“Design is not a Science”: Otl Aicher’s Constitutional Putsch at the HfG and His Credo for the Social Responsibility of Designers René Spitz Translated by Kate Hunter

Introduction

The terms design science and design research currently hold great Downloaded from http://direct.mit.edu/desi/article-pdf/31/1/7/1715373/desi_a_00304.pdf by guest on 29 September 2021 importance in international discourse. Countless publications, pre- sentations, symposia, and conferences—as well as announcements for positions for research assistants, PhDs, and teachers—all indi- cate that design is a “scientific discipline” and that it is struggling for the self-assurance of its own unique nature. This debate bears essential features of a vicious conflict that, at its argumentative core, took place once before: 50 years ago in Ulm, at the Hoch- schule für Gestaltung (HfG). At least two things can be learned from this 1962 debate. First, we can easily follow the lines of dis-

1 The Ministry of Education still tried to cussion presented then and since then, for clear language was define the school’s status according to encouraged at Ulm. Second, Ulm was established on the belief that traditional categories of the educational design does not exist for its own sake, but rather should make a system in 1962: “The Hochschule für substantial contribution to a socially responsible construction of Gestaltung in Ulm is an institution with the world. If we bear the Ulm debate in mind, we should remem- its own style. The operating legal entity is the Geschwister-Scholl-Stiftung, ber that design always operates in a social context and that design which is a foundation established under discourse must not allow this to fade from view. private law. This means that there is no potential for granting state recognition The Impulse to Establish the HfG: An Independent Center for for this institution.” Wolfgang Donndorf, Humane Design Kultusministerium von Baden-Württem- The HfG Ulm was supported by a private foundation; its founders berg, Aktenvermerk Nr. K 2463/94, Stuttgart, December 20, 1962. hoped that this funding structure would lead to the greatest possi- 2 The supporting legal entity, the ble autonomy.1 Otl Aicher, in particular, was convinced that the Geschwister-Scholl-Stiftung, had greatest possible degree of freedom of thought and action could been established on December 5, 1950. best be practiced in a place not under the influence of the State. Teaching began in the temporary This fundamental motivation did not end with the successful premises on August 3, 1953. The HfG 2 building located outside Ulm was not establishment of the school. Striving for independence remained a inaugurated until the ceremony on driving force throughout the entire existence of the HfG, in terms October 1–2, 1955. See René Spitz, HfG of both organization and content. Ulm: The View Behind the Foreground: Aicher was forced to recognize that the German education The Political History of the Ulm School system had not helped overcome the crisis of the 1920s:3 The edu- of Design (1953–1968) (Stuttgart: Edition cated classes, who valued their culture so highly, were not able to Axel Menges, 2002), 68ff. 3 For more information, see Spitz, HfG Ulm, put a stop to the barbaric insanity of the Nazis. German society 48ff, and Eva Moser, Otl Aicher: Gestalter had not learned to show either good judgment or decisiveness at [Otl Aicher: Designer] (Ostfildern: Hatje Cantz, 2012). © 2015 Massachusetts Institute of Technology doi: 10.1162/DESI_a_00304 DesignIssues: