show

Jessica Helfand

What We Talk About When We Talk About Design History


From the packaging of our belongings to the presentation of our surroundings, most of us recognize that design has, over the course of the past century, become a ubiquitous component in everyday life. Design is signage and graffiti and labels and lace, posters and propaganda and toothbrushes and teapots: objects and artefacts that captivate and delight us, frustrate or provoke us, but why?

This is where design historians come in.

Design history is, after all, social history: it's an evolutionary (and somewhat cautionary) tale of use and abuse, of innovation and migration, of the inevitable tide of obsolescence that puzzles some of us to such a vexing degree that we simply have no other choice but to become design historians to start making sense of things.

And we begin, like all historians, by doing research.

At the core of a historian's research lie the archives that often accompany a collection, pieces of documentation that support a collection's holdings. Not infrequently, space constraints demand the annexation of certain, less critical materials: yet reports this week that the Cooper-Hewitt National Design Museum has decided to move some of its archives to other branches of its parent, the Smithsonian Institution, suggest that archival unity is, at least in a geographic sense, central to governing a museum's holdings. Some critics disparage the Cooper-Hewitt's decision as wrong, at least insofar as scholarship is concerned: they argue that collections should all be housed in one place, to both facilitate access and encourage use.

This is a flawed conceit, not least due to the misguided assumption, to space-deprived New Yorkers, that a building as generously proportioned as the Andrew Carnegie mansion has no claim citing real estate limitations. (In truth, not only is the Cooper-Hewitt's exhibition space diminutive compared with most major New York City museums, its storage capacity is egregiously compromised as well.) The core criticism points, too, to the impatience that characterizes modern communication and increasingly, the acquisition of information, otherwise known as data: this is, after all, the kind of thing we've become primed to expect with a certain degree of uncompromised efficiency. But information is not the same as knowledge, and a historian's hunt more closely resembles an archaelogical excavation than a digital download. Finally, there's a skewed sentiment at play here that seems to suggest that venturing further afield for source material will diminish the curatorial value of one-stop shopping at the Cooper-Hewitt. Yet the opposite is much more likely to be true: in an age that will likely be remembered for its internet links and hypertext interconnections, such distance may prove to be an added benefit. (And where the Smithsonian museums are concerned, what is the likelihood that a truly dedicated researcher might locate additional treasures find along the way?) Finally, alarmists may choose to see the train ride from New York to Washington as a burdensome and ill-advised harbinger of museum policy, but it is a pragmatic solution to an ongoing problem. And it is a common choice for many museum administrators, eager to preserve the role of ongoing scholarship by setting priorities — in this case, about what goes where. (It is probably worth remembering, too, that it is the archives being retired from active duty — not the collections themselves.)

And what of the distance, from the New York-based Cooper-Hewitt to the Smithsonian, sited in our nation's capital? Scholars in general (and historians in particular) will go to great lengths to unearth what they need. Hungry for discovery, they yearn to make connections where none have previously existed: this is especially true of design historians, for whom visual material is like a treasure hunt, awash in cryptic suggestion and complex inference. Design history is an art of conjecture, brought magnificently to life by illuminating material evidence that recasts a vague hypothesis as a dazzling reality. A hunt for rarified material often means extending your reach beyond the narrowly-parsed domain of internet search engines and online finding aids and doing more, much more. It means talking to librarians, (the unsung heroes of scholars everywhere) who expertly navigate, and selflessly decode those dense troves of mysterious materials, whether they're shelved at your local public library or buried in the distant land of microfiche. It means taking the time to seek (and more importantly, find) the supporting materials that clarify your chosen topic — whatever that might be, and wherever that might take you.

Design history takes the object as its point of departure and probes beneath its surface for meaning, significance and a clear rationale. It is in the conceptual excavation of the made thing that the design historian serves a need both personal and public, reminding us of the design in humanity — and of the humanity in design. At the end of the day, being a design historian means being observant and fearless, stubborn and driven, principled, passionate and anything but lazy. It means going where you have to go to get what you need. Even if that means the Smithsonian.

