What would design be if there weren't any money? A primitive truism?

If the recession is killing our idea of what an architect is (see my post on Cameron Sinclair, 9 April), then what of our idea of design? What would design be if there weren't any money? The repurposing and reshaping of things that exist already or come for free? The organisation of what surrounds us into order and sense? The solving of problems of a practical and semiotic nature by amateurs leaping into the commercial breach? My first three e-invitations to events at this week's Milan Furniture Fair gave me reason to believe it might be so. Tom Dixon's show Utility promises "some of the most basic and primitive and materials, re-thought for the modern age". Then I got the Craft Punk notice promising "tenacious creative expression, unruly experimentation and brilliantly low-tech design". Finally, and most intriguingly, something called Amateur Share with an A-list of contributors, no promises and an invitation to bring your own drinks, cigarettes, spirit and discussion. 

If the recession is killing our idea of what an architect is (see my post on Cameron Sinclair, 9 April), then what of our idea of design? What would design be if there weren't any money? The repurposing and reshaping of things that exist already or come for free? The organisation of what surrounds us into order and sense? The solving of problems of a practical and semiotic nature by amateurs leaping into the commercial breach? My first three e-invitations to events at this week's Milan Furniture Fair gave me reason to believe it might be so. Tom Dixon's show Utility promises "some of the most basic and primitive and materials, re-thought for the modern age". Then I got the Craft Punk notice promising "tenacious creative expression, unruly experimentation and brilliantly low-tech design". Finally, and most intriguingly, something called Amateur Share with an A-list of contributors, no promises and an invitation to bring your own drinks, cigarettes, spirit and discussion. 

In the middle of writing this, Pascal Anson sent me the link to his absolutely brilliant YouTube films. He asks almost exactly what I've just asked, as a proposition for a new home-design tv show: How can you start with nothing and end up with a really beautiful home? If all your money goes on your mortgage, how do you furnish the property? Pascal then applies charm, comic bravura and all his resourcefulness as a designer to fabricating a kitchen, a set of dining chairs, a mirrored wall and a shelving system in the form of a three-dimensional alphabet. "Do try this at home" is the message.

It all sounds like a grand un-doing of design; part of the big Victor Papanek moment we seem to be in. I've come accross more Papanek citings in the last 6 months than ever before. Trouble is, it always seem to be designers who cite him. Designers know what he says is true: "All men are designers. All that we do, almost all of the time, is design" and thrill to this primitive truism.

Yesterday, in the final round of our Action for Age student design award sponsored by Gulbenkian Foundation, finalist Katy Shields offered a great example as she proposed a new social network bringing together society's two most isolated groups: old people and new parents. Katy is a doing a Masters in design as a novice; she was previously an occupational therapist. When asked by puzzled community members why the problem of social isolation needs a designer to solve it, she told us she often gets her two vocations muddled in responding: "it's about working holistically" she says, "looking at every aspect of what people do in their lives".

I'm not accusing Papanek of reducitveness - he does after all take about 350 words to explain his primitive truism. But in practice, how is the public imagination to navigate between the idea that all we do almost all of the time is design; and the much more readily consumable idea that all designers do is design clever and pleasing things. I wonder if non-designers actually like and want and need design to be more than "a fundamental human activity"; more elevated, more professional, more distilled into outward and visible signs, in order to perceive it as design.

My pulse quickenend as I heard mention of design on the Today Programme - occasioned indeed by the Milan Furniture Fair - at 0747 this morning. For all the wit and wisdom of Tom Dixon's insights, it was a disappointing feature; all about chairs. So last century.