This has been a question that has been on my mind for the past couple of weeks whenever i’ve needed a paper bag to help me breathe (which occurs often enough these days considering i have 4 weeks left to this thesis) or was interviewed by tristam sparks for his thesis prototyping. A mantra of the school, thanks to Gillian Crampton Smith, its founder has always been “JEP” Just Enough Prototyping. This means that you need to illustrate your idea with the right amount of prototyping, and not push it too far, this also implies that you are able to prototype your project yourself and you will know when to say “when” in a way. I find myself however in a situation where i could go 2 ways with prototyping: 1. video prototyping the service i am designing using props and smoke and mirrors, or 2. spend an indecent amount of time trying to come up with a functional prototype that ultimately i do not have the skills to build and will only be asking Massimo Banzi to help me with this.
This is part of my frustration with considering technology in design within the school. I see a difference between understanding what technology can do and designing within those constraints and being limited by what i can personally implement. It’s as if my school was expecting me to develop a skill-set some people spent years developing and that by being able to hack a fridge, i’d somehow be able to infuse more value and meaning into what i am designing.
At this point in time i think that video scenarios have a much bigger chance of explaining the value of my project and the interactions through time than a functional prototype which might be just one touch point of the service. So frack it as my friends would say : )