The Coloniality of Design

THE COLONIALITY OF DESIGN Matthew Norman Kiem A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy 2017 Western Sydney University THE COLONIALITY OF DESIGN Matthew Norman Kiem A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy 2017 Western Sydney University STATEMENT OF AUTHENTICATION The work presented in this thesis is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, original except as acknowledged in the text. I hereby declare that I have not submitted this material, either in full or in part, for a degree at this or any other institution. …………………………………………………… Matthew Norman Kiem ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF COUNTRY This thesis was researched and written on Aboriginal lands, predominantly that of the Cadigal people of the Eora nation. I pay my respects to the Elders of these lands, past and present, and to any Indigenous person generous enough to engage with the document I have prepared below. Always was, always will be, Aboriginal land. ABSTRACT Since its emergence in the later part of the twentieth century, the field of design studies has functioned as a discourse that configures and directs the designs of what decolonial thinkers call the colonial matrix of power, alias zero point epistemology. As such, ‘design’ has come to represent a disciplinary orientation, a mode of thinking, and a set of practices that act in support of a specifically modern/colonial structure of violence and exploitation. Enfolded into this configuration is the problem of the coloniality of knowledge, a condition in which the coloniality of power seeks to govern the designing of knowledge, understanding, and attachment, all according to the rationalist and anti-relational designs of the zero point. In sum, the condition that this study confronts is one in which the designs of the zero point configure a restrictive and conformist conception of ‘design’ that undermines the capacity of designers to disclose the structural (designed) violence of the colonial matrix and, as such, to reconfigure designing in support of relational plurality. Notwithstanding important counter movements within, beyond, and at the margins of zero point designs, this study takes as its central problem the idea that ‘design studies’ as a whole has failed to comprehend and respond to the ontological designing of zero point epistemology. This study looks to address the non-disclosure of the coloniality of design through a process of relational reading with and across two major intellectual genealogies: ontological designing and decolonial thinking. The concept of relationality as methodology is further explained through a reinterpretation of Tony Fry’s concept of unsettlement. Whereas for Fry ‘unsettlement’ names the condition of the global breakdown of settlement as a dominant mode of human habitation, this study argues that a process of unsettling the terms and designs of zero point epistemology in favour of relational plurality is an imperative of Fry’s concept of Sustainment. The claim here, in short, is that a politics of Sustainment implies a commitment to learning how to discern the presence and relational (designing) import of the experience of unsettlement. The study unfolds in five chapters that are configured as two movements of thought. The first movement enacts a process of reading ontological designing in light of coloniality and coloniality in light of ontological designing so as to disclose a preliminary conception of the coloniality of design. A confrontation with the fascist political ontology of Martin Heidegger is configured as a critical examination of the philosophical underpinnings of ontological designing. In light of this, the argument is made for theorists of ontological designing to think and design with a critical sense for the normative designs of Heideggerian thought. This is followed by a process of reading with and across feminist and decolonial interpretations of Heidegger’s philosophy, in order to disclose possibilities for alternative ways of conceptualising ontological designing. Finally, after a close reading of Mignolo’s concept of the locus of enunciation, the argument is made that Mignolo’s practice of producing decolonial concepts represents a designerly process of disclosing and, as such, redirecting of the unsettling designs of zero point epistemology. The second movement is devoted to interpreting ‘Australian’ settler colonialism in light of the concept of the coloniality of design. An argument is made concerning the need to consider the import of settler colonialism in the context of theorising the experience and designs of marginality. Further, an argument is made for the value of Ghassan Hage’s analysis of white nationalist ontologies of governmental belonging in the context of thinking about ‘Australian’ nationalism. Additionally, the import of Cheryl Harris’ theory of ‘whiteness as property’ — as elaborated within and for an ‘Australian’ context by Aileen Moreton-Robinson and Angela Mitropoulos — is brought to bear on the question of ‘nation as image’. Nelson Maldonado-Torres’ conception of the coloniality of being is used to trace the shifting configurations of colonial knowledge from the event of the European Christian invasion of the Americas in the sixteenth century to the British invasion of Cadigal country (the present location of the city of Sydney) in the late eighteenth century. The second movement concludes with an argument for interpreting the core violence of the coloniality of design as anti-relational designing. The overriding thesis of this study is that ‘design’ is presently configured as a design for normalising relations of negation, hyperexploitation, and ecological destruction. In the context of this study, this condition is named and explicated as the coloniality of design. The central finding of this study is that the core violence of the coloniality of design manifests as a metaphysics of nihilism, alias anti-relational designing. In this light, decolonial designing is disclosed as a life affirming practice of reconfiguring designing in support of relational plurality. PERSONAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Writing this thesis was an involved and challenging process. It would not have been possible without the support I received of various kinds from a number of people. I’d like to express my gratitude to the following: Paul and Judy Kiem, my parents, who have supported me throughout my entire academic career, for which I am forever grateful. Abby Mellick Lopes and Louise Crabtree, my supervisors, for all their encouragement, insight, patience, support, and guidance. While the shortcomings of this thesis are all mine, I simply could not have completed it without them. To the staff at the School of Humanities and Communication Arts for all the assistance I received at various stages in this project. Sopheak Chann, Tim Frewer, Greg Harriden, Xanthe Warren, and Peter Wildman, my friends, whose support, advice, and understanding has been invaluable. Also to Rebecca Stone, whose energy remains with us despite missing her dearly, RIP. Cameron Tonkinwise, Tony Fry, Anne-Marie Willis, Tessa Zettel and Karl Khoe, and Tara Andrews for all their support, encouragement, and guidance over the years in helping me to think and enact design as politics. Angela Mitropoulos, Liz Thompson, and others I have met and worked with as part of xBorder, from whom I have learnt so much. Danah Abdulla, Ahmed Ansari, Ece Canlı, Mahmoud Keshavarz, Pedro J S Vieira de Oliveira, Luiza Prado de O. Martins, and Tristan Shultz from Decolonising Design, for the solidarity, the care, the inspiration, and for everything that I have learnt in the course of our work and discussions. ) Wenny Theresia, for far more than I can express, He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster. And if you gaze long into an abyss, the abyss also gazes into you. (Nietzsche 2003, p.102) […] may we honor other people’s feelings respect their anger, sadness, grief, joy as we do our own Though we tremble before uncertain futures may we meet illness, death and adversity with strength may we dance in the face of our fears. (Anzaldúa 2002, p.575) CONTENTS INTRODUCTION | !! THINKING COLONIALITY AND DESIGN IN A MOOD OF UNSETTLEMENT ........................................... 1! 0.0! I am where I think ............................................................................................................. 1! 0.0.1 ! Embodying decision and direction .............................................................................. 3! 0.0.2! Designing the disclosure of violence ........................................................................... 4! 0.0.3! Designing unsettlement as a decolonising mode of disclosure ................................... 4! 0.1 ! Unsettlement snapshot I | 9/11 ........................................................................................ 6! 0.2 ! Unsettlement snapshot II | ‘Occupy Sydney’ ................................................................... 8! 0.3 ! Relating to Fry on unsettlement ..................................................................................... 12! 0.3.1! Disclosing unsettlement as experience designing ..................................................... 14! 0.4! On the designing of zero point epistemology ................................................................. 16! 0.4.1! Unsettlement as Sustainment .................................................................................... 17! 0.4.2! Relational reading as a methodology for unsettling the

Load more