记得与张夫也先生聊起设计批评的话题时,他提到在美术学院任教的过程中,明显感觉到以学设计实践为背景的学生对于设计批评的兴趣、敏感和理解,要比学习史论背景的学生更胜一筹。对此笔者深表认同。无论设计批评还是设计研究,最终都要落实到设计实践这一源点和本体,解决设计实践中所遇到的问题,并引领其发展。而吸引设计师关注、阅读甚至参与设计批评,也一直是我们这个栏目从设置伊始便高悬的一种学术追求。当然,理论工作者也应该积极与设计师合作,进行基础研究,并不断完善或调整设计研究方法来应对实践领域所出现的各种问题。本期刊发黄敏的文章,便是一位设计师基于自己设计实践的切身反思,其中尽管语言表达和研究方法与理论工作者有一些差别,但相信这样的观点无论是对于设计师,还是对于设计客户,都能带来某种积极的启示。 Recalling the topic of design criticism with Mr. Zhang Fu-yeh, he mentioned that during the teaching at the Academy of Fine Arts, he obviously felt that students interested in design criticism in the background of learning design practice were more sensitive and understanding than learning history On the background of the students better. I deeply agree with this. Regardless of the design criticism or design and research, ultimately to implement the design of the source and ontology to solve the problems encountered in the design practice, and lead the development. Attracting the attention of designers, reading or even participating in design criticism has also been an academic pursuit of our part, which was suspended from the very beginning. Of course, theoreticians should also actively cooperate with designers to carry out basic research, and continuously improve or adjust design and research methods to deal with various problems that arise in the field of practice. This issue of Huang Min’s article is an in-depth reflection of a designer based on his own design practice. Although there are some differences between linguistic expression and research methods and theoretical workers, it is believed that such a view is not only for designers but also for Design customers, can bring some positive inspiration.