesigneduca-
tiontoaddressthefuture.Indeed,thepluralismofdesignanddesignresearchisoneof
thefundamentalcharacteristicsoftheﬁeld.Itisacharacteristicthatwemayignoreatthe
perilofgrossmisunderstandingoftherichnessandcomplexityoftheﬁeld.Itisacharac-
teristicthatisoneofthedeeperphilosophicproblemsinunderstandingdesignorany
otherﬁeldofhumanactivity.Manyinvestigatorsaretemptedwiththeprospectofasingle,
monisticvisionofdesign,butthediversityofpotentialmonismssuggeststhatpluralismis
anunavoidablereality.Thepluralismofdesignresearchsuggeststhatdesignisaﬁeld
comprisedofmanyﬁelds,eachshapedbyitsownproblemsandlinesofinvestigation.
Suchdiversityisbothstrengthandweaknessintheﬁeld.Itisaweaknessbecause
thediversityofworkmakesitdifﬁculttopresentaclear,uniﬁedexplanationofthead-
vance of design research to those outside the ﬁeld. Moreover, the diversity makes it difﬁ-
cultforthoseworkingwithintheﬁeldtotakeadvantageofthecontributionsofothers.
Untilthebasisofthediversityiswellunderstood–sothatcontributionsareassessedand
appreciatedontheirownterms–theﬁeldwillremaininasomewhatnaïvestate,en-
trappedinunproductiveself-criticismanddisputesoverthevalidityofdifferentlinesof
investigation.Fromabroaderperspective,designresearchishealthy,withadvanceson
many fronts.
Strategies of inquiry
Ineveryﬁeldofinquiry,theinvestigationandsolutionofproblems
leadstothediscoveryofnewproblemsthatrequirethesameornewstrategiesofinquiry.
Aftertheearlystepsinestablishingtheﬁeldofdesignresearch,threemajorstrategiesof
inquiry emerged in the 20th century to move the ﬁeld forward. Each strategy had its suc-
cessesanddisappointments,butthediversitywidenedanddeepenedourunderstanding
of design. These strategies continue to shape the ﬁeld of design research, although they
haveundergonemanyvariations.Theyhaverisenanddeclinedpopularity,buttheyhave
allpersistedandbeenavailablewhenoneoranotherembodimentofastrategyhastempo-

DIALECTIC
Holistic Systems &
Unifying Ideas
EXPERIENCE OF
PRODUCTS & DESIGNING
DESIGN SCIENCE
Underlying Elements &
Mechanisms of
Combination
FIG. 01
57Essay StrategiesofDesignResearch:ProductiveScienceandRhetoricalInquiry
rarilyrundryorhassuggestedfurtherproblemsforwhichadifferentstrategywasneeded.
Theirinterplayaccountsformuchofthevitalityoftheﬁeldofdesignresearch.
Thestrategiesmaybeeasilycharacterised,thoughtheirvariationsaremanyand
diverseevenwithinthemselves.Theﬁrststrategyistoexplaindesignandtheproducts
of design within a larger whole or system. It begins with contradictions and conﬂicts in
everyday experience – for example, the conﬂict of user requirements or the values of de-
signersandtheirclients–andseeksunifyingideasandalargercontextwithinwhich
differences may be overcome in theory and in practice, often with speciﬁc methods of
participation,analysisandsynthesis,andcreativethinking.Itemphasisesthesocialand
culturalcontextofdesign,andtypicallydrawsattentiontothelimitationsoftheindi-
vidualdesignerinseekingsustainablesolutionstoproblems.ThisisthestrategyofDia-
lectic,whetherinanidealist,materialistorscepticalvariation.Ineachvariation,techni-
calissuesareassimilatedintoabroadercontext,andtheperspectivesoropinionsof
individualsareasmuchapartofunderstandingdesignasanytechnicalanalysis.
Thesecondstrategyistoexplaindesignandtheproductsofdesignbyseekingthe
basicelementsthatunderliethecomplexitiesofthematerialworldandtheworkingsofthe
mind. It emphasises analysis of the processes and mechanisms by which those basic ele-
ments,oncetheyareidentiﬁedandanalysed,arethencombinedandsynthesisedtoyield
theworldofexperienceandthecognitiveprocessesofdesigninganddecision-making.
ThisisthestrategyofDesignScience,whetherintheformofcognitivescience,psychol-
ogyandcomputersimulation,orinrelatedvariationsofthestudyofconsumeranduser
behaviour.Inthisstrategy,DesignScienceisoftencomplementedbyknowledgegained
fromothersciences,buttheperspectiveofindividualsisstrictlylimited,sincetheproper
method of analysis is objective and independent of opinion and personal perspective.

58
ThestrategyofDesignSciencehadawiderfollowingthanotherstrategiesinthe
1970s,1980sand1990s,particularlyinEuropeandNorthAmerica.However,thereare
amplesignsthatthestrategiesofDialectic,aswellasotherstrategies,areonceagainris-
inginpopularitybecauseofnewproblemsthatarenotadequatelyaddressedbyDesign
Science.BothDesignScienceandDialectichaveledtosustainedconversationsthathave
advanced our understanding of design and technology, though the strategies tend to be
mutuallydistrustful.Signiﬁcantly,bothofthesestrategiesmayalsomakeclaimtobeing
scientiﬁc.AvividexampleoccursinAsiandesignresearchprogrammesthatfollowthe
trend of Design Science in western nations but also infuse their research agendas with
dialecticalconsiderationsthatfollowtheintellectualtraditionsofeasterncultures–a
featurethatisoftenneglected,dismissed,ormisunderstoodbywesterndesignresearch-
erswhofollowforexample,theworkreportedintheJapaneseSocietyfortheScienceof
Design.Toillustratethepoint,theSixthAsianDesignConference,heldinTsukuba,Ja-
pan,in2003,wasorganisedaroundthethemeof‘IntegrationofKnowledge, Kanseiand
IndustrialPower’,whichisclearlyadialecticalthemeofassimilationandintegration
withinaholisticconcept.Toanunbiasedobserver,theclaimtobeing‘scientiﬁc’byboth
DesignScienceandDialecticsuggeststhat‘science’isanambiguoustermthathasdi-
verse meanings. Science may be integrative in holistic systems or it may be reductive in
the study of underlying elements. However, there are other possibilities for the meaning
of science and the strategy of design research.
ThethirdstrategyliesmidwaybetweenDialecticandDesignScience.Insteadof
seeking to understand design and the products of design by reference to something else
– the context of a holistic system or the basic elements that underlie the complexity of ex-
perience–thethirdstrategyseeksanexplanationintheexperienceofdesignersand
those who use products, without recourse to the theoretical abstractions of Dialectic or
Design Science. On the one hand, it may emphasise theinventive and creative powerof the
designerandhisorherabilitytoeffectsocialchangethroughargumentandcommunica-
tion,whetherinwordsorinproducts.Ontheother,itmayemphasisethe disciplineofde-
signing, based on analysis of the essential elements of products and the creative synthesis
of these elements in the various branches of design, with appropriate regard for how prod-
uctsareproducedanddistributedaswellasforhowproductsevolveinhumanusewithin
acommunity.ThisisthestrategyofDesignInquiry,unfoldingintwocloselyrelatedbut
distinct lines of investigation. The lines are closely related because they both emphasise
humanexperienceasthebasisforexplanation.However,theymaybedistinguishedby
theiremphasisandpointoffocus.Onelinefocusesoncommunicationandtheimagina-
tivepowerofthedesigner,whiletheotherfocusesonthedisciplineofmaking,withinthe
frameworkofproductsandtheiruse.OneisastrategyofRhetoricalInquiry;theotheris
astrategyofProductiveScienceorPoetics–frompoeisis,the ancient Greek word for all
activitiesofhumanmaking,andfromAristotle’sspeciﬁcuseofthetermforthescienceof
made-things or the artiﬁcial.
Essay Richard Buchanan

