This is an AI transcription, they are usually pretty accurate but apologies for any typos.
[00:00:00] Ross Lovegrove: Welcome to For Love and Design, the podcast that explores the world of design, innovation, art, and creativity. I'm Ross Lovegrove. And together with Hila Colombo, in this episode, we'd be talking about visual creativity versus cognitive creativity, and if the two can be different modus operandi in design.
But before we begin, if you enjoy our podcast, please be sure to subscribe and leave us a review. And don't forget to follow us on social media to stay up to date. Let's get started.
[00:00:30] Ila Colombo: Hi everyone. Back here for one of our conversations on the future of design and creativity. I'm here with ever curious Ross Lovegrove as always.
[00:00:41] Ross Lovegrove: That’s me. So what are we going to talk about?
[00:00:45] Ila Colombo: Well, today I would like to talk about the intertwining paths of visual versus cognitive creativity. The distinction that I mean is between something that can be represented by fine art, more literally like conceptual art versus figurative art. And I always loved that.
And one of my forever remote. mentors in creativity is someone like Anthony Gormley, which I find both visual and cognitive. I mean, he's a conceptual artist, but his creations are also very visual and very powerful. I find your work potentially fitting in the same bubble. In the age of generative AI and rapid technological progress, where do we see this, uh, spectrum stands?
Visual creativity. Creative
[00:01:32] Ross Lovegrove: creativity. Well, you know, AI immediately gives you, wow, I mean, so much more potential, doesn't it? I mean, just, it opens it up. I mean, as I'm talking to you, I got all sorts of visions in my mind. You mentioned Anthony. I mean, the thing is Anthony, he has these fabulous undercurrents which are all based on something very primordial and raw.
discovered. It's deeply, deeply sort of not even pre human, it's human, but it's something. That really touches me and, you know, without really trying to analyze anything. So the, the cognition of the material, certainly when he extrudes the human and you walk through a passage, you have light at the end, it's dark, it's, you know, you feel enclosed but you feel that you can escape.
A lot of these emotions that can be created from nothing. I mean, that's what interests me is the fact that, you know, relatively speaking within that sphere of art, you can really, really test people's emotions, you know, without delivering something prescriptive. So, you know, Anthony started out by casting his own body.
He used the means and tools around him and that's why it's so, so self referential. But as he's moved on, for example, working with, you know, he hired Pierre who used to work for me. Suddenly it became very digitized. It was
[00:02:56] Ila Colombo: much more diverse and subtle, his early work, but for example, in one of his latest book, I think it was.
by Rizzoli. You can see that his early work was highly conceptual, highly cognitive, uh, you know, when he did this, uh, sequence of decreasing spheres. The reason why I'm personally interested more towards cognitive creativity versus Visual and literal figurative one is that I'm more drawn to things that provoke some thinking into me and that have a meaning.
Something can be just beautiful visually, like, I don't know, like the butterflies by Damien Hirst, but equally is a, is a quick fix meaning, Oh, I say, yeah, beautiful, great. And then next. Yeah. But
[00:03:36] Ross Lovegrove: you know that I fully understand that. And that's what I like about you and what I like about how you've, you've grown into that mindset because.
Nobody, especially if you're a creative person, you don't need things around you just to decorate a wall. I mean, it's ridiculous. It's better not to have it. It's got to have a deeper meaning. That's why often, you know, you create things yourself because maybe the meaning is missing. And you have a way of describing that, you know, I know you do that in your own work.
I mean, as a, as an artist, as a painter, you know, with your work on proxemics. So it's that thing where how, how do you convey feelings about being in a dense place with other people or, you know, all of these dimensions to that, which I think it's such an amazing subject that you've discovered that could go into.
You know, 2d or 3d effortlessly, but would always, you'd know there was something underneath it. Yeah,
[00:04:31] Ila Colombo: precisely. Well, thank you for saying what you just said. And if we stay within art, which between me and you, art is a huge influence in the way we think, certainly about creativity. I feel like Dadaism was a movement that successfully put together the two potentially.
Like for example, if you take Marcel Duchamp's Fountain. Uh, urinal visually it's, it was very mundane and almost vulgarly obvious, but cognitively it was questioning the very definition of art.
[00:05:01] Ross Lovegrove: This is like Tracey Emin's bed or Damien's shark, you know, it's disruptive. And you know what, what I love about art.
What's happening again today, I would even say with AI is that anything goes, you know, you want to float humans in the air like Magritte or you, you know, you, you can do things which, you know, your dreams and imagination can envisage, but then you can put it. into imagery. That's where film and other methodologies can really connect up.
I
[00:05:34] Ila Colombo: totally agree. We keep talking about generative AI, we can't escape the subject and it's something that we constantly work with. But yeah, generative AI like GANs are already producing art, blending visual patterns with conceptual algorithms. But I do have a constant question. In my mind, which is, can AI truly understand the depth of human emotion and cognition?
And the short answer of today is obviously no, but can we grow generative AI within a creative application that will eventually do that? Will it ever? understand the depth of human emotion and therefore have more cognitive
[00:06:13] Ross Lovegrove: aspect. What do you mean by cognitive? Because it's about perception, isn't it? You perceive things differently than I do.
No,
[00:06:19] Ila Colombo: but the intellectual meaning of something, you know, Anthony Gormley's cognitive side of his work is very human. Right. He's very human centric, but Richard Serra is not necessarily human centric. It's very much about mass, volume, and weight, the perception of space. So the perception of space could potentially be something that AI can relate to as well.
[00:06:40] Ross Lovegrove: But in that is through experimentation, and this relates to people like Anthony or to Richard Serra through experimentation, you will discover, and there will be a moment when. By pure chance, something will be discovered that will formulate your future. When Richard Serra put a sheet, uh, I think it was metal, into a corner of a room and it stood up, that kind of connectivity between space, material, geometry, mass, weight, da da da, and it gave you something that, A few seconds before did not exist, and a few seconds after could not exist, meaning it comes into play momentarily and then can be taken away.
So there's in, in Anthony's work and Sarah's work, of course, there's this incredible permanence and cognitive permanence is a very interesting thought for me. I mean, what'd you think about that?
[00:07:34] Ila Colombo: It's a very interesting in a session point. So
[00:07:36] Ross Lovegrove: the idea would repeat and move on to new generations. beyond you.
[00:07:41] Ila Colombo: Yeah. Well, between what you just said, I, I, I find very interesting and very thought provoking also the experience of discovery, meaning you discover something within a process and also, and almost by accident. And I think that because of this accidental, occasional, almost glitch experience that you have.
That is something that ultimately AI will be able to experience. I mean, we know for a fact, Google's AI, when it was working and playing professional chess games, or even the game of Go, they discovered that the softwares were creating new accidental moves and those moves were the winning moves. So the very intrinsic experience.
of accidental discovery can happen between an
[00:08:26] Ross Lovegrove: algorithm. AI is that they could make that move because their knowledge is way down the road. So they know that that act. will result in... No, but those,
[00:08:36] Ila Colombo: those were completely novel acts. This is what I'm trying
[00:08:39] Ross Lovegrove: to say. Yeah, they were novel acts. Acts which a human would not take the risk to do.
