The book, Are We Human? Notes on an Archaeology of Design by US-based historian and author duo Beatriz Colomina and Mark Wigley interestingly opines on a broader understanding of the practice of design as opposed to the profession of design, stating that design has always existed through the history of humanity, in one form or another. Exploring the complex interrelationships of design, built environments and human intervention and activity, it discusses how design has been an intrinsic part of the way humanity interacts with the world. As humans evolved, they acquired a better understanding of space and began imbuing it with components that represented their culture, beliefs and identity. The development of complex systems of architecture and interior design allowed people to extend their personalities to spatial design elements. As people started to lead vastly different lives with distinct needs, desires and routines, their built environments further became highly curated and meticulously designed; from the architectural 'shell' to the everyday objects within it making the mundane possible—and even exciting in rare cases—every detail beget a reflection of the user. Against the background of industrial mass production, this dichotomy between choice and expression became a particularly interesting one and continues to guide the industry of design even today.

In our contemporary world and sense of being, people can readily modify and (to an extent) redesign their environments owing to the convenience and ease of access provided by technology and the mass production of objects. From a static shell, the 'built environment'—or our perception of it and the sense of control we exert over it—thus transforms into an ever-evolving personal world, a culmination of human desires and identity. Exploring the importance of the design of everyday objects, the design exhibition Infuriating Objects, on view earlier last month between February 22 – March 2, 2025, at the Farrell Centre in Newcastle, United Kingdom, sparks interesting discourse over what constitutes our built environments and how it impacts our everyday lives.

The interactive exhibition, realised in collaboration with the National Innovation Centre for Ageing (NICA) under the Internet of Caring Things (IoCT) programme, showcases a collection of objects that lend themselves to everyday use, but cause frustration and inconvenience due to their designs. Presenting alternatives built through innovative design solutions, the exhibition invites visitors to explore and try 15 product design prototypes, lending a new perspective on their highly designed environments by highlighting the research and creativity that goes into creating these objects.

“Although we think of everyday objects of the type and scale featured in the exhibition and the built environment as separate things, ultimately they are all part of the ‘designed environment’, which runs continuously from the smallest, most seemingly inconsequential household object, to interior spaces, buildings, neighbourhoods and whole cities,” Owen Hopkins, director of the Farrell Centre, tells STIR. “The ‘designed environment’ shapes our lives for good or for ill at all scales, and it is vital that the smaller aspects don’t get lost in the bigger picture. Small-scale changes or improvements can have big impacts,” he adds.

The Infuriating Objects exhibition is the result of a creative challenge launched by IoCT earlier this year, which invited 16 people to participate in its Voice® Citizen Designers panel for human experience feedback. From 3D conceptual designs to physical prototypes, the exhibits are informed by a long and rigorous creative process involving months of identifying infuriation-inducing objects from our everyday, and exploring alternative design possibilities for them.

The assemblage of Infuriating Objects includes kitchen-related items such as the Sensor-Sational Spice Rack, which determines the expiration date of the spices by reading QR codes, alerting users to not use them by flashing red light. The Toasty Tray and Hottie Holder keep food and water warm while providing insulation on the outside, preventing skin burns and damaged tabletop surfaces. While the foldable and reusable Pocket Cup features a sustainable design, the Carry Cup delivers a hands-free experience of carrying beverages on the go through belt attachments.

Redefining the eating experience of the breakfast cereal, the Neuro D Bowl ensures the controlled release of milk into the bowl through two compartments and a release lever. The Squeezy Beezy Pouch comes with an integrated squeezing clip mechanism to prevent any possible mess from the dripping of honey. The Poppa Pill product removes all pills from the blister packs with a single push, depositing them into the daily dispenser, making the repetitive task more convenient.

The exhibition also presents alternatives to everyday utilitarian objects such as Pull a Plug, a foldable device that helps remove the tight, tricky plugs that are often hanging by a thread. Opening jars and bottles is no longer a struggle with the mini Get a Grip bottle opener, which is especially useful for people with dexterity issues. The Vizi lids are a replacement for the generic clear plastic lids that one loses easily, featuring a transparent yet visually appealing design.

Objects such as the Smoke Detector Power Protector and Slide ‘n’ Wipe address issues of accessibility. While one is an easily reachable battery compartment for smoke detectors, the other is a mechanism that uses a sliding bracket that extends and brings toilet paper rolls closer to the user. The All Brush is a brush head, toothpaste dispenser and tongue scraper, all in one, reducing plastic waste and saving storage space, especially during travelling. With the integration of small fabric loops and coat-type toggles to the duvet cover, the Duvet Duffle makes it easier to change and manage it.

In a conversation with STIR, IoCT further opens up about the process and intent behind the exhibition.

Bansari Paghdar: Could you describe the selection process for Infuriating Objects and the design development process behind the prototypes?

IoCT: The Infuriating Objects co-creation project aimed to disrupt and challenge the design of frustrating everyday objects, and it was in this spirit the exhibition was co-curated.  Each of the 16 objects reimagined by the citizen designers was deemed worthy of inclusion because of its novel adaptation and associated narrative story. However, in the case of the ‘pocket cup’ (which already exists on the market), we decided to include this in the exhibition because of the value that the citizen designer placed on sustainability and ethical considerations and the extent to which this influenced their purchasing decisions.

