As a student in graphic design, I have been taught that every good design is based on an idea. The design itself represents the idea in the most apparent and ideal way. This way of seeing the world of design is very important and a fundamental way of thinking in general when it comes to design, whether in graphic design, product design, architecture etc.
The execution of a single idea is crucial. Alongside this method you must aquire a vast amount of knowledge, a knowledge of history and methods. Seeing the work of other designers, reading their essays, almost getting into their state of mind when they produced a certain design. By doing this you are in a way restricting yourself to a array of do’s and dont’s. This array sometimes becomes your greatest nemesis in your creative process, because you might get a brilliant idea, an idea that requires only a simple illustration, dialog or a word, and presto! A masterpiece is born. But as soon as you put the finishing touch on your design, you realize that you’ve seen this before.
An anti-climax that many designers have experienced.
This array, in most cases though, becomes your greatest instrument, because with the knowledge that you’ve aquired over the years, you become more confident in your solution-making abilities. It’s a two way street, it’s just a matter of how you, as a designer, choose to use this information.
When you are in school, you should experiment, with your work I mean. You should make “ugly” designs and concept everything to hell. But you should also just let go of your boundaries, just make stuff. Sometimes it makes sense, other times it won’t. This is a freedom that students have. Clients do not appreciate this kind of thinking, but by the time a student is dealing with them, he or she should have already gone through a phase of some sort and knows his or hers capabilities to some extent.
When it comes to saying something is ugly, is it a matter of pure aesthetics? And where do theses aesthetic values of someone come from? What states so clearly in an “ugly” design that makes it so ugly?
Can a piece, made by an famous designer, based on a brilliant idea, who consciously made an effort of making the end point looking very primitive, “out there” or just a matter of form following function be considered ugly?
Ask a designer, and he’ll probably say yes, but he’ll try to make sense of it, using what he sees. Trying to connect some invisible dots that must explain the hidiousness of this piece. Or he’ll try to go deeper and claim that this is a daring piece, which has broken loose from it’s boundaries and roaring with pride and screaming ugly at you.
Other designers might adopt this brand new ugly style, and for about 3-4 years every design is pretty much ugly. David Carson?
Post moderinsm is essentially the home of the ugly. Because when using bits and pieces from different cultures and different decades, blending everything together and producing something that has a point, instead of a look or a feel, you’re bound to get something ugly from time to time. The world accepted this transition almost blindfolded to the things right in front of them, in denial to admit to ugliness because of the very apparent idea or point behind the design. Many beautiful things make one ugly. Do many ugly things make one beautiful?
Ugly is part of evolution. Whether to inspire new aesthetitcs or stand as a warning sign for future designers.