You’re viewing a version of this story optimized for slow connections. To see the full story click here.

strengthening the source

Creative education in southeast Asia (part 3)

Story by Sali Sasaki November 18th, 2017
“Creativity flows between the past and the future. There is a great accumulation of knowledge from where we can take our inspiration.” (K. Hara – ‘Designing Design’ © 2007)

The design process, if used intelligently, is an invisible thread to link one thing to the next, one person to the next, one place to the next, weaving through the past to the present and the future. However, global expectations and influence have largely contributed to a damaging one-sided and vertical system where designers and companies always have the economic advantage.

It is very easy to spend a week in a tiny village, have access to local materials and technologies, and leave with a collection of gorgeous objects. It is also relatively easy to publish beautiful pictures with these objects and with the faces of people who took part in the workshop in specialized magazines, labeling the initiative as “social responsibility”. The difficult part is to ensure this work is meaningful and relevant for the local community, so that it can be continued.” (A. Borges – from ‘Design+Crafts, The Brazilian Path’ © 2011)


Traditional products used by local communities, and which are not yet impacted by external influence.
An artisan working on traditional metal works in Mae Chaem, Chiang Mai Province.
This type of accessories is used in combination with traditional costumes, during special events and festivals.

In many craft-design collaborations, the process of connecting past to future is reduced to an aesthetic modernization of traditional content without looking further into its cultural depth. Even in the context of “ethical trade”, the articulation between past and future is often missing. I find this approach problematic over the long term.

First, it can lead to the superficial interpretation of cultural assets, which limits the development of local capacities. Secondly, it associates cultures with “commodity-centered development” dictated by market demand and with the risk of severely altering local community values. In the case of “ethical products”, the notion of “ethical” is a branding construct, the integrity of which is not always possible to verify. This approach can perpetuate a socio-economic hierarchy (i.e. “rich” countries assisting the “poor”) unless the target communities are able to grow the adequate capacity to manage their own assets and develop real self-confidence.

Night market in Chiang Mai, where traditional indigenous cultures are often altered and commercialized for tourism.
These days, factory products are replacing the handmade at markets around southeast Asia, lowering the quality of local offer.

To foster dynamic local cultures in southeast Asia, artisans need to strengthen their own creative abilities and cultural awareness in the context of globalization in order to educate and support their communities, especially the younger generations. They also need better awareness, access and channels to collaborate with groups, institutions (e.g. universities, museums), the private sector and learn to recognize their own assets as distinctively unique and relevant for the world we live in. Genuine efforts must be directed toward the development of deeper self-knowledge and cultural pride at a local community level.