DESIGN INQUIRY PRODUCTIVE SCIENCE
Functional Elements with
Analysis & Synthesis
RHETORIC
Invention & Argument
FIG. 02
59
The strategies that we have discussed are ‘strategic’ in the sense that they offer
broadperspectivesondesignandproducts–andanyothersubjectofinvestigation,since
theyarestrategiesthatmaybeappliedtoallareasofhumaninquiry.Whatdistinguish
thestrategiesarethecharacteristicrelationshipsandconnectionstowhichtheydrawat-
tention.Itistheconnections,notwhatisconnected,thatsigniﬁesastrategy.Betterun-
derstandingofwhatisconnectedandwhyitissigniﬁcantlyconnectedisthegoalofin-
quiry–thegoaltowardwhichthethreestrategiesofferalternativeapproaches.As
connections are explored in research, the inquiry becomes progressively more tactical
andmayinvolveawidevarietyofparticularmethodsandtechniquesthataresharedby
different investigators. Indeed, the strategies guide the use of methods and techniques
thatmaybecommontomanyorallformsofdesignanddesignresearch.Forexample,
drawingisamethodofdesignthatinvolvesmanytechniques,butdrawingmaybeguided
by quite different strategic considerations, both in manner of execution and in purpose.
Thestrategiesprovidethepotentiallinesofinvestigationthatshapedesignresearch,
leading in different directions.
ThestrategiesofDialecticandDesignSciencerequirecomparisonanddiscussion
withinthecommunityofdesignresearchers,butitmaybeusefultopreparetheground
for such a discussion by considering some of the most important features of Design
Inquiry and its branches of Productive Science and Rhetorical Inquiry. Design Inquiry
offersamediatingmiddlebetweentheotherstrategies,becauseitbringsourattention
back from the sometimes abstract issues of the other strategies, reminding us that design
isaconcretehumanactivitygroundedinhumanexperienceandwhatwechoosetomake
of our world.
Essay StrategiesofDesignResearch:ProductiveScienceandRhetoricalInquiry

DIALECTIC
Holistic Systems &
Unifying Ideas
DESIGN INQUIRY PRODUCTIVESCIENCE
Functional Elements with
Analysis & Synthesis
RHETORIC
Invention & Argument
DESIGN SCIENCE
Underlying Elements &
Mechanisms of
Combination
FIG. 03
60
The strategy of productive science
Like Design Science, the strategy of Productive Science employs
astrongdistinctionbetweenanalysisandsynthesis.However,theanalysisofProductive
Scienceisnotdirectedtowardtheunderlying elementsorpartsofcomplexphenomena.
Rather,itfocusesonthefunctional elementsof effective products. This is an important
distinction,indicatingtwodifferentdirectionsforinvestigation.DesignSciencetypically
regardstheproductasanaggregationofpartsthatareadditivelycombinedtoresultina
complex whole. In contrast, Productive Science begins with the idea of a whole product,
thepotentialofwhichisprogressivelyrealisedormadeactualbyreﬁnementoftheessen-
tial functional elements that are necessary for effective performance.
Typically,theanalysisofProductiveSciencerecognisesfourelements.Theﬁrstis
themannerofdesigning,producing,distributing,maintainingandrecyclingordisposing
ofproducts.Eachbranchofdesignhasitscharacteristicwayofworking,withsomeprac-
ticessharedbetweenmanybranches.Forexample,therearemanybooksintheliterature
thatfocusonthedisciplineofoneoranotherbranchofdesign,butthedevelopmentof
collaborativedesignandparticipatorydesign,toselectonlyoneexample,isanimportant
aspectofthemannerofdesignworkinmanybranches.
01 |
Research into the manner of
designingandthevarietyofwaysthatdesignersworkisanimportantconsideration.
The second element is the material employed in a design. Different kinds of products
use different kinds of materials, and advances in science and technology have provided a
01 |
01 |
SeeCoDesign:InternationalJournalofCoCreationinDesignandtheArts
Essay Richard Buchanan

61
widerangeofnewmaterialsfordesigners.Thematerialsmaybetangibleorintangible,as
indigitalproducts.Ineachcase,however,itisimportanttounderstandthenatureofthe
materialstobeusedindesigning.Researchintomaterialsandtheiractualorpotential
useindesignisanimportantconsideration.
The third element is product form. Form may be static or dynamic, but understand-
ingtheformofexistingproductsisessentialforthedesignerifheorsheistodevelopnew
forms that are suited to new technological developments or to different circumstances of
productuse.Researchintoproductformandthedimensionsofproductforminuseful-
ness,usability,anddesirabilityisanimportantconsideration.
Finally,thefourthelementofanyeffectiveproductisitspurposeorfunctioninsup-
portinghumanactivity.Acarefulanalysisofthetaskthataproductperformsisessential
forthedesigner.Analysisofexistingproductsprovidesmanyinsightsintothesituationof
useorthedesigner’sinterpretationandunderstandingofsuchsituations.Analysisoffunc-
tionextendsbeyondtheformalstructureofaproduct.Itextendsintotheindividual,so-
cialandculturallifeofhumanbeingsinalloftheirvariedcircumstancesofexperience.
Researchintotheexpandedmeaningoffunctionandnewproductpossibilitiesisanim-
portantconsideration,particularlywhenconnectedwiththeissuesofethicsandpolitics
that surround products.
OneaspectofProductiveScienceisthestudyofexistingproductsandhowdesigners
work.Thus,ithasbothhistoricalandcriticalcomponents.However,itisalsoanempirical
and theoretical science in the sense that it provides insight into the nature of design as a
whole, the products of design, and the activities of designing. In this sense, it may con-
tribute to new or improved design practices, broadening the theory of design and sup-
portingpractice.Nonetheless,ProductiveScienceisdistinctfromthepracticalartof
designandtheindividualpracticesofdesigners.Thatis,thecreativeandsyntheticartof
design presents its own problem, distinct from the analytic problems addressed by Pro-
ductive Science.
John Dewey provides keen insight into this distinction in his discussion of inquiry.
Hedeﬁnesinquiryas‘thedirectedorcontrolledtransformationofanindeterminatesitu-
ation into a determinately uniﬁed one’.
[02]
However, he also distinguishes between formal
inquiriesandinquiriesof‘commonsense’.Formalinquiriesarescientiﬁc,andmayin-
cludethenaturalsciences,thesocialandbehaviouralsciences,andproductivescience.
Incontrast,theinquiriesofcommonsensearepracticalinquiries,typicalofdesignitself,
aswellasalloftheotherformsofpracticalandprofessionalactivity,rangingfrommedi-
cine and farming to any other form of human problem-solving in action.
Dewey’sdistinctionbetweencommonsenseandformalorscientiﬁcinquiries,and
hisideaofasharedcoredeﬁnitionofinquiry,echoinHerbertSimon’smorewidelyfami-
liardeﬁnitionofdesignas‘changingexistingsituationsintopreferredones’.
[03]
While
Simon subsequently turns this idea into the central feature of his version of Design Science
–reducingalldesignactivitiestounderlyingcognitivemechanismsofdecision-making
Essay StrategiesofDesignResearch:ProductiveScienceandRhetoricalInquiry

