‘What is Critical Design’ is an attempt by Brad Haylock to establish the emergance of critical design and its relation with the Marxist and Enlightenment ideologies from the past and its integral role in contributing to an utopian speculative future.

Although the term ‘critical design’ is familiarised through the works and writings of Anthony Dunne and Fiona Raby, both educators and designers, Haylock traced the roots of critical design back from a lecture by Michel Foucault, ‘What is critique?’, followed by the Enlightenment philosophy.

Critique is believed to be an agitator for change rooted from the Marxism ideology. This particular notion was crucial in the history of philosophy as it dismissed the belief in mysticism, religion, legends and implemented rationalism and human freedom instead. However, in the later pages of the chapter it was explained that classic Marxism has an issue critical design and its futures, since the ideology opposes one specific social class only, the downfall of the bourgeois during that capitalism era.

On the other hand, critical design applies to more than one social class and it can reach out to different futures, illustrated by Hancock and Bezold in the form of a cone. Stephan Duncombe mentioned in his paper ‘Does it Work?’ where he described an artwork’s impacts as a rainbow refracted from a prism. Despite the possible, plausible, probable, and preferable outcomes, all of us must dream of the utopian speculative future instead of the dystopian one. Nevertheless, the intentionality comes first.

According to Dunne and Raby, the majority of design produced only affirms or announces the already pre-existing conditions. On the contrary to critical design which investigates the status quo, they are bolstering the behaviour of the present. Mark Horkheimer’s argument, which stated the distinction between traditional theory and critical theory, is essential as now the idea of critique is reinforced. Critical theory means to question the ‘truth’, to expose the artificial, even the society itself, and to reject the ‘let nature take its course’ mindset in order to transform something that is socially constructed and appear as natural.

___

The text reminds us to handle ‘critical design’ carefully and if the status quo remains as it is, then the phrase will be ineffective. Haylock then explained the four orders of critical design developed from Breslin and Buchanan’s work. (1) communication design; (2) industrial and product design; (3) human/service design; (4) architecture. These are aligned with Buchanan’s four orders of design, respectively: (1) symbolic and visual communications; (2) material objects; (3) activities and organised services; (4) environments for living. With this, he emphasised that critical design works in various fields of design, that we all have a role and the same amount of responsibility.

To practice critical design, designers must take the role in being skeptical. In other words, critical design practitioners must examine our project's ethics, its impacts, and understand there are things that are explorable and changeable. I found the future studies very intriguing, these philosophers, researchers, educators are able to identify types of future which are used as a guidance for critical thinkers. Throughout the course, the papers we have been reading interlaced with each other and Haylock’s chapter has intensified the amount of attention and urgency needed, in understanding aeffect, impact, critical thinking, the good future. Can we be a thinker as well as a designer? In my personal view, the challenge is how to be courageous enough, as mentioned by Jan Van Toorn, to apply these thinking to our practice and how we can educate our colleagues, the importance of critical design and the reason they should care about it.