Posted in: Cities + Places, Culture, Design History

Comment 10  |     |     |   Like 0  |   Tweet 0
Comments [10]
As someone who LIVES in the District of Columbia after formerly living in San Francisco, I miss having the inspiration from design collections, contemporary art museums and art film houses. So, moving part of the design collection to DC will be a welcome addition to my (and the District's) design and visual vocabulary. Perhaps I'm being self interested, but all the good visual source material shouldn't be hoarded by New York and San Francisco. (And yes, I'm overstating the case here, but it is true that other big cities have much more visual inspiration to draw from.)
DC1974
02.16.06
12:31

Where exactly are the Cooper Hewitt archives being moved to? The Smithsonian museums have collections that far exceed their exhibit space, and as I recall, they have storage facilities in the suburbs.
jenny
02.16.06
01:37

You make an important distinction between the difference of moving the Cooper-Hewitt's collections versus the archives, but even if the museum were to disperse some of its collection to a second location, so what? I'd consider it to be a smart move (pardon the pun). There isn't one singular museum for art, science—or even history, since this thread is addressing the Historian's needs—so why all the fuss about disseminating the Design archives across a mere two locations? It's hardly being scattershot across the globe. Call me naïve (although I prefer the term "optimistic"), but isn't it a good thing for the contents of the Cooper-Hewitt to be introduced into multiple locations? I'd like to think of the archives' move as an outreach initiative of sorts; a way to further the reach of educating the general public about the importance & power of design.

And if it is true that "a historian's hunt more closely resembles an archaelogical excavation than a digital download," then historians shouldn't mind the quest; in fact, they should relish the 4 hr. journey from Manhattan to DC; in either case, suck it up in the name of research. For digital excavators, it really won't matter where the archives are housed... with so many collections becoming highly accessible on-line, one can hardly argue that a shift in geographic location actually limits the ability to conduct research.
tracy kroop
02.16.06
03:15

Jessica, if this is your way of asking if you can stay in our guest room when you come down to visit the Smithsonian, the answer is yes.
Dan Kohan
02.16.06
05:07

Thank you, Dan, for the kind offer. (Although I wouldn't want our readers here to feel left out.)
jessica helfand
02.16.06
06:45

Tracy, I agree, a good move to distribute the collection, but the Cooper-Hewitt's archive is hardly the only such collection in the states. There's the AIGA Archives going to the Denver Art Museum and countless designer/movement/time-specific collections in university libraries throughout the country.
Randy J. Hunt
02.16.06
11:50

I am a graduate of the Cooper-Hewitt MA program (with zero insider info). When I read the NY Times article, I was kind of wondering if they were whipping up a story out of something fairly routine-- museums do move things around quite a bit, and often less-in-demand materials are stored off site and take a while to access. Though it is a little unclear whether these materials are moving because they are too "social history" or whether it is just a space thing. Probably a combo.

I think another issue is that design-related materials often fall across categories-- social history, business history, local history, art history. In my experience, the Archives of American Art and other Smithsonian branches already have amazing materials that relate to design (not least the Saarinen papers, or the Eames papers at the LOC)-- so if anything, maybe this article will just remind us that there has always been a lot more out there than at the Cooper-Hewitt.

Incidentally, I am now doing graduate work in Delaware, and anyone is welcome to sleep on my couch if they want to tap the underappreciated archives at the Hagley Museum-- they've got Raymond Leowy and the IDSA, among many others... neighboring Winterthur isn't too shabby, either.
bess
02.18.06
08:59

It seems to me this is only responds to half the question. One of the anxieties caused by this news surrounds the increasingly foggy mission of the CH. Exactly how does it see itself? Does moving this material indicate a shift in its objectives as an institution? Clearly. This seems a legitimate concern when the CH appears much more interested in honoring people like Tom Ford at their National Design Awards than in articulating some comprehensible position on design, let alone design history.
Al
02.19.06
01:09

What's in those archives anyway? And how many people seek them out every year? By the way, Tom Ford is many a man's personal design hero.
Bernard Pez
02.22.06
01:46

I totally agree that cultural artifacts, design and art should be spread across the country. Why should a minority share in these. Obviously not everyone can reside in the same city.
Alfie Wood
03.29.06
08:27



Creative Opportunities
  • Twitter Facebook Google+
    Tumblr Pinterest RSS

    Design Observer
    social media à la carte
  • Newsletter signup

  • Design Jobs
    Observer Jobs Spotlight




Places Journal
Mail Chimp