Under the token of ‘trans-design’ we ask: can social change be ‘designed’ within an(y) emanicpatory approach of the social? And: should it? And: what does this even mean if seen from the perspective of a critical transversal politics and theory refusing ‘designed politics’ as much as the ‘designed’ mechanisms of current-day subsumption – whether by capitalist or statist machines, technoid enviro-systems, the harvesting-protocols of ‘social’ media, expanded imagineering industries… or otherwise?
For a moment we are stopping short of a full-blown repudiation of the new ‘ideology of design’ which seems to be sweeping global discourse. Instead we will be asking about the meaning or implication of a broader, more fundamental notion of ‘design’ referencing any ‘strategic approach for someone (or some collectivity) to achieve a specific expectation’. The question thus is: can – and: should – ‘design’ be part of the articulation of a current-day progressive politics? Is there a way to include any understanding or notion of ‘design’ – as intentful, preconceived, planned, coordinated, and reflexive shaping – in relation to our shared social structures and longed-for (trans-)collective futures?
A Workshop by Clemens Apprich, Miglė Bareikytė, Joshua Neves and Nelly Y. Pinkrah