Skip to main content

Design for a Better World - Don Norman ***

Don Norman is, without doubt, one of the most influential figures in design - and particularly in making designs fit for human use. In his definitive The Design of Everyday Things he identified designs that 'probably won a prize' but that totally fail to make clear to the user how to use them. He pointed out that something as simple as a door, for example, had opportunities for design failure. Whether it was glass doors that couldn't be distinguished from windows, or doors you had to push that were fitted with a pull handle, he showed how a focus on appearance over usability could make for terrible design.

In this book he attempts to take on an even bigger target - the way that we move the world away from its natural state, what can go wrong with that and how better design - and more inclusion of design in our approach - could change things.

In principle, this is great, but unfortunately the book fails to deliver beyond broad brush concepts. Norman addresses how to communicate in meaningful ways, the importance of sustainability, moving from 'human centred' to 'humanity centred', transforming human behaviour and the possibilities for action. And in each of these areas, he comes up with some good ideas, but part of the problem is that the book itself falls over on the design front. 

I'm not talking about the dull cover, or even that the font is just a bit too small to read comfortably. It's more that designing a piece of writing to get a message across effectively involves making the text well structured and readable. It means telling stories well. But that just doesn't happen here. The whole thing is verbose - Norman doesn't get past the introduction before page 57. The text is extremely repetitive and feels very thin on detail. It simply doesn't read well.

There are a few other issues. Some of the arguments seem forced. A central message is that, while STEM is extremely important, we drive things too much from science and maths. Norman gives the example of the seasons, claiming the four seasons are arbitrarily based on astronomical data and don't reflect real experience. This is true in some countries - however, in the UK, for example, no one cares about the astronomical seasons, but there are four very clear, very different periods in the year that arise from a combination of weather and the behaviour of nature. There are also one or two oddities in the science Norman mentions. It's not too bad that he seems to say that tides are higher because the Moon is full, rather than because of the same reason that the Moon is full. At one point, though, he describes hydrogen as a power source like wind and solar, where it's actually an energy transmission medium.

I am a huge fan of Don Norman's work on design, but for me, this book doesn't do what I'd hoped it would in giving clear design-based guidance on building a better world for humanity. In some ways, this book parallels aspects of Hans Rosling's remarkable book Factfulness. It even overlaps in places, where Norman argues for better presentation of data rather than meaningless single figures like GDP, and gives examples of ways of presenting data that aren't as good as Rosling's. It's a shame Norman ignores Factfulness, rather than building on its starting point, which could have produced a much stronger outcome. In the end this isn't the design-based manifesto for the future that it might have been.

Hardback:   
Kindle 
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you
Review by Brian Clegg - See all Brian's online articles or subscribe to a weekly email free here

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Roger Highfield - Stephen Hawking: genius at work interview

Roger Highfield OBE is the Science Director of the Science Museum Group. Roger has visiting professorships at the Department of Chemistry, UCL, and at the Dunn School, University of Oxford, is a Fellow of the Academy of Medical Sciences, and a member of the Medical Research Council and Longitude Committee. He has written or co-authored ten popular science books, including two bestsellers. His latest title is Stephen Hawking: genius at work . Why science? There are three answers to this question, depending on context: Apollo; Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, along with the world’s worst nuclear accident at Chernobyl; and, finally, Nullius in verba . Growing up I enjoyed the sciencey side of TV programmes like Thunderbirds and The Avengers but became completely besotted when, in short trousers, I gazed up at the moon knowing that two astronauts had paid it a visit. As the Apollo programme unfolded, I became utterly obsessed. Today, more than half a century later, the moon landings are

Space Oddities - Harry Cliff *****

In this delightfully readable book, Harry Cliff takes us into the anomalies that are starting to make areas of physics seems to be nearing a paradigm shift, just as occurred in the past with relativity and quantum theory. We start with, we are introduced to some past anomalies linked to changes in viewpoint, such as the precession of Mercury (explained by general relativity, though originally blamed on an undiscovered planet near the Sun), and then move on to a few examples of apparent discoveries being wrong: the BICEP2 evidence for inflation (where the result was caused by dust, not the polarisation being studied),  the disappearance of an interesting blip in LHC results, and an apparent mistake in the manipulation of numbers that resulted in alleged discovery of dark matter particles. These are used to explain how statistics plays a part, and the significance of sigmas . We go on to explore a range of anomalies in particle physics and cosmology that may indicate either a breakdown i

Splinters of Infinity - Mark Wolverton ****

Many of us who read popular science regularly will be aware of the 'great debate' between American astronomers Harlow Shapley and Heber Curtis in 1920 over whether the universe was a single galaxy or many. Less familiar is the clash in the 1930s between American Nobel Prize winners Robert Millikan and Arthur Compton over the nature of cosmic rays. This not a book about the nature of cosmic rays as we now understand them, but rather explores this confrontation between heavyweight scientists. Millikan was the first in the fray, and often wrongly named in the press as discoverer of cosmic rays. He believed that this high energy radiation from above was made up of photons that ionised atoms in the atmosphere. One of the reasons he was determined that they should be photons was that this fitted with his thesis that the universe was in a constant state of creation: these photons, he thought, were produced in the birth of new atoms. This view seems to have been primarily driven by re