Volume 31, Number 1 Winter 2015 7 the moment when these traits were needed most. The heaps of knowledge surrounding Goethe and Schiller, Bach and Brahms, Schinkel and Semper, and Dürer and Spitzweg could therefore be of no help in shaping the languishing post-war Germany into a mod- ern western society of democratic and free citizens. Aicher’s belief was that, after 1945, Germans could no longer base their convic- tions on an adherence to cultural traditions, nor re-establish the social hierarchies that had been in place until 1933. Instead, the Ger- mans were to trust themselves to shape their own future by coming to terms with uncertainty and by daring to do something new. From the viewpoints of both Aicher and his future wife, ,4 Germany needed to establish a new society. They did not want to leave the task of creating the basic conditions for this Downloaded from http://direct.mit.edu/desi/article-pdf/31/1/7/1715373/desi_a_00304.pdf by guest on 29 September 2021 society in the hands of politicians. Instead, such creation was the responsibility of all those who created “everyday culture” but whose work had hitherto been considered inferior to “higher cul- ture”: “When we speak of civilization, we mean things like electric lights and fast trains. But when we speak of culture, many think of a concert they attend in their best clothes.”5 In light of their per- spective, Aicher and Scholl believed that, for instance, urban plan- ners and architects were responsible ensuring that the bombed-out Late Medieval city centers would not be restored with a view to building a historicizing backdrop. Rather, they should concern themselves with building affordable apartments with prefabri- cated elements to provide modern alternatives for the future requirements of a city life characterized by technology. All design- ers should work toward bridging the gap they had seen emerging between the worlds of work and leisure, material civilization and spiritual values, the individual and society. Only such bridging would overcome the results of the alienation of people from their activities—alienation that had appeared with industrialization. As a consequence, Aicher felt that art could no longer com- placently remain in its inherited position as the point of reference for all tasks concerning the design of the artifacts of industrialized civilization. He believed that the aesthetic criteria for assessing 4 Inge Scholl was the elder sister of Aicher’s early love, , opera, theater, poetry, and paintings could not help in the develop- whose involvement in the students’ ment of mass communication and mass production for modern resistance group “Die Weiße Rose” industrial societies. [The ] led to her murder by the Nazis in 1943. See Barbara The HfG Ulm: Cultural Means of Coping with Schüler, Im Geiste der Gemordeten… Die “Weiße Rose“ und ihre Wirkung Technical Civilization in der Nachkriegszeit [In the Spirit of In this point, the programmatic goal of the HfG differs fundamen- the Murdered… “The White Rose” tally from that of the . The intention of the HfG’s founders and their Effect in the Post-War Period] was not to follow in the footsteps of the Bauhaus, and particularly (Paderborn: Schöningh, 2000). not the Dessau Bauhaus under Walter Gropius. Gropius’s motto, 5 Inge Aicher-Scholl, “Eine Volkshoch- “Art and Technology—A New Unity,” meant that art (or a new art) schule und ihre Stadt” [An Adult Education Center and its City], Der was supposed to be the reference point for all designerly activities. Städtetag 9 (1953): 452.

