Author: Katsiaryna Palishchuk

Couple of days ago, I watched a Netflix Documentary about designers and artist around the world. All of the parts are inspired, but one of them caught my attention the most. It is called “Bio-Architektur mit Neli Oxman”.

Neli Oxman — is an American–Israeli designer and professor at the MIT Media Lab, where she leads the Mediated Matter research group. She is known for art and architecture that combine design, biology, computing, and materials engineering.

Oxman writes about the world and environment as organisms, changing regularly and responding to use, full of gradients of color and physical properties rather than sharp boundaries. She proposed developing a material ecology with “holistic products, characterized by property gradients and multi-functionality” – in contrast to assembly lines and “a world made of parts”.

The innovations developed by Oxman and her team have enabled a new age of ‘biological alchemy’ whereby micro-organisms can be designed to mimic ‘factories’ and materials strategically augmented at their basic biological properties. These technologies offer a radical new approach to design and production in which almost any biomass can be transformed into biomaterials to be used for a variety of purposes, from the production of wearable garments to the construction of buildings. For example, E coli, a bacterium that lives in the gut, can be transformed into edible sugar; grass converted into diesel; and corn transfigured into plastic.

In this particular film she was working on the Aguahoja  project. The aim of the product is to show the use of alternative materials, instead of plastic. The Aguahoja collection (pronounced: agua-hocha) offers a material alternative to plastic subverting the toxic waste cycle through the creation of biopolymer composites that exhibit tunable properties with varied mechanical, optical, olfactory and even gustatory properties. These renewable and biocompatible polymers leverage the power of natural resource cycles and can be materially ‘programed’ to decay as they return to the earth, for purposes of fueling new growth.

Neri Oxman is using another way: organic structures embody more efficient and adaptable material properties compared with human-made ones, and leave no environmental marks. From a limited palette of molecular components, including cellulose, chitin, and pectin―the very same materials found in trees, crustaceans and apple skins―natural systems construct an extensive array of functional materials with no synthetic parallels.

Chitin, for instance, manifests in the form of thin, transparent dragonfly wings, as well as in the soft tissue of fungi. Cellulose makes up more than half of plant matter planet-wide. These materials, and the living systems they inhabit, outperform human engineering not only through their diversity of functions but also through their resilience, sustainability, and adaptability.

“Imagine the possibility of being able to create a digitally-printed, biologically-augmented beating heart that will perfectly match its host, for those in need of a transplant. There is then new potential to save millions of lives.”

https://oxman.com/projects/aguahoja

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neri_Oxman

We are discussing changes in every article. We already got it — everything is changing. Redesign — side effect of changes. And if one part is changing, then the chain of changes starts.

What influence what? Are people influence changes or changes influence people?

Developing web-page, good to remember — people will not like changes immediately, they need time to accept it. Doesn’t matter if it is new design, new icon color or new effective tool to use. We need time.

Who tells the timing? When companies understood, that it is time to change the icon color? Who tells, that this color is not reliable or modern now? With technologies it is the flow, right? Creating one technology, we are preventing old problems, but questioning the new ones. 

Speaking about icon or font color, web-page or app, people are providing changes. Artist, art director of big company influence smaller through people’s review. Smaller wants to imitate bigger. We are following trends, fashion, that one person create and couple of others support. In total, one person brings the idea,  but change itself — widespread it. 

Following the thought, why we deciding to widespread the idea of one person, we don’t even know? Because brand stays in foreground of this person? Or we just like changes? They give us the filling of movement? That we live our life? That it is not boring and we actually have a flow?

And more people widespread the idea, the more mainstream it appears to be, the more we like it. Herd instinct? Fear of being different from the crowd? Doesn’t we want to be unique? Or at least the best? 

I suppose, that changes influence people, we don’t pay attention on it, in most of the times. But they do, slightly. At the same time, from the other side of straight line is people opinion. I mean, people give feedback to the technologies, changes and new inventions. If those feedback processed in a right way, and it usually does, then listening to it, new technologies are invented. But not in the way people suppose they want it, but in the way they need it. 

