The cost of the time needed to fix an object, sometimes too high, is nowadays no longer considered acceptable if compared to the cost of re-purchasing it. This is why people tend to prefer the second – short-sighted and now unacceptable – solution, that is, throwing out to buy again. In the past, in some carpentry workshops, they would even straighten crooked nails!
From “disposable” to “timed object”: how design is changing
In our society, fixing has become a luxury. In many cases, we prefer to buy cheaper objects even though we already know they will not last long. From bicycle inner tubes to smartphones, from nails to fast fashion, here are ten classic examples.
Paintbrush Mobi design by Marco Zito for Pennelli Tigre
View Article details
- Lorenzo Damiani
- 22 June 2022
In the consumer society, the concept of ‘punctuation’ theorised by Bauman allows us to focus on the idea of the excessive importance given to the present time. We even throw out objects if they’re no longer considered functional to fully enjoy the present time.
Thinking about the use and, as a consequence, the life and death of a product is fundamental to any design idea that wants to make sense in the world in which we currently live. These thoughts are antithetical to the programmed obsolescence of objects, concerning – for example – durability, fondness, the possibility of fixing anything, and perhaps even the opportunity to make changes to an object in order to meet new needs.
To many people, these may seem obvious considerations, but they would not be so if we were honest enough to look around us critically. For example, why should we design any appliance that is difficult to disassemble?
The aim should always be to pursue more reasoned production in terms of quantity and quality. Objects, in most cases, outlive humans: once we have ‘digested’ this assumption, we should think and behave accordingly. Our choices, in front of a glittering shop window overflowing with merchandise, become a programmatic vision triggered by our critical thinking – which, in addition to the issues mentioned above, should also consider how and who made what.
In the next few lines, I want to encourage you to reflect on the usual concept of ‘disposable object’ and, above all, the degeneration of the consumerist attitude induced by the contemporary lifestyle and the reduced sensitivity of some people. There is, therefore, a world of disposable products, designed to be consumed, used only once and then – at best – regularly disposed of: the hygienic aspect and practicality of use are fundamental discriminating factors in the choice of those products linked to health, personal hygiene, food consumption or preservation.
Some interesting examples of consumer products are toothbrushes and face masks, which can be transformed into durable objects by replacing only the part that needs to be changed – bristles and filters, in this case. I think that disposables should be replaced in all those cases where the same need could be met with long-lasting objects, also to consume fewer resources for their production and pollute the environment less for their disposal.
Why, for example, do some people use disposable dishes or razors in their homes? The answers to these trivial questions sometimes reveal indifference and shallowness. We should understand what conveniences we are willing to sacrifice to promote a more virtuous use of common resources. The mental habit of buying an object and using it immediately, without worrying about cleaning it or its upkeep, given the possibility of disposing of it quickly – as is typically the case with disposable objects –, seems to extend to many other more durable products, now considered almost as the new disposables, which I would define as ‘limited-use objects’.
In this case, people purchase these objects knowing that their use will have a limited life span, with no past or future, because they’re the children of consumption. Think of the inner tube of bicycles, now increasingly replaced rather than fixed, or paintbrushes that are not even washed after being used... because they are cheap and it is difficult to wash them anyway.
Light switches, just like plugs, are often no longer removable and fixing them becomes difficult. The Rompitratta switch by Achille and Pier Giacomo Castiglioni teaches us how beautiful design, together with safety and functionality, can go hand in hand with repairability.
This worrying and distorted conception of the use of objects is stimulated by factors as diverse as, for example, their relatively low cost, their easy availability, their difficult or impossible reparability, and, last but not least, the ‘indifference’ of many people, self-centred and not interested in the world we share... These and other aspects have certainly contributed to shifting the threshold of the concept of disposability.
The new object is immediately ready to be ‘consumed’; if a few years ago people bought furniture for their home thinking that it should last a lifetime, now they prefer to spend less but know that they can replace it more easily, perhaps keeping a few cherished pieces to feel less guilty.