8 DesignIssues: Volume 31, Number 1 Winter 2015 In contrast, Aicher established a goal of humane design for material civilization, which imitated neither cultural nor technical

6 One of the best-known outcomes traditions, but rather was meant to develop from its own condi- of the HfG was the stackable dish, tions. For him, humane design was any design that did not emo- “TC 100,” which became popular in tionally overwhelm—a reaction to the staged violence of Nazi inexpensive hotels and youth hostels. marches and torch lit parades that had captivated so many people The series was the final project of and debased the individual to an interchangeable, meaningless graduate Hans (called Nick) Roericht part of a superhuman whole. Design was humane when it in 1959 and was manufactured by Thomas/Rosenthal. Roericht worked informed objectively and convinced with its own arguments. closely with Otl Aicher for many years. Finally, design was humane when it accounted for the concrete Compare his poster, “Meine 10 Stationen connections for which it had been developed. Aicher was not inter- zu Otl Aicher,” which was shown at the ested in expensive, one-of-a-kind objects; he was seeking systems exhibition, “Aicher 88,” Ulmer Museum, for mass production and mass communication.6 In Aicher’s eyes, May 13, 2010. Downloaded from http://direct.mit.edu/desi/article-pdf/31/1/7/1715373/desi_a_00304.pdf by guest on 29 September 2021 7 One of the earliest testimonies to this the development of serialized products in terms of the media, arti- use is Inge Scholl’s letter to Theodor facts, and cities in the technologically driven industrial societies Heuss, the first President of the Federal should not be dominated by either the artist or the technician (or, Republic of Germany, March 27, 1950. for that matter, the salesperson). Instead, these things should be (Source: Federal Archive, Koblenz). organized by a new type of specialist who had not existed before 8 Mart Stam was apparently the one and who became known as the designer only at the end of the who introduced the term “design” to the German language when he spoke of 1950s. He judged a designer’s social responsibility by whether the “industrial designers” in his inauguration designer succeeded in making a contribution to the cultural speech as rector of Dresden’s Academy response to technological civilization. of Fine Arts in 1948. Heinz Hirdina, This difference did not prevent the Ulmers from using the “Designbegriffe zwischen Kunst und Bauhaus as a reference during the early years to make their fuzzy Industrie” [Design Terms between Art and Industry], Weimarer Beiträge 36, goals easier for representatives of West German economics and 7 no. 2 (1990): 216. politics to understand. Their rejection of a Bauhaus succession was 9 Christiane Wachsmann, ed., Bauhäusler more than merely a formal question. They also lacked a terminol- in Ulm. Grundlehre an der HfG 1953– ogy for what was new. The word “design,” for instance, had not yet 1955 [Bauhaus Members in Ulm: The made its way into the German language.8 Foundation Course at the , 1953–1955] (Ulm: Süddeutsche Verlagsgesellschaft,1993). Science at the HfG Ulm 10 The architect Konrad Wachsmann, During ’s rectorate, which lasted from August 3, 1953, a student of Hans Poelzig, was deeply until March 31, 1956, HfG’s activities first took on the appearance involved in industrial prefabrication for of a Bauhaus succession.9 Nevertheless, impulses developed that, buildings. In the 1940s, he and Walter although hardly perceived from the outside, paved the way for a Gropius developed a prefab house system while they were in exile in the new direction. For instance, Tomás Maldonado and Konrad 10 United States. Called the “Packaged Wachsmann were appointed as lecturers in 1954. Norbert Wiener House System;” it allowed unskilled spoke about cybernetics at the HfG on July 14, 1955. In the invita- workers to erect a wooden house in tion to Wiener, Max Bill had written that “it is the goal of the just a few hours. Michael Grüning, Hochschule für Gestaltung to achieve unity in designerly creation. Der Wachsmann-Report. Auskünfte Therefore, we follow with great interest the development of cyber- eines Architekten [The Wachsmann Report: Information of an Architect] netics and teach the fundamentals of the subject in lectures within (Berlin: Verlag der Nation, 1989). the framework of ‘cultural integration.’ As a science of information 11 Max Bill to the members of the and communication, cybernetics is, in particular, also one of the Gesellschaft der Freunde und Förderer foundations of the information department of our school.”11 der Geschwister-Scholl-Stiftung [Society of Friends and Supporters of the Geschwister-Scholl-Stiftung], Ulm, July 11, 1955.

