Posted on 09/03/2007 3:34:05 AM PDT by shrinkermd
While I loved 300, Hollywood got the attire wrong. I think they did that to attract the light in the loafer crowd.
One of my Internet hobbies is to surf the trend/design sites. There is interesting work that only exists on paper, as a thesis, usually, but never made it to production.
I do not agree that the design in the marketplace is of any higher quality than it was in the 70s-80s. One of the trends I find mildly amusing is that of wood cases for iPods/cell phones/computers. Quite retro, but not what I would term innovative.
Clothing, at the moment, is quite late Sixties/early Seventies, with the inclusion of some *shock* items in the lines, like male short-shorts. Jewelry seems to range from Industrial to bead stringing, with the perennial high price point stone/gold/platinum still prevalent....but none of it evinces any higher degree of craftsmanship or any innovative technique. I like the work of Jeff Wise (lots of odd-shaped precious/semi-precious stones in high karat gold...very challenging bezel work), but he is of our era and is a mature craftsman.
I do not find most consumer items particularly well designed, although some interesting approaches are evident in high-end kitchen appliances and bathroom fixtures. Packaging is primarily about security, visibility and pallet stacking, IMO, and there is way too much of it per item. There are some clever labels, but today, with computer graphics, they are fairly simple to produce and the emphasis is, from my experience, on having to fit in all the legally required information, sometimes in multiple languages, than on arresting graphics. For example, it is difficult for freelance American graphic artists to ever land work for a product that will be sold in the EU, as their labeling requirements are just a horror show of mandated information/size/language. And then there are the UPC and RFID elements the designer must incorporate. Not creative work.
I disagree that marketing is design. Marketing is a plan and a process. Merchandising is what I believe you mean, which is the presentation of product at the point of sale, be it wholesale to the trade or final retail destination.
My observations are just that, even with all the high-end graphics/art/design courses being offered and the studio crafts majors that were unheard of until the mid-late Eighties, the improvement/innovation/technical considerations of art, craft and commercial design has not been improved markedly, if at all. Where there is excellent design or innovation, IMO, too much “value” has been added to the price, considering the actual worth of the final product. As an example, the popular vessel sinks, which range from several hundred to a thousand dollars and for which a vintage or antique stoneware bread bowl or a porcelain bowl from an old washing set for $25-$125 at an antique store with a drain hole cut in by a competent plumber for under $50 and a drain assembly for relatively little cost can not only substitute, but give a room a very unique appeal. What I see, as a craftsperson, is a lot of corner cutting in materials and technique. I have seen items that are designed to leave out a few fractions of cent worth of washers or which have substituted inferior plastics for composites or photo textured contact paper for veneer in order to reduce the cost, but not the price. Look at the prevalence of bamboo in flooring and furniture and the hype about how *renewable* it is. It is attractive, but it is not a hardwood and overtime, the surface degrades and stains. It is *cheaper*; it is not even comparable to the other materials available.
Art school, per se, is only the beginning. Only so many graduates are going to work for Kohler or Siemens or other large manufacturers. Given the prevalence of graphic design courses, I wonder just how many of the graduates ever find employment in their field and how many are successful as entrepreneurs.I know younger (40s) designers who are not working full time, even if they did get a single commission from a large manufacturer or public space right out of the Chicago Art Institute. Designers/artists/craftsmen are now a drug on a buyers market.
Then, there is a whole other discussion about "familiarity breeds contempt". I think that we are all so innundated with mediocre design and so overexposed to marketing and so bombarded with ads that we have become a bit numb. I call this the "more of the same" syndrome. Lots of retro and fusion and very little innovation or real value added. It adds up, again, IMO, to a consumer base that is quite blase and a market situation that is not advantageous to any designer who is really a passionate talent.
I rest my case.
I have to disagree. I see a lot of really good design these days. A lot of the elements used from the 70s are now considered classic. Yes, this is most apparent at the high-end stuff, but it’s filtering down quickly. Target has been hiring “names” to design (or at least approve designs) for a lot of its stuff.
Everyone knows the iPod design. It’s not as simple as it looks. Basically a gooid-looking, intuitive user interface using simple controls that is cost effective.