No, a
[00:08:44] Ila Colombo: human could not
[00:08:45] Ross Lovegrove: even conceive. Because they can't think that far
[00:08:48] Ila Colombo: ahead. Yeah, it was just a mathematical, occasional episode. Yeah, but just
[00:08:52] Ross Lovegrove: that idea. Oh, that's interesting. The idea of being able to think so far ahead. But also referenced so far back and in the present this past present future massive scale of information orientation that interests me because you know, I have a mind which is really Futurist mind I can imagine things which might come for whatever reason You know, I've had that since I was a kid.
So I think that one of my interests in, in AI is AI's ability to project so far forward to forming a simulation that is beyond the human mind. That's not even science fiction because science fiction is a bit of a guesswork towards that. It's the human thing. But what AI variant of cognitive...
[00:09:38] Ila Colombo: Creativity.
Yeah. I'm deeply fascinated because it relates almost to life on earth, meaning what are the chances and the probability of life happening on a planet? I mean, it's very little yet is very grand because of the mathematical expansion of massive potential of numerics, right? We have an infinite growing universe with infinite planets.
What are the chances of that happening is, is again, this journey of accidental discovery. Life on earth was an accidental discovery and you're talking to me these days about something very interesting about the evolution of life on
[00:10:14] Ross Lovegrove: earth. Oh yeah, it's serendipity, but time, time plays such an important factor.
We talk about millions of years, but with AI, we're talking about compression, absolutely momentary compression. And then you throw into the mix the quantum factor. Which is unbelievable, we haven't even started that whole idea yet. It's just gonna move so far past us. I mean, the Earth itself, and it's coming into being over, what, four and a half billion years, has been so complex, and once you learn more about that, you walk out into your garden, and almost tears will, will accumulate, because you can't believe what this complexity and this sort of...
There was no, no consciousness in the earth to push it a particular direction. It, that's what nature is. Nature just reacts to atmospheric condition. Uh, AI does not react to atmospheric condition because it's non physical and it needs energy and it needs a few other things, but it's just about an information data digital driven point
[00:11:21] Ila Colombo: in time.
Yeah. At the moment, I think at some point, the more it grows and potentially evolves and potentially develop some kind of awareness of itself, it will start to explore spatial awareness and therefore physical awareness is going to start. Yeah. Try to expand. And the moment he tries to expand, it going to reach a limit.
And when you have a limit, you know, a finite. Environment. This is what it's fascinating about the earth, that we're a, a, a growing species, potentially exponentially growing. Mm-hmm. to infinite numbers, but we are on a finite planet and that makes our condition very much true to
[00:11:59] Ross Lovegrove: us. A finite planet. For what are we talking for biological life.
Is it a fin? planet for that. If we ice over again because of what we're doing to the atmosphere, who knows? We speculate
[00:12:08] Ila Colombo: a lot about the future. What do you think will be the psychological aspects of that? Like, we will develop new psychological issues, therefore the cognitive side of creativity is going to change a lot, obviously.
Do you feel any effect on your psychology of relating to the time in which we live, which are very all over the
[00:12:27] Ross Lovegrove: you go into the politics of it all. Humans are dumbing down. They're being dumbed down through systems control. So, you know, here we are talking about cognitive art in this very sophisticated sense, but already, do you think people have the awareness or the ability to really disseminate that?
level of sophistication. Don't think so. I'm sure if you sat in front of a Pollock for weeks on end, you would go into some sort of dream like, you know, metaphysical state. A REM state. Yeah, you would, because it's a transfer of a human act, which is mindless, a mindless, endless, well, act that grips people.
And I think that's what does, not everybody, of course, but it, it, it grips. Intelligent minds, because it's not delivering something that you fully understand. Yeah,
[00:13:18] Ila Colombo: it's also not delivering something that is necessarily obvious. You mentioned Pollock, and my mind goes to Rodko. And I find Rodko's pieces almost like mindscapes.
Meaning I stare at it, and my mind, it's suddenly sucked into a void of freedom.
[00:13:34] Ross Lovegrove: Well, he had to find that though, his mental state way before that did not deliver that type of art. It delivered a very figurative, illustrative form of art, which was pretty awful. And then he found maybe through some existential threat to himself or his mind, I mean, mind had to almost freak out in a very deep earth way to be able to arrive at delivering something that was so incredibly abstract.
That's why one has such. respect for abstraction because it takes so much courage, the lack of fear, seeing things a different way that are just so radical. Yeah,
[00:14:11] Ila Colombo: exactly. Within design, do you think we can draw such a clear line between visual design and cognitive design and where Would you say yours
[00:14:21] Ross Lovegrove: fits?
I like cognitive design, even though it can't be just cognitive because then it just doesn't mean anything. You don't even know what it is. So, you know, we talk about iconography, you know, the thing is that it has to represent whatever it is, if it's so wildly out there. I mean, you see it in a bit of design art these days, where people are just being so derivative of an idea for a chair that it's no longer a chair.
What is it? Is it a good chair? No. Is it a good piece of sculpture? No. So I think it's just kind of missing whatever it's supposed to be. At least if there's something deliberately figurative like, uh, you know, a Degas. ballerina than it is what it is. I think there's a missing level of clarity. And in my own work, certainly, I like things which are more cerebral.
I mean, you say cognitive, but I like cerebral things which, um, have, have layers of thought, even if the final object is reduced, you know, that's why I like organic essentialism because I feel it's so sincere on
[00:15:20] Ila Colombo: many levels. Well, some of your references looking at the books you always go back to, um, I see Gabo, Carlo Molino.
Is there any of those that you feel were also more cerebral and
[00:15:34] Ross Lovegrove: cognitive? Well, Noguchi by a long way. I've laid on his tatami mat. I've sat at his desk in Mure. You know, I, I wanted to become emotionally and soulfully connected to whatever it was that moved him. But what I liked about Noguchi was, when he did turn his hand to design, whether that's furniture or an object, they retained something from his sculpture, like the nurse radio and various other, his chess set, which I always wanted to own.
It's like a table. Can't afford it now. But, you know, those kind of things, which you can tell that somebody Who has a, has an alternative way of seeing things and an innate sense of material can move between those worlds freely. So that's something that I would love to do. I think my watch for Issey Miyake bears some kind of relativity to the work of Noguchi.
Not that I sat down to do that, but I just know that that kind of purity and interesting form. Yeah. Why not? Whereas these artists, you know, Nam Gabo. Physically looking at how you would construct space, how you would define space, is something again that remains with me. My aluminium bioform series are all things which help to define space and relate to their environment.
How they reflect and meld with the environment. Their environment. So the, you know, when I did the show at the Pompidou, they asked me if there were pieces from Naum Gobo and so on that I wanted to put in my show, but I, that's another idea. That's a, that's another show. I felt that was a little bit pretentious to do that, but then I would love to go into conversation with that kind of idea at some point, just maybe to relate to people that design is not the poor relative.
It has something in it, which is enriching.
[00:17:25] Ila Colombo: Hmm. It's very fascinating. Beyond its function, you know. It's a very fascinating point, yes, that you're making. And I would love to see such a show. I mean, those are names that deeply resonates within me as well. I do believe that cognitive creativity has a stronger power when it kind of does commentary on whatever time in history, for example, Dadaism was very specific to that time.