DesignIssues: Volume 31, Number 1 Winter 2015 9 Until these impulses bloomed with their full effects, the HfG appeared to be continuing in some form of the Bauhaus tradi- tion. This apparent continuity alone explains the extent of uncer- tainty and incomprehension caused by the final departure of Max Bill on March 14, 1957—especially among supporters of the HfG. No one had expected this end to the public conflict that had arisen months before. Then, just a few weeks later, the Rectorial College decided in favor of a fundamental change to the organizational structure and content-related orientation of the HfG.12 The pace of this change was a clear sign of just how influential the powers— operating behind the scenes, of those who supported a program other than a so-called Bauhaus succession—had become. First, three institutes were set up or planned: product Downloaded from http://direct.mit.edu/desi/article-pdf/31/1/7/1715373/desi_a_00304.pdf by guest on 29 September 2021 design, visual communication, and industrial building. In these institutes, all the lecturers had the right to establish their own development groups. They were abbreviated to the letter E (for the German Entwicklungsgruppe [development group]) and then numbered. Aicher led the now-legendary E5 group. The sense of this new structure lay in connecting the commercial commissions that were necessary for the financing of the HfG to the pedagogi- cal concept that every association with artistic-looking “studios” under the leadership of “masters” was to be avoided at all costs.13 Second, on October 3, 1957, the chairman of the Rectorial College, Tomás Maldonado, announced a new program aimed at the scientification of design.14 Every remaining trace of artistic ref- 12 Tomás Maldonado, Protokoll zur Sitzung erence was to be judiciously exorcised. Instead, the ideal designer des Rektoratskollegiums vom 12.7. bis was to become a well-rounded, rigorously trained scientific and zum 14.7.1957 [Transcript of the Govern- technological team player, as described by Maldonado in 1958: ing Board Meeting from July 12 to July We cannot shut ourselves off from the necessity of 14, 1957], unpublished typescript, Ulm, disseminating scientific knowledge in a disciplined July 14, 1957. 13 In connection with this change, the Forsc- way. The industrial designer of the next years will surely hungsinstitut für optische Wahrnehmung not be the inspired “stylist,” a sort of enfant terrible for (FOW) [Research Institute for Visual Per- industry, a person who will be treated with distrust in all ception] was set up in 1958, assisted by technical offices. On the contrary: a new kind of industrial the Ford Foundation. Inge Aicher-Scholl designer will take over, namely an industrial designer hoped that the institution would be a source of constant funds. Such was not who can work on a team and whose function is not defined the case, and the closing of the FOW led only by “design,” but who can create products based on to more unrest. technical knowledge and in cooperation with specialists 14 Tomás Maldonado, Ansprache des Vorsit- and technicians. As a consequence, questions of methodol- zenden des Rektoratskollegiums zur ogy are taking on more importance in terms of education Eröffnung des 4. Studienjahrs (1957/58) for these industrial designers. [...] The methodological [Speech of the Head of the Governing Board at the Opening of the 4th Aca- aspect which is under discussion here and which will have demic Year (1957/58) ], unpublished type- more and more importance for our approach, was in the script, Ulm, October 3, 1957. past not only neglected, but even discredited. [...] Based on 15 Tomás Maldonado, Bericht in der Verwal- these facts, we have convinced ourselves of the need to tungsratssitzung am 21. April 1958 introduce a new dimension in our curriculum, one we can [Report to the Management Board meet- 15 ing April 21, 1958], unpublished type- call the methodological dimension. script, Ulm, April 21, 1958.

10 DesignIssues: Volume 31, Number 1 Winter 2015 The scientification of design led to a radical new curriculum and to the appointment of new lecturers. For example, the mathemati- cian Horst Rittel, whose wicked problems theory is still current, came to Ulm. The engineer L. Bruce Archer, who later became known as a professor of design research at the Royal College of Art and a leading international proponent of the design research community that had started to establish itself, also came.16 Of the subjects taught in 1957/1958, 90% had not been offered at the HfG the year before. Methodology was taught in two disciplines: in mathematical operational and in scientific theory. They comple- mented the subjects taught in the discipline of technology. Tomás Maldonado stated: “You can see that we have made an effort to build the HfG’s work on an exact foundation.” Downloaded from http://direct.mit.edu/desi/article-pdf/31/1/7/1715373/desi_a_00304.pdf by guest on 29 September 2021 Users of the term “science” in relation to the HfG explicitly meant the engineering and natural sciences. Whether this meaning resulted in the transformation of designers into (natural) scientists or whether they were supposed to master their knowledge to the point that they would be taken seriously as conversation partners of equal value remained open. The experiment in education policy, as the HfG was often described by its staff, had started, but the outcomes were yet to be known.