Do we know what we need? We think so. But we don’t really know how to define our thoughts. They are different from what we need. Different design experiments have shown that people do not really know what they are talking about. Do you remember implementation of new Instagram app icon? People were so shocked, they tell it ugly, non-modern and, of course, previous one was much better! In a week they change their opinion. Same with Mail group. They slightly change the icon color twice. First time to the lighter blue. And in couple of years to the neon-blue. People were hating both colors. Why?

Why is bad question. Or wrong. It kinda should give the wider idea about things, but it stands us us in front of the new questions, we have no idea about. Cave with no bottom.


Someone from famous people said, that the only unchangeable thing in this world — changes. The world around us changes radically, our life is changing, we are changing, and, unknown what comes first. Either changes occur in us, and exactly they are the reason for new plot for our lives.  Either our lives, developing in certain rules, force us to change.

Small Introduction to “Redesign” Topic, firstly.

Speaking with supervisor, person advised me to narrow down my topic. What is kinda complicated, since I still have no idea, where it leads.  So to say, I still believe that redesign is more about changes, when do they start and to what lead.

Thats true,  we can’t find the answer on question «when will we finish to redesign things» since it is rhetorical.  New solutions, technologies, people, ideas. Redesign is about our world itself.


So, I decided to narrow topic to redesign as flow of time, where we discussing results, influences, slightest changes. No questions, only observation and disсussions.

And now back to the main theme:

Redesign of Art. Crypto Art.

In previous topic I described the contemporary art and how that will probably change in future or presence. And I miss one important detail — crypto art. Sounds like new contemporary, isn’t it?

СryproArt — synthesis of art and cryptocurrency. At first glance, combining cryptocurrency and blockchain with fine art may seem like a strange idea. Street art, graffiti, memes — all these types of contemporary art are quite suitable for the crypto world, but the words “cryptocurrency” and “painting” rarely appear in the same sentence.

Bitcoin and the entire explosion of modern digital currencies have been a technology that has transcended currencies and is ultimately transforming a whole host of industries in truly important ways.

To understand the appeal of crypto art, it is worth accepting one idea about blockchain: blockchain technology allows digital assets to become scarce.

Blockchain is a fairly new technological platform that connects millions of devices and is open to everyone. The Harvard Business Review describes it as “an open distributed ledger that can record transactions between two parties in an efficient and verifiable manner on an ongoing basis.” If you have never heard of blockchain, you may be familiar with Bitcoin or Ethereum cryptocurrencies that use such technology.

Being a digital media-only artist is very difficult due to the nature of digital media, which can be copied indefinitely. It is not unique, and people just weren’t interested in collecting it and appreciated it as closely as physical art in the real world.

Also, demand is influenced by the fact that new collectors have come to the world art market. Now, they are millennials, who grew up in the digital age. They need instant access to information, including prices for works of art. 

This is a revolutionary concept: what is digital can actually be unique. Yes, what is digital can be rare, which means that, finally, digital media can be owned and collected in the same way as physical objects.

Usually the idea when it comes to cryptocurrencies is that when using blockchain, coins always look the same. With the help of NFTs (non-fungible tokens), you can tell right away that this token is for this work of art, and this token is for this work of art. 

Crypto Art (NFT) can be divided into two groups: First generation and second generation.

Several questions arise, right?

The first and most important question: why does anyone pay for something that is already in the public domain?

There is a difference between downloading a picture or animation to a computer and owning the original backed by an NFT token. The files you download are worth nothing, while the NFT-backed painting is an original piece of art from the artist. In the same way, everything happens in the physical world. You can download a photograph of a Van Gogh painting or order a hand-drawn replica —  in any case, such copies will not cost as much as the original. In the digital world, only owning an NFT token will allow you to sell or gift a piece of art, as well as receive a percentage of subsequent resale.

Second question: why is crypto art so expensive?

The presence of value is always associated with a lack of something. The scarcity of digital art is again confirmed by blockchain and NFT. In addition, people themselves endow any objects in our world with value, including in the digital space. Why are collectible cardboard athlete cards selling for thousands of dollars on Ebay? Designs of objects in computer games, T-shirts and even napkins with autographs of stars, and the actual banknotes themselves are of value only because people agreed so. In the case of crypto art, value is invested by collectors. Someone buys it for speculative purposes, while someone just wants to support the author with a coin. Crypto coin.