I mean, you could take some pieces back and still apply it, show them today, and it would be representative. But you know, Ewewe is very contemporary and also very culturally belonging. Today, one of our biggest subject that we should all talk about day after day is of course climate change and sustainability and so on.
Can you be creative a little bit real time here and speculate on some ideas on how would you create a design, say a product, it can be any product, that would be cerebrally talking or commenting a little bit about sustainability. What would be your design process? for creating such an object.
[00:18:26] Ross Lovegrove: Well, sustainability, I have issues with that because it just seems to become this ubiquitous word.
It's almost worn out. What are we sustaining? And, uh, so I have to first of all, try and get my head into what that
[00:18:41] Ila Colombo: really means. Well, call it then eco friendliness in terms of earth friendly. If you had to create something that was visually satisfying within your own design language, but also cognitively earth friendly.
How would you approach such a challenge?
[00:18:55] Ross Lovegrove: Well, I don't think you're going to do that with a vacuum cleaner. No, exactly. You know, I mean, no, no, hang on. I mean, just be block headed about it, okay? I mean, you're not going to do that with a vacuum cleaner because who cares? It's just got to do the job. At the end of the day, you could look at something from a physical point of view that would have a birth, life and death very naturally.
So it would come into existence for a particular period of time and then it would. somehow disappear. That's not an easy one because you could do that anyway through taking a product and constantly dematerializing it. Meaning you take the phone and your 20 year objective or 10 year objective is to just constantly.
Reduce to a point where you just have a sheet of glass or you, I don't know, you just, you'd have nothing. I don't know what the nothing would be, but you see what I'm saying? That's the ultimate dematerialization. Or, you go the other way, you know, you just say, right, you want to be sustainable? Let's, let's talk about it.
I'm gonna do a solid cast iron chair that nobody's gonna move, and that's it. It's forever, you know, and I'm sorry, whoever this chap is down the road in a thousand years time, he's going to sit on my chair because legs are not going to change in that period of time. So intellectually, if you talk about, you know, the cerebral approach to everything.
Is it about making an object out of a material that can be broken down and reused again, or whatever, going through a particular cycle, like aluminium can, you know? But then, the irony is, and the contradiction is, you do something that's maybe so beautiful that nobody's ever going to break it down and recycle it to make something else.
You could recycle it into something worse. So, no. I think, you know, you do less, and better, and thoughtful, and you move by the minute. Of how life moves itself and positions itself against nature, where we are in the world, what our resources are, numbers, all of that. So you go step by step. So if somebody contacts me like the work I'm doing absolutely of the moment is of the moment.
It could not have been done before because I'm moving minute by minute with the potential of the time in which we live relative to the issues. of our time. So that's why I don't do all the other stuff that other people do because I don't, I think
[00:21:21] Ila Colombo: it's pointless. As you were speaking, I keep thinking and reasoning about something called essentialism.
So what you're describing is basically of any given project or any given situation, find the essence and that is intrinsically cognitive and intrinsically potentially sustainable or earth. So any, if you find Yeah, essentialism could become a whole new movement.
[00:21:44] Ross Lovegrove: Yeah, but I'm smiling, well I'm laughing because I'm thinking, I wonder if people become more primitive into the future.
I mean, there is that possibility that it becomes much more Neanderthal. And that is, so does one design for that kind of eventuality? I mean, it's quite interesting, that idea that we reverse it out, that it goes through these phases. Forward, backward, forward, backward, whatever that is. Well, life is a cycle anyway, so.
Yeah, but you know, I mean, that is an intellectual position, isn't it? And I just think if you took something like my monolith chair and you made it so permanent, you know, wow, that you, you know, that's for you, for your life, for that. What's the point with certain things which only provide one essential function, that are non electronic?
There's this immense freedom to go whichever way you want to go in it. You do not need to industrialize these things. You can make one or four or my, I don't know, my, my skin is tingling as I'm saying that. Yeah, mine
[00:22:46] Ila Colombo: too. I love what you're saying and, and, and that's why I'm not. And we are not together slowing the adoption of those new technology.
I mean, we were recently together in a design Shanghai back in early June, and I gave a talk on the use of AI within the creative processes. And then the conversation tapped upon web three and the metaverse and whatever. And I was just. trying to promote this thinking that the more we go into a metaphysical state of creativity, which is non binded to physicality, the more, not only we can be more expressive and free, but we can actually be more essential.
Meaning we do not need all these objects around us in the physical sense of the world. We do not need new collection. We do not need to ship all those physical goods. That is. Counterintuitive.
[00:23:34] Ross Lovegrove: All the great minds that say life is about experience. Uh, it's not about ownership and You know one goes through this massive phase of ownership because they think owning is is being owning Reflects who you are certainly in my case or our case, I mean Having certain things around you that remind you of time and the making of things from different generations is a beautiful thing, whatever that might be, from art, African art, to whatever, which is often unknown.
I mean, it's, uh, it's not designer led, it's not branded. Nothing that we have around us is branded, if you notice that. So that's a really interesting thing. Nature's not branded. So I love that idea, but as you were speaking, I was thinking when we were back in Shanghai, the power of the city, the external accumulative spaces are what gives you a sense of being alive.
Maybe it's not going home to sleep. That's not what it is. That going home to sleep with new AR, VR and all these devices that we get can expand our interior experience Beyond our walls and I I'm interested in that And then what you get outside In a city is another thing and then what you get outside of a city I mean, we're about to relocate and you know, i'm really I'm interested in desert and I'm in, I'm interested in the barren desert where you, it's like black and white photography.
You take everything out and you see it for what it is. I mean, can't wait to touch that because I'm kind of missing, I'm missing licking of some stone in the desert and the smell that you just don't get in a confined, organized place. I think it can go any way. I, you know, even AI can help us understand which way that we go.
Whether we go more primitive or we go more complex and
[00:25:31] Ila Colombo: nuclear. Yeah, it's a deep life experiences and you mentioned earlier your monolith. Chair for Morozo and, uh, in my opinion, and not just mine, you have many fans of yours that love that chair as well, is, yeah, one of the most beautiful objects and chairs you designed.
Can you recall what was design, the design process of Monolith? You know, what was the cognitive aspect and why Monolith? What were you trying to achieve with that?
[00:25:58] Ross Lovegrove: Well, we, we've talked in our conversations about references, whether they're conscious or subconscious, those references. And, you know, the art.
One might love or want to be associated with in whichever way you're Henry Moore, you're Sarah, and so on. The depth, these things which are so profound. When I thought about Monolith, I was thinking about the idea that you start with a block. And then slowly from in, in the inside, you suck the air out so you retain its edges.
So it retains its architecture, but then it pulls in where there are voids. Just that. It's like my headphones for Kev. It's the same principle. It's the idea of sucking the air out to softly reveal a void. And that means you take something which can appear heavy. And then it appears lightweight. So it has its own architectural anatomy.
Everything I do has that, everything. And you don't know that, but that's everything I do. What I'm working on now has anatomy and sucking the air out, minimalism. Is it an external skeleton? Is it an exoskeleton? What is it? So, to be even given that chance with Morozo was great and, uh, it exists. That product exists, you know, it's a roto molded product.