62
fordevisingcoursesofaction–hismostimportantworkondesign, TheSciencesofthe
Artiﬁcial, has its roots in the pragmatic concept of inquiry and productive science. Dewey’s
distinctionalsoechoesintheworkofDonaldA.Schön,whoarguesthatthetechnicalra-
tionalityofSimon’spositivistandreductiveapproachthroughDesignScienceisinad-
equateinaccountingforthereﬂectivepracticeofdesigners.
[04]
Schön’s reﬂective practi-
tioner,whilemorewidelyfamiliarasaconceptinthedesignresearchcommunity,isbest
understoodasapopularisedversionofDewey’sconceptofcommon-senseinquiry.Indeed,
Deweyprovidesthestrongerargumentsandconceptsforthiskindofactivity,wellground-
ed in the philosophy of pragmatism and the nature of inquiry. Where Schön’s exposition
beginstofalterandbecomevague,Dewey’slineofargumentoffersamoresustainable
strategy for development.
ProductiveSciencedoesofferthisinsightintodesignpractice:thestruggleofthe
designer is to synthesise the functional elements ofmanner of design and production,
materials,formandfunction.ProductiveSciencemayofferinsightintotheseelements,
butitdoesnotofferprescriptions,simplestepsofmethod,oraformulatothepractising
designer.Instead,itoffersadifferentaccountoftheworkofdesigning.Ratherthanre-
ducing design practice to Productive Science, it points toward design as a creative inquiry
initsownrightthatinvolvesthinking,feeling,andconcretepracticalaction.Practicemay
beidiosyncratic,withpersonalvariationsofmanykinds–hencethecommonrealityofthe
designcommunityisthateverydesigneroffersadifferentpersonalaccountofsuccessful
practice,eachwithfavouritepractices,methodsandtechniques.However,thereisthe
possibilityofashareddisciplineofdesigningthatmaybecapturednotinProductive
Science but in a formal art of the discipline of design.
Aristotle provides an interesting insight into this matter. Writing in thePoetics,his
example of Productive Science directed toward the study of drama and tragedy, he pauses
fromtheanalysisoftheelementsoftragedytodiscusshowawriteroftragediesmay
visualisetheactionofastoryinthecourseofwriting.Thisisapracticalsuggestionthat
departsfromthemainlineofanalysis,butpointstowardthedisciplinethatanartist
employs in solving the problem of creation. At another point, he pauses even more signi-
ﬁcantlytosuggestthatsomeonewhowantstowriteatragedyshouldstudythediscipline
ofrhetoricinordertocrafttheactualspeechesofcharactersinadrama.Thesesugges-
tionsconﬁrmwhatisalreadywellknowninthedesigncommunityandindesignresearch.
Forallofouradvancesintechnicalknowledge,thereremainsthecentraltaskofcreative
synthesisthatcharacterisesdesignthinkingandpractice.
DonaldSchön’sapproachmaybedissatisfyingandvagueinmanyways,butita-
chievedpopularityinthedesigncommunitybecauseitexpressedacommondoubtabout
thepracticalvalueofDesignScience.Schöndrewattentiontoaproblemthatrequireda
newstrategyofinvestigation.Infact,hiswritingservedtobringdesignanddesignre-
search back from the strategy of Design Science, turning toward alternative strategies of
research. One alternative approach is the idea of ‘practice-based’ research. Although this
isstillasomewhatlooseandvagueconcept,itisperhapsbestunderstoodasanexpression
Essay Richard Buchanan

Other documents randomly have
different content

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
FIG. Page
1. Henry VIII. 368
(From a painting by Holbein about 1536, belonging to
Earl Spencer)
2. Cardinal Wolsey 365
(From an original picture belonging to the Hon. Sir
Spencer Ponsonby-Fane, K.C.B.)
3. The embarkation of Henry VIII. from Dover, 1520 370
(From the Society of Antiquaries' engraving of the
original picture at Hampton Court)
4. Silver-gilt cup and cover, made at London in 1523; at
Barber Surgeons' Hall, London 371
(From Cripps's 'College and Corporation Plate')
5. Part of Hampton Court; built by Cardinal Wolsey; finished
in 1526 373
(From a photograph)
6. Portrait of William Warham, Archbishop of Canterbury,
1503-1532, showing the ordinary episcopal dress, with
the mitre and archiepiscopal cross 376
(From a painting by Holbein, belonging to Viscount
Dillon, F.S.A., dated 1527)
7. Tower of Fountains Abbey church; built by Abbot Huby,
1494-1526 378

(From a photograph by Valentine and Sons, Dundee)
8. Catharine of Aragon 380
(From a painting in the National Portrait Gallery)
9. The gatehouse of Coughton Court, Warwickshire; built
about 1530 381
(From Niven's 'Illustrations of Old Warwickshire Houses')
10. Hall of Christchurch, Oxford; built by Cardinal Wolsey;
finished in 1529 384
(From a photograph by W. H. Wheeler, Oxford)
11. Sir Thomas More, wearing the collar of SS. 387
(From an original portrait painted by Holbein in 1527,
belonging to Edward Huth, Esq.)
12. John Fisher, Bishop of Rochester, 1504-1535 393
(From a drawing by Holbein in the Royal Library, Windsor
Castle)
13. Edward Seymour, Earl of Hertford, brother of Jane
Seymour, afterwards Duke of Somerset, known as 'the
Protector,' at the age of 28, 1507-1552 395
(From a painting at Sudeley Castle)
14. Henry VIII. 403
(From a painting by Holbein, belonging to the Earl of
Warwick)
15. Angel of Henry VIII., 1543 405
(From an original example)
16. Part of the encampment at Marquison, 1544, showing
military equipment in the time of Henry VIII. 406
17. 191. Part of the siege of Boulogne by Henry VIII., 1544,
showing military operations 407, 408
(From the Society Of Antiquaries' engravings, by Vertue,

of the now destroyed paintings formerly at Cowdray
House, Sussex)
18. Armour as worn in the reign of Henry VIII.; from the
brass of John Lymsey, 1545, in Hackney church 409
19. Margaret, wife of John Lymsey; from her brass in
Hackney church, showing the costume of a lady circa
1545 409
(From Haines's 'Manual of Monumental Brasses')
20. Thomas Howard, third Duke of Norfolk, 1473(?)-1554
410
(From a painting by Holbein at Windsor Castle)
21. Thomas Cranmer, Archbishop of Canterbury, 1533-1556
414
(From a painting by Holbein dated 1547, at Jesus
College, Cambridge)
22. Nicholas Ridley, Bishop of London, 1550-1553 417
(From the National Portrait Gallery)
23. King Edward VI. 419
(From a picture belonging to H. Hucks Gibbs, Esq.)
24. Queen Mary Tudor 422
(From a painting by Lucas de Heere, dated 1554,
belonging to the Society of Antiquaries)
25. Hugh Latimer, Bishop of Worcester, 1535-1539, burnt
1555 425
(From the National Portrait Gallery)
26. A milled half-sovereign of Elizabeth, 1562-1568 435
(From an original example)
27. Silver-gilt standing cup made in London in 1569-70, and
given to Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, by Parker