There is no generally accepted concept of what crypto art is, but it can be described by the following principles:

1. Digital nature. Digital art can be created, published, purchased and sold completely electronically.

2. Geographic independence. Artists from all over the world take part in the creation of the works. CryptoArt is the first truly global art movement.

3. Democracy. Everyone is encouraged to create artwork and popularize the movement, regardless of skill, achievement, class, gender, race, age, religion, etc.

4. Decentralization. The tools developed reduce the influence of art brokers and increase the power of the artists themselves.

5. Anonymity. The use of pseudonyms allows artists to create and sell works of art while remaining anonymous (if preferred), freeing them from social judgments.

Now digital art is going through its inception, driven by the development of technology. The number of artists and community members will only grow. And there is every reason to believe that CryptoArt is a completely new page in the history of art.

In my opinion, the phenomenon of crypto art, supported by these principles and promising NFT technology, deserves understanding, and early adopters and investors can be well rewarded in the future for their contribution to the development of the community in the early stages of its existence.

We can easily distinguish Renaissance from Classicism, and Impressionism from Cubism, but is it so easy to understand what contemporary art is?

Contemporary art in its current form was formed at the turn of the 1960s and 70s. The artistic quest of that time can be characterized as a search for alternatives to modernism (this often resulted in denial through the introduction of principles that were directly opposite to modernism). This was expressed in the search for new images, new means and materials of expression, up to the demoterization of the object (performances and happenings). The main goal was to distort the concept of spirituality. Many artists followed the French philosophers who coined the term “postmodernism”. We can say that there has been a shift from the object itself to the process.

The most notable phenomena of the turn of the 1960s and 1970s can be called the development of conceptual art and minimalism. In the 1970s, the social orientation of the art process became noticeably stronger, both in terms of content and composition: The most notable phenomenon of the mid-1970s was feminism in art.

The late 1970s and 1980s were characterized by a weariness of conceptual art and minimalism, and returning of interest in presenting, color, and figurativeness (the heyday of movements such as the New Wild). In the mid-1980s, the rise of movements that actively use images of mass culture — campism, East Village art, neo-pop are gaining strength. The heyday of photography in art also dates back to this time — more and more artists are beginning to turn to it as a means of artistic expression.

The art process was influenced by the development of technology: in the 1960s-video and audio, later computers and in the 1990s — the Internet .

The beginning of the 2000s was marked by disillusionment with the possibilities of technical means for artistic practices. Destructive concepts have done their pernicious work. At the same time, constructive philosophical justifications for contemporary art of the 21th century have not yet appeared. Some artists of the 2000s believe that Modern art is becoming an instrument of power in a “post-democratic” society. This process arouses enthusiasm among representatives of the art system and pessimism among artists and professionals.

A number of artists of the 2000s return to the commodity object, abandoning the process, and offer a commercially profitable attempt at modernism of the 21th century.

Aсcording to the iesa portal, contemporary art —is “the art of today,” more broadly includes artwork produced during the late 20th and early 21st centuries. It generally defines art produced after the Modern Art movement to the present day. However, modern artwork is not just art produced during a specific time-frame. This genre of art does have its own approach or style that distinguishes it from others. 


The distinctive features of art include its versatility, timelessness and belonging to the entire human race, its ability to unite and inspire. It is hard to find any canons in this art direction. The definition is quite vague. People can draw classical paintings, mix different textures and conduct amazing performances.  A review thrown by a passing person can change the fate of the artist and his exhibition. It is not necessary to get any art degree to be an artist. Instagram, dribble, behance — access to the internet, desire to create or destroy — social media gives the possibilities. That works in both sides and everyone can be an art critic, if he would like to — comments, postsharings, reposts.