Otl Aicher: “Design Is Not a Science” Four years later, in the 1961/1962 academic year, a new organi- zation of the teaching program was introduced. The four-year process of scientification of design and design teaching at the HfG had now become apparent to everyone via the results of the reorganization. What was less obvious were the organizational, peda- gogical, and ideological changes that had come about; the new lecturers, who were called theoreticians, had consistently advanced the new scientific orientation of the school. The HfG was split. This schism divided not only the teachers, but also the student body and the foundation that supported the institution. Aicher refused to accept this situation. He wanted to bring about an uncompromising clarity by means of the split: He felt that the scientification of design that had been attempted at the HfG during the previous four years had shown itself to be the wrong path. Just as in 1956/1957, when he had fought tooth and nail against the approach of “aesthetics” and brought a new direction into being for the HfG, in 1962 he attacked the approach of “science.” For him, the hope of victory justified any means—even 16 Chanpory Rith und Hugh Dubberly, violating the democratic constitution of the HfG, which he himself “Why Horst W. J. Rittel Matters,” had largely drafted. Design Issues 22, no. 4 (Autumn 2006): 1–20; Nigan Bayazit, “Investigating Design: A Review of Forty Years of Design Research,” Design Issues 20, no. 1 (Winter 2004): 16–29.

DesignIssues: Volume 31, Number 1 Winter 2015 11 The conflict was carried out on several interrelated levels (includ- ing the personal level): • A dispute over methods: Is design a science? • A dispute over values: Is design value-free? • A dispute regarding the constitution: Should students, workshop supervisors, and guest lecturers continue to be allowed to participate in the election of the rector, and may any lecturer become rector? • A dispute regarding privileges: Is Otl Aicher, founder of the HfG, above the HfG’s constitution?

The conflicts began when first-year students from all departments wrote a joint yet department-specific “memorandum.” They Downloaded from http://direct.mit.edu/desi/article-pdf/31/1/7/1715373/desi_a_00304.pdf by guest on 29 September 2021 sharply criticized the teaching content. For instance, students from the Department of Visual Communication wrote: It is difficult to understand why they keep telling us in physiology class how to make glasses for short-sighted or far-sighted people. And in structural theory, why should we know how to build a thinking machine and calculate how many combinations of numbers are possible in the lottery? In elements, a permutation which accounts for an arrangement without repetition and punch cards will not help us create posters. [...] why are color exercises limited to the mindless production of scales without taking account of color composition or the relationship between form and color? Why is it not considered necessary for us to learn the techniques of color application?17

The students from the Department of Product Design who signed the memorandum complained that their education was lacking in the foundations of design, such as visual perception theory, rep- resentational methods, knowledge of materials, and the elements of design. Instead, classes had degenerated into: the industrious collecting of technical skills and the writing of tests and exams. The heaping up of indigestible knowledge, the copying and parroting is intolerable. [...] if structural theory is supposed to help us in our work, then it should not degenerate into seeking combinations for safes. We must use practical exercises within structural 17 First-year students of the Department of theory as a means of providing justification for designers. Visual Communication at the HfG Ulm, Otherwise, it is worth nothing to us. Denkschrift an den Vorstand der Geschwister-Scholl-Stiftung, das Rektor- atskollegium und die Festdozenten der In the joint memorandum, the first-year students maintained that HfG Ulm [Memorandum to the Managing “we don’t want to be sociologists, nor physiologists, nor psycholo- Board of the Geschwister Scholl Founda- gists and certainly not structural theorists, statisticians, analysts or tion, the Governing Board, and the Per- mathematicians, but designers!”18 manent Lecturers], unpublished typescript, Ulm, February 3, 1962. 18 Ibid.

