Abstract

Collapsed into every mundane, everyday object, that surrounds us are complex, mysterious, and interscalar worlds. As we begin to unpack those worlds we develop the understanding that our everyday objects are anything but mundane; rather they carry within them design history, cultural context, the marks of our systems of production, social biases, and possibilities. Using scalar thinking we can expand our perceptions of these everyday objects and open a discussion about who is most often failed by the shifts in scale required for mass produced objects to be designed, manufactured, and used. I propose that by looking at examples of where design has failed, we can learn new ways of designing to minimize exclusionary features.

Examples of user-modified objects were collected from study participants, and interviews were conducted about their relationships to modified objects, and the motivations behind their modifications. The qualitative coding of these interviews suggests reasons why people typically modify objects, considerations for modifications, and insight into the user-modification process. A research-creation process follows, focused on one of the participants' needs for a better grip for the Nintendo Switch. This custom modification process highlights the presence of design elements that allow for adaptations to take place. I propose that these design elements be considered “modification affordances”. Modification affordances can be seen as a point-in-time solution to consider how we might shift production away from mass produced markets and towards individual and custom alternatives, which can serve to benefit both people and the planet.