Where will all this furniture end up once we get rid of it? Not everything can be reused or recycled. Some shops sell very attractive objects at a cheap price, from alarm clocks to lamps, from radios to headphones to pots, shoes, and clothing: we all know that their use will be very limited, perhaps we will use them only one time, but we buy them anyway just for the pleasure of doing it; within a short time, obsolescence and the impossibility of fixing them will turn these purchases into ‘limited-use objects’, or rather objects that have quickly run out of time.
I find this alarming: to fix is not economically viable, to maintain or even clean an object after it has been used often is a waste of time, and to dispose of it becomes an almost liberating practice... In doing so, however, it will soon be impossible to live on a planet that is already very compromised, and it will also favour an increasingly unfair economy. I want this to change, don’t you?
The nail, a metallic element used for joining things together and consisting of a flat head and a pointed shank, is – in my opinion – the paradigm for this reflection on the shift in the threshold of perception of disposability. Many years ago, every object or material had a value - when a new apprentice arrived in the carpentry shop, their first task was often to straighten crooked nails, which had been extracted from other wooden components, to reuse them. Now, however, it seems an anachronistic practice: when a nail becomes slightly bent, we throw it away, thus avoiding any possible inconvenience. Time is money and straightening a nail would waste too much time, even for an apprentice... But straightening a nail was perhaps also a formative practice – in a broader sense.
The inner tube of a bicycle, placed inside the tyre, features an expandable tubular rubber structure filled with inert gases under pressure. Of course, every cyclist’s nightmare is a punctured inner tube. When I was a kid, I used to repair the hole myself: I would take the wheel apart and after removing the inner tube from the tyre I would immerse it – thus inflating it – in a bucket full of water, having fun trying to find the air bubbles, always hidden near the hole. With a bit of putty and a patch (sometimes made from old inner tubes), I would then fix the damage. Each well-applied patch could be considered a permanent repair. Nowadays, however, it is more straightforward to replace the entire inner tube directly because the cost of this replacement is low and, for many, does not justify the time needed to repair it.
The paintbrush, a tool used to paint or spread liquid or viscous substances, is composed of (animal or synthetic) bristles and an elongated handle. The materials used for the handle and the bristles determine the quality and cost of the tool. The need to be able to count on an effective tool that is ready to use, always as good as new, that does not lose its bristles thus spreading them on the surface of the paper or canvas and – last but not least – the need to clean the bristles with a special detergent depending on the paint used, thus dirtying one’s hands, often lead people to throw away the brush once the job is done, turning it into a disposable object. It is interesting to notice that some companies have started producing brushes with replaceable bristles. They do it not to clear the idea that this kind of tool can be ‘disposable’, but rather to prevent people from disposing of it entirely for no reason at all.
The kitchen knife, a cutting tool consisting of a blade, usually made of steel, attached to a handle that can be made of different materials, has always relied on the professionalism of the knife-grinder – a craftsman, often travelling, who restores the cutting capacities of certain tools by sharpening them. Routine maintenance of the blade is important: cleaning and ‘do-it-yourself’ sharpening, with an abrasive stone or other tools, allow us to maintain an effective and clean cut. How many of us still do this? If the knives are not of great quality or, more trivially, the owner does not feel like wasting time, they prefer to throw the knife in the bin and buy a new one. For some, it is better to have a cheap knife, knowing they can replace it more often without worrying about its upkeep. The same thing applies to scissors.
The umbrella, a foldable and portable shelter against sun or rain, consists mainly of a shaft with a handle and folding ribs attached to a piece of waterproof fabric. Its low cost, its difficult repairability and the consequent disappearance of umbrella-makers made the umbrella a real ‘limited-use object’. When the metal joints break, it becomes almost impossible to replace them, even with a more expensive umbrella – which does not necessarily mean it has a higher quality and repairability. Sometimes, during a sudden rainstorm, we buy umbrellas from street vendors, perhaps only to arrive at the destination, often forgetting about them or breaking them almost immediately. Speaking of umbrellas, the U211 project by the Pocodisegno studio is very interesting. They have designed a durable umbrella with metal joints that can finally be repaired.