440
(From Cripps's 'College and Corporation Plate')
28. Sir Francis Drake in his forty-third year 448
(From the engraving by Elstracke)
29. Armour as worn during the reign of Elizabeth; from the
brass of Francis Clopton, 1577, at Long Melford, Suffolk
451
(From Haines's 'Manual of Monumental Brasses')
30. Hall of Burghley House, Northamptonshire, built about
1580 455
(From Drummond's 'Histories of Noble British Families')
31. Sir Martin Frobisher, died 1594 459
(From a picture belonging to the Earl of Carlisle)
32. The Spanish Armada. Fight between the English and
Spanish fleets off the Isle of Wight, July 25, 1588 461
(From Pine's engravings of the tapestry formerly in the
House of Lords)
33. Sir Walter Raleigh (1552-1618), and his eldest son Walter
at the age of eight 463
(From a picture dated 1602, belonging to Sir J. F.
Lennard, Bart.)
34. A mounted soldier at the end of the sixteenth century
465
(From a broadside printed in 1596, in the Society of
Antiquaries' collection)
35. Wollaton Hall, Nottinghamshire; built by Thorpe for Sir
Francis Willoughby, about 1580-1588 466
(From a photograph by R. Keene, Derby)
36. Hardwick Hall, Derbyshire; built by Elizabeth, Countess of
Shrewsbury, about 1597 467

(From a photograph by R. Keene, Derby)
37. E-shaped house at Beaudesert, Staffordshire; built by
Thomas, Lord Paget, about 1601 469
(From a photograph by R. Keene, Derby)
38. Ingestre Hall, Staffordshire; built about 1601 471
(From a photograph by R. Keene, Derby)
39. Coaches in the reign of Elizabeth 473
(From 'Archæologia,' vol. xx. pl. xviii.)
40. William Shakspere 474
(From the bust on his tomb at Stratford-on-Avon)
41. Robert Devereux, second Earl of Essex, K.G., 1567-1601
476
(From a painting by Van Somer, dated 1599, belonging to
the Earl of Essex)
42. Queen Elizabeth, 1558-1603 477
(From a painting belonging to the University of
Cambridge)
43. William Cecil, Lord Burghley, K.G., 1520-1591 479
(From a painting in the Bodleian Library, Oxford)
44. Royal arms borne by James I. and succeeding Stuart
sovereigns 482
(From Boutell's'English Heraldry')
45. North-west view of Hatfield House, Herts; built for Robert
Cecil, first Earl of Salisbury, between 1605 and 1611 485
(From a photograph by Valentine and Sons, Dundee)
46. An unknown gentleman 487
(From a painting belonging to T. A. Hope, Esq.)
47. King James I. 491
(From a painting by P. Van Somer, dated 1621, in the

National Portrait Gallery)
48. Civil costume, about 1620 492
(From a contemporary broadside in the collection of the
Society of Antiquaries)
49. The banqueting-hall of the Palace of Whitehall (from the
north-east); built from the designs of Inigo Jones, 1619-
1621 493
(From a photograph)
50. Francis Bacon, Viscount St. Alban, Lord Chancellor 495
(From a painting by P. Van Somer in the National Portrait
Gallery)
51. Costume of a lawyer 497
(From a broadside dated 1623 in the collection of the
Society of Antiquaries)
52. The Upper House of Convocation 498
53. The Lower House of Convocation 499
(From a broadside dated 1623, in the collection of the
Society of Antiquaries)
54. King Charles I. 504
(From a painting by Van Dyck)
55. Queen Henrietta Maria, wife of Charles I. 505
(From a painting by Van Dyck)
56. Tents and military equipment in the early part of the
reign of Charles I. 507
(From the monument of Sir Charles Montague (died in
1625), in the church of Barking, Essex)
57. George Villiers, first duke of Buckingham, 1592-1628 509
(From the painting by Gerard Honthorst in the National
Portrait Gallery)

58. Sir Edward and Lady Filmer; from their brass at East
Sutton, Kent, showing armour and dress worn about
1630 515
(From Waller's 'Monumental Brasses')
59. Archbishop Laud 517
(From a copy in the National Portrait Gallery by Henry
Stone, from the Van Dyck at Lambeth)
60. Silver-gilt tankard made at London in 1634-5; now
belonging to the Corporation of Bristol 518
(From Cripps's 'College and Corporation Plate')
61. The 'Sovereign of the Seas,' built for the Royal Navy in
1637 522
(From a contemporary engraving by John Payne)
62. Soldier armed with a pike 527
63. Soldier with musket and crutch 527
(From a broadside printed about 1630, in the collection
of the Society of Antiquaries)
64. –243. Ordinary civil costume, temp. Charles I., viz:—
A gentleman and a gentlewoman 550
A citizen and a citizen's wife 551
A countryman and a countrywoman 552
(From Speed's map of 'The Kingdom of England,' 1646)
65. View of the west side of the Banqueting-House,
Whitehall, dated 1713, showing the window through
which Charles I. is said to have passed to the scaffold
558
(From an engraving by Terasson)
66. Execution of King Charles I., January 30, 1649 559
(From a broadside in the collection of the late Richard
Fisher, Esq., F.S.A.)

67. A coach in the middle of the seventeenth century 564
(From an engraving by John Dunstall)
68. Oliver Cromwell 567
(From the painting by Samuel Cooper, at Sidney Sussex
College, Cambridge)
69. Charles II. 579
(From the portrait by Sir Peter Lely in Christ's Hospital,
London)
70. Edward Hyde, first Earl of Clarendon, 1608-1674 581
(From an engraving by Loggan)
71. A mounted nobleman and his squire 582
(From Ogilby's 'Coronation Procession of Charles II.')
72. Dress of the Horseguards at the Restoration 583
(From Ogilby's 'Coronation Procession of Charles II.')
73. Yeoman of the Guard 583
(From Ogilby's 'Coronation Procession of Charles II.')
74. Shipping in the Thames, circa 1660 584
(From Pricke's 'South Prospect of London')
75. Old St. Paul's, from the east, showing its condition just
before the Great Fire 591
(From an engraving by Hollar)
76. John Milton in 1669 597
(From the engraving by Faithorne)
77. Temple Bar, London, built by Sir Christopher Wren in
1670 601
(From a photograph)
78. Anthony Ashley-Cooper, first Earl of Shaftesbury, 1621-
1683 604

(From the painting by John Greenhill in the National
Portrait Gallery)
79. Ordinary dress of gentlemen in 1675 611
(From Loggan's 'Oxonia Illustrata')
80. Cup presented, 1676, by King Charles II. to the Barber
Surgeons' Company 612
(From Cripps's 'College and Corporation Plate')
81. Steeple of the church of St. Mary-le-Bow, London, built
by Sir Christopher Wren between 1671 and 1680 614
(From a photograph)
82. Dress of ladies of quality 628
(From Sandford's 'Coronation Procession of James II.')
83. Ordinary attire of women of the lower classes 628
(From Sandford's 'Coronation Procession of James II.')
84. Coach of the latter half of the seventeenth century 629
(From Loggan's 'Oxonia Illustrata')
85. Waggon of the second half of the seventeenth century
629
(From Loggan's 'Oxonia Illustrata')
86. Reaping and harvesting in the second half of the
seventeenth century 630
(From Loggan's 'Cantabrigia Illustrata')
87. Costume of a gentleman 632
(From Sandford's 'Coronation Procession of James II.')
88. James II. 635
(From the painting by Sir Godfrey Kneller in 1684-5 in the
National Portrait Gallery)
89. Yeomen of the Guard 636
(From Sandford's 'Coronation Procession of James II.')