And then, when you paint the polymer, you end up with something, you get automotive clarity and, and revelation of line. Mm hmm. Wow. But the, you know, what I'm, another thing I'm working on right now uses... A similar technique, but with something that could be, it's from an African tribe, but it's something I've thought about for years, uh, as a way of defining topographical surface.
So I could take the whole idea of topographical surface and I could apply that to everything I've done, I mean literally everything, mapping, how you describe at a distance. So that's an intellectual process, um, people don't, might not even... begin to relate to that. I mean, can you relate to that? I mean, you know me, so can you relate to what I'm saying?
[00:28:10] Ila Colombo: Oh, totally. Totally. That's why I always say you're more of an artist than a designer because you think totally differently. And, um, you have very intellectual aspects like you just described. And I love the whole contraposition of principles that you have in you, like the monolith, this lightness, but perceived volumetric.
Mass. It is a very fascinating point. We're going to further explore this through some of the questions that we receive. Uh, this profile is sent through the question in the future, if we move more and more into automated designing, will there be true design without designers?
[00:28:48] Ross Lovegrove: That's my idea. So I kind of got to think about that.
Yeah, you know, only be a designer if it really is true to self and if there's something that's uncontrollable inside you that means you've got to release something and get it out to the world. If you're going into design because you think it's a cool profession and you can earn a living and you can do this and you can do that, you're just going to be mediocre and you're going to toe the line.
You've got to have this mindset The. Confronts and challenges, whatever it is that you do. So yeah, I, I'm hoping that to a certain degree, there will be one channel, which is definitely, uh, automated, uh, automata, automata. of, of, of conception based on the right amount of material, the right amount of energy, what it does, everything, you know, performance related characteristics that reduce that object to something clinically refined as in nature.
Butterfly or whatever. Smart designing. Smart design. It's a form of industrial biomimicry, if you want, that really just pulls it all into shape, doesn't leave a gap in its composition, cellular, nano, at that, wow, point of description where we even create the momentary pixels of material in combination with others.
So it's just, it's, it's absolutely. Incredible. That, that for me is, can happen with AI and I want to be part of that using additive technologies, how we lay down materials, when we need, what we need, why we need, and everybody's thinking, Oh my God, how boring. That's what Apple did, by the way. Apple, probably, if not the most successful company on earth, uh, an immensely intelligent company.
So in terms of moment in time, you might be thinking, Oh, that's a weird thing, but no, it's not because Apple did it. They just, it looked a little bit different to how I'm explaining. Yeah. I also
[00:30:49] Ila Colombo: think that to a comment like, how boring is that? I think as creatives, as, and as humans, we need to start realizing that it's not about being boring anymore or interesting anymore.
We're facing fundamental existential crisis on every level that is not about being boring is about being efficient, smart, intuitive. And successful, I mean, successful in a, we're going to survive as a species and we're not going to collapse with our own destruction. Another interesting question is, can you please describe the process from an idea that you may have to a tangible product and what are some of the obstacles that sometimes you run into?
Oh gosh.
[00:31:32] Ross Lovegrove: Well, you run into a lot of obstacles. Often these obstacles are self made. In the studio, in London, I always used to say to the team as they go out for lunch, I said, just make sure you don't have a hole in your bucket. I said, yeah, because if there's water in your bucket, it will go through the smallest of holes.
So, just be watertight in your thinking. If you take a case study, like my cutlery, called Solo, for Drea Day, many years ago, First of all, it's a forged process, so you're taking stainless steel and you're hitting it hard with a lot of energy. And I just wanted to reveal that process in the cutlery, in the design of the cutlery.
You hold a fork and a spoon differently than when you hold a knife. So that gestural elegance, if you like, can be assisted through the design. So I put a shape in there that was forged that would allow your thumb to enter that. space so that you would hopefully eat in an elegant way. The shape of the spoon, by the way, comes from a time when in the Pre 16th century, most people carried a spoon above their ear when they went out because when they needed to eat cutlery was not really provided.
They'd always have a knife on them because they would and they would carry a spoon above their ear and the particular shapes of that time were really great. So I took that shape and I put that into modern cutlery. But ironically Well, because I don't have it. I only have a couple of sets, and I have to keep those for exhibitions.
I love the work of Enzo Mari, for example. So give me any day a fork or a spoon from Enzo Mari. Even a knife, because it's got a very generous blade. So lovely to use. It proves that there's not one way of doing anything and one has to have respect for other people's creativity and minds. And then you only get that discovery once you get past the visual in that case.
So it's the tactility and I used to say, I want to create things that you touch that even if you were blind. You would love like my water bottle. So yes, that's a heavy statement But it's something which I think is really important kind of an important gesture of human tactility Very
[00:33:57] Ila Colombo: interesting someone else on Instagram and reached out talking about the potential association of epigenetics To your design work.
So epigenetic is the study of how your behaviors and environment can cause changes that affect the way your genes work. If we apply that to design and we apply that to organic design, what might be some of the current situation around you? Um, that are influencing and a genetic level, your organic design language today, sustainability for sure is one of them because you're trying to be more eco friendly.
What other principles, um, or environmental
[00:34:39] Ross Lovegrove: changes? That is a great question. I mean, first of all, I think you have to. You have to have a particular kind of instinct, so you have to have an automatic, reflexive way of evaluating something, whether it's fat free, therefore it's reduced, if it's reduced it's got to be less material, less energy to produce, less, less, less, so that is something embedded in it.
You're completely right about the other issues which are out there in the air, and those issues really confront me. They put me in a state of fight or flight. It's really weird. I'm in a weird position where I think Is it even worth doing? Most of the time and uh, i'm putting myself down most of the time because other there are things which already exist which Do the job in a wonderful way and me coming along with some kind of Not that I would do this, but gratuitous design language just because it looks cool.
You see it in shoes today. 3D printed shoes. They're, they're three times the size that they need be. They don't even make you walk properly. Global warming means polymer shoes. Who wants to walk in polymer shoes in 40 degrees? It's, it's mindless. You understand me? So I would think... How can I take that really fascinating research that people are doing, the, the netification, the, the, the structures, the porosity, how could I put that into a coagulation of material that would satisfy all the things I'm talking about?
So for example, shoes today are not, for me, are not about looking cool and, you know, on a catwalk at all. I think shoes should, should. Really help your physiognomy and your health or because we have aging populations huge aging Populations around the world they need it. It's not all about being cool If you're in the news meaning you stay up to date in on current affairs all levels, you know today America did a second run of nuclear fusion.
That's getting closer to energy autonomy, free energy autonomy. I mean, wow, amazing. Toyota developing, it's what we discussed yesterday, how Toyota are developing AI programs to absolutely hyper rationalize how you build a car. I'm in. They're blending engineering. Oh man, that is exactly what it's about. So yeah, I love that.
And then I. I love the idea that maybe as we discussed the idea of putting some pixie dust back into that so you, you give it something that you can't predict. Yeah,
[00:37:08] Ila Colombo: beautifully articulated. Well in conclusion, it's a dance between visual and cognitive creativity and this dance will only grow more intricate.
It's an embrace of blending, championing authenticity, but also intellectual thinking and in a world of algorithms. We have to retain our own cognitive aspect to succeed. Thank you.
