Oftentimes, design students use the word interesting during reviews and critiques. They elevate a design to the stature of acceptable, ideal, or award-worthy. But interesting is not an easy path to glory.
Google lists over 9,000,000 results for interesting design amidst images and web pages. I’ve heard the word used equally as much during my life in the classroom, and it makes me groan each time. When I was a student, my classmates loved talking about interesting things like movies and music. We loved looking at interesting design, and reading interesting philosophy. The word was as vacuous during that pseudo-intellectual heyday as it is now. I still hear it pronounced like it means something, but overcoming that word is the first step to succeeding in a critique.
Design Student: “I like that design. It’s interesting.”
Me: “What do you find interesting about it?”
Design Student: “I don’t know, it’s just interesting.”
Young designers could learn a thing or two from Aristotle, who gave a formula that could apply to critiques: make a statement and prove it. Interesting is not enough—give me a statement, a conversation, then give me proof. Nothing is wrong with the word interesting, but when you repeatedly use it to justify or aggrandize work, you’re missing an opportunity for a discussion. One of the tasks that we as designers are charged with is observing and analyzing the world around us. We must also act as critics to justify our design choices with our colleagues or clients. The classroom is one of the first places we learn to do this, but I’m not asking for lengthy historical justifications about the work. It’s okay if you can’t explain why the piece looks authentic or fresh compared to its peers. But give me some analysis, don’t just select a winner and be done with it. Don’t award something the title of interesting and be on your way.
There are only two parts to a speech:
You make a statement and you prove it.
—Aristotle, Rhetoric
If interesting means that the design keeps your attention, then tell us why. Is the composition exciting, dynamic, active? Do the colors harmonize in such a way that you lose yourself in the myriad of hues? If the design evokes an emotional response, do your best to verbalize it. Give us a report. Is it really clean? Is it well executed? Does the content keep your attention, but the form require more finesse? Tell us something substantial about the design if it really is a winner in your eye. Give us as much detail as possible because interesting alone means nothing—interesting alone is a generality, too broad and vague. Deftly tell us how the design works, why it succeeds, or what makes it the best.
But interesting doesn’t always make something a winner, and since moving to the Southeast, I’ve learned that interesting may carry pejorative connotations. If a Southern lady meets an abrasive man at the grocery store, she may remark, “Wasn’t that man interesting,” using a scowled inflection with down-turned eyebrows. I have seen this happen with design as well, but if you truly hate the piece reviewed, then tell us why. Don’t scowl like the old women I hear, who fret about unchivalrous men and label them interesting. If the design looks like a fourth grader executed it in Photoshop using too many filters, then tell us that so we understand it’s a craft problem. If somebody used an all-Helvetica Swiss-design style for a horror film festival poster, when they should have employed a more rugged aesthetic, then tell us why. Evaluate the design. Make connections. Speak in clear terms and speak articulately. Be prepared to back up your statements, and appreciate alternate opinions when they arise.
Looking at design and judging design has as much to do with asking questions as giving answers. So before you decide to summarize your critique in one word with interesting, ask yourself what you mean to say, then say it like you mean it. And most importantly, when you’re in my classroom, do not use the word interesting.
"I don't want to be interesting, I want to be good" - Ludwig Mies van der Rohe
On May.12.2008 at 01:41 AM