The design process involved two interactive workshops with the citizen designers, which offered an opportunity to experiment, co-create and articulate their ideas. Each citizen designer was set a mission challenge: to explore the objects they used or encountered in their daily lives and to identify those that they found ‘infuriating’, not working well for them and their needs. Using the tools and design techniques acquired during the workshop sessions, the citizen designers created drawings or basic prototypes of their re-imagined infuriating objects, which they modified to serve their needs.

Taking these design ideas, our design and technology associate was able to create renders and 3D technology to create physical objects, prototypes and solutions. These physical prototypes allowed the Citizen Designers’ voices to be heard. Their re-imagined, rendered or printed objects provided a tangible element to their narratives, enabling them to better communicate their lived experiences, challenges and potential solutions to design flaws. These deep insights highlight key design and societal problems with products.

Bansari: Beyond utility, one of the aspects behind the commercials of contemporary design and objects is ownership and the desirability of these products. How do you think that factors in the slightly deconstructivist language of the prototypes for Infuriating Objects?

IoCT: Our choice of language in the description of the Infuriating Objects was both playful and provocative, with the aim of stimulating discussion and debate, which it did extremely successfully. We placed a great deal of consideration on the branding of the exhibition, both in the logo design and the red and pink colour scheme. Red signifies frustration, and pink signifies calmness. Again, these design choices were purposely provocative to attract a curious audience.

Bansari: Do you believe everyday objects or objects that partake in our daily utility, frame or dictate how we live, or vice versa? What kind of impact do you think that relationship has on built environments?

IoCT: The built environment (everything from homes to workplaces to public spaces) is shaped by the objects within it, as well as the ‘design choices’ we make regarding these objects. So, essentially, everyday objects act as building blocks of the built environment. Design inherently dictates how people behave and influences the ways we interact with our surroundings. These objects can either enable a smooth, efficient flow of activities or create friction, limiting how a person moves, works or lives in that space.

Conversely, the built environment also impacts how objects are designed or evolve. For example, a city may influence the design of the public transport system, which in turn influences how residents or visitors interact with the city's spaces. Moreover, the built environment can also dictate what kinds of objects are necessary or desirable. Multi-functional furniture becomes a preferable choice in small apartments. So, the relationship is reciprocal: objects influence our behaviour in the built environment, but the environment also shapes the way objects are designed or modified.

In our Infuriating Objects workshops, it was crucial to hear the lived experiences of our Voice® members to understand how they interact with their environment and how their built environment shapes their needs. This helped us collectively ideate or redesign objects that had the potential to better integrate into our lives while also improving the user experience.

Bansari: Individuals often appropriate or tinker with industry/mass-produced design objects based on their conveniences or preferences, truly making the design their own in ways that make sense to them. How does that factor into the quintessential redesign in the prototypes behind Infuriating Objects?

IoCT: Usability and user needs are fundamentals for good design. When people modify everyday products, it often highlights where the original design has failed to meet their needs - which means either the design is not intuitive enough, or it doesn’t fully align with the user’s expectations or the context in which the object is used. In our Infuriating Objects workshop, we used this gap as a catalyst for change. Having these discussions with our Voice® Citizen Designers was crucial to identify these moments of frustration and redesign with the actual needs and natural behaviours in mind, whether it is simplifying controls, enhancing feedback, improving ergonomics or making the object's functions more predictable and consistent. The idea is to create designs that are flexible enough to cater to various needs, but also simple enough that the user doesn’t feel compelled to make modifications.

Bansari: How important is it for objects to be constantly improved for better user experiences? Should designers be responsible for this, or is it up to the users?

IoCT: Design modifications or improvements should be responsive to user experience and feedback.  While it is important commercially to improve objects/products to maintain interest and appeal, designers should be sensitive to the needs and aspirations of the end user.  Increasingly, there are opportunities for users to personalise objects/products to offer the best experience based on user needs or desires (e.g. the automobile industry). While some confines will remain, largely due to the choices proposed by the designer, the user will have some freedom to create a ‘bespoke’ version of the object/product. 

It will be interesting to see how the drive towards more sustainable products and a growing trend for re-purposing and recycling (vinted/eBay, etc.) will challenge designers. If objects are designed in a way that recognises an individual’s uniqueness by allowing modifications, the user can create a version that serves their specific needs and desires and provides the best experience. While designers are responsible for creating products that are adaptable, there is a joint responsibility to identify when further adaptations are necessary as our bodies and brains change through life. Technology and AI could help identify patterns and any changes in those patterns and can alert the user, though it is up to the user whether they choose to act or not.

The intangible memories and experiences one holds dear are shaped by everything tangible that surrounds us. Beyond wanting to make everyday objects visually 'bespoke', visitors to the exhibition were bound to be encouraged to think about the core concept, mechanism and purpose of the design of everyday objects they encountered or use, prioritising their own needs and lifestyles. Without instilling a sense of hyper-awareness about our designed environments, Infuriating Objects is compelling enough to drive one to observe, question, explore and speculate design—through inconveniences, nonetheless—along with the extent to which it affects and influences one’s life.