現成物創作在1910年代由達達主義的先鋒人物馬修杜象(Marcel Duchamp )揭開序幕後，在藝術創作領域掀起一陣波瀾，並間接的影響到50-60年代的產品設計風格。本創作藉由閱讀現成物設計相關的文獻，以及分析現成物的設計案例，並融入產品設計當中的原型設計理論，使得現成物設計的成果傾向於產品設計的領域，而非物體藝術。

本創作在分析現成物與原型的設計案例後，得出三項現成物設計融入原型設計理論後的三項設計準則：「指鹿為馬」、「聚沙成塔」與「削足適履」。並藉由觀察人類於社區環境中，用來標記及占有領域所使用的三種現成物，並將其運用前述的三項設計法則進行產品設計。在最後運用三項法則創作得到五件作品，「指鹿為馬」-小餐桌Cone Table、傘架 /Umbrella Cone與菇燈Mushroom Lamp；「聚沙成塔」-Vanished Pot 消失的花盆；「削足適履」-明朝椅 Ming Dynasty Chair，這一系列的作品的產出，做為本創作在文獻歸納整理後的理論驗證。

Ready-made creative art can be traced back to 1910s. It was developed by Marcel Duchamp, a pioneer of Dadaism, and had started a wave in the field of arts, indirectly influencing product design styles during the 50s and 60s. 　This study was based on literature related to ready-made design and analyses of ready-made design cases. The archetypal design theory of product design was also integrated, so that the result of the ready-made design could be more likely categorized into the field of product design instead of object art.

After analyzing the cases of ready-mades and archetype designs, this study obtained 3 design principles from the 3 ready-made designs integrated with the archetypal design theory, including “calling a stag a horse”, “piling up grains of sand to make a pagoda”, and “cutting the feet to fit the shoes”. By observing the 3 ready-mades people used in their communities to mark and occupy territories, product design 　was conducted according to the 3 previously-mentioned principles. After the 3 principles were applied, 5 works were completed, including the Cone Table, the Umbrella Cone, and the Mushroom Lamp from the “calling a stag a horse” principle, the Vanished Pot from the “piling up grains of sand to make a pagoda” principle, and the Ming Dynasty Chair from the “cutting the feet to fit the shoes” principle. This series of works were later used for theory verification after the summary of literature in this study.

Key　Words：Ready-mades, Archetype, Product Design

[1]Altman, I. (1975). The environment and social behavior. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
[2]Charlotte Fiell, P. F. (2005). 1000 Chairs. Koln: Taschen.
[3]Cotterell, J. (1991). The emergence of adolescent torritories in large urban lesiure [4]environment . Journal of Environmental Psychology,11 , pp. 25-41.
[5]Edney, J. (1974). Human Territoriality. Psychological Bulletin, 81 , pp. 12, 953-973.
[6]Hagiwara, S. (2006). Origins. Tokyo: Kodansaha International.
[7]Houseley, L. (2009). The Independence Design Guide. UK: Thames and Hudson.
[8]Kawakami, K. (1995). The big bento box of Unuseless Japanese Inventions. Hugh
Fearnley-Whittingstall Published.
[9]Moates Danny & GarySchumacher. (1980). An introduction to cognitive psychology.
Wadsworth Pub. Co.
[10]Naoto Fukasawa . (2007). Naoto Fuksawa. USA: Phaidon Press Limited.
[11]Norman, D. A. (2000). 設計心理學─以使用者為中心、安全易用的日常生活用品設計原理. 台北市: 遠流.
[12]Peek, F. W., E. Franks and D. Case. (1972). Recognition of nest, eggs nest site, and
young in female red-winged blackbirds.
[13]Renny RemakersMoorsAnneke. (2008). Simple Droog：就是Droog. 台北: 田園文化
[14]Rosch, E. H. (1973). Natural Categories. Cognitive Psychology , pp. 328-350.
[15]Steven Heller,Mirko Ilic著，韋曉強譯(2009)。設計解剖全書。臺北：積木文化。
[16]小泉誠. (2003). デザインの素. 東京: ラトルズ.
[17]王維憶. (2009). 諷刺仿作風格應用在「全球暖化 」海報設計的創作與研究.
國立台灣師範大學碩士論文.
[18]何新. (1989). 藝術現象的符號：文化學闡釋. 台北巿: 明鏡文化.
[19]李佩玲. (2005). 現成物對現代設計觀念的衝擊與反思. 師大學報 , pp. 91-103.
[20]尚玉昌. (2003). 行為生態學. 五南出版社.
[21]林銘煌. (2006). 工業設計思潮. 台北市: 全華科技出版.
[22]林銘煌&鄭仕弘. (2004). 原型理論與原型設計. 設計學報第9卷第4期 .
[23]後藤武、佐佐木正人、深澤直人. (2008). 不為設計的設計. 台北: 漫游者文化
[24]書萬元. (1994). 幽默與諷刺藝術. 商鼎.
[25]徐磊青、楊公俠. (2005). 環境心理學 --環境、知覺和行為. 台北市: 五南.
[26]深澤直人、原研哉、佐藤卓. (2002). デザインの原形. 六耀社.
[27]劉瑞琪（2004)。陰性顯影：女性攝影家的扮裝自拍像。臺北：遠流出版社