12 DesignIssues: Volume 31, Number 1 Winter 2015 Older students, who were more familiar with the study of mathematical/logical and natural science topics, as promoted by Horst Rittel, tried in vain in their rebuttal of the first-year students’ accusations to bring the discussion round to the question of power that had erupted at the HfG: “How should our work be supported by scientific knowledge when theoretical lecturers are being kept away from departmental work? [...] [W]e want to be a post-second- ary institution, and we must remain open to all possibilities of working with our studies.”19 Aicher pulled the rug out from under this argument with an interesting remark: The HfG was not a post- secondary institution. As a consequence, after 1962 he referred to the HfG exclusively as the “Ulm School.” In September 1962, shortly before the start of the new aca- Downloaded from http://direct.mit.edu/desi/article-pdf/31/1/7/1715373/desi_a_00304.pdf by guest on 29 September 2021 demic year, he prepared an essay with the succinct title, “on the situation of the hochschule für gestaltung,” which was based on a presentation made to representatives of the foundation.20 This text holds the central key to understanding Aicher’s motivation and the consequences of his actions, which, because of their uncompromis- ing nature, were largely incomprehensible to those both within and beyond his sphere. Aicher first devoted a few sentences to outlining the devel- opment of the HfG until 1962: In an early phase, when industrial design still had to win cultural and economic recognition, the pedagogical conception of the HfG was based on a more artistic interpretation of design. This attitude shifted in connection with an internal crisis, when a number of lecturers ([G]ugelot, [M]aldonado, [O]hl, [Z]eischegg, [A]icher) insisted that design was no longer possible without the reappraisal of scientific and technological foundations. In their view, the designer can no longer sit on the throne of the artist. He must be educated to become the equal partner of the engineer and the scientist. Only rational methods can legitimate conceptual thinking. The consequence was the retirement of the first rector ([M]ax 19 Karlheinz Allgayer, Stellungnahme des Studentenvertreters zu den Denkschriften [B]ill) and the introduction of a series of technological and der Studenten des ersten Studienjahrs scientific disciplines to the curriculum. A number of [The Students’ Representative’s State- scientists and technicians have been appointed.21 [...] the ment to the Memorandums of the First- HfG took on a new, now “scientific” concept whose goal year Students] unpublished typescript, was to establish a real, that is to say, a scientific post-sec- Ulm, March 1962. ondary institution based primarily on mathematical and 20 Otl Aicher, zur situation der hochschule für gestaltung 1962 [On the Situation at statistical methods. The designers already working at the the HfG 1962], unpublished typescript, HfG were relegated to the position of non-scientists [...]. Ulm, September 1962. 21 Otl Aicher was referring to Horst Rittel, In no way did Aicher agree with this situation at the HfG. A Hanno Kesting, and Gert Kalow, who as founding member, he was not afraid to express his thoughts that members of the rectoral college were actively involved in running the HfG the HfG would have to be re-established under new conditions: between 1960 and 1962.

DesignIssues: Volume 31, Number 1 Winter 2015 13 “after our excursion into science, it has become possible to describe a further-reaching design approach and perhaps adapt into a new school.” Then Aicher took a position on the conflict with the self- proclaimed theoreticians at the HfG Ulm, particularly Horst Rittel, and formulated his credo of design theory: A concept which generally postulates the allocation of design, science, and technology is too general. [...] science, including applied science, seeks knowledge that can be generalized, patterns of a general nature, whereas design seeks objects of a concrete nature. [...] design asserts itself in the individual decision, in the individual object, not in the quest for truth. Its goal and its benchmark are the single product-result. Therefore, science and design are Downloaded from http://direct.mit.edu/desi/article-pdf/31/1/7/1715373/desi_a_00304.pdf by guest on 29 September 2021 diverging activities as the one moves toward abstraction and the other toward the concrete. [...] design is a creative activity that does not end with a conclusion, but rather a conception built on ideas. [...] knowledge can be either true or false. On the other hand, design is subject to the criteria of rightness and must prove its own worth. [...] the world must not only be known, but also [be] made.

Aicher went on to outline his concept of how the relationship between design and science should be understood: Science is more than just science. Over the past few years at the hfg, scientific methods have been tolerated as science only insofar as they rested on mathematical or statistical foundations and their results were quantifiable. Qualitative methods which aim at the what, why, and to what purpose have been treated with suspicion. They are based too firmly on subjectivity, intuition, and interpretation. [...] however, design is based exactly on the substantiation of meaning and purpose, which cannot be achieved with help from statistical or mathematical methods. [...] facts have their place in design, but facts cannot result in conceptions. Design consists in interpreting, conceiving, and taking no satisfaction from the fact that something exists, but rather from why and what for.

