Here is the second full-text interview of two Q&A's I did with Adrian Shaughnessy and Rick Poynor for a recent article on design criticism education for the February issue of Icon magazine. It was Rick's essay in Icon in March 2006, entitled "Death of the critic", that first got me interested in design criticism, and what this could mean for me as a potential design writer and critic.

Do you think these programs are a step in the right direction towards addressing the design criticism deficit? Is it enough?

The arrival of these courses is good news for anyone who thinks that design criticism matters, but it remains to be seen how many people are interested in writing about design in greater critical depth. There is nothing stopping writers doing that right now, yet the number of committed writers in the field is small. The existence of these courses will certainly help to give critical design writing focus and perhaps some additional credibility. If the courses attract students and if graduates find ways of applying what they have learnt in their subsequent careers, then other institutions will develop similar courses.

Why now? Does this represent a maturation of the discipline of design criticism?

These courses are the fruit of a tendency towards greater self-awareness and seriousness in design writing that goes back to the early 1990s. I don't see this as a maturation of the discipline so much as an inevitable development sooner or later. You could only say there is a maturation of the field when we have a lot of critics, who we know by name, whose writing we encounter regularly, writing critically about every aspect of design in all kinds of outlets. In English-language writing there are plenty of occasional writers of criticism, but there are very few strong, consistent voices identified with rigorously argued and original critical positions. And let's be clear that design journalism, which we do have in abundance, is not the same thing as design criticism. Often it is no more than promotional PR.

What skills do graduates of these programs need to be equipped with?

These graduates will need historical awareness, a deep fascination with design, a healthy measure of scepticism and a willingness to challenge received opinions. Real criticism is going to involve sticking their necks out. Above all, graduates will need the ability to write compelling prose. That can be fostered in those with talent, but not implanted. Without excellent writing that people want to read, "design criticism" will come to nothing. Graduates may also need entrepreneurial skills so they can create new outlets for their criticism.

I've recently had a piece published in the February 2008 issue Icon on three new master's programs in design criticism in New York, London and Stockholm. The program in Stockholm at the University College of Arts, Crafts and Design (Konstfack) is already up and running and the first American and British programs start in the fall. It seems the article came out at just the right time as I've seen at least two other pieces on the New York master's (in STEP and Metropolis) in the last month. Here is the full text of the interview with Adrian Shaughnessy, a design consultant and editor of Varoom. Adrian maintains a healthy skepticism (as one would expect from any good design critic), but is cautiously positive about the arrival of these new programs.

It’s interesting that all three of these programs are starting at approximately the same time. Why now?

Firstly I’d say that there is an extraordinary amount of interest in design writing. I get more emails from students on this subject than anything else. The sudden interest can be partly explained by the huge rise in the number of design books over past two decades. Interestingly, the demand for eye candy books has dwindled; publishers will tell you that monographs of even fashionable designers no longer sell, and book buyers demand commentary, analysis and criticism. But by far the biggest impetus has come from the design blogs. Blogging has contributed to a huge upsurge of interest in design writing – the visitor figures for Design Observer – where I am a contributor – and Speak Up, are phenomenal. Far more than any print magazine could hope to achieve.

My own view is that some of the interest in writing is driven by an unwillingness to engage with the messy, blood and guts world of clients, jobs, and the harsh reality of designing in the 21st century. An interest in theory and criticism may be replacing and interest in doing – and that doesn’t auger well.

Is there a market for 40 new design critics and what skills do these graduates need to come out of these programs with?

There is currently only a tiny ‘market’ for design criticism. How many people in the world live purely by writing about design? Half a dozen? Less? But as an intellectual adjunct to working as a designer, I think it’s a useful practice. It also may lead to the nirvana so many designers crave – a situation where design is discussed in the non professional media with intelligence and understanding. This will take a few years to work through the system, but it might be the consequence of the new courses.

Is this enough to address the design criticism deficit, and if not, what else needs to happen?

It might be enough – who knows. Only time will tell. Certainly the people running the courses are inspirational and far-sighted, so that’s a good start.

While all three programs have different focal points, the chairs of all three stress that one of the main goals is to develop a common language or vocabulary to speak about design criticism – on an academic as well as a popular level. Any thoughts on this?

I understand the need for a ‘common language,’ but until we have a common language that is understood by non-designers, design criticism will remain locked within design. Personally, I’m looking for the next Reyner Banham, someone who can write about design from a broad cultural perspective, but informed by the insight that comes from mastering a subject in a way that appeals to a non-design audience. Rick Poynor and Steve Heller achieve this, as do some of the bloggers, but its rare. And unless the new Des Crit courses can engender this, I don’t see anything changing. What mustn’t happen is that a ‘generic’ design voice emerges. I’d like to see something like the emergence of pop music criticism in the late 1960s and 1970s. There was no precedent for this, but distinctive voices emerged that changed the way we think about pop music. Can this happen in design? I don’t see why not.