90. Dress of a bishop in the second half of the seventeenth
century 642
(From Sandford's 'Coronation Procession of James II.')

GENEALOGICAL TABLES
I
KINGS AND QUEENS OF ENGLAND (AFTER 1541 OF
ENGLAND AND IRELAND) FROM HENRY VII. TO ELIZABETH.

Henêy VII.
1485-1509
=
Elizabeth
of York



Arthur
Prince of
Wales
=
Cath
arin
e of
Arag
on
=
Henêy
VIII.
1509-
1547
=
(2) Anne
Boleyn
=
(3)
Jane
Sey
mou
r


Maêy I.
1553-
1559

Elizabeth
1558-
1603

Edwaêd
VI.
1547-
1553

II
KINGS OF SCOTLAND AND GREAT BRITAIN, FROM JAMES
IV. OF SCOTLAND TO WILLIAM AND MARY.
Henêy
VII.,

king
of
Engla
nd


James IV.
king of
Scotland
1488-
1513
=
Marg
aret
=
Archi
bald,
Earl
of
Angu
s



James
V.
1513-
1542
=
M
ar
y
of
Gu
ise

Marg
aret
Dougl
as
=
M
att
he
w
St
ua
rt
Ea
rl
of
Le
nn
ox



(1)
Francis
II.
king of
France
=
Maêy
1542-
1567
=
(2)
Henr
y
Stuar
t
(Lord
Darnl
ey)


James VI.
1567-1625
king of
Great
Britain

as James I.
1603-1625
III
KINGS OF GREAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND FROM JAMES I. TO
GEORGE I.

James
I.
1603-
1625
=
An
ne
of
De
n
m
ar
k



Henry
Prince
of
Wales

Chaêle
s I.
1625-
1649
=
He
nri
ett
a
Ma
ria
of
Fr
an
ce

Elizab
eth
=
Frede
rick V.
Electo
r
Palati
ne




Chaêle
s II.
(nomi
nally)
1649-
1660
(actua
=Ca
th
ari
ne
of
Br
ag
Mary=Willia
m II.
Prince
of
Orang
e
(1)
Anne
Hyde
=James
II.
1685-
1689
=(2)
Ma
ry
of
Mo
de
na

lly)
1660-
1685
an
za



Willia
m III.
Prince
of
Orang
e,
king
of
Great
Britai
n
and
Irelan
d
1689-
1702
=
Maêy II.
1689-
1694
Anne
1702-
1714

James
(The
Old
Prete
nder)



Charle
s
Edwar
d
(The
Young
Prete
nder)




Charle
s
Lewis
Electo
r
Palati
ne

Prince
Ruper
t

Sophi
a

Geçêg
e I.
1714-
1727

IV
GENEALOGY OF THE KINGS OF FRANCE FROM LOUIS XII. TO
LOUIS XIV., SHOWING THEIR DESCENT FROM LOUIS IX.

(St.) Louis IX.
1226-1270




Philip
III.
1270-
1285

Robert
of
Clermon
t



Louis I.
Duke of Bourbon

Philip IV.
1283-1314

Charles
de
Valois


(For
descendant
s of Philip
IV.
see Part I.
Table IV.)

Philip
VI.
1328-
1350



Jçhn
1350-
1364

Chaêles
V.
1364-
1380

Lçuis
Duke of
Orleans




Chaêles
VI.
1380-
1422

Charles
Duke of
Orleans

John
Count of
Angoulê
me



Chaêles
VII.
1422-
1461

Lçuis
XII.
1498-
1515
Charles


Lçuis XI.
1461-
1483

Fêancis
I.
1515-
1547



Chaêles
VIII.
1483-
1498



Henêy II.
1547-
1559
Antony =
Jeanne
d'Albret,
queen of
Navarre


Fêancis II.
1559-1560

Chaêles
IX.
1560-
1574

Francis
Duke of
Alençon

Henêy
III.
1574-
1589

Henêy
IV.
1589-
1610



Louis
XIII.
1610-
1643

Louis
XIV.
1643-
1715

V
GENEALOGY OF THE KINGS OF SPAIN FROM FERDINAND
AND ISABELLA TO CHARLES II.
Maximilia
n I.
Emperor

Feêdinand
king of Aragon
1479-1516
=
Isabella
queen of Castile
1474-1504


Philié I.
Archduke
of
Austria,
king of
Castile
1504-
1506
= Juana
Catharin
e
=
(1) Arthur, Prince of Wales
(2) Henry VIII. king of
England



Chaêles I.
(the Emperor
Charles V.)
king of Castile,
1506-1556,
king of Aragon,
1516-1556

Ferdinand I.
Emperor



Philié II.
1556-1598

Philié III.
1598-1621



Philié IV.
1621-1665



Chaêles II.
1665-1700

VI
GENEALOGY OF THE GERMAN BRANCH OF THE HOUSE OF
AUSTRIA FROM FERDINAND I. TO LEOPOLD I.
(The dates given are those during which an archduke was emperor.)

Feêdinand I.
1556-1564




Maximilian II.
1564-1576

Charles
Duke of Styria


Rudçléh II.
1576-1612

Matthias
1612-1619

Feêdinand II.
1619-1635


Feêdinand III.
1635-1658


Leçéçld I.
1658-1705

VII
GENEALOGY OF THE PRINCES OF ORANGE FROM WILLIAM
I. TO WILLIAM III.

William I.
(The Silent)
1558-1584



Philié William
1584-1618

Mauêice
1618-1625

Fêedeêick Henêy
1625-1647


William II.
1647-1650


William III.
1650-1702
SHORTER AND SOMETIMES MORE DETAILED GENEALOGIES
will be found in the following pages.
PAGE
Genealogy of the Poles 399
" " children of Henry VIII. 411
" " Greys 421
" " last Valois kings of France 433
" " Guises 435
" of Mary and Darnley 438
" of the descendants of Charles I. 609

PART V
THE RENASCENCE AND THE REFORMATION
1509-1603
CHAPTER XXIV
HENRY VIII. AND WOLSEY. 1509-1527
LEADING DATES
Reign of Henry VIII., 1509-1547
Accession of Henry VIII. 1509
Henry's first war with France 1512
Peace with France 1514
Charles V. elected Emperor 1519
Henry's second French war 1522
Francis I. taken captive at Pavia 1525
The sack of Rome and the alliance
between England and France 1527