Beach slippers, often made of plastic or natural materials, can be considered exemplary to evoke all those objects, clothes and utensils that gravitate around the temporariness of seaside life, typical of holidays. Flip-flops are often considered and purchased as seasonal footwear, thus becoming ‘limited-use objects’; In fact, once the holiday is over, they are often thrown in the bin directly at the holiday resort: this can also happen to beach umbrellas, buckets, and shovels. Such objects are becoming real ‘disposables’ almost like a tube of toothpaste; probably the low cost, poor quality and laziness – typical of the consumerist, superficial and indifferent to the environment – lead to disposing of them just so as not to have to take them back home. Rubbish bins and, unfortunately, also seas and beaches, are invaded by objects of this kind, abandoned more or less unconsciously.
Household hairdryers are another object that – in the event of accidental breakage or malfunction – are not worth trying to fix; often these objects cannot even be disassembled, so they do not allow the user to identify the source of the problem. In some cases, they feature a joint that makes them foldable, in order to save space, but this choice increases the chances of breakage. Enzo Mari’s idea of putting ‘the user at the centre’ still seems difficult to apply: low price, poor user manuals, and lack of time all work against this idea; the long-awaited repair manuals are unfortunately difficult to decipher. It thus becomes normal to think of the (low-cost) hairdryer as an object to be consumed and thrown away: it may represent all appliances that cannot be disassembled or are not worth fixing. Higher quality hairdryers offer spare parts for repair, but then one has to consider the cost of the technical intervention and assess its actual cost-effectiveness.
The smartphone is now an object that many people, of various ages, can no longer give up, and have become addicted to. Many people are accustomed to replacing it too quickly, lured by the mirage of ever-higher performance, leading to chronic premature obsolescence. Recently, fortunately, we are hearing more and more about the process of refurbishing smartphones. Even if the user is still unable to fix the phone on their own, there are centres where used phones are subjected – before being put back on the market – to functional checks and the replacement of small components, in order to restore their original quality. In this way, many smartphones can be given a second life and sold at a lower price without prematurely clogging up landfills. Unfortunately, however, refurbishing only really concerns some mid-to-high-priced products because cheap smartphones are limited-use objects, despite the new European directives on the subject.
The Rompitratta project is a light switch consisting of two moulded shells made of hardening plastic. It was designed by Achille and Pier Giacomo Castiglioni in 1968 for the company VLM and represents an authentic eulogy to reparability. I believe that this example of ‘anonymous designer’ product shows how possible and necessary it is for the designer and the company to create objects capable of surprising for their immediacy of use, poetry and longevity: the possibility of opening this small switch by removing two screws has allowed entire generations of ‘anonymous buyers’ to fix small inconveniences resulting from prolonged use over the years by themselves. More and more often, however, we are forced to fiddle with plugs and switches that cannot be inspected for faults, with the consequent inability to work out what is really wrong... at best, we end up replacing the whole wiring.
Bruno Munari and his quote “nothing goes out of fashion like fashion” anticipates many themes related to the logic of contemporary consumption. The obsolescence of clothing is favoured by the very concept of fashion, as a fast-changing trend, and by clothes of ever poorer quality offered at ever-lower prices. Nowadays, it may happen to buy a t-shirt, for example, only for one season, or even for a particular occasion, and then throw it out: the markedly reduced prices implement, especially among teenagers, such limited-use garments. Fast fashion is sometimes seen as a way of democratising fashion, allowing everyone to dress according to the latest trends – assuming this is necessary; however, it has numerous negative aspects, such as the pollution (from the production process and from the continuous generation of waste) and the exploitation of labour, especially child labour, to guarantee lower prices.