A rather popular definition of design, especially among design teachers and students in India, is that it is “creative problem solving”. While this is quite a handy, objective description, one might wonder how to fill the blanks when it comes to a more detailed understanding of what design does. Who solves problems and whose problems are being solved? If we commit to finding answers to this question, we are faced with a mountain of subsequent queries. Does the designer need to have the ability to create a solution, the resources, the agency, or the right– or all four? And of course, we then wonder whether the people who receive design- in some cases, called ‘the consumers’- need to have any or all of these four things/qualities. In essence, we are asking ourselves whether products (goods or services or ideas) need to be designed by only a particular set of people, or can they be designed by anybody who wishes to create. The field of design, like other fields, is limited by human imagination and prejudice. While we all like to believe that hard work is the key to success, it also has to be admitted that many factors like economic status, gender and physical ability put success out of the reach of most. After all, it is uncommon to name a disabled designer or a female architect when asked to make a list of famous names of creators. On the other end, it is difficult to ensure that the products created benefit a large populace, or a group of people who have hitherto been deprived, while also raking in enough profit for design to be a lucrative field. For example, Apple is famous for creating products that are priced extremely high. While it is debatable whether Apples’s design is brilliant or not, it is definitely true that they are not being able to solve problems for anyone who cannot shell out thousands of rupees.

To take this discussion further, on a slight tangent, we may look at the work of Subodh Gupta, a celebrated contemporary artist in the field of sculptures and installations in India. Gupta’s dadaist influences drive him to use ordinary objects as elements of art. His design almost always includes stainless steel containers and utensils. A photograph of his famous installation ‘Faith Matters’ can be seen in the featured image of this post. His motifs are supposed to be important for their familiarity to low income or middle class households, especially in his place of origin, Eastern Bihar. But despite the ‘ordinariness’ of Gupta’s subjects, is the fame and social capital that he has earned accessible to every ordinary person? Do stay-at-home mothers or domestic helps or other members of lower class families – who are most familiar with such steel containers- have the ability to design such pieces, or to acquire them? Or, to put this question differently, if these people design something, will we consider it beautiful or globally useful? Perhaps not. There is a need to democratize art and design, to open up the arena for those who are ignored. Together, we can.