The Function of Nonfunctional Objects. Semiotics of functionalism

Humans use a lot of objects that do not work perfectly, have some faults or even serious flaws. They use them not only because they don't have a better choice, but because they like using them as they are. The paper will then try to answer two questions. First, why do users show such affection for nonfunctional objects? And, if so, does it mean nonfunctional objects have a function? The hypothesis will be put forward that nonfunctional objects perform the social function of being 'live' artifacts. Thus they communicate in a dialogic relation with their user, enhancing his/her mastery over the environment. Furthermore, if objects acquire their identity in this way, we may pose a new question: is it possible to design a non-functional object? A short discussion on functionalism will follow. I will then introduce the vision of semiotics, specifically Charles Peirce's theory about functionality as one aspect of semiosis. In this way, the semiotic/symbolic approach is not opposed to functionalism but both can be set in a unified frame. Functions of objects are texts as well as texts perform functions. This perspective allows us to view design not as separated from knowledge and communication, but as a component of the semio-pragmatic sphere, in which action and perception, investigation and project, science and industry, interact and merge at every scale of the human sphere.