aestethics in things that doesn't NEED it... | xltronic messageboard
 
You are not logged in!

F.A.Q
Log in

Register
  
 
  
 
(nobody)
...and 564 guests

Last 5 registered
Oplandisks
nothingstar
N_loop
yipe
foxtrotromeo

Browse members...
  
 
Members 8025
Messages 2614121
Today 0
Topics 127542
  
 
Messageboard index
aestethics in things that doesn't NEED it...
 

offline Drunken Mastah from OPPERKLASSESVIN!!! (Norway) on 2005-10-14 11:48 [#01749915]
Points: 35867 Status: Lurker | Show recordbag



..or at least "intentional" aestethics. a person can find
something beautiful in anything, but I'm more thinking the
form vs function thing (but not exactly that either) from
the creators side.. like architecture.. it isn't NECESSARY
for the architect to do anything "artistic" with what
he's building; he could just do what works, calculate
stuff here and there and construct something that will "do
the job." same goes for for example (informational) web
pages, industrial design (if I understand the concept
correctly) and interior design (in a broader sense.. not
only normal interior like chairs and tables, but also cups,
cutlery and so-on).. there are of course other fields, but
that's just an example...

anyway, my question is something like: "do you think people
who do stuff like this should make things that may be
aestethically pleasing and experiment with form, sometimes
at the cost of some functionality (like creating a mono
radio because it looks better or making uneven and kind of
random stair-steps on a building, making them harder to walk
on)?"


 

offline giginger from Milky Beans (United Kingdom) on 2005-10-14 11:53 [#01749916]
Points: 26326 Status: Lurker | Show recordbag



Aesthetics is the word mate :P

Aesthetics play quite an important part in everything. It's
hard to not judge things on how they look to you.


 

offline Drunken Mastah from OPPERKLASSESVIN!!! (Norway) on 2005-10-14 12:04 [#01749921]
Points: 35867 Status: Lurker | Followup to giginger: #01749916 | Show recordbag



ah.. I think I kind of knew that, but.. my bad then...

yeah, as I said, everyone can find aesthetics
in stuff, what I'm asking is if people think it should be
taken into consideration by the creator upon the creation of
the thing...


 

offline hma from real life on 2005-10-14 13:42 [#01749982]
Points: 528 Status: Lurker



Aesthetics is when both your avatars (post 1&3) don`t spin
at the same time. probably impossible.


 

offline hooked from United States on 2005-10-14 17:28 [#01750183]
Points: 17 Status: Regular



that's an interesting question -- it made me think about all
the things i see every day with "artistic" embelishments.

to answer the question -- aesthetics should be taken into
account when composing something if that (aesthetics) is the
primary reason for the creation. so, if you have a spoon and
your say, "well, lets add something pretty to the spoon," --
it's no good. but if your approach is "i am going to create
something beautiful" and it turns out to be a spoon -- then
you have something. all that other shit is tacky.


 

offline hooked from United States on 2005-10-14 17:29 [#01750185]
Points: 17 Status: Regular



oh, i forgot to add -- my response is valid (to me) if the
question is function vs aesthetics, but not necessarily
valid in a more general sense.


 

offline zazen on 2005-10-14 19:03 [#01750217]
Points: 184 Status: Regular



I read someone somewhere saying that designed-in aesthetics
have become too prevalent now, and hence design has become
visual pollution

sums it up for me



 

offline evolume from seattle (United States) on 2005-10-14 19:09 [#01750222]
Points: 10965 Status: Regular | Followup to zazen: #01750217



like, bloody Apple computers making it so like now even my
fucking toaster has to be all red and like have a purple
knob that pops up and plays this "ding" like you was
entering an old timey candy shop.


 

offline hobbes from age on 2005-10-14 19:10 [#01750224]
Points: 8168 Status: Lurker



To have both is actually possible.
As you say it's relative.

As for visual pollution, yup, we're infested by it. But
it's more the result of the fact too many people are into
DIY "graphic design", mostly because it's now very easy to
do things that were rather hard to master before .. I don't
think it's so much the result of people trying to be
functional...though i'm sure they think they are.


 

offline hobbes from age on 2005-10-14 19:12 [#01750226]
Points: 8168 Status: Lurker | Followup to hobbes: #01750224



All that just to say so many people are pretentious and
tasteless.


 

offline mappatazee from ¨y¨z¨| (Burkina Faso) on 2005-10-14 19:12 [#01750227]
Points: 14294 Status: Lurker



To be honest I'm turned off by a lot of this modern or
postmodern architecture because it's form doesn't seem to be
related in any way to function. I mean, you might as well
just make a sculpture.


 

offline evolume from seattle (United States) on 2005-10-14 19:17 [#01750229]
Points: 10965 Status: Regular | Followup to Drunken Mastah: #01749915



best example of form at the cost of function is that fucking
round MAC mouse. ugg gawd. i hate that fucking thing.


 

offline hobbes from age on 2005-10-14 19:25 [#01750235]
Points: 8168 Status: Lurker



When i recieve the handmade table i ordered and get a lump
of shit with a flag stuck in it, i know it's not a table.


 


Messageboard index