Prep for my viva for Waters of Leith
opening
Rather than proposing a single solution to flooding, this project explores how design can create space for people to think, speak, and imagine together about uncertain futures.
The three parts you’ve seen aren’t separate outcomes — they’re different entry points into the same conversation, each designed for a different kind of participation.”
q&a
1. “Why three parts? Why not one ‘strong’ outcome?”
“The project isn’t three outputs — it’s one conversation happening at three levels: participation, imagination, and legacy.”
2. “How is this design, not art or activism?”
“The role of design here is not to declare a future, but to structure how futures are imagined, shared, and made legible.”
3. “What evidence do you have that this actually works?”
“At this stage, I’m testing whether people want to engage with future flood imaginaries — not whether those imaginaries are ‘correct’.”
4. “How do you avoid being extractive when working with communities?”
“I’m careful not to ask communities to carry the emotional or cognitive labour of ‘fixing’ climate futures — only to share how they imagine living with them.”
5. “What is your role here — designer, facilitator, author?”
“I see my authorship in the design of the system, not in the futures it produces.”
6. “Why focus on imagination instead of practical flood solutions?”
“Hard infrastructure manages water. This project looks at how people manage meaning.”
7. “How would this scale or live beyond the degree show?”
“The degree show is not the end point — it’s the first public test.”
9. “What’s the key takeaway you want us to remember?”
“Waters of Leith isn’t about predicting the future of flooding — it’s about giving people permission and tools to imagine themselves still belonging in a changed landscape.”
“Those disciplines are definitely in dialogue with the project, but my grounding is still product design — particularly in how objects mediate behaviour.
I’m interested in products not as endpoints, but as things that structure how people act, reflect, and relate to one another.”
feedback
richard says just do the hands theres not enough time
trent + matt makes a good point about the telescope, theres not much point in developing them much more, maybe a nicer model. We understand how the telescope works from the video and they are good interms of another way of interacting with the project. but what does another prototype tell us? you can spend time playing around with how they work but theres bigger questions to answer.
matt thinks the helping hands thing is lost when not coming from the floor, he think helping hands- helping someone up from the ground, i kinda get that but some styling could alievcate that something like the hand coming from a portal. being on the floor feels like it would be dangerous, some sketch exploration needed.
none of them seemed that fussed in the kit aspect of it i guess it just doesn’t look as cool as the rest important to me though.
richard says the hand posing is a bit obvious and uninspired. I think hes kinda talking shit and doesnt really understand or can’t visualise how much detail and difference there are in different peoples hands. but more poses and sketches to be done i suppose. some sketch ideas include two hands doing a yinyang symbol, but other ideas include a pint glass, maybe flowers being held etc.