There’s no accounting for taste
1
Posted under: Design
My wife and I were watching an interior design show, where a designer’s own home was presented. He had a lot unique ideas for his space.
There was a lot of muted gold and red textures used in the walls and fabrics, and then in the oddest place, a painting that used a completely contrasting bright aqua palette. The use of contrast was extensive—next to a sleek modern chair was a block of untreated lumber used as a table. Next to a large, black, Japanese-style table were two golden, Victorian-style coffee tables that had almost cartoonish floral carvings. Was it ‘out there’? Yes. Was it poorly designed? No.
My wife’s reaction was “I hate itâ€.
The difficulty in designing, no matter what category of design it falls into, is always the same: Design is partly subjective and partly objective. While the designer’s home was ugly to my wife’s taste, it was not poorly designed. In contrast, there are many poorly designed spaces, the owners of which are in love with. In many cases, it comes down to personal taste.
So where does that leave us? Are we as designers always doomed to the mercy of the crowds in the Roman arena? Does 100% of the people who glance at our designs need to become so ‘wowed’ that they immediately grab a copy to stick on their fridges? Should our design decisions always be based on what the client is going to ‘like’? In school, my instructor wouldn’t allow a student to simply state ‘I like it’, regarding a peers design. He would retort, ‘Do you like pie as well?‘ All criticism had to be qualified.
We all know that you can’t please everybody. So how does one qualify his/her design? Obviously there are some rules that come into play with design, such as proper use of contrast, alignment, repetition, gestalt, harmony, flow, movement, proximity etc. And it takes study, practice and a bit of talent to be able to use these principles masterfully in your design. But more importantly, you need to know who it is you want your design to please.
To me, what separates design from art is that art is a personal expression which is left open to interpret, discuss, or ultimately—like. Design is trickier than that. It’s a calculated expression of creativity. And while it is usually seasoned with personal influence, it is really supposed to speak to a target audience. That means that if your design is required to speak to a select group who finds rainbow gradients appealing, and you can use it with an idea backing it up, while ensuring it’s well-designed—then use it. It can be ugly to 90% of the population, and yes, even ugly to you. But if it’s working it’s mission, and your not compromising good-design for client satisfaction, then work your rainbow-gradient-magic (RGM) I say.
It is rumored that the president of Nike, when originally looking at the choices his designer presented for logos, felt strongly about several options other than the check mark that has since defined the company. So, why did he choose the swoosh? Although he didn’t personally like it, he felt it was appropriate for his audience. Is it a coincidence the company has done well?
The designer mentioned at the outset accomplished his objectives. He used solid principles and some unique ideas to design a space he felt comfortable calling his own. In that case he was the audience, and not the viewing public. The key: Good design is good design. Make it appropriately speak to your audience and it won’t matter if your wife or your boss, or even your client dislikes it.
By Anicka
on August 22nd, 2009
Lol : ) “My wife’s reaction was “I hate it– tnx 4 sharin