Onions have layers and hardly anyone uses the outermost one. Corns have a covering but I don't see anyone eating that. The sweet taste of apples is judged by the white inside rather than the red outside. I have never seen anyone eat the shells of peanuts either. Its the inside that counts - and I like to believe that it holds true for design.
Yes, when one thinks of design, our mind instantly thinks of improving how something looks. However, it is not completely disassociated from its concept, its inner soul. Design briefs are always convoluted and to simplify all that into one symbol, one layout or one design is a very challenging task. The problem is that quite often the solutions strive to make something 'pretty' and end up looking identical to earlier solutions to completely different jobs. Without a concept, most designs will end up having no individuality of their own. This is a problem especially in an atmosphere of intense competition between companies who want to stand apart from each other. And yet designers keep trying to make just pretty things. It could work once, twice, maybe thrice but really, if there has hardly been any thought into it, it will die out 99 out of 100 times. Among the many things that i have learnt from design school and design studios, one of them is to never ever kill the soul.
Lets take logos for example. Especially the typographic ones, especially in the fashion sphere. They look so similar to each other. Heck I saw a upmarket grocery store which had a type treatment that reminded me of some fashion labels- and sadly, the rest of the branding inside that supermarket/grocery was not at all related to the main logo. And then there are some amazing marks you remember- like the coke logo which you just never forget. The saddest part is that every designer remembers to make their design stand apart but ends up not really doing so. Some think that they need to reinvent the wheel but it really is not possible unless you are a genius or god himself! And the fact that most design solutions may have been used should not mean that we cannot create more solutions from these either. All the time staying true to the spirit of what we are making.
What I am saying is that we should desist from making grungy designs for upscale projects or polished ones for 'street' projects. "Relevance"- that should be the operative word while deciding the USP of our designs. NOT "pretty". After all, a banana's peel stays as fresh as the banana itself.
Monday, July 14, 2008
Thursday, July 03, 2008
Burnt toasts and favorite seats
A few of us may have received one of those forwards about life's unsolved mysteries which actually asks some interesting questions like "Does pushing the elevator button more than once make it arrive faster?" or "Why do banks charge a fee on "insufficient funds" when they know there isn't enough?" or "Why do they used sterilized needles for death by lethal injection?" or what I am going to answer here- "Why do toasters always have setting so high that could burn a toast to a horrible crisp, which no decent human being would eat?" Why indeed? And one day at the labs, while I was mulling on this idiosyncrasy of all toaster companies, I saw a bunch of new students troop into class and I wondered about how often it has happened that we sit on the one seat on the first day of class and that seat becomes 'our seat' for the rest of the semester from that moment on. Why do we do that I asked myself. The answer led me back to the toaster!
In middle school, some teachers implemented the policy of seat-rotation where every week, students on each row would move back one row and the one in the last row would have to come up front. This basically meant that noone could change their seats (the row or the columns) or their seat partners no matter how obnoxious they may have been. Plus, the future 'back-benchers" would always dread the week that they would have to come to the front- right in the line of fire of the teacher! What was worse that sometimes, people were actually assigned seat partners by the teacher and in the event of any indiscipline, only she/he had the authority to change the seats!
The situation got better in higher grades as there was no seat roattion and students could change seats and partners - somewhat like the first experiment with promiscuity. However, it did not mean that everyone did it. Me, and almost everyone else, had their "reserved" seats- and quite often people would guard their seats fiercely and any encroachment was not taken kindly. I did not really face this problem as my seat was right upfront (though with the quickest exit to the door in the unlikely event of a fire or natural disaster inside class). The whole idea of back-benchers came about eveolving through college. However, loyalties to seats were less intense in college as students realized that they could get by with coming in late into class. The loyalties were directed more to the side of the room and a certain group of seats which were automatcally cycled between the group.
It's kind of the same in design school as well- where even if students cannot manage the same seat, it will be more or less on the same side of the room with the same group of people around them. Unless ofcourse the teacher kept changing her seat every class- but it was rare. I have sometimes been in the need to venture to new sides of the room if someone took away my seat or there wasn't any space left on my side. The experience can be a mix of anxiety and isolation- to talk to my new neighbors meant that I would have to know what they were talking about or start a whole new conversation- otherwise it is akin to becoming a social outcast (which could also be 'cos of other reasons like my personality! :P).