For Love & Design is produced by Fascinate Productions.
[00:00:00] Ross Lovegrove: Welcome to For Love and Design, the podcast that explores the world of design, innovation, art, and creativity. I'm Ross Lovegrove. And together with Hila Colombo, in this episode, we'd be talking about visual creativity versus cognitive creativity, and if the two can be different modus operandi in design.
But before we begin, if you enjoy our podcast, please be sure to subscribe and leave us a review. And don't forget to follow us on social media to stay up to date. Let's get started.
[00:00:30] Ila Colombo: Hi everyone. Back here for one of our conversations on the future of design and creativity. I'm here with ever curious Ross Lovegrove as always.
[00:00:41] Ross Lovegrove: That’s me. So what are we going to talk about?
[00:00:45] Ila Colombo: Well, today I would like to talk about the intertwining paths of visual versus cognitive creativity. The distinction that I mean is between something that can be represented by fine art, more literally like conceptual art versus figurative art. And I always loved that.
And one of my forever remote. mentors in creativity is someone like Anthony Gormley, which I find both visual and cognitive. I mean, he's a conceptual artist, but his creations are also very visual and very powerful. I find your work potentially fitting in the same bubble. In the age of generative AI and rapid technological progress, where do we see this, uh, spectrum stands?
Visual creativity. Creative
[00:01:32] Ross Lovegrove: creativity. Well, you know, AI immediately gives you, wow, I mean, so much more potential, doesn't it? I mean, just, it opens it up. I mean, as I'm talking to you, I got all sorts of visions in my mind. You mentioned Anthony. I mean, the thing is Anthony, he has these fabulous undercurrents which are all based on something very primordial and raw.
discovered. It's deeply, deeply sort of not even pre human, it's human, but it's something. That really touches me and, you know, without really trying to analyze anything. So the, the cognition of the material, certainly when he extrudes the human and you walk through a passage, you have light at the end, it's dark, it's, you know, you feel enclosed but you feel that you can escape.
A lot of these emotions that can be created from nothing. I mean, that's what interests me is the fact that, you know, relatively speaking within that sphere of art, you can really, really test people's emotions, you know, without delivering something prescriptive. So, you know, Anthony started out by casting his own body.
He used the means and tools around him and that's why it's so, so self referential. But as he's moved on, for example, working with, you know, he hired Pierre who used to work for me. Suddenly it became very digitized. It was
[00:02:56] Ila Colombo: much more diverse and subtle, his early work, but for example, in one of his latest book, I think it was.
by Rizzoli. You can see that his early work was highly conceptual, highly cognitive, uh, you know, when he did this, uh, sequence of decreasing spheres. The reason why I'm personally interested more towards cognitive creativity versus Visual and literal figurative one is that I'm more drawn to things that provoke some thinking into me and that have a meaning.
Something can be just beautiful visually, like, I don't know, like the butterflies by Damien Hirst, but equally is a, is a quick fix meaning, Oh, I say, yeah, beautiful, great. And then next. Yeah. But
[00:03:36] Ross Lovegrove: you know that I fully understand that. And that's what I like about you and what I like about how you've, you've grown into that mindset because.
Nobody, especially if you're a creative person, you don't need things around you just to decorate a wall. I mean, it's ridiculous. It's better not to have it. It's got to have a deeper meaning. That's why often, you know, you create things yourself because maybe the meaning is missing. And you have a way of describing that, you know, I know you do that in your own work.
I mean, as a, as an artist, as a painter, you know, with your work on proxemics. So it's that thing where how, how do you convey feelings about being in a dense place with other people or, you know, all of these dimensions to that, which I think it's such an amazing subject that you've discovered that could go into.
You know, 2d or 3d effortlessly, but would always, you'd know there was something underneath it. Yeah,
[00:04:31] Ila Colombo: precisely. Well, thank you for saying what you just said. And if we stay within art, which between me and you, art is a huge influence in the way we think, certainly about creativity. I feel like Dadaism was a movement that successfully put together the two potentially.
Like for example, if you take Marcel Duchamp's Fountain. Uh, urinal visually it's, it was very mundane and almost vulgarly obvious, but cognitively it was questioning the very definition of art.
[00:05:01] Ross Lovegrove: This is like Tracey Emin's bed or Damien's shark, you know, it's disruptive. And you know what, what I love about art.
What's happening again today, I would even say with AI is that anything goes, you know, you want to float humans in the air like Magritte or you, you know, you, you can do things which, you know, your dreams and imagination can envisage, but then you can put it. into imagery. That's where film and other methodologies can really connect up.
I
[00:05:34] Ila Colombo: totally agree. We keep talking about generative AI, we can't escape the subject and it's something that we constantly work with. But yeah, generative AI like GANs are already producing art, blending visual patterns with conceptual algorithms. But I do have a constant question. In my mind, which is, can AI truly understand the depth of human emotion and cognition?
And the short answer of today is obviously no, but can we grow generative AI within a creative application that will eventually do that? Will it ever? understand the depth of human emotion and therefore have more cognitive
[00:06:13] Ross Lovegrove: aspect. What do you mean by cognitive? Because it's about perception, isn't it? You perceive things differently than I do.
No,
[00:06:19] Ila Colombo: but the intellectual meaning of something, you know, Anthony Gormley's cognitive side of his work is very human. Right. He's very human centric, but Richard Serra is not necessarily human centric. It's very much about mass, volume, and weight, the perception of space. So the perception of space could potentially be something that AI can relate to as well.
[00:06:40] Ross Lovegrove: But in that is through experimentation, and this relates to people like Anthony or to Richard Serra through experimentation, you will discover, and there will be a moment when. By pure chance, something will be discovered that will formulate your future. When Richard Serra put a sheet, uh, I think it was metal, into a corner of a room and it stood up, that kind of connectivity between space, material, geometry, mass, weight, da da da, and it gave you something that, A few seconds before did not exist, and a few seconds after could not exist, meaning it comes into play momentarily and then can be taken away.
So there's in, in Anthony's work and Sarah's work, of course, there's this incredible permanence and cognitive permanence is a very interesting thought for me. I mean, what'd you think about that?
[00:07:34] Ila Colombo: It's a very interesting in a session point. So
[00:07:36] Ross Lovegrove: the idea would repeat and move on to new generations. beyond you.
[00:07:41] Ila Colombo: Yeah. Well, between what you just said, I, I, I find very interesting and very thought provoking also the experience of discovery, meaning you discover something within a process and also, and almost by accident. And I think that because of this accidental, occasional, almost glitch experience that you have.
That is something that ultimately AI will be able to experience. I mean, we know for a fact, Google's AI, when it was working and playing professional chess games, or even the game of Go, they discovered that the softwares were creating new accidental moves and those moves were the winning moves. So the very intrinsic experience.
of accidental discovery can happen between an
[00:08:26] Ross Lovegrove: algorithm. AI is that they could make that move because their knowledge is way down the road. So they know that that act. will result in... No, but those,
[00:08:36] Ila Colombo: those were completely novel acts. This is what I'm trying
[00:08:39] Ross Lovegrove: to say. Yeah, they were novel acts. Acts which a human would not take the risk to do.
