Back story. Results. Use wisely. (via)

The odd thing is that no one sets out to design something that’s mediocre. So why does design go wrong so often? Let’s set aside the rational reasons why projects can fail - like budgetary constraints, deadline pressure and lack of talent - to concentrate on the scenarios that should be easily avoidable, but crop up again and again, with predictably dire results.

Brilliant article. Give it a read. (thanks John)

Check out the redesign of TIME Magazine, as well as Will Ferrell’s hair. Crazy. Anyway, the article does a great job of explaining the “whys” of the redesign. That crazy conscious thought - we just hoped it was a fad!

As we touched on in only the briefest of fashions a few weeks back, different cultures have different sensitives. Verbal or visual messages that are fine for the United States can and will offend an entire other continent. Using blue for a corporate website here is fine; using blue in certain parts of Asia for the same need will lose you customers.

The Wall Street Journal has a story dealing with Apple’s ongoing Mac/PC ads and the changes Apple has had to make to be effective and be culturally sensitive.

But in Japanese culture, where direct-comparison ads have long been frowned upon, it’s rude to brag about one’s strengths. So for Japanese versions of the ads that rolled out last fall, two local comedians from a troupe called the Rahmens made subtle changes to emphasize that Macs and PCs are not that different. Instead of clothes that cast PC clearly as a nerd and Mac as a hipster, PC wears plain office attire and Mac weekend fashion, highlighting the work/home divide between the devices more than personality differences.

Please read the entire article and make note of the various cultural differences. We will discuss your observations in class.

Kevin Cornell of bearskinrug.co.uk fame has a very interesting article dealing with the definitions of art and design that reach all the way back to week one’s conversation on the matter. Some initial snippets:

I eventually came to the conclusion, after many Art History classes, Graphic Design classes, discussions, and observations, that the basic difference between Fine Art and Illustration was their goal. I came to feel that Illustration sought to answer questions; whereas Fine Art intended to ask them.

This rang true to me, and what’s more, it fell in line with my sensibilities as a designer. Design and Illustration walk hand-in-hand because both look to solve a problem.

As he has developed and matured in his field, however, Kevin’s own definitions have evolved:

The subjective use of the title “Art” also led me to believe my philosophy was errant. My neighbors would call something Art that I would not. My dentist definitely has a different definition of Art than I. There are eminent scholars who have devoted their life to the study of Art, who I’m sure would roll their eyes derisively at the work I’d clutch lovingly to my breast. Would I be doomed to never call something Art until I had reached a similar echelon of study? Of course not. What I thought was Art, was at least Art to me.

So, after much mulling, I’ve arrived at a definition of Art that seems to resolve these inconsistencies.

Oh, the suspense, right? Go ahead and give the whole article a read. I’d be interested in your interpretations of his definitions. Do you agree? Disagree? What definitions are you willing to work with (at least for the rest of the semester)?

Consider your comments to this post (on this site) your answer to the quiz; as such, I’ll drop some points in your bucket. We’ll consider this quiz closed before the beginning of class on 3/7/07.