I'll be gentle, dear...
I've wanted to respond to this thread again, but haven't had time.
Hope it's still around when I do. But in the meanwhile, remember to
think outside The Box. That is what makes some Oriental and
Scandinavian designs so interesting.
I think it's a very poor definition, as well. Suitable for woodwork, I
But if I can cover up the tool marks a bit:
"Design is the arrangement of interacting elements in a functional
matrix toward a specific (but not necessarily singular) purpose."
I don't think art and craft are separable, either, or at least not
mutually exclusive. Sure, you can bang out a hundred thousand dowhats
according to a design template, and that's pure craft. But if the
design is especially well thought out to accomplish something in an
elegant way, you may find art in there.
Think of what the greeks thought of art. Or the classic european
meaning of the word. It's technology, accumulated knowledge.
Art as in Orange-blankets-waving-in-the-trees is moving away from a
necessary function into something only aesthetic, but you could argue
that the same creativity of thought is common to the elegant tool.
I think "interacting" is necessary to this. Think of children's blocks:
you can arrange them all sorts of different ways (ooh, that calculation
would have an answer much larger than 42) but it is the way they work
together to affect some goal that determines whether you have a genius
on your hands...
"Purpose" is a little less definite (or meaningful?), as you can have
the most abstract things in mind as you design...
On Wed, 09 Nov 2005 14:10:51 -0700, email@example.com wrote:
Actually, Bridge, I meant it to be a one word response to the call for
I think that the intent to design is the intent to manage chaos.
Certainly there have to be parameters that will be applied.
But, I figure that the general intent of design is to take us out of
the chaotic world of experience, and into the world of managed
The priorities may be multivalent, and the valences would have
If I want to design a kitchen, I would assign a higher priority to
function, if I were designing for a cook - but I have designed
kitchens for people who would never do more than boil water in the
These were Show kitchens, intended to impress their fellows - I
designed them to look good, following the glossy magazine crap that
was currently purveyed in the designer level rags.
If someone wanted a wall to encompass their stereo and TV, I would try
to manage the chaos according to their needs.
Let's take this to a different level.
Let's say that you are a GUI designer.
You have a given level of functionality that you must present.
It really needs to be graded according to importance.
This gradation must be available on a graphic level.
The user's relationship to the object must be intuitive.
Oh, and for a minute I didn't think that I was talking about
Tom Watson - WoodDorker
On Tue, 08 Nov 2005 00:10:28 -0800, charlie b wrote:
Don't forget the negative spaces. One can do subtle things with the space
not occupied by the wood.
[snipping from different posts:]
"Graphic Design" used to be called "business art." (Still is, as long as
there aren't any business artists around to poke you in the eye with a
Post-Modern crap, possibly. Real art most certainly does have a function;
it's just not tangible.
Milwaukee Art Museum had an Arts&Crafts exhibition recently. (Maybe
the exhibit is showing elsewhere now?) One piece was a Finnish sideboard
of birch, alder and pearwood. It was stained with greens and golds. The
piece was large, yet didn't overpower because of the grain and color
variations. Sure, it was a Box, but the verticals were curved to break the
"Keep your ass behind you"
vladimir a t mad scientist com
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.