One of the main arguments I extracted from this week’s reading is the interplay between fashion and discretion in design, particularly in the context of disability. Whether a design should blend in or stand out is subjective and depends on the user. For instance, teeth implants and removable teeth were initially functional medical solutions meant to resemble natural teeth. Over time, however, these appliances have become fashion statements, with materials like gold being used to signify wealth or spirituality. This shift exemplifies how functional designs can appeal to broader audiences and evolve into tools of self-expression. Similarly, the example of the athlete in the reading, who embraced her prosthetic legs as a fashionable part of her identity, demonstrates how design choices can transcend functionality to reflect individuality. This underscores the idea that the line between utility and self-expression is fluid and often shaped by societal influences.
The reading also provokes thought about the ethics of design, particularly when it comes to medical appliances. While designers from unrelated fields might bring fresh perspectives, their lack of specialized knowledge can lead to unintended consequences. For example, the trend of hearing aids resembling earphones doesn’t address how excessive earphone use may itself lead to hearing loss, creating a harmful cycle. This highlights the risk of prioritizing aesthetics or profit over the users’ actual needs. These insights also apply to interactive design, reminding us that functionality and user experience must take precedence over superficial appeal. Thoughtful design must strike a balance, respecting the user’s needs and individuality while avoiding exploitation or unnecessary commercialization.