Henry VIII.; from a painting by Holbein about 1536, belonging to Earl Spencer.
1. The New King. 1509.—Henry VIII. inherited the handsome
face, the winning presence, and the love of pleasure which
distinguished his mother's father, Edward IV., as well as the strong
will of his own father, Henry VII. He could ride better than his
grooms, and shoot better than the archers of his guard. Yet, though
he had a ready smile and a ready jest for everyone, he knew how to
preserve his dignity. Though he seemed to live for amusement
alone, and allowed others to toil at the business of administration,
he took care to keep his ministers under control. He was no mean
judge of character, and the saying which rooted itself amongst his
subjects, that 'King Henry knew a man when he saw him,' points to
one of the chief secrets of his success. He was well aware that the

great nobles were his only possible rivals, and that his main support
was to be found in the country gentry and the townsmen. Partly
because of his youth, and partly because the result of the political
struggle had already been determined when he came to the throne,
he thought less than his father had done of the importance of
possessing stored up wealth by which armies might be equipped and
maintained, and more of securing that popularity which at least for
the purposes of internal government, made armies unnecessary. The
first act of the new reign was to send Empson and Dudley to the
Tower, and it was significant of Henry's policy that they were tried
and executed, not on a charge of having extorted money illegally
from subjects, but on a trumped up charge of conspiracy against the
king. It was for the king to see that offences were not committed
against the people, but the people must be taught that the most
serious crimes were those committed against the king. Henry's next
act was to marry Catharine. Though he was but nineteen, whilst his
bride was twenty-five, the marriage was for many years a happy
one.
2. Continental Troubles. 1508-1511.—For some time Henry
lived as though his only object in life was to squander his father's
treasure in festivities. Before long, however, he bethought himself of
aiming at distinction in war as well as in sport. Since Louis XII. had
been king of France (see p. 354) there had been constant wars in
Italy, where Louis was striving for the mastery with Ferdinand of
Aragon. In 1508 the two rivals, Ferdinand and Louis, abandoning
their hostility for a time, joined the Emperor Maximilian (see pp. 337,
348) and Pope Julius II. in the League of Cambrai, the object of
which was to despoil the Republic of Venice. In 1511 Ferdinand
allied himself with Julius II. and Venice in the Holy League, the
object of which was to drive the French out of Italy. After a while the
new league was joined by Maximilian, and every member of it was
anxious that Henry should join it too.

3. The Rise of Wolsey. 1512.—England had nothing to gain by
an attack on France, but Henry was young, and the English nation
was, in a certain sense, also young. It was conscious of the strength
brought to it by restored order, and was quite ready to use this
strength in an attack on its neighbours. In the new court it was
ignorantly thought that there was no reason why Henry VIII. should
not take up that work of conquering France which had fallen to
pieces in the feeble hands of Henry VI. To carry on his new policy
Henry needed a new minister. The best of the old ones were Fox,
the Bishop of Winchester, and Thomas Howard, Earl of Surrey, who,
great nobleman as he was, had been contented to merge his
greatness in the greatness of the king. The whole military
organisation of the country, however, had to be created afresh, and
neither Fox nor Surrey was equal to such a task. The work was
assigned to Thomas Wolsey, the king's almoner, who, though not, as
his enemies said, the son of a butcher, was of no exalted origin.
Wolsey's genius for administration at once manifested itself. He was
equally at home in sketching out a plan of campaign, in diplomatic
contests with the wariest and most experienced statesmen, and in
providing for the minutest details of military preparation.
4. The War with France. 1512-1513.—It was not Wolsey's
fault that his first enterprise ended in failure. A force sent to attack
France on the Spanish side failed, not because it was ill-equipped,
but because the soldiers mutinied, and Ferdinand, who had
promised to support it, abandoned it to its fate. In 1513 Henry
himself landed at Calais, and, with the Emperor Maximilian serving
under him, defeated the French at Guinegatte in an engagement
known, from the rapidity of the flight of the French, as the Battle of
the Spurs. Before the end of the autumn he had taken Terouenne
and Tournai. War with France, as usual, led to a war with Scotland.
James IV., during Henry's absence, invaded Northumberland, but his
army was destroyed by the Earl of Surrey at Flodden, where he
himself was slain.

5. Peace with France. 1514.—Henry soon found that his allies
were thinking exclusively of their own interests. In 1512 the French
were driven out of Italy, and Ferdinand made himself master of
Navarre. In 1513 the warlike Pope, Julius II., died, and a fresh
attempt of Louis to gain ground in Italy was decisively foiled. Henry's
allies had got what they wanted, and in 1514 Henry discovered that
to conquer France was beyond his power. Louis was ready to come
to terms. He was now a widower. Old in constitution, though not in
years, he was foolish enough to want a young wife. Henry was ready
to gratify him with the hand of his younger sister Mary. The poor girl
had fallen in love with Henry's favourite, Charles Brandon, Duke of
Suffolk, a man of sturdy limbs and weak brain, and pleaded hard
against the marriage. Love counted for little in those days, and all
that she could obtain from her brother was a promise that if she
married this time to please him, she should marry next time to
please herself. Louis soon relieved her by dying on January 1, 1515,
after a few weeks of wedlock, and his widow took care, by marrying
Suffolk before she left France, to make sure that her brother should
keep his promise.

Cardinal Wolsey: from an original picture belonging to the Hon. Sir Spencer
Ponsonby-Fane, K.C.B.
6. Wolsey's Policy of Peace. 1514-1518.—In 1514 the king
made Wolsey Archbishop of York. In 1515 the Pope made him a
Cardinal. Before the end of the year he was Henry's Chancellor. The
whole of the business of the government passed through his hands.
The magnificence of his state was extraordinary. To all observers he
seemed to be more a king than the king himself. Behind him was
Henry, trusting him with all his power, but self-willed and
uncontrollable, quite ready to sacrifice his dearest friend to satisfy
his least desire. As yet the only conflict in Henry's mind was the
conflict about peace or war with France. Henry's love of display and
renown had led him to wish to rival the exploits of Edward III. and
Henry V. Wolsey preferred the old policy of Richard II. and Henry VI.,

but he knew that he could only make it palatable to the king and the
nation by connecting the idea of peace with the idea of national
greatness. He aspired to be the peacemaker of Europe, and to make
England's interest in peace the law of the world. In 1515 the new
king of France, Francis I., needed peace with England because he
was in pursuit of glory in Italy, where he won a brilliant victory at
Marignano. In 1516 Ferdinand's death gave Spain to his grandson,
Charles, the son of Philip and Juana (see p. 358), and from that time
Francis and Charles stood forth as the rivals for supremacy on the
Continent. Wolsey tried his best to maintain a balance between the
two, and it was owing to his ability that England, thinly populated
and without a standing army, was eagerly courted by the rulers of
states far more powerful than herself. In 1518 a league was struck
between England and France, in which Pope Leo X., the Emperor
Maximilian, and Charles, king of Spain, agreed to join, thus
converting it into a league of universal peace. Yet Wolsey was no
cosmopolitan philanthropist. He believed that England would be
more influential in peace than she could be in war.
7. Wolsey and the Renascence.—In scheming for the elevation
of his own country by peace instead of by conquest, Wolsey
reflected the higher aspirations of his time. No sooner had internal
order been secured, than the best men began to crave for some
object to which they could devote themselves, larger and nobler
than that of their own preservation. Wolsey gave them the
contemplation of the political importance of England on the
Continent. The noblest minds, however, would not be content with
this, and an outburst of intellectual vigour told that the times of
internal strife had passed away. This intellectual movement was not
of native growth. The Renascence, or new birth of letters, sprung up
in Italy in the fourteenth century, and received a further impulse
through the taking of Constantinople by the Turks in 1453, when
the dispersal of Greek teachers from the East revived the study of
the Greek language. It was not merely because new teachers landed
in Italy that the literature of the ancient world was studied with
avidity. Men were weary of the mediæval system, and craved for