No, a
[00:08:44] Ila Colombo: human could not
[00:08:45] Ross Lovegrove: even conceive. Because they can't think that far
[00:08:48] Ila Colombo: ahead. Yeah, it was just a mathematical, occasional episode. Yeah, but just
[00:08:52] Ross Lovegrove: that idea. Oh, that's interesting. The idea of being able to think so far ahead. But also referenced so far back and in the present this past present future massive scale of information orientation that interests me because you know, I have a mind which is really Futurist mind I can imagine things which might come for whatever reason You know, I've had that since I was a kid.
So I think that one of my interests in, in AI is AI's ability to project so far forward to forming a simulation that is beyond the human mind. That's not even science fiction because science fiction is a bit of a guesswork towards that. It's the human thing. But what AI variant of cognitive...
[00:09:38] Ila Colombo: Creativity.
Yeah. I'm deeply fascinated because it relates almost to life on earth, meaning what are the chances and the probability of life happening on a planet? I mean, it's very little yet is very grand because of the mathematical expansion of massive potential of numerics, right? We have an infinite growing universe with infinite planets.
What are the chances of that happening is, is again, this journey of accidental discovery. Life on earth was an accidental discovery and you're talking to me these days about something very interesting about the evolution of life on
[00:10:14] Ross Lovegrove: earth. Oh yeah, it's serendipity, but time, time plays such an important factor.
We talk about millions of years, but with AI, we're talking about compression, absolutely momentary compression. And then you throw into the mix the quantum factor. Which is unbelievable, we haven't even started that whole idea yet. It's just gonna move so far past us. I mean, the Earth itself, and it's coming into being over, what, four and a half billion years, has been so complex, and once you learn more about that, you walk out into your garden, and almost tears will, will accumulate, because you can't believe what this complexity and this sort of...
There was no, no consciousness in the earth to push it a particular direction. It, that's what nature is. Nature just reacts to atmospheric condition. Uh, AI does not react to atmospheric condition because it's non physical and it needs energy and it needs a few other things, but it's just about an information data digital driven point
[00:11:21] Ila Colombo: in time.
Yeah. At the moment, I think at some point, the more it grows and potentially evolves and potentially develop some kind of awareness of itself, it will start to explore spatial awareness and therefore physical awareness is going to start. Yeah. Try to expand. And the moment he tries to expand, it going to reach a limit.
And when you have a limit, you know, a finite. Environment. This is what it's fascinating about the earth, that we're a, a, a growing species, potentially exponentially growing. Mm-hmm. to infinite numbers, but we are on a finite planet and that makes our condition very much true to
[00:11:59] Ross Lovegrove: us. A finite planet. For what are we talking for biological life.
Is it a fin? planet for that. If we ice over again because of what we're doing to the atmosphere, who knows? We speculate
[00:12:08] Ila Colombo: a lot about the future. What do you think will be the psychological aspects of that? Like, we will develop new psychological issues, therefore the cognitive side of creativity is going to change a lot, obviously.
Do you feel any effect on your psychology of relating to the time in which we live, which are very all over the
[00:12:27] Ross Lovegrove: you go into the politics of it all. Humans are dumbing down. They're being dumbed down through systems control. So, you know, here we are talking about cognitive art in this very sophisticated sense, but already, do you think people have the awareness or the ability to really disseminate that?
level of sophistication. Don't think so. I'm sure if you sat in front of a Pollock for weeks on end, you would go into some sort of dream like, you know, metaphysical state. A REM state. Yeah, you would, because it's a transfer of a human act, which is mindless, a mindless, endless, well, act that grips people.
And I think that's what does, not everybody, of course, but it, it, it grips. Intelligent minds, because it's not delivering something that you fully understand. Yeah,
[00:13:18] Ila Colombo: it's also not delivering something that is necessarily obvious. You mentioned Pollock, and my mind goes to Rodko. And I find Rodko's pieces almost like mindscapes.
Meaning I stare at it, and my mind, it's suddenly sucked into a void of freedom.
[00:13:34] Ross Lovegrove: Well, he had to find that though, his mental state way before that did not deliver that type of art. It delivered a very figurative, illustrative form of art, which was pretty awful. And then he found maybe through some existential threat to himself or his mind, I mean, mind had to almost freak out in a very deep earth way to be able to arrive at delivering something that was so incredibly abstract.
That's why one has such. respect for abstraction because it takes so much courage, the lack of fear, seeing things a different way that are just so radical. Yeah,
[00:14:11] Ila Colombo: exactly. Within design, do you think we can draw such a clear line between visual design and cognitive design and where Would you say yours
[00:14:21] Ross Lovegrove: fits?
I like cognitive design, even though it can't be just cognitive because then it just doesn't mean anything. You don't even know what it is. So, you know, we talk about iconography, you know, the thing is that it has to represent whatever it is, if it's so wildly out there. I mean, you see it in a bit of design art these days, where people are just being so derivative of an idea for a chair that it's no longer a chair.
What is it? Is it a good chair? No. Is it a good piece of sculpture? No. So I think it's just kind of missing whatever it's supposed to be. At least if there's something deliberately figurative like, uh, you know, a Degas. ballerina than it is what it is. I think there's a missing level of clarity. And in my own work, certainly, I like things which are more cerebral.
I mean, you say cognitive, but I like cerebral things which, um, have, have layers of thought, even if the final object is reduced, you know, that's why I like organic essentialism because I feel it's so sincere on
[00:15:20] Ila Colombo: many levels. Well, some of your references looking at the books you always go back to, um, I see Gabo, Carlo Molino.
Is there any of those that you feel were also more cerebral and
[00:15:34] Ross Lovegrove: cognitive? Well, Noguchi by a long way. I've laid on his tatami mat. I've sat at his desk in Mure. You know, I, I wanted to become emotionally and soulfully connected to whatever it was that moved him. But what I liked about Noguchi was, when he did turn his hand to design, whether that's furniture or an object, they retained something from his sculpture, like the nurse radio and various other, his chess set, which I always wanted to own.
It's like a table. Can't afford it now. But, you know, those kind of things, which you can tell that somebody Who has a, has an alternative way of seeing things and an innate sense of material can move between those worlds freely. So that's something that I would love to do. I think my watch for Issey Miyake bears some kind of relativity to the work of Noguchi.
Not that I sat down to do that, but I just know that that kind of purity and interesting form. Yeah. Why not? Whereas these artists, you know, Nam Gabo. Physically looking at how you would construct space, how you would define space, is something again that remains with me. My aluminium bioform series are all things which help to define space and relate to their environment.
How they reflect and meld with the environment. Their environment. So the, you know, when I did the show at the Pompidou, they asked me if there were pieces from Naum Gobo and so on that I wanted to put in my show, but I, that's another idea. That's a, that's another show. I felt that was a little bit pretentious to do that, but then I would love to go into conversation with that kind of idea at some point, just maybe to relate to people that design is not the poor relative.
It has something in it, which is enriching.
[00:17:25] Ila Colombo: Hmm. It's very fascinating. Beyond its function, you know. It's a very fascinating point, yes, that you're making. And I would love to see such a show. I mean, those are names that deeply resonates within me as well. I do believe that cognitive creativity has a stronger power when it kind of does commentary on whatever time in history, for example, Dadaism was very specific to that time.
