Parts:Whole / OPUS entry 4

In design, one is often focused on how various parts of the creation relate to the collective representation of the creation, the whole. This focus is defined by the person engaged in it and the culture or environment that this person comes from, itself another part and whole. People in western cultures tend to be reductionists, prone to attempting to explain an overwhelming whole by reducing it to its individual parts. In contrast eastern religion and medicine tend to be more holistic, emphasizing the relationship between parts as much or more than each part’s relation to the hole. A holistic approach allow for the possibility that, in the words of Aristotle, “The whole is more than the sum of its parts” (Suarez & Doyle, 2004, p.188). I believe that a holistic mentality is a necessity for both creating and understanding design.

In design, a hybrid is more than the collection of two styles. It is something different altogether, and not necessarily positive. For example, the first drawing below is done with strong lines and uses markers. The second drawing below is done with looser lines and uses water colors. The third drawing is a hybrid of techniques and mediums used in the first two


The drawing above is a hybrid of the techniques used in the two above it. However, combining the techniques did not add to the overall composition of this drawing. Instead it resulted in a somewhat disjointed impression.

It is important to remember that adding elements to a design does not necessarily make it better. In the words of design historian Robbie Blakemore, “Both in form and ornament Roman design was based on Greek prototypes” (Blakemore, 2006, p. 67). However, I personally prefer the clean lined simplicity of the Greeks to the comparatively ornate grandiosity of the Romans. A holistic mentality avoids a linear orientation. Things do not necessarily progress through time in one direction. Thus we must avoid thinking of prototypes as more primitive or as lacking in some way. As designers, respecting our prototypes enables them to ultimately serve as better sources.

Our prototypes are often far more telling than we give them credit for. In Psychology, we speak of archetypes as universal symbols, culturally undefined representations of a human core or essence. In this sense, an archetype is the ultimate prototype, the prototype from which all other prototypes come from. This level of universality in communication is the ultimate success sought by all designers. To achieve it we must certainly not limit our thinking to a linear reduction or addition.

Designers must also be aware of not limiting their sources of inspiration. Creating a hybrid of different elements, improving upon a prototype or adjusting that prototype for different conditions, thinking in terms of archetypes or universal truths and human experiences: These are all good design strategies, but they all look outside the project for direction. In creating and understanding design, we must also look within. For example, below is a wall I designed to house a miniature version of an original artifact, a ring.
Certainly the shape and structure of the wall comes from outside influences. The solid white color and glass case mimics cultural representations of art on display, a museum setting. However, the organic clay form takes its inspiration directly from the ring itself, and the story the ring represents. This focused inspiration can again be related back to the archetype of the snake, a biblical symbol of evil or trickery. Similarly, when we look at Greek architecture we must look inward to the world of the Greeks. They were a people who lived unified on a harsh landscape that separated them into distinct city states. The area that they inhabited was prone to violent thunderstorms and earthquakes (Roth, 216, pp. 216- 217). These insights give us greater appreciation for their invention of the amphitheatre (sketched below).
The amphitheatre was built into the landscape surrounding it (reflecting respect for a harsh earth). It was a place for many to gather, in a unified yet separated fashion, to watch the drama unfold before them.

The environment that the Greeks inhabited influenced their designs. The totality of a given environment, or entourage, is an important inward source of design inspiration. A design is its own whole, but it is also a part of the whole that surrounds it. For example, the picture below is designed to communicate elements of a story.
The main design in this picture is a trio of trees in a house below a swan. However, the water line below the swan and the watercolors surrounding this design play a pivotal role in the experience of this design. In this next picture, the lines surrounding the bent figure and the spot of color become just as, if not more central than the figure itself.

Similarly, the structures of the Greeks and Romans are merely one part of the entourage, the totality of the designed environments of these cultures. For example, the small Roman tables for holding food compared to the long couch like forms designed to display the male body while he lounged and ate (Blakemore, 2006, pp. 64-67) are key to understanding the meaning of display in the designs of Roman structures. Mainly, certain things/people were on display, while others were not, and certain displays were more important than others.

Importance, an ideological weight, an established hierarchy, these are all ways of denoting inequality. Such stratification is evident in the earliest architectural designs from Stonehenge onward. Even the ancient Greeks, often credited with developing the concept of democracy, restricted that democracy to members of the Polis, the high caste locals (Roth, 2007, pp.221-222). In Rome, triumphal columns and arches denoted that conquest and power, male over female, empire over lesser beings, these concepts overshadowed others. These examples are dramatic, but even in daily living; it is rare that design does not involve hierarchy. For example, consider the pencil below.
Not every part of this pencil is of equal importance. Most objects, like this pencil, have some elements that are more central to the design than others. It is a common misconception that a holistic approach avoids hierarchical arrangements. This is simply not true. A holistic approach considers all relationships, but certainly does not preclude that some are more important than others.

Another common misconception about taking a holistic approach is that such an approach should avoid establishing or recognizing order. Again, this is simply just not true. The human brain cannot avoid ordering the information it receives. Brain synapses are activated according to electrical impulse. The impulse follow an order of preexisting pathways based on mental prototypes, simplified representations that one has encountered before. This process is analogous to the relationship with which modern historians relate the architecture and Furnishings of the Italian Renaissance as an era specific version of a hybridized Greco/Roman style (Blakemore, 2006, p. 28). In other words, order is unavoidable on both an individual, cultural, and societal level.


In summary, a holistic mentality, one that emphasizes the relationship between parts as much or more than each part’s relation to the hole is a necessity for both creating and understanding design. Design is more than a conglomeration of parts, thus simply adding elements to a design does not necessarily make it better. A design that can be universally communicated requires that we go beyond limiting our thinking in terms of a linear reduction or addition and incorporate multiple sources from multiple origins including the totality of the design’s environment. This is not to say that every element of the design or every source of inspiration should be given the same weight. Rather, we should allow our natural tendency to find order among chaos guide our decisions. Incorporating all of these considerations in creating and reflecting upon design requires a holistic approach. In Design, the whole really is more than the sum of its parts.

-------------------------------------------------------------
Balkemore, R.G.(2006). History of interior design & furniture: From ancient Egypt to nineteenth-century Europe: second edition. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons Inc.

Roth, L. M. (2007). Understanding architecture: Its elements, history, and meaning: second edition. Cambridge: Westview Press.

Doyle J. P. (2004). A Commentary on Aristotle's Metaphysics: A Most Ample Index to the Metaphysics of Aristotle. Milwaukee: Marquette University Press.