Conversation with the materials: a dialogue between the designer and the problem

I completely agree with Schön when he underlines the importance of a repertoire of experience. Since every practitioner deals almost everyday with hypothesis confutation he has to face unknown situations. But what if he has not a good enough repertoire? I refer to my first project experience when I had no previous experience in interaction design since my background was in commmunication and sociology. I had never dealt with design and sketches so my problem solving skills were not so adequate. However, that period has been useful because I filled the gap I had.In the beginning my conversation with the material was really poor because I had no situations that I could rehearse to frame the problem. I knew that a ‘discipline’ was important and I created my own one. Then I started drawing my rough ideas and having some conversations with the material I produced. However, I was not able to evaluate the implications of the choices I was doing and soon got stuck. The problem was that I would not break open my discipline since it appeared to me as a failure.While I was in that situation, my conversation with the material started growing a lot: I was stuck and the only escape route I was able to see was to ask the material for an answer. Even though I had no previous situations to refer to, I reflected in front of the materials and talked while I was re-drawing them. I learnt that talking is a good stimuli for your mind: your thoughts have to follow your hand. As your pen draws lines and objects, your words draw concepts and ideas in your mind. It was an productive effort since I was not used to draw and talk at the same time.Then, my reflection-in-action made all the things clearer. After that, I was able to see my choices and their implications. Moreover, I understood that my discipline had to be more flexible and that I had to break it open since it was not working.Even though my repertoire was not so rich, I’ve been capable to see and evaluate my choices thanks to those conversations.I think that the richness of the conversation depends on different factors and I have not the experience to explain all the whys. What I know is that sometimes there is a sort of feeling between you, the designer, and the materials. When you are on the right route, the dialogue with them seems easier and more fluent. Other times, when the implications of your choices overwhelm you, it is very hard. As Schön writes, it is a game between “freedom” and “imperatives” and if you don’t know how to play it, you’ll get stuck quite soon.Anyway, I think that the conversation is rich when the practitioner has a clear view of what he is doing and knows exactly the implications of his choices. It is like having almost everything under control. The reflect-in-action is like a dialogue and the materials are your interlocutor: if your reasoning is clear they will follow your thoughts. If your questions are right and well formulated, they will give you the answers you were looking for.The interaction is not only between the final product and the persons who are going to use it. There is a former dialogue between the practitioner and his problem area. It is in the very design process. I think that this interaction respects all the rules and the convention of a common dialogue since you have not just only to write down your ideas. What is asked to the designer is to communicate with the problem and interact with it. The best design is the middle: the richness of these conversations is all in the exchange between the two parts. The more rich is the conversation the more rich will be the design process.