Thank you to Linda Norlen of AIA Seattle for discussing the inaugural Seattle Design Festival with us and providing an introduction.
The Seattle Design Festival, the first of its kind in the Puget Sound region, ran for ten days from September 16-25, 2011. With more than 30 events—including tours, films, speakers, panels, exhibits and installations—the Festival explored and celebrated the variety and depth of design in Seattle and beyond.
Responding to the festival theme of “Beneath the Surface,” ten different partner organizations organized events and installations, many focusing on aspects of design that are often overlooked or hidden from view. The ten groups were AIA Seattle, AIGA Seattle, ARCADE magazine (interdisciplinary design publication), 4Culture (non-profit public arts agency), IDSA NW (industrial designers), IIDA Northern Pacific (interior designers), Seattle Architecture Foundation, Space.city (architecture + art group), SIFF Cinema (film society), and WASLA (landscape architects).
By putting design at the forefront of conversation, the Festival aimed to raise expectations about what is possible through great design, especially in the public sphere. The varied programs of the Festival offered the public an opportunity to better understand design and how it adds value our lives, our city and our region.
The final attendance tallies are just now being finished, but the size of the Festival audience altogether topped 3,500. The Festival used more than 60 volunteers, not counting all the volunteers of the 10 partner organizations.
Katherine Stalker, AAO (KS): What models did you look at when you set out to create the festival? What appealed to you about the examples that you studied?
Linda Norlen, AIA Seattle (LN): We looked at models from around the U.S. and around the world, both architecture festivals and design festivals, but we also felt it was important that the Seattle Design Festival be in tune with local sensibilities and not feel imported from somewhere else. AAO member Erin Cullerton was especially helpful in recounting the history of the “Architecture and the City” festival in San Francisco. Her description of their modest first year and how that festival grew over the years was instructive.
KS: How did you organize events? Did you curate them internally or seek community participation? Why?
LN: From the beginning the board had decided we would invite other design organizations and cultural nonprofits in Seattle to become “program partners” in the festival. The motivation for that was both philosophical and practical. Because part of the purpose of the festival was to build relationships in the community to pave the way for a future design center, inviting partners was essential.
And only by collaborating with such partners could we mount an ambitious 10-day festival. We curated only a few of the events internally, gave advice and input to some of the partner organizations about programs, and collaborated on the programming of the film series within the festival.
KS: What was the relationship between the collaborators? Any surprisingly fruitful partnerships?
LN: My initial vision was that each of the 10 partner organizations would send one or two members to the festival planning committee, but only some of the organizations did so. While the partner events were quite successful, it did require a great deal of coordination and communication from us to deal with that many organizations. Most of our partner organizations were staffed by volunteers. The most fruitful partnerships were those with more established non-profits that had staff resources to interact with us more extensively. One surprisingly fruitful partnerships was with SIFF Cinema, the year-round programming arm of the Seattle International Film Festival.
KS: With every design festival there are the flashy programs and then the more serious, educational programs. Did you feel Seattle was ready for some heavy conversations about design or did you strategize that a lighter touch would reach more people?
LN: We were mindful in all our planning that the main audience we were trying to reach was the public. We had several humorous and light-hearted events and installations that struck the right chord with broad audiences. But we also found that two of the best-attended and highest energy events were the ones that were more challenging conversations about design (one that focused on architectural work that stretches conventional boundaries of the practice and moves into art installation; another proposed a manifesto for design in the 21st century).
Where both the more serious and more accessible content really came together, though, was in the films and some of the panel discussions we ran with them. We showed 8 documentaries about architecture and design, 5 of them Seattle premieres. The audiences for these were quite mixed—there were some architects and designers there, but it was mostly a general audience, and the discussions were very lively.
KS: What specific tools or technology proved to be useful, for organization or communication purposes?
LN: I don’t know that there were any particular tools that we used in organization, but for communicating the festival to the public, we spent a lot of time and attention on building a good website, which we felt was a good investment of time and budget.
KS: Were there ways the local press made certain aspects really successful or overlooked other areas you personally thought were very successful?
LN: We got quite a few notices in the press for the film series, which I think was appropriate, since they really were a great crossover medium for reaching beyond the design disciplines. We would have liked some broadcast media to have covered the street installations and an installation we had in a storefront, but weren’t successful in getting their attention, despite our attempts.
KS: What were the biggest challenges, and how did you address them?
LN: One of the biggest challenges was that this was the first time for a design festival in Seattle—and people weren’t quite sure what a design festival was. We did a lot of branding and communication: posters, postcards, signage, ads, email blasts, social media. Of course the other challenges were having a modest budget and a tiny staff. We stretched our resources as far as we could.
KS: What have been the most popular programs?
LN: Some of the most popular programs were these:
Dear Seattle, a hands-on installation with four activities that allowed the public to identify design treasures and places in Seattle they loved, write a collective letter to the city, and contribute their “bright ideas” for how to make the city better.
Design Marks, a series of 25 outdoor columns, each installed at a different cultural site in the city and designed by a different design firm.
Beyond Boundaries, a panel of three design studios pushing the boundaries between architecture and art.
A 21st Century Design Manifesto lecture
Films on Architecture and Design: 8 documentaries
Design League, an event in a public park where a team of industrial designers engaged hundreds of visitors in a playful game of design trivia to raise awareness about the design of everyday objects.
KS: What’s been the mood/attitude of the Board and staff after such a big undertaking?
LN: Since the festival just ended last night, we haven’t fully assessed everything yet, but when the Board met last week, during the middle of the festival, they were pleased…