I found Markussen’s interpretation of how the product metaphor
can be dismissed really useful. It pointed out the fact that Anna G should
almost visualise a catholic praying when simply viewed. However, if someone is
not really interested in the aesthetics of the product they just want to use it
then the fact that one would be looking up the corkscrews skirt would conflict
with the initial metaphor. The fact that it can give off two extreme of connotations
suggests the product is at a disadvantage when it is used. This is really
useful because it makes me understand that the same product can express an intentional
metaphor (be the same denotations) however the same product can have a variety
of connotations through its use which, can be conflicting due to cultural, social,
gender etc differences. It is kind of ironic how the products name Anna G adds
to the critics of this object. This
reading taught me a lot more terms and expressions I was not familiar with for
example the differences between product metaphor, product blend, semantics to
name a few.
A metaphor is to understand
and experience something in terms of another. It was interesting in section 3
when the author asserted that metaphors have become a part of our language. E.g.
time is money. How easy the distinction
can be made in design but how oblivious we are to it on a day to day basis. I
kind of get Lakoff and Johnsons theory on semantics about the connection
between a source and a target. Through the experience the target becomes the
source. However it is something I would
need to read more on. In the context of Anna G, the corkscrew is the target and
the source is a women figure. Therefore Anna G is experienced as a woman when
used?
I do find this area
of emotional design really fascinating and helpful in my own designs because it
has more connection with semiotics which is was my degree focuses on. I would like
to do further research into the 3 processes a product undergoes.
1)
product interaction / meaning attribution
2)
meaning attribution evolving over time through
product usage
3)
How a
product creates conflicting meanings.
No comments:
Post a Comment