other ideals than those of the devotees of the Church. Whilst they
learnt to admire the works of the Greek and Latin authors as models
of literary form, they caught something of the spirit of the ancient
world. They ceased to look on man as living only for God and a
future world, and regarded him as devoting himself to the service of
his fellow-men, or even—in lower minds the temptation lay
perilously near—as living for himself alone. Great artists and poets
arose who gave expression to the new feeling of admiration for
human action and human beauty, whilst the prevailing revolt against
the religion of the middle ages gave rise to a spirit of criticism which
refused belief to popular legends.
8. The Renascence in England.—The spirit of the Renascence
was slow in reaching England. In the days of Richard II. Chaucer
visited Italy, and Italian influence is to be traced in his Canterbury
Tales. In the days of Henry VI. the selfish politician, Humphrey, Duke
of Gloucester, purchased books, and gave to Oxford a collection
which was the foundation of what was afterwards known as the
Bodleian Library. Even in the Wars of the Roses the brutal John
Tiptoft, Earl of Worcester, and the gentle Earl Rivers, the brother of
Elizabeth Woodville, were known as patrons of letters. The invention
of printing brought literature within reach of those to whom it had
hitherto been strange. Edward IV. patronised Caxton, the first
English printer. In the peaceful reign of Henry VII. the seed thus
sown sprang into a crop. There was, however, a great difference
between the followers of the new learning in England and in Italy. In
Italy, for the most part, scholars mocked at Christianity, or treated it
with tacit contempt. In England there was no such breach with the
religion of the past. Those who studied in England sought to
permeate their old faith with the new thoughts.
9. The Oxford Reformers.—Especially was this the case with a
group of Oxford Reformers, Grocyn, Linacre, and Colet, who were
fighting hard to introduce the study of Greek into the University.
Among these Colet specially addicted himself to the explanation of
the epistles of St. Paul, insisting on following their plain meaning

instead of the mystical interpretations then in vogue. In 1510 he
founded St. Paul's School, that boys might be there taught without
being subjected to the brutal flogging which was in those days the
lot even of the most diligent of schoolboys. The most remarkable
member of this group of scholars was Thomas More. Young More,
who had hoped much from the accession of Henry VIII., had been
disappointed to find him engaging in a war with France instead of
cultivating the arts of peace. He meditated deeply over the miseries
of his fellow-men, and longed for a time when governments would
think it to be their highest duty to labour for those who are too weak
to help themselves.
10. 'The Utopia.' 1515-1516.—In 1515 and 1516 More
produced a book which he called Utopia, or Nowhere, intending it to
serve as a satire on the defects of the government of England, by
praising the results of a very different government in his imaginary
country. The Utopians, he declared, fought against invaders of their
own land or the land of their allies, or to deliver other peoples from
tyranny, but they made no wars of aggression. In peace no one was
allowed either to be idle or overworked. Everyone must work six
hours a day, and then he might listen to lectures for the
improvement of his mind. As for the religion of Utopia, no one was
to be persecuted for his religious opinions, as long as he treated
respectfully those who differed from him. If, however, he used
scornful and angry words towards them, he was to be banished, not
as a despiser of the established religion, but as a stirrer up of
dissension. Men of all varieties of opinion met together in a common
temple, the worship in which was so arranged that all could take
part in it. Amongst their priests were women as well as men. More
practical was the author's attack on the special abuses of the times.
England swarmed with vagrants, who easily passed into robbers, or
even murderers. The author of Utopia traced the evil to its roots.
Soldiers, he said, were discharged on their return home, and, being
used to roving and dissolute habits, naturally took to vagrancy.
Robbery was their only resource, and the law tempted a robber to
murder. Hanging was the penalty both for robbing and murder, and

the robber, therefore, knowing that he would be hanged if he were
detected, usually killed the victim whom he had plundered in order
to silence evidence against himself; and More consequently argued
that the best way of checking murder would be to abolish the
penalty of death for robbery. Another great complaint of More's was
against the ever-growing increase of inclosures for pasturage.
"Sheep," he said, "be become so great devourers and so wild that
they eat up and swallow down the very men themselves. They
consume, destroy, and devour whole fields, houses, and cities." More
saw the evil, but he did not see that the best remedy lay in the
establishment of manufactures, to give employment in towns to
those who lost it in the country. He wished to enforce by law the
reversion of all the new pasturage into arable land.
11. More and Henry VIII.—Henry VIII. was intolerant of those
who resisted his will, but he was strangely tolerant of those who
privately contradicted his opinions. He took pleasure in the society of
intelligent and witty men, and he urged More to take office under
him. More refused for a long time, but in 1518—the year of the
league of universal peace—believing that Henry was now a convert
to his ideas, he consented, and became Sir Thomas More and a Privy
Councillor. Henry was so pleased with his conversation that he tried
to keep him always with him, and it was only by occasionally
pretending to be dull that More obtained leave to visit his home.
12. The Contest for the Empire. 1519.—In January 1519 the
Emperor Maximilian died. His grandson Charles was now possessed
of more extensive lands than any other European sovereign. He
ruled in Spain, in Austria, in Naples and Sicily, in the Netherlands,
and in the County of Burgundy, usually known as Franche Comté.
Between him and Francis I. a struggle was inevitable. The chances
were apparently, on the whole, on the side of Charles. His
dominions, indeed, were scattered, and devoid of the strength given
by national feeling, whilst the smaller dominions of Francis were
compact and united by a strong national bond. In character,
however, Charles had the superiority. He was cool and wary, whilst

Francis was impetuous and uncalculating. Both sovereigns were now
candidates for the Empire. The seven electors who had it in their gift
were open to bribery. Charles bribed highest, and being chosen
became the Emperor Charles V.
13. The Field of the Cloth of Gold. 1520.—Wolsey tried hard
to keep the peace. In 1520 Henry met Francis on the border of the
territory of Calais, and the magnificence of the display on both sides
gave to the scene the name of the Field of the Cloth of Gold. In the
same year Henry had interviews with Charles. Peace was for a time
maintained, because both Charles and Francis were still too much
occupied at home to quarrel, but it could hardly be maintained long.
The embarkation of Henry VIII. from Dover, 1520: from the original painting at
Hampton Court.
14. The Execution of the Duke of Buckingham. 1521.—
Henry was entirely master in England. In 1521 the Duke of
Buckingham, son of the Buckingham who had been beheaded by
Richard III., was tried and executed as a traitor. His fault was that he
had great wealth, and that, being descended from the Duke of
Gloucester, the youngest son of Edward III., he had not only
cherished some idea of claiming the throne after Henry's death, but

