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.