All said and done, I think it is a experience which serves well in the long run- one gets to know a different bunch of people and realize that the air on the other side of the room is not all that different. We can learn how to adapt to diferent people or better still, which people we do not have to adapt to - you know, people who gel with our personalities, people who we would like to hang out with. Its a good exercise but an excess could mean that you end up not hanging out with anyone and you feel like you really are a outcast and cannot fit anywhere and want to go commit suicide. Okay, not so extreme but I hope you get my point- if you drink too much water and just sit in a cold room, you will want to pee all the time.
So anyway, what does a toaster have to do with all this? Everything. I don't know anyone who really tried the highest setting but I am guessing the result would be a waste of some valuable source of fatty carbs. One could always try it but I am guessing everyone becomes aware of the consequences once they reach near-burnt status on the toaster while testing it out for the first few times. It is after that they end up having a favorite setting - 2 or 3 or even 4 in some toasters. But I doubt anyone will go for 'max'. Different toasters have different heat values- plus a toast is not the same everytime as it depends on other actors like how fresh the bread is and how hot the toaster-coils are. But it takes a bit of experimentation to know what suits us best. I hope you are getting my point. Like on a new toaster we need to find which setting suits our tastes best, we need to move around in the four walls on life and find out if there is a corner we belong to- otherwise, if we don't, there are chances that we may miss our chance to get that perfect crust.
In middle school, some teachers implemented the policy of seat-rotation where every week, students on each row would move back one row and the one in the last row would have to come up front. This basically meant that noone could change their seats (the row or the columns) or their seat partners no matter how obnoxious they may have been. Plus, the future 'back-benchers" would always dread the week that they would have to come to the front- right in the line of fire of the teacher! What was worse that sometimes, people were actually assigned seat partners by the teacher and in the event of any indiscipline, only she/he had the authority to change the seats!
The situation got better in higher grades as there was no seat roattion and students could change seats and partners - somewhat like the first experiment with promiscuity. However, it did not mean that everyone did it. Me, and almost everyone else, had their "reserved" seats- and quite often people would guard their seats fiercely and any encroachment was not taken kindly. I did not really face this problem as my seat was right upfront (though with the quickest exit to the door in the unlikely event of a fire or natural disaster inside class). The whole idea of back-benchers came about eveolving through college. However, loyalties to seats were less intense in college as students realized that they could get by with coming in late into class. The loyalties were directed more to the side of the room and a certain group of seats which were automatcally cycled between the group.
It's kind of the same in design school as well- where even if students cannot manage the same seat, it will be more or less on the same side of the room with the same group of people around them. Unless ofcourse the teacher kept changing her seat every class- but it was rare. I have sometimes been in the need to venture to new sides of the room if someone took away my seat or there wasn't any space left on my side. The experience can be a mix of anxiety and isolation- to talk to my new neighbors meant that I would have to know what they were talking about or start a whole new conversation- otherwise it is akin to becoming a social outcast (which could also be 'cos of other reasons like my personality! :P).
All said and done, I think it is a experience which serves well in the long run- one gets to know a different bunch of people and realize that the air on the other side of the room is not all that different. We can learn how to adapt to diferent people or better still, which people we do not have to adapt to - you know, people who gel with our personalities, people who we would like to hang out with. Its a good exercise but an excess could mean that you end up not hanging out with anyone and you feel like you really are a outcast and cannot fit anywhere and want to go commit suicide. Okay, not so extreme but I hope you get my point- if you drink too much water and just sit in a cold room, you will want to pee all the time.
So anyway, what does a toaster have to do with all this? Everything. I don't know anyone who really tried the highest setting but I am guessing the result would be a waste of some valuable source of fatty carbs. One could always try it but I am guessing everyone becomes aware of the consequences once they reach near-burnt status on the toaster while testing it out for the first few times. It is after that they end up having a favorite setting - 2 or 3 or even 4 in some toasters. But I doubt anyone will go for 'max'. Different toasters have different heat values- plus a toast is not the same everytime as it depends on other actors like how fresh the bread is and how hot the toaster-coils are. But it takes a bit of experimentation to know what suits us best. I hope you are getting my point. Like on a new toaster we need to find which setting suits our tastes best, we need to move around in the four walls on life and find out if there is a corner we belong to- otherwise, if we don't, there are chances that we may miss our chance to get that perfect crust.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)