As a conclusion and climax of his argument, Aicher postulated that the social responsibility of the designer can be expressed in the idea that there is a moral dimension inherent to design: An interpretation of design based on the natural sciences is completely insidious. [...] to a great degree, design is a statement and thus a moral activity. It is based on both cultural and social values. It contains aims, assessments, and involvement. [...] a freedom from values is the abnega- tion of design, where it makes no difference whether

14 DesignIssues: Volume 31, Number 1 Winter 2015 design is sacrificed to the market, public opinion, or a corporate strategy. [...] design is a moral, that is to say, evaluative, activity based on the foundations of a cultural and social value system. This results in the need for a precise design doctrine.

What Aicher had vehemently rejected just a few years before— that an individual, a master of the traditional kind, should deter- mine what design is or is not—he now laid claim to. He wanted to determine “precisely” which ideology, which “doctrine” should be taught at the “Ulm School.” Design was thus no longer a demo- cratic matter open to negotiation, but something to be bestowed from on high. Implementing this doctrine required the reorganiza- Downloaded from http://direct.mit.edu/desi/article-pdf/31/1/7/1715373/desi_a_00304.pdf by guest on 29 September 2021 tion of the HfG: “the HfG cannot be an open school in the sense that various design approaches could be brought together under one roof, as must be the case for scientific post-secondary institu- tions. [...] at the HfG, academic freedom is limited by the frame- work of a cultural and social standpoint which can be considered an obligation because the entire institution was founded for its sake.” Therefore, his argumentation led to the thesis that the “pre- condition [for a regeneration of the HfG] is a constitution which accounts for the fact that the HfG should provide education in the field of design. It should educate neither engineers nor scientists.” The foundation actually gave in to his demands. It reformu- lated the once-democratic HfG constitution to be authoritarian and ratified it in the face of the provisions of the constitution that had been in effect until then. These moves can truly be called a consti- tutional “putsch.”22 Aicher ended this grotesque act with a short speech as the new rector of the HfG: The hochschule für gestaltung must again become a design school. The doctrine and pedagogy of design orients itself first and foremost at the design process and design result. [...] design and design theory can be developed and justified only from their results. It was 22 Aicher’s election as rector on December a great misunderstanding to confuse design with science. 20, 1962, was a farce. Of all the […] design differs from science as a process of discovery permanently employed staff and guest differs from a process of creation. [...] design must not lecturers, the assistants’ representatives, be subject to industry in any of its forms, but must be and the technical teachers and students, subject to society. [...] for me, an obligation to society only six appeared because most others had decided to boycott the election. means offering conceptions that objectively and Of these six participants, only three aesthetically go beyond the scope of the familiar. were actually eligible for election. Cultural obligation means moving beyond norms, See Spitz, HfG Ulm, 276. standards, and analytical derivations.23 23 Otl Aicher, Erklärung nach seiner Wahl

zum Rektor [Statement after his Election as Rector], unpublished typescript, Ulm, December 20, 1962.