What makes today’s art especially challenging is that, like the world around us, it has become more diverse and cannot be easily defined through a list of visual characteristics, artistic themes or cultural concerns.

https://www.iesa.edu/paris/news-events/contemporary-art-definition

https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/art-1010/beginners-guide-20th-c-art/introduction-20c-art/a/contemporary-art-an-introduction

A couple days ago, I read a book, where history was not defined as chronicle, but as a series of rare bright events, that we perceive as abnormal. While, in fact, such events change our world and continue history more, then everyday life.

Covid-19 came into our life and will not leave it soon. Seems, that everything has already been written and said. But I propose to look at how it redesigns our lives in real time.

The COVID-19 pandemic has made major changes in our lives. Against this background, in particular, the digitalization process accelerated: within a few months, the number of people who work from home and shop on the Internet has sharply increased. At the same time, technologies appeared to stop the spread of the virus, which are essentially technologies for effective government surveillance of citizens.

The usual meetings were replaced by Zoom parties. Probably, everyone has visited at least one. Not to mention Zoom-birthdays, Zoom-proms, Zoom-weddings, and Zoom-all-all-all. No wonder the company earned more in the second quarter of 2020 than in the whole of 2019. In this situation, video calls began to be used not only for work and study, but also for leisure. At the beginning of the pandemic, online concerts were very popular. There were even online tours, online exhibitions, and online performances. But by the end of the year, this trend has lost its relevance.

In the spring of 2020, the world’s demand for psychotherapy has grown at a record high. The jump occurred in late March and early April, when the borders were closed and a self-isolation regime was declared. Sales of plant-based sedatives increased. In families, conflicts escalated, which had not surfaced before, because people were busy outside the house all day. Another stress factor was economic instability. Neurologists have found that people who are prone to anxiety and auto-suggestion began to detect false symptoms of the coronavirus.

The services went online. Cinemas, gyms and cafes, if they work, only in the fresh air. 

Now people pay more attention to their relatives, take care of their own health and appreciate the time spent together. To be sure, the pandemic has given a dramatic boost to changes that none of us expected: appears new words in the lexicon, technology and medicine began to develop more rapidly.

The world has been exposed by drastic redesign. And we will see the consequences later.

One of the most hackneyed sources of inspiration for young people is Michael Tonet’s long-suffering chair No. 14.

Designers turn it not only into other chairs, but also into things that are fundamentally different in type. The Englishman Darren Lago, for example, decided that such a recognizable object could be used as a lamp and just screws the bulbs to it.

Designer Ron Gilad has used scaled-down models of the chair, made of steel, for the wardrobe legs and bench, that he created for the Adele-C brand.

The fate and legacy of Charles and Ray Eames was redesigned as well.
Designer Carl Sanford modified the chair to use a garden wheelbarrow as a seat.

The sovereignty of designer products  — hat was suggested by the German Hiob Haaro, who released a crystal souvenir ball, inside which, instead of the usual snowman or the Eiffel Tower, there is a Juicy Salif juicer designed by Philippe Starck.

Czech designer Jan Čtvrtník has created a new version of Alvar Aalto’s famous vase, which aims to remind the world of the challenges of global warming.

The outer contour of the vase (sketched by Aalto from the outlines of one of the Finnish lakes) remained the same, but the inner one shows how the lake should have shrunk over the past decades.

And last, but not the least, the Englishman Michael Eden remade the classic Wedgwood vase.

He chose the same material for its new interpretation — porcelain, but instead of burning the vase in the oven, he printed it on a 3D printer. To highlight the possibilities of modern technology, Eden painted the vase in acid colors.

This blog is devoted to redesign

Nowadays lots of companies have decided to change their styles and brands. I will try to reveal topics, as: why they decided to do it right now, what is the purpose and how dangerous a drastic redesign could be. And, mainly, when will we finish to redesign things and what is the goal?

Main motivations for me choosing this topic was the soul of the topic itself.

A huge opportunity is the presence of endless edges of redesign. Redesigning apps, web-pages, products, everyday things, interior items, appliances.

Also be interesting, how redesign changes our mind, how it is connected with the world history, mentality, our relationship with ourselves and with others, rivalry and banal change of time tendency.

I hope it will be useful and interesting to all of us.