Minimalist making is an idea I’m adapting from Danica Savonick’s concept of “Minimalist Digital Humanities” that builds on the idea of frugal innovation and minimal computing. The principles are basically the same and I am using this space to brainstorm some thoughts about their application to academic makerspaces and making generally. I am particularly thinking of curricular situations here, but the same things likely apply to individual makers. Digital humanities is really digital making and I’d love us to better support digital making in the future.

Basically, Minimalist Making is making that embraces the following principles:

1. Keep it simple
2. Make it fun
3. It must be relevant
4. Keep it low impact (social, environmental, and economic impact)

Keep it simple

• Whatever you are initially thinking, start smaller. Much smaller.
• What pre-work can be done ahead of time?
• What infrastructure needs to be in place? Does equipment work? Are supplies available? Are instructions and troubleshooting tips at hand?
• The goal here can never be to do the work for users, that would negate the value of a makerspace, rather it is to set conditions that are realistic for the level of expertise of the users (zone of proximal development)

Make it Fun

• Choice and user autonomy is essential. To me, making is about having a vision you want to bring to fruition. If you need to mandate a particular activity or outcome (and should you really? really?) what can the user choose to make it their own? Design, colour, process, etc.
• Make the environment fun. Add music. Make it social. Conversely: have an option for people who don’t find that fun, like a room they can use that is quiet.

It must be relevant

• As noted above: something I suspect is that making works best when you have a vision in your head you are trying to achieve, and so each time you iterate you are pushing against the limits of your abilities and closing the gap between your vision and what you can actually do. If the thing you are doing is arbitrary, you don’t have a vision or gap to close, just the artificial assignment requirements. This is one type of relevancy.
• What skills are you developing? How will they help the user?
• What is the impact of what you are doing on your community, society, culture, the environment, etc?
• There is a link here with mindful making as well, thinking about users and purpose and values.

Keep it Low Impact

• Think about costs, waste, time, equipment, stigma, etc.
• Impacts should be proportional to outcomes and should never be arbitrary
• Ask users to think about what the impact of their making will be, positive and negative, on the space, other users, the community, etc. all the way out in ever expanding circles.
• Environmental and economic impacts are the easiest to think about here, but social, cultural, emotional impacts are the most important
• There are big questions here with cultural impacts as well, especially when people are making things from other cultures or traditions.