Functional Elegance

            I didn’t leave home at all on Sunday, November 27^th. I read an article on Design twice for Aesthetics class and I worked on getting caught up on my journal entries.

            I watched an episode of Johnny Staccato in which he went to hear an old friend of his who used to be a great saxophone player, play badly. I sure couldn’t tell. It sounded like bepop to me. It didn’t seem very plausible that a good musician would have a nervous breakdown and afterwards would just think that he sounded good when he didn’t. There was also the even more implausible element of his piano player and drummer being part of a heroin ring and using the trio as a front. When Johnny got on their trail, they drugged him and then shot him up with heroin. That show was trying a little too hard to be hip.

            Before leaving for Aesthetics class on Monday November 28^th, I changed the laces on my Blundstones. In the package, the laces that I’d bought looked like they were a darker brown than when they were on my boots. They turned out to be golden brown and a lot brighter than I would have preferred.

            I raced with two women on my way to class. One of them had very long, light brown pigtails and the other was a young, big-boned Black woman in a short, black dress. They weren’t riding together but they both kept passing me at and then I kept catching up and passing them. I was ahead of them again when one end of the new lace on my right boot got wound up where my crank arm meets the axle, so I had to stop to unravel it and then double tie my laces.

            There are two young women that always come early together and sit four rows behind me, talking constantly and loudly in Chinese. Maybe it’s racist of me but I find it unpleasant to listen to. Then again, maybe it’s not racist of me to be annoyed by it. It would only be racist if I were to say they shouldn’t speak loudly in Chinese, and I wouldn’t do that. I’ve heard people speak Chinese a lot and it’s never bothered me, but I have to admit that if they were speaking French or Italian or even German loudly it might not bother me as much.

            At the beginning of class, Professor Russell gave us some information about the next Monday’s quiz. Like the last one there would be ten short answer questions. The questions would cover everything from our first class on art and ethics to the end. There had been a bit of an overlap after the last quiz, because we’d talked a bit more about Wollheim’s idea of criticism as retrieval, but Devlin said not to worry about Wollheim for the second quiz. The main difference would be that instead of a 24-hour window in which to write the quiz, we would have 12-hour window, from 9:00 to 21:00.

            Our lecture was on the topic of design, but more specifically on industrial design, which is an activity where one designs man-made objects for practical use. The designer focuses on external features that one can perceive and control, but not on the engineering. They do not make the objects.

            He showed images of a kitchen counter, a chair, a table and a bed. These were examples of Modernist furniture design. Modernism rejects ornamentation, so no details, including engravings and carvings. According to early 20^th Century architect, Adolph Loos, we live in a time when art is for artists and so there should be no art in design.

            The problem is that not everyone wants products without ornament and so as a response to Modernism came Postmodernism in design.

            He showed us images of colonial style kitchen; an ornate brass bed; a kidney shaped table; and a lamp, the base of which was shaped like a woman’s leg and foot in fishnet stocking and stiletto shoe that was reminiscent of the lamp from the movie “A Christmas Story”.

            He took an iclicker poll, asking us if there is an objective principal of good design. 34% somewhat agreed, while 24%, including me, somewhat disagreed.

            If the object performs its function, what is wrong with it being decorated? Decoration is perhaps wasteful. Ornamentation goes out of style easily and clutters the environment.

            What if design can be aesthetically pleasing without being frilly?

            He showed the image of an Anglepoise style balanced-arm lamp and another of the classic AB1 Braun alarm clock. There are certain designs that stand the test of time, with functional elegance. So Articulate Functionalism may be better than Post Modernism. Less is more.

            He showed the image of the Diamond Rio PMP300, which was the first commercially successful MP3 player, beside the image of the first ipod. The ipod had a wheel for controlling the menu compared to buttons on the Rio situated around a circle in the same position. The ipod was simpler, more elegant and it solved the design problem effectively.

            Geoff mentioned the Mac being so accessible that entry-level users can’t learn about computers.

            Functional elegance achieves function in a less complex way, but it’s boring. I look at the ipod and I think it looks sterile and almost like a medical instrument and so in that sense its design is disturbing.

            He showed us a chart featuring the heading of Functional Beauty (function must constrain form), with subheadings, Functional Elegance that has achieved function, Apparent Fitness, Apparent Unfitness. But we ran out of time.