This year, the National Design Award of Latvia was presented for the first time, ordered by the Ministry of Culture of the Republic of Latvia and organized by the design studio H2E after gaining the organization’s right in the tender.
In total, 147 applications, which were evaluated by seven Latvian and international jury members, were submitted for the award. When analyzing the specifics of the applications, it should be noted that 40 percent of the applications belonged to the product design category, 20 per cent — to the exhibition design category, 10 per cent — to the brand design category, and the same amount — to the interior design category. The rest of the applications — about 5 percent each — were related to the communication design, fashion, space design and digital media design.
Having examined all the applications, the jury selected 20 finalists whose works are still presented at the exhibition in the Museum of Decorative Arts and Design — the venue where the National Design Award of Latvia ceremony took place on 3 March.
It is curious that, according to the overall application statistics, 20 percent of the 147 applications are exhibitions. Moreover, among the 20 finalists, we can see as many as four exhibitions — and all of them are made or commissioned by the Latvian National Library. Only one finalist is directly related to the traditional museums — the Family Bag competing in the product design category, which was commissioned by the Latvian National Museum of Art and developed in collaboration with the association “Droši un koši”.
A topical issue is the relationship between museums and design, since this year, when a record number of museums were opened after the reconstruction, there still were no museum projects among the finalists (apart from the new Book Museum, which is one of the four Latvian National Library finalists in the exhibition design category) – not only in the exhibition category, but also in the rebranding, website design or service category? Is it an objective picture of the situation?
Of course, in such a small market as Latvia, it is significant to note that one of the most visible players in the exhibition design making – H2E, whose 2016 balance includes as many as 5 (!) museum exhibitions (Rezekne Green Synagogue, Riga Motor Museum, Museum of Rainis “Tadenava”, Rainis and Aspazija House, Rainis and Aspazija Cottage in Majori) – did not apply for the contest with its implemented projects for ethical reasons as it was an organizer of the annual award. Another thing is that application could be submitted by the client, but we do not know it – the organizers and the jury have decided that they would only reveal the names of the 20 finalists but not all the 147 applicants.
This is why the first National Design Award of Latvia has raised a series of questions in the museum sector: do museums consider design as an integral part of their work and do they know what fits into the broader concept of design? What does this award reveal to us about the phenomenal success of the newcomer in the exhibition design development – Latvian National Library? And, if we assume that design is communication, then what does it say about the Latvian museums in general?
Finally, the organizers and the experts emphasize in public interviews that the National Design Award of Latvia has to initiate discussions. If so, then, within this framework, not a minor question would be why the Latvian museums, including the finalists’ exhibition venue – the Museum of Decorative Arts and Design, are still, on average, considerably behind other players in the field of service design?
There are many questions, and they are certainly indicative of the need for broader discussions. In an effort to answer some of them, the Creative Museum met with the organizer of the National Design Award of Latvia, the artistic director of the H2E design studio Ingūna Elere.
Ineta Zelča Sīmansone: How would you characterize the National Design Award of Latvia?
Ingūna Elere: The National Design Award of Latvia is not about the 1st, 2nd and 3rd places. It is a competition that helps to build a better future with design required as a tool in making design-literate customers who respect a designer's work by applying design at the strategic level rather than using it only as a beautiful packaging.
IZS: Talking about the museum sector and the design — what trends do the 20 award finalists reveal? What does it tell me about the museum design trends? The quick observation would be that it is the triumph of the Latvian National Library with its four projects among the 20 finalists. In addition, there is a beautiful but relatively small product from the Latvian National Museum of Art. There are no finalists from the museum sector in the public accessibility or service design category.
IE: Yes, museums could apply for the competition with their identity rebranding design or service design. It is important to give and receive the answers and analysis. Attention is given to all the 20 finalists. Hitting the top twenty is already a victory.
IZS: Actually, there was a surprisingly high number of exhibition applications — 20 percent of the total number of submitted projects. However, the dominance of the Latvian National Library in the final with its four exhibitions sends some signals to the whole cultural heritage sector, including museums. But what are these signals?
IE: The signals prove that the exhibition design department works well in the library. Its planning and communication activities are well-run. This shows that the library is operated by people who are related to design: first, they noticed this award and, secondly, they were able to prepare high-quality applications.
Another condition important for an organization or an individual is to be brave enough to make an application and receive feedback, rather than just create an exhibition and later forget about it. A participant has to be proud of what he has done and not be afraid to receive feedback on it.
Exhibitions are made in Latvia all the time: there are hundreds of exhibitions which we do not know about at all.
Websites, identity change, rebranding – all of this can be potentially submitted for the competition.
In this regard, any of the 147 contestants who submitted an application is brave enough not to feel embarrassed showing up its work and wish it to be shown.
IZS: The 147 participants are these brave hearts who saw themselves in the context of the award as applicants; but most probably there are many of those who did not realize that this design award is meant for them. What has to be done to make as many players participate in the design award as possible — in this case I particularly think about museums and other cultural heritage institutions?
IE: Yes, we as organizers have to deal with this task — we have to encourage people to apply for the contest. Especially when we see good products, we have to motivate their authors to apply.
We are not involved in the assessment, so we cannot influence the process, but we are interested in receiving good applications.
IZS: If you had to examine the four Latvian National Library projects that are among the twenty finalists, then what to your mind would be the trend leading them to their victory?
IE: This is a question that must be addressed to the jury members. I think, experience design. And how much it is communicable and understandable. The overall experience. When referring to the exhibition that took the second place — The Imprint of Civilization — then it is worth mentioning the uniqueness and amazing solution that arise from the content of the particular exhibition.
IZS: And finally, you had only three days to organize the exhibition, even if it was not a technically complicated task. It is absolutely incredible, and in terms of timing, the result is laudable. I really liked that you came up with the idea to engage visitors and initiate discussions (the interactive analogue table at the end of the exhibition hall asking the questions How do you assess design and What design criteria do you consider the most crucial?; as well as the opportunity to vote for the favorite project that had proceed to the final).
IE: Organization of an awarding ceremony that takes place in one venue with an exhibition is a complicated task. We had little time for selecting the 20 finalists and communicating the results. If we want a good jury team, we have to expect that they will never spend there more than three days. In parallel, the exhibition of the finalists was organized. We had to arrange the closing ceremony and other practical activities — arrivals, interview schedules, work sessions. It was crazy. It demanded a strict planning.