DesignIssues: Volume 31, Number 1 Winter 2015 15 Conclusion The conflict that arose in 1962 concerning the correctness of Aicher’s beliefs and their consequences did great damage to the HfG: Negative reports appeared in the press about the argument and what came of it. Many supporters turned away in disappoint- ment, and state subsidies ran out because federal funds were allocated only to scientific research institutions—a status the HfG could no longer claim. From our current perspective, we can see that Aicher’s ideas concerning the unscientific nature of design, insofar as science must exclude value judgments, are dramatically exaggerated. His statement was a polemic tool that he used to limit the influence of lecturers of theoretical and methodological subjects so that he Downloaded from http://direct.mit.edu/desi/article-pdf/31/1/7/1715373/desi_a_00304.pdf by guest on 29 September 2021 could win the upper hand in the power struggle. His statement that design does not lead to new knowledge can also be described as polemic. His own work—for the 1972 Olympic Games, the Bayerische Rück reinsurance company, and ERCO—surely refutes this statement. The greatest challenge no doubt resides in conclusively integrating the moral dimension of designers’ social responsibility into a theory of design that links science, research, intuition, and subjective aesthetic judgment. No one would deny that design car- ries a high social responsibility, but how this responsibility can be addressed in an intersubjectively negotiable formulation of design—beyond the romantic ideal of the genius—has now become a central question in design theory. We need to find new words for new concepts. What references to the current discourse in design theory do the HfG debates make manifest? A few of the old debates are now circulating—although in new terms and formulations—about various attempts to make negotiable the autonomy of the produc- tion of knowledge and artifacts by means of design. At the HfG, experiments took place to reorder the relationships between research, analysis, drawing conclusions, conception, and design. From the current point of view, this reordering would then allow the practices in the development groups to be interpreted as seam- less transitions to “practice-led research,” “project-grounded research,” or “research through design.”24 The Ulm debates merely lacked such fine distinctions of notation and connotation. The same lack of explicit articulation applies to the over- arching question of what relation exists between design and 24 Alain Findeli, “Searching for Design Research Questions: Some Conceptual science. No one would seriously question the fact that Ulm helped Clarifications,” in Questions, Hypotheses pave the way to overcoming the simplistic ideas of how science & Conjectures – Discussions on leads to new knowledge, while designers can only apply this Projects by Early Stage and Senior knowledge. However, these very ideas were not plumbed as deeply Design Researchers, Rosan Chow, as they are today: The concept of the scientification of design Wolfgang Jonas, and Gesche Joost, comes across as quibbling jargon and has remained misleading. ed. (Bloomington, IN: iUniverse, 2010), 278–93.

16 DesignIssues: Volume 31, Number 1 Winter 2015 Aicher made the attempt to postulate fundamental methodological differences between the natural sciences and humanities, primar- ily for motives of power politics. He completely disregarded the obvious differences between the humanities and social sciences, although the relevance of empirical and hermeneutic paradigms and methods for design are under discussion today. Aicher’s core hypothesis about the necessity for the designer—that designers must make decisions based on subjective judgment and then develop designs from the results—can be seen as an early version of the now-famous concept of “designerly ways” of knowing and of producing knowledge.25 Aicher defended fiercely against letting the external standards of the natural sciences be applied to design. Rather, he defined design as an activity whose goal specifically lay Downloaded from http://direct.mit.edu/desi/article-pdf/31/1/7/1715373/desi_a_00304.pdf by guest on 29 September 2021 in the realization of ideas. All the same, his claim to subjective judgment sets the basic belief that designers not only apply knowledge and expe- 25 Nigel Cross, “Designerly Ways of rience from adjacent disciplines into their work, but that social, Knowing,” Design Studies 3 (October cultural, and political frameworks are substantial factors in their 1982): 221–27. 26 Michael Gibbons et al., The New decision-making processes. Since the second half of the 1990s, Production of Knowledge. The Dynamics this conviction has been discussed under the transdisciplinary of Science and Research in Contemporary term, “mode 2.”26 Societies (London: Sage,1994). Furthermore, we must recognize that the HfG redefined 27 See, e.g., Karin Knorr Cetina, Epistemic the role of the laboratory in design by means of practical experi- Cultures: How the Sciences Make 27 Knowledge (Cambridge, MA: Harvard ments. Ulm’s research station for optical perception and its University Press, 1999). electronic music lab were first steps in this direction, even though 28 Julian Bleecker, “Design Fiction: A Short they saw little success because of internal problems at the school. Essay on Design, Science, Fact, and Finally, the HfG was founded on the desire to create the utopia of a Fiction | Near Future Laboratory.” better society, one step at a time. The question of “what if...?” is Near Future Laboratory. http://blog. more than a component of “design fiction”;28 it is fundamental to nearfuturelaboratory.com/2009/03/17/ design-fiction-a-short-essay-on-design- the HfG and what it stood for. Those who were part of the school science-fact-and-fiction/ (accessed refused to accept their surroundings as given. Indeed, the HfG March 15, 2014). was based on the belief that the future can be designed.

DesignIssues: Volume 31, Number 1 Winter 2015 17