None of those innovations have anything to do with arts and crafts. He designed the case, the workings are inside by designers who know math and science based technology.
I re-rest my case.
He designed the case, the workings are inside by designers who know math and science based technology.
The design of the case merges the inner technology with the user. It makes the product more desirable to own, which translates into sales. And it creates a destinctive look that can’t be copied.
Hey, if it were me, I’d have used a couple of toggle switches from Radio Shack.
Gotta run, have grass to cut with my sleek john deere designed by a budding artist.
Take care. It’s been a pleasure.
I grew up in ready-to-wear, as my mother was first a buyer for a couple of Federated department store chains and later had her own line and her own shop. Eventually, I also designed/manufactured clothing and used my own woven fabric. This was from around 1975-1987. Our market was destroyed by cheap imports from India. Today, when I go to fairs/shows and see the clothing and the woven work, it is all static and hasn’t changed a bit from 25 years ago, except it is about 5x more expensive.
Did you know that 1967-68 was the first Fall season ever when
7th Avenue (the old American garment industry) went into the red? It was because the innovative young American craftspeople were making and selling clothing that our generation wanted, but that was not available commercially. Immediately after a famous headline in Woman’s Wear Daily proclaiming disaster, the *names* began sending assistants out into the streets to to rip off design ideas from the grassroots artists, which is SOP today, of course. That was innovation and that is what is now being called classic!! Too funny! So, what is new about any of this?
As for “names”, they not only sell their “name” to a line, especially for the discount big boxes, the real work is done by teams of those same art school grads, who do not get the credit outside of the industry. Target, et al, do not *hire*. They accept the line as any other vendor and it takes someone huge with cutting edge supply chain management and Asian or Central American or South Pacific manufacturing facilities to meet the criteria. The average independent American designer cannot meet the vendor requirements, including huge discounts off wholesale, inventory management and often vendor transportation. Often, these *designer* labels are really knock-off companies licensed to produce lower quality goods by the couture and ready-to-wear houses. The designs don’t *filter down*. They are self knock-offs that are as cheaply made as possible while retaining a flavor and the all important label of the *name*. So, the consumer is conditioned by the magazines and the ad agencies to think this is something wonderful from someone who is acclaimed, when it is all just a marketing scheme.
I agree that design is a huge industry and I am totally aware of the billions upon billions of GDP involved.
For my own idea of cutting edge design, I prefer the interior design/furniture coming out of the Netherlands, Belgium and Scandinavia. For clothing innovation, I enjoy the street cam sites from Japan. Both are very innovative and fresh and authentic after decades of American hype.
So, back to the topic: after 25/30 years of the art schools teaching the 1968-1990 designs as classics, just what has been produced in fashion (for example) that is culturally iconic in the manner of Jayne Barnes or Mary Quant? I’m old, so I guess I don’t count any longer, but even after watching the past seasons of “Runway”, I have only seen perhaps one or maybe two designers who were really doing something new. Same goes for most interior/furniture/appliances, although I haven’t watched any of the reality contests that cover those fields.
I think it is interesting that today, even with loads of design education available, it takes the marketing power of TV and the Internet to find, winnow and sift interesting new designers in almost any field. The spontaneous appearance of that sort of design from the so-called *street* seems to have disappeared, although I guess one could say that the hip-hop culture has produced the most authentic (although horrendous, IMO) clothing/accessories/jewelry designs in the past decade or so.
As my parents would have said:”So, for this you went to college?”
Aren't any. Draftsmen maybe. It is known that talent for musical instruments correlates with talent for mathematics, but that isn't being an artist.
Our priest has a doctorate in music. His wife is completing hers.
We have an excellent music program, among other things.
You have to think beyond clothing. Think graphic design — the magazine V is a good place to start.
Electronics, too. Companies long ago realized that all technology quickly becomes a commodity and design is their edge as much as the latest features.
In terms of clothing, the high end stuff is now international. That means street styles are international as well. It’ll take a few years to filter down to mass market, but it’s all interesting stuff.
I am happy for you.
you make cogent arguments.
thanks.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.