▲ Jung-Bae Kim. Publisher and Editor. Lighting Critic.   ©World Lighting News.

●Written by : Jung-Bae Kim / Publisher & Editor. Lighting Critic.

History is the study of the research and investigation of what has happened since the birth of humanity. But there is a topic in this history that has been controversial for a very long time. It is a controversy about "how should we view history?"

◆ Three Perspectives of History

The three most important players in this debate are three. First, German historian Leopold von Ranke insisted that "history should be seen as it is." This is called an empirical view of history, an objective view of history.

But Italian historian Benedetto Croce argued that "history as it is, in the process of describing history, is impossible". This is called the Relativist view of history. Meanwhile, British historian Edward Hallett Ted Carr published a book in 1961 called 'What is History?'

In this book, he criticized both Lanke's positivist history and Croce's subjective history. He said, "History is not a slave to the facts, nor is it a master of the facts." He insisted that the historian is in fact equal and that history must be interpreted within that limit.

The history Carr pursued was not only the constant conversation between the past and the present, but also the conversation with the future in mind. Carr believed that understanding the past enhances insight into the future.

In this regard, Davis interpreted, "I thought it was especially important for you (Carr) as a historian to examine and present his own understanding of the present and the prospect of the future in times of skepticism and despair."

◆ Two thoughts on the 'essence of lighting'

But this "controversy over essence" also exists in the field of lighting. One such issue is "What is lighting design?"

In fact, there are two ways of looking at lighting design. One is to look at lighting design as “light engineering”. Proponents of this view argue that "lighting design creates an optimal lighting environment in the space, which requires a thoroughly calculated lighting engineering."

“A good lighting space environment can be created when all requirements, from lighting physics to electrical engineering to architectural design, are solved scientifically, technically and technically.”

On the other hand, some people want to see lighting design in terms of design. “Light design is not engineering. It is literally a design. That's why the designer's subjective thinking and aesthetics are more important. ”

In the end, they argued, “Lighting design is an area of ??design such as art. Therefore, lighting design works cannot be evaluated from an engineering perspective. Lighting design is an artistic activity that requires no qualifications. ”

◆ What is correct lighting design?

What is the truth about this controversy? Will lighting design be lighting engineering? Or is the engineering and technical foundation a needless art? Perhaps the truth is on the "third way" that embraces both of these arguments?

In other words, designing an optimal lighting space environment that puts the user's first priority on the basis of lighting engineering's creativity and artistry is not the right lighting design.

In fact, lighting design is not just the domain of lighting engineering, but the domain of pure art. It is a world where engineering and design become one. Only then will the optimal lighting space be created.

Only when we acknowledge this fact and reality can science, engineering, technology and specialization of lighting be possible. And it's finally possible to create a lighting space that's also based on engineering and yet highly artistic.

I think that's what lighting and lighting design are the goals and challenges that we have to pursue in the future.