Designtheory and the Symbolic Function

According to design theory, the symbolic function serves as a vehicle for conveying, for example, ideas, values, or identities, insofar as design is capable of transforming an ordinary object into one imbued with meaning. Such an object can be manipulated in ways that make it correspond to the values, ideas, and identity of the observer or potential purchaser and, consequently, render it appealing beyond the mere pleasure or beauty derived from the object itself. Furthermore, according to design theory, the symbolic function of objects communicates a sense of belonging to particular groups or, conversely, a distinction from certain groups. For this reason, the symbolic function can also be understood as a carrier of social norms that are associated with the manipulated objects. In this context, it is important to emphasize that objects can, on the one hand, possess a practical function, such as a means of transportation that takes a person to a desired destination, while simultaneously possessing a symbolic function, such as communicating the status that one wishes to present. These two functions must therefore be analytically distinguished from one another. According to design theory, the object functions as an imbued or symbolically charged entity and assumes the role of manifesting one’s own convictions and one’s abstract understanding of the particular form of belonging—whether political, economic, religious, or otherwise—with which one wishes to be identified. It can therefore be argued that such manipulated objects themselves become “speaking” objects and simultaneously serve as a medium for both the artist and the purchaser, as well as for the identity or conviction that they consciously seek to communicate. Viewed on a meta-level, language itself, which we use, can be understood as a manipulable object within design theory. On one level—the factual or propositional level, one might say—it conveys meaning, information, and significance. At the same time, however, the choice of words also signals identity, for example, through whether an individual employs an educated or formal register or “slang.” Although both forms may convey essentially the same content, there is nevertheless a difference on the other level, insofar as a sense of belonging, as well as certain values, is communicated without these ever having to be explicitly articulated. Finally, I would like to criticize the fetishization of this symbolic function, insofar as “speaking” and manipulated objects can also serve to strongly separate people from one another and exert a certain attraction upon them. This attraction does not necessarily merely satisfy a need for belonging; rather, such objects and their symbolic functions can also be politically instrumentalized. Particularly in the present day, individuals increasingly seek to represent and reaffirm their own sense of belonging and identity, while in the process neglecting solidarity and the shared dimensions of strong social values and conceptions that are capable of holding a society together in a stable manner.