I mean, you could take some pieces back and still apply it, show them today, and it would be representative. But you know, Ewewe is very contemporary and also very culturally belonging. Today, one of our biggest subject that we should all talk about day after day is of course climate change and sustainability and so on.
Can you be creative a little bit real time here and speculate on some ideas on how would you create a design, say a product, it can be any product, that would be cerebrally talking or commenting a little bit about sustainability. What would be your design process? for creating such an object.
[00:18:26] Ross Lovegrove: Well, sustainability, I have issues with that because it just seems to become this ubiquitous word.
It's almost worn out. What are we sustaining? And, uh, so I have to first of all, try and get my head into what that
[00:18:41] Ila Colombo: really means. Well, call it then eco friendliness in terms of earth friendly. If you had to create something that was visually satisfying within your own design language, but also cognitively earth friendly.
How would you approach such a challenge?
[00:18:55] Ross Lovegrove: Well, I don't think you're going to do that with a vacuum cleaner. No, exactly. You know, I mean, no, no, hang on. I mean, just be block headed about it, okay? I mean, you're not going to do that with a vacuum cleaner because who cares? It's just got to do the job. At the end of the day, you could look at something from a physical point of view that would have a birth, life and death very naturally.
So it would come into existence for a particular period of time and then it would. somehow disappear. That's not an easy one because you could do that anyway through taking a product and constantly dematerializing it. Meaning you take the phone and your 20 year objective or 10 year objective is to just constantly.
Reduce to a point where you just have a sheet of glass or you, I don't know, you just, you'd have nothing. I don't know what the nothing would be, but you see what I'm saying? That's the ultimate dematerialization. Or, you go the other way, you know, you just say, right, you want to be sustainable? Let's, let's talk about it.
I'm gonna do a solid cast iron chair that nobody's gonna move, and that's it. It's forever, you know, and I'm sorry, whoever this chap is down the road in a thousand years time, he's going to sit on my chair because legs are not going to change in that period of time. So intellectually, if you talk about, you know, the cerebral approach to everything.
Is it about making an object out of a material that can be broken down and reused again, or whatever, going through a particular cycle, like aluminium can, you know? But then, the irony is, and the contradiction is, you do something that's maybe so beautiful that nobody's ever going to break it down and recycle it to make something else.
You could recycle it into something worse. So, no. I think, you know, you do less, and better, and thoughtful, and you move by the minute. Of how life moves itself and positions itself against nature, where we are in the world, what our resources are, numbers, all of that. So you go step by step. So if somebody contacts me like the work I'm doing absolutely of the moment is of the moment.
It could not have been done before because I'm moving minute by minute with the potential of the time in which we live relative to the issues. of our time. So that's why I don't do all the other stuff that other people do because I don't, I think
[00:21:21] Ila Colombo: it's pointless. As you were speaking, I keep thinking and reasoning about something called essentialism.
So what you're describing is basically of any given project or any given situation, find the essence and that is intrinsically cognitive and intrinsically potentially sustainable or earth. So any, if you find Yeah, essentialism could become a whole new movement.
[00:21:44] Ross Lovegrove: Yeah, but I'm smiling, well I'm laughing because I'm thinking, I wonder if people become more primitive into the future.
I mean, there is that possibility that it becomes much more Neanderthal. And that is, so does one design for that kind of eventuality? I mean, it's quite interesting, that idea that we reverse it out, that it goes through these phases. Forward, backward, forward, backward, whatever that is. Well, life is a cycle anyway, so.
Yeah, but you know, I mean, that is an intellectual position, isn't it? And I just think if you took something like my monolith chair and you made it so permanent, you know, wow, that you, you know, that's for you, for your life, for that. What's the point with certain things which only provide one essential function, that are non electronic?
There's this immense freedom to go whichever way you want to go in it. You do not need to industrialize these things. You can make one or four or my, I don't know, my, my skin is tingling as I'm saying that. Yeah, mine
[00:22:46] Ila Colombo: too. I love what you're saying and, and, and that's why I'm not. And we are not together slowing the adoption of those new technology.
I mean, we were recently together in a design Shanghai back in early June, and I gave a talk on the use of AI within the creative processes. And then the conversation tapped upon web three and the metaverse and whatever. And I was just. trying to promote this thinking that the more we go into a metaphysical state of creativity, which is non binded to physicality, the more, not only we can be more expressive and free, but we can actually be more essential.
Meaning we do not need all these objects around us in the physical sense of the world. We do not need new collection. We do not need to ship all those physical goods. That is. Counterintuitive.
[00:23:34] Ross Lovegrove: All the great minds that say life is about experience. Uh, it's not about ownership and You know one goes through this massive phase of ownership because they think owning is is being owning Reflects who you are certainly in my case or our case, I mean Having certain things around you that remind you of time and the making of things from different generations is a beautiful thing, whatever that might be, from art, African art, to whatever, which is often unknown.
I mean, it's, uh, it's not designer led, it's not branded. Nothing that we have around us is branded, if you notice that. So that's a really interesting thing. Nature's not branded. So I love that idea, but as you were speaking, I was thinking when we were back in Shanghai, the power of the city, the external accumulative spaces are what gives you a sense of being alive.
Maybe it's not going home to sleep. That's not what it is. That going home to sleep with new AR, VR and all these devices that we get can expand our interior experience Beyond our walls and I I'm interested in that And then what you get outside In a city is another thing and then what you get outside of a city I mean, we're about to relocate and you know, i'm really I'm interested in desert and I'm in, I'm interested in the barren desert where you, it's like black and white photography.
You take everything out and you see it for what it is. I mean, can't wait to touch that because I'm kind of missing, I'm missing licking of some stone in the desert and the smell that you just don't get in a confined, organized place. I think it can go any way. I, you know, even AI can help us understand which way that we go.
Whether we go more primitive or we go more complex and
[00:25:31] Ila Colombo: nuclear. Yeah, it's a deep life experiences and you mentioned earlier your monolith. Chair for Morozo and, uh, in my opinion, and not just mine, you have many fans of yours that love that chair as well, is, yeah, one of the most beautiful objects and chairs you designed.
Can you recall what was design, the design process of Monolith? You know, what was the cognitive aspect and why Monolith? What were you trying to achieve with that?
[00:25:58] Ross Lovegrove: Well, we, we've talked in our conversations about references, whether they're conscious or subconscious, those references. And, you know, the art.
One might love or want to be associated with in whichever way you're Henry Moore, you're Sarah, and so on. The depth, these things which are so profound. When I thought about Monolith, I was thinking about the idea that you start with a block. And then slowly from in, in the inside, you suck the air out so you retain its edges.
So it retains its architecture, but then it pulls in where there are voids. Just that. It's like my headphones for Kev. It's the same principle. It's the idea of sucking the air out to softly reveal a void. And that means you take something which can appear heavy. And then it appears lightweight. So it has its own architectural anatomy.
Everything I do has that, everything. And you don't know that, but that's everything I do. What I'm working on now has anatomy and sucking the air out, minimalism. Is it an external skeleton? Is it an exoskeleton? What is it? So, to be even given that chance with Morozo was great and, uh, it exists. That product exists, you know, it's a roto molded product.
