"With the arrogance of youth, I determined to do no less than to transform the world with Beauty. If I have succeeded in some small way, if only in one small corner of the world, amongst the men and women I love, then I shall count myself blessed, and blessed, and blessed, and the work goes on. "
--William Morris
"If you want a golden rule that will fit everything, this is it: Have nothing in your houses that you do not know to be useful or believe to be beautiful."
--William Morris
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A couple of quotes to chew on from good old William Morris. When talking as we have about design responsibility, I think it is easy to make "responsible" design purely utilitarian. Morris seems to suggest, however, that beauty not only has the power to transform but also serves a valuable purpose outside of usefulness. Is there room for design that is beautiful but serves no real "justifiable" use?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
great quotes matt. i think the issue of beauty is what separates designers from engineers or programmers. we recognize the potential for a transcendant element within a fundamentally utilitarian object. why settle for something that just gets the job done, when it can get the job done with excellence, or make the job fun, or bring a smile, insight, or knowledge to the viewer / user? sometimes, though, the beauty of an object is in its simple utility; when it is so elegantly easy to use and well thought out that you appreciate it for those qualities alone. it's also important to realize that beauty takes many forms, many of them context-dependant, or "in the eye of the beholder" as they say.
to answer your question specifically: "is there room for design that is beautiful but serves no real "justifiable" use?" i suppose that would be called art. but that quickly bleeds off into the whole "what is art / what is design / are they different " debate.
Post a Comment