The I-mark

new logo

Over the past few weeks, a lot has been talked about the latest winning design of the I-mark on online groups and social networks. In short: The earlier design that was chosen by the Indian Design Council (IDC) was rejected by designers at large. But, coincidentally the new logo is not very different from the older version. Designers again have raised their voices against it. And the IDC has put its foot down saying this is what it is.

The IDC plans to confer the marking on certain products, services, objects and works that conform to the process and standards set by it to ‘define good in the concept of good design’. So, when there is a debate on whether the design of the mark itself is ‘good’ or not, it makes one wonder on the processes and standards thus defined to elevate good design. Something the IDC should consider.

Also, look at it from a global perspective. An I-mark is officially launched globally at the inauguration of the Japanese Good Design Exhibition at the Federation of Indian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (FICCI), in March 2011, and is raved about by the jury and IDC members. YET, back home, another competition is set up because of dissent from the design community in India. And the eventual result is not very different from the earlier version, creating more angst amongst the designers, who have been openly critical about the design and the jury.

Whether the criticism is right or not is not the question, nor is the process of selection the important factor here. What is important is that the image of India and Indian designers gets across as a very confused or controversial entity thanks to this back-n-forth movement. And do we need this bad publicity?

The second point to ponder upon is ‘Why is there a dissent?’.  It’s not that the design community has anything against competitions or people winning those competitions. Nor is there any disrespect to the idea of the I-mark and the IDC members. Yet the furore. Why?

Perhaps the designers could have been more participative in the competition, but then why did they not? There were only 200 entries received.  Was there was no proper communication and outreach? The amount of comments after the launch of the I-mark is a good indicator of the interest the designers have in this competition.  Therefore, the lack of participation needs to be explored by the IDC.

Amongst the shortlisted 13, the winning design is the best, no doubt of it. But this only when you compare the shortlisted entries. 

The IDC could have worked along side a body like ADI, which represents designers from India and put together the competition for the I-mark – this would have surely gotten in more entries, and a good representation from the design industry. And also less criticism. More importantly, this would have come across as an inclusive exercise that every designer would have wanted to be part of and have pride in working for.  After all, an I-mark is not something that can come top down, but has to come from within the design community to succeed.

And if the designers seem to have a problem with the I-mark design and the competition, then perhaps it is because of an underlying current of non-transparency, exclusiveness and no real connect between the IDC and the designers- a fact that the IDC should realise and act towards, especially if it wants this mark be treated and accepted as the stamp of good design.

- Darpana Athale.

Architecture and Design- the old and new!

Let’s start with the new beginnings…

India finally has it’s own body for the Design Industry. Called the ‘Association of Designers of India’ (ADI), the initiative of forming this body began a year ago, when the Pune Design Foundation and AIDI, Bangalore members decided to dissolve their respective local bodies and come together to create a pan-India body for Design. So history is being made and the Facebook group, within a matter of few days only, has a membership of 300+ designers, all raring to come together and work for Design and it’s promotion.

The ADI will be formally launched on February 10th, 2011 during the inauguration of the Pune Design Festival.

The Pune Design Festival or PDFest as it is more popularly known as, is in its 5th year and promises to be a wonderful collaboration between different design fields, with various events lined up.

Mukund and I from Sarvasva are proud and honoured too, to have been part of the founding body of both – the ADI and the PDFest. What glorious times we live in! And I’m sure, this is just the beginning of more to come.

Look up ADI on www.associationofdesignersofindia.com (the site is still coming up, will keep you all posted) and PDFest on www.punedesignfestival.org.

On another note, I have been doing a month’s course on Indian History/Archaeology and Architecture and have been learning so much of what makes this great country; including some of the renowned teachers who are taking time out to lecture and share their work and viewpoints. I especially wanted to do this course so that I could further supplement ‘Pune Walks’ (the heritage walks that our firm conducts) with the knowledge from experts.

And while I have been seeing the extreme passion and care being taken for projects in archaeology, I have failed to see the same happening in the heritage conservation/ restoration segment, especially here in Pune. And what is saddening more so is the huge gap between the ancient history (archaeology) and the modern times; which makes the middle segment of history/heritage all the more so important. And hence required to be respected, saved, documented, conserved, restored and maintained. Not retrofitted with the new only, or with the modernistic idea of what we think these buildings /structures should be. Because, if these structures are not going to be part of our present and future, we will in the long run have no link to our immediate past.

And the past is important for the future to exist.

- Darpana.