And then, when you paint the polymer, you end up with something, you get automotive clarity and, and revelation of line. Mm hmm. Wow. But the, you know, what I'm, another thing I'm working on right now uses... A similar technique, but with something that could be, it's from an African tribe, but it's something I've thought about for years, uh, as a way of defining topographical surface.
So I could take the whole idea of topographical surface and I could apply that to everything I've done, I mean literally everything, mapping, how you describe at a distance. So that's an intellectual process, um, people don't, might not even... begin to relate to that. I mean, can you relate to that? I mean, you know me, so can you relate to what I'm saying?
[00:28:10] Ila Colombo: Oh, totally. Totally. That's why I always say you're more of an artist than a designer because you think totally differently. And, um, you have very intellectual aspects like you just described. And I love the whole contraposition of principles that you have in you, like the monolith, this lightness, but perceived volumetric.
Mass. It is a very fascinating point. We're going to further explore this through some of the questions that we receive. Uh, this profile is sent through the question in the future, if we move more and more into automated designing, will there be true design without designers?
[00:28:48] Ross Lovegrove: That's my idea. So I kind of got to think about that.
Yeah, you know, only be a designer if it really is true to self and if there's something that's uncontrollable inside you that means you've got to release something and get it out to the world. If you're going into design because you think it's a cool profession and you can earn a living and you can do this and you can do that, you're just going to be mediocre and you're going to toe the line.
You've got to have this mindset The. Confronts and challenges, whatever it is that you do. So yeah, I, I'm hoping that to a certain degree, there will be one channel, which is definitely, uh, automated, uh, automata, automata. of, of, of conception based on the right amount of material, the right amount of energy, what it does, everything, you know, performance related characteristics that reduce that object to something clinically refined as in nature.
Butterfly or whatever. Smart designing. Smart design. It's a form of industrial biomimicry, if you want, that really just pulls it all into shape, doesn't leave a gap in its composition, cellular, nano, at that, wow, point of description where we even create the momentary pixels of material in combination with others.
So it's just, it's, it's absolutely. Incredible. That, that for me is, can happen with AI and I want to be part of that using additive technologies, how we lay down materials, when we need, what we need, why we need, and everybody's thinking, Oh my God, how boring. That's what Apple did, by the way. Apple, probably, if not the most successful company on earth, uh, an immensely intelligent company.
So in terms of moment in time, you might be thinking, Oh, that's a weird thing, but no, it's not because Apple did it. They just, it looked a little bit different to how I'm explaining. Yeah. I also
[00:30:49] Ila Colombo: think that to a comment like, how boring is that? I think as creatives, as, and as humans, we need to start realizing that it's not about being boring anymore or interesting anymore.
We're facing fundamental existential crisis on every level that is not about being boring is about being efficient, smart, intuitive. And successful, I mean, successful in a, we're going to survive as a species and we're not going to collapse with our own destruction. Another interesting question is, can you please describe the process from an idea that you may have to a tangible product and what are some of the obstacles that sometimes you run into?
Oh gosh.
[00:31:32] Ross Lovegrove: Well, you run into a lot of obstacles. Often these obstacles are self made. In the studio, in London, I always used to say to the team as they go out for lunch, I said, just make sure you don't have a hole in your bucket. I said, yeah, because if there's water in your bucket, it will go through the smallest of holes.
So, just be watertight in your thinking. If you take a case study, like my cutlery, called Solo, for Drea Day, many years ago, First of all, it's a forged process, so you're taking stainless steel and you're hitting it hard with a lot of energy. And I just wanted to reveal that process in the cutlery, in the design of the cutlery.
You hold a fork and a spoon differently than when you hold a knife. So that gestural elegance, if you like, can be assisted through the design. So I put a shape in there that was forged that would allow your thumb to enter that. space so that you would hopefully eat in an elegant way. The shape of the spoon, by the way, comes from a time when in the Pre 16th century, most people carried a spoon above their ear when they went out because when they needed to eat cutlery was not really provided.
They'd always have a knife on them because they would and they would carry a spoon above their ear and the particular shapes of that time were really great. So I took that shape and I put that into modern cutlery. But ironically Well, because I don't have it. I only have a couple of sets, and I have to keep those for exhibitions.
I love the work of Enzo Mari, for example. So give me any day a fork or a spoon from Enzo Mari. Even a knife, because it's got a very generous blade. So lovely to use. It proves that there's not one way of doing anything and one has to have respect for other people's creativity and minds. And then you only get that discovery once you get past the visual in that case.
So it's the tactility and I used to say, I want to create things that you touch that even if you were blind. You would love like my water bottle. So yes, that's a heavy statement But it's something which I think is really important kind of an important gesture of human tactility Very
[00:33:57] Ila Colombo: interesting someone else on Instagram and reached out talking about the potential association of epigenetics To your design work.
So epigenetic is the study of how your behaviors and environment can cause changes that affect the way your genes work. If we apply that to design and we apply that to organic design, what might be some of the current situation around you? Um, that are influencing and a genetic level, your organic design language today, sustainability for sure is one of them because you're trying to be more eco friendly.
What other principles, um, or environmental
[00:34:39] Ross Lovegrove: changes? That is a great question. I mean, first of all, I think you have to. You have to have a particular kind of instinct, so you have to have an automatic, reflexive way of evaluating something, whether it's fat free, therefore it's reduced, if it's reduced it's got to be less material, less energy to produce, less, less, less, so that is something embedded in it.
You're completely right about the other issues which are out there in the air, and those issues really confront me. They put me in a state of fight or flight. It's really weird. I'm in a weird position where I think Is it even worth doing? Most of the time and uh, i'm putting myself down most of the time because other there are things which already exist which Do the job in a wonderful way and me coming along with some kind of Not that I would do this, but gratuitous design language just because it looks cool.
You see it in shoes today. 3D printed shoes. They're, they're three times the size that they need be. They don't even make you walk properly. Global warming means polymer shoes. Who wants to walk in polymer shoes in 40 degrees? It's, it's mindless. You understand me? So I would think... How can I take that really fascinating research that people are doing, the, the netification, the, the, the structures, the porosity, how could I put that into a coagulation of material that would satisfy all the things I'm talking about?
So for example, shoes today are not, for me, are not about looking cool and, you know, on a catwalk at all. I think shoes should, should. Really help your physiognomy and your health or because we have aging populations huge aging Populations around the world they need it. It's not all about being cool If you're in the news meaning you stay up to date in on current affairs all levels, you know today America did a second run of nuclear fusion.
That's getting closer to energy autonomy, free energy autonomy. I mean, wow, amazing. Toyota developing, it's what we discussed yesterday, how Toyota are developing AI programs to absolutely hyper rationalize how you build a car. I'm in. They're blending engineering. Oh man, that is exactly what it's about. So yeah, I love that.
And then I. I love the idea that maybe as we discussed the idea of putting some pixie dust back into that so you, you give it something that you can't predict. Yeah,
[00:37:08] Ila Colombo: beautifully articulated. Well in conclusion, it's a dance between visual and cognitive creativity and this dance will only grow more intricate.
It's an embrace of blending, championing authenticity, but also intellectual thinking and in a world of algorithms. We have to retain our own cognitive aspect to succeed. Thank you.
For Love & Design is produced by Fascinate Productions.
