IS THE USER'S DECISION PROCESS NEAT AND PRECISE?:
WHAT THE USER LOOKS FOR

Family Use Products Unit 1 is the classification that includes the products referred to as miscellaneous items for daily life or everyday goods, excluding major electrical appliances (washing machines, refrigerators, heating and cooling devices, etc.). It includes everything from pet cages to toolboxes, tools, poles for drying clothes, tableware, air purifiers, Buddhist altars, and more. It is the classification for small items inside and outside the house that are necessary but do not play a major role. The designers of these items aim for beauty arising out of practical use.
When users or purchasers select furniture or interior decorations, not to mention large electrical appliances, they are aware that they are choosing something that will "play a major role" in the space inside their home or something that is "important and valuable." This awareness causes them to muster their individuality, good judgment, and esthetic sense for the decision process. This is because they know that the quality of the space will be determined or largely controlled by these items.

However, we have to wonder if the same is true for the product classifications in this Unit, whether they are chosen with the same care as furniture and large electrical appliances. (Of course, there are some exceptions, such as tableware.) When buying smaller items, well, you need them, they are of practical value, the price is right, and this choice seems just fine. When you make decisions on the spot like that, you end up with an abundant number of goods, but they are nothing more than a mismatched jumble, and they do nothing to improve the quality of the space. On the contrary, it is more likely that the main pieces of furniture and appliances that you put so much effort into choosing end up buried amidst all the clutter. This is both the unique characteristic and the special challenge of this classification.

Nowadays, it is often said that users have developed a more mature attitude about their possessions. I certainly believe that they are more mature about many classifications of products, but on the other hand, I can't help feeling that when it comes to choosing the items that play a "supporting role" in their spaces and daily lives, they still don't have a firm point of view or a sufficient sense of vision to chose things. This is not because of a lack of good products. As we adjudicated this classification, we were continually reminded that there needs to be a connection between the conoisseur (user) who chooses good products and the one who creates them (the designer).

DESIGNERS MUST NOT BE SHORT-SIGHTED:
THE EYES OF THE DESIGNER

Looking closely at the more than 200 entries one by one, we found very few of which it could be said, "This is substandard," whether we are talking about function, form, or degree of completeness. That fact alone allows us to state that the quality of entries has risen.
However, while there were no items that were absolutely no good, there were also no items that made us think, "That's fantastic!" Even though the five Screening Committee members of our Unit differed on what they considered to be "fantastic," I would have thought that at least one entry would have prompted at least one Committee member to say, "Now that is wonderful!" This means that products within each classification of everyday goods are moving toward an average or that they have become more uniform.
We were a bit bothered about the classification that included air purifiers and other small household appliances. It was as if the manufacturers had consulted among themselves and decided to use the colors pink, orange, blue, green, and purple, and even though the units themselves seemed to have nice, compact designs, when we imagined how most of them would look installed in a room, we doubted that they would improve the quality of the space. We wonder if there is not a need for design that pays more attention to the circumstances and space in which a product will be used. (Ever since the iMac, color has been used as a quick and easy feature, not only in household appliances but also in many other kinds of everyday goods, and it has become a sort of fashion. If they are going to do that, I would like them to make use of the iMac's strategy.)
Of course, these problems are not the fault of designers alone. People in sales and marketing, wanting products to be easy to sell, probably play a major role in suggesting that items with similar functions be distinguished on the basis of color. That is why we would like have designers display firm convictions and their own insights.

DESIGN OF RELATIONSHIPS: LOOKING AT THE SOCIETY

Even in this Unit, where the objects of screening are mostly the products themselves, there are an increasing number of cases in which the very processes that gave birth to the product (procedures, relationships, environment) are evaluated. Examples include 50% Light weighted Small Size Milk Bottle Z200, which received the Universal Design Prize, and the Re-Shokki: Reproduction of Tableware, which received the Ecology Design Prize.
The small milk bottle has achieved the first 50% weight reduction in the industry. This reduces the burden on everyone, not only on people who drink milk, but also on all the people involved in distribution, and it reduces the amount of energy needed for transport.
Re-Shokki has created a new market for recycled tableware through an alliance among manufacturing companies, distributors, testing and research organizations, and users concerned with recycling and reuse of porcelain, the region's major industry.
Both of these entries demonstrate the existence of design that serves as a means of solving various issues in the social and industrial environments around their products.

It has been said that design has moved beyond dealing with only the shapes of products. Design greatest strength is its ability to create a variety of relationships between people, between people and things, between people and nature, between people and the environment, and between things, and in doing so, to move and modify them in different directions. It also has another strength: and I suggest that it is the ability to make things attractive. I will never stop hoping to see beautiful, attractive designs, whether for systems, technology, or shapes.

Rei Kurokawa
Chief Jury of Unit 1
President, Rei Kurokawa Architect's Office