The Functionalist movement provided a very limited definition of "need" at least partially in reaction to a similarly limited definition of "need" in use by the eclectic designers of the 19th century. The Functionalists reduced the definition of need to "the need of physical efficiency in accomplishing the programmatic task for which an element or environment was designed." The eclectic designers had reduced it to "the need for adherence to a socially acceptable 'code' by every building in the form of a applied 'style' or 'character.'" The principle was followed even at the expense of the efficiency of the design in fulfilling programmatic tasks.
Prior to this great polarisation in the debate, the definition of need had oscillated between social need, and efficiency. The major protagonists in the debates created works that, though occasionally extreme with respect to each other, were understood in terms of the various needs of various users, needs, the understandings of which evolved over time with reactions to and inspirations from competing theories and ideas.
Need and the ability to cope with our environment
New Sadism Discovered in School of Design
Programme of the 25th Annual Symposium on Sadism in Design
Document Name: tb.percept.need.htm
Copyright (c) 1997 -- Mike Fletcher
Reproduction for other than personal use prohibited without express written permission from the author.