Cup and Cover, 1523,
at Barber Surgeons' Hall,
London.
had chattered about his prospects. In former days justice was not to
be had by those who offended the great lords. Now, one despot had
stepped into the place of many, and justice was not to be had by
those who offended the king. The legal forms of trial were now as
before observed. Buckingham was indeed tried before the court of
the Lord High Steward, which consisted of a select number of peers,
and which had jurisdiction over peers when Parliament was not
sitting. These, however, were no more than forms. It was probably a
mingled feeling of gratitude and fear which made peers as well as
ordinary juries ready to take Henry's word for the guilt of any
offender.
15. Another French War. 1522-
1523.—The diplomacy of those days was a
mere tissue of trickery and lies. Behind the
falsehood, however, Wolsey had a purpose
of his own, the maintenance of peace on
the Continent. Yet, in 1521 war broke out
between Charles and Francis, both of
whom laid claim to the Duchy of Milan, and
it was evident that Wolsey would be
unable to keep England out of the
struggle. If there was to be fighting Henry
preferred to fight France rather than to
fight Charles. In 1522, in conjunction with
Charles, he invaded France. There was
burning and ravaging enough, but nothing
of importance was done. Nevertheless in
1523 Henry was in high spirits. A great
French noble, the Duke of Bourbon,
provoked by ill-treatment, revolted against
Francis, and Henry and Charles fancied
that he would open a way to them into the
heart of France. If Henry was to be crowned at Paris, which was the
object on which he was bent, he must have a supply of money from
his subjects. Though no Parliament had been summoned for nearly

eight years, one was summoned now, of which More was the
Speaker. Wolsey asked for an enormous grant of 800,000l., nearly
equal to 12,000,000l. at the present day. Finding that the Commons
hesitated, he swept into the House in state to argue with them.
Expecting a reply, and finding silence, he turned to More, who told
him that it was against the privilege of the House to call on it for an
immediate answer. He had to depart unsatisfied, and after some
days the House granted a considerable sum, but far less than that
which had been demanded. Wolsey was now in a position of danger.
His own policy was pacific, but his master's policy was warlike, and
he had been obliged to make himself the unquestioning mouthpiece
of his master in demanding supplies for war. He had long been hated
by the nobles for thrusting them aside. He was now beginning to be
hated by the people as the supposed author of an expensive war,
which he would have done his best to prevent. He had not even the
advantage of seeing his master win laurels in the field. The national
spirit of France was roused, and the combined attack of Henry and
Charles proved as great a failure in 1523 as in 1522. The year
1524 was spent by Wolsey in diplomatic intrigue.
16. The Amicable Loan. 1525.—Early in 1525 Europe was
startled by the news that Francis had been signally defeated by the
Imperialists at Pavia, and had been carried prisoner to Spain. Wolsey
knew that Charles's influence was now likely to predominate in
Europe, and that unless England was to be overshadowed by it,
Henry's alliance must be transferred to Francis. Henry, however, saw
in the imprisonment of Francis only a fine opportunity for conquering
France. Wolsey had again to carry out his master's wishes as though
they were his own. Raking up old precedents, he suggested that the
people should be asked for what was called an Amicable Loan, on
the plea that Henry was about to invade France in person. He
obtained the consent of the citizens of London by telling them that,
if they did not pay, it might 'fortune to cost some their heads.' All
over England Wolsey was cursed as the originator of the loan. There
were even signs that a rebellion was imminent. In Norfolk when the
Duke of Norfolk demanded payment there was a general resistance.

On his demanding the name of the captain of the multitude which
refused to pay, a man told him that their captain's 'name was
Poverty,' and 'he and his cousin Necessity' had brought them to this.
Wolsey, seeing that it was impossible to collect the money, took all
the unpopularity of advising the loan upon himself. 'Because,' he
wrote, 'every man layeth the burden from him, I am content to take
it on me, and to endure the fame and noise of the people, for my
goodwill towards the king ... but the eternal God knoweth all.' Henry
had no such nobility of character as to refuse to accept the sacrifice.
He liked to make his ministers scapegoats, to heap on their heads
the indignation of the people that he might himself retain his
popularity. For three centuries and a half it was fully believed that
the Amicable Loan had originated with Wolsey.
Hampton Court; built by Cardinal Wolsey, finished in 1526.
17. Closing Years of Wolsey's Greatness. 1525-1527.—All
idea of continuing the war being now abandoned, Wolsey cautiously
negotiated for an alliance with France, and in the autumn of 1525

peace was signed between France and England. In February 1526
Charles set Francis at liberty on his promising to abandon to him
large tracts of French territory. As soon as he was out of Spain
Francis declared that, without the consent of his subjects, such
promises were not binding on him. An Italian league, jealous of
Charles's power, gathered round the Pope, Clement VII., to oppose
him. In May 1527 the exiled Duke of Bourbon, who was now one of
Charles's generals, took Rome by assault. He was himself slain as he
mounted the wall, but his followers took prisoner the Pope, and
sacked Rome with horrible barbarity. Wolsey was too worldly-minded
to be shocked at the Pope's misfortunes; but he had much to fear
from the enormous extension of the Emperor's power. For some
weeks he had been negotiating a close alliance with France on the
basis of a marriage between Henry's only surviving child, Mary, and
the worn-out voluptuary Francis. Suddenly the scheme was changed
to a proposal for a marriage between Mary, who was ten years old,
and the second son of Francis, who was but six. The bargain was
concluded, and for a time there was some thought of carrying it out.
At all events when the news of the sack of Rome arrived, England
and France were already in close alliance. Wolsey's position was, to
all outward appearance, secure.
CHAPTER XXV
THE BREACH WITH THE PAPACY. 1527-1534
LEADING DATES
Reign of Henry VIII., 1509-1547
Henry seeks for a divorce 1527
His suit before a Legatine Court 1529
Fall of Wolsey 1529
The clergy acknowledge Henry to be
Supreme Head of the Church of England
1531

Welcome to our website – the perfect destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. We believe that every book holds a new world,
offering opportunities for learning, discovery, and personal growth.
That’s why we are dedicated to bringing you a diverse collection of
books, ranging from classic literature and specialized publications to
self-development guides and children's books.
More than just a book-buying platform, we strive to be a bridge
connecting you with timeless cultural and intellectual values. With an
elegant, user-friendly interface and a smart search system, you can
quickly find the books that best suit your interests. Additionally,
our special promotions and home delivery services help you save time
and fully enjoy the joy of reading.
Join us on a journey of knowledge exploration, passion nurturing, and
personal growth every day!
ebookbell.com

Design Research Now Essays And Selected Projects Board Of International Research In Design 1st Edition Ralf Michel

About This Presentation

Slide Content

Tags

Categories

Download

Quick Actions

Statistics

Related Slideshows

Design Research Now Essays And Selected Projects Board Of International Research In Design 1st Edition Ralf Michel

About This Presentation

Slide Content

Slide 1

Slide 2

Slide 3

Slide 6

Slide 7

Slide 8

Slide 9

Slide 10

Slide 11

Slide 12

Slide 13

Slide 14

Slide 15

Slide 16

Slide 17

Slide 18

Slide 19

Slide 20

Slide 21

Slide 22

Slide 23

Slide 24

Slide 25

Slide 26

Slide 27

Slide 28

Slide 29

Slide 30

Slide 31

Slide 32

Slide 33

Slide 34

Slide 35

Slide 36

Slide 37

Slide 38

Slide 39

Slide 40

Slide 41

Slide 42

Slide 43

Slide 44

Slide 45

Slide 46

Slide 47

Slide 48

Slide 49

Slide 50

Slide 51

Slide 52

Slide 53

Slide 54

Slide 55

Slide 56

Slide 57

Slide 58

Slide 59

Slide 60

Slide 61

Slide 62

Slide 63

Slide 64

Slide 65

Slide 66

Slide 67

Slide 68

Slide 69

Slide 70

Slide 71

Slide 72

Slide 73

Slide 74

Slide 75

Slide 76

Slide 77

Slide 78

Slide 79