Reading the "Cult of the Ugly" by Steven Heller and having to do research in order to write an opinionated paper on it has really made me think. When I first heard about the subject of ugly design, I hardly had to pause before I said I hated the very idea. Why on earth would you ever, EVER want to make a design that was "ugly"?! But the more I read about it, from both sides of the argument, I began to realize that there could be some merits to such and unconventional design style (the expressive aspect for example). Some solutions just make more sense if they look horrible. One of the quotes from an article I read said this about so-called ugly design: "The only thing lost was an absolute dedication to minimalist form, which is a completely different issue from rationalist process." That made me think even more. Just because the form is more chaotic, it doesn't mean it was chosen at random.
What is aesthetically pleasing is such a subjective thing and really depends on who is doing the looking. I guess what I got out of the readings was an appreciation for ugly design, even if I couldn't ever get to especially like it. In some cases it does have its merits, and as long as a designer can sufficiently defend his or her use of the ugly style (like the designer should be able to do for any other choice in his or her design), I suppose it is fine to use.
Links:
http://www.highgrounddesign.com/mccoy/km3.htm
http://emigre.com/Editorial.php?sect=1&id=32
http://books.google.com/booksid=31R1Uc1L3u8C&pg=PA165&lpg=PA165&dq=meaning+john+rheinfrank&source=web&ots=cSPNR6lFt5&sig=1KH-pGNXmG6NirX-q4omuQQNzo#PPA170,M1
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment