Slashdot Mirror
The Substance of Style
"Those old sci-fi movies were wrong. the 21st century doesn't look at all the way they said it would. We citizens of the future aren't wearing conformist jumpsuits, living in utilitarian high-rises, or getting our food in the form of dreary-looking pills. On the contrary, we are demanding and creating a stimulating, diverse, and strikingly well-designed world. We like our vacuum cleaners and mobile phones to sparkle, our backpacks and laptops to express our personalities."
Postrel's writing is easy to read and the text flows effortlessly. Her opening chapter ("The Aesthetic Imperative") describes how manufacturers and other businesses cannot escape style issues. Starbucks is a recurring example: she says "Curmudgeons may grouse about the price of its coffee, but Starbucks isn't just selling beverages. It's delivering a multisensory aesthetic experience, for which customers are willing to pay several times what coffee costs at a purely functional Formica-and-linoleum coffee shop." In a crowded and incredibly competitive marketplace, style is one of the few ways to differentiate yourself.
In chapter two, "The Rise of Look and Feel," Postrel describes the changing role of aesthetics over the past century. She discusses the rise of mass production, 1930's trends of streamlining everything (why should a toaster be aerodynamic?), wartime utilitarianism, and businesses' changing emphasis on style. Much of this, she says, was spurred by the rural-to-urban population shift. As cities grew, niche markets became concentrated enough that businesses could cater to them. Markets fragmented and elements of niche styles were adopted and transformed by the mainstream.
Chapter three ("Surface and Substance") looks at the power of pretty surfaces. The discussion ranges from Hilary Clinton's hair, to the destruction of the World Trade Center towers in 2001. Do surfaces have genuine value? Postrel definitely thinks so.
The fourth chapter ("Meaningful Looks") studies the messages that can be conveyed by aesthetics. "Identity is the meaning of surface," Postrel says. "Before we say anything with words, we declare ourselves through look and feel: Here I am. I'm like this. I'm not like that. I associate with these others. I don't associate with those." Look at punk rockers for a great example: at the same time punks are rebelling against society, they are conforming to tenets and garb of their sub culture.
Chapter five ("The Boundary of Style") explores the impact of aesthetic choices on those around you. Much of the chapter deals with architectural issues and building codes or deed restrictions. I think it is one of the more balanced chapters and, as someone who has just bought his first home in a deed-restricted community, had a lot of material that I found very interesting. By the end of the chapter, I disliked deed restrictions even more.
The final chapter is called "Smart and Pretty." It revolves around the idea that "pretty or smart" is a false dichotomy. Making things beautiful or interesting is as important as making them work. Postrel goes one step further and cites the work of usability guru Donald Norman, who argues that attractive things actually work better. I have a hard time explaining it, but I agree. Hammering out text on my iMac is a different experience than doing the same on my Windows or Linux box. The Apple machine oozes with creativity. Maybe it's contagious?
Postrel's argument for the value of aesthetics is definitely one-sided, but I wouldn't go so far as to call her a cheerleader. Her logic is solid, intertwined, and backed up with thirty-two pages of notes at the end of the book. The flaw in the book lies in the arguments she doesn't make -- specifically, she doesn't spend much time on dealing with misleading surfaces (facades). For a few pages she talks about people who dress not for who they are, but for who they aspire to be. I would have liked to see more about those who display whatever it is they think you want to see. Politicians do this for a living.
Unless you belong to the adornment-is-for-fools camp, you will enjoy this book. Its subject is one that I have never devoted much thought to, but after reading The Substance of Style, I can't help but be more critical of the surfaces around me and I can better appreciate the ones that are well designed.
You can purchase The Substance of Style: How the Rise of Aesthetic Value Is Remaking Commerce, Culture, and Consciousness from bn.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.
Prevent email address forgery. Publish SPF records for y
Strunk and White's Elements of Style addresses the type of verbose writing used in this book review.
"Avoid needless words."
Best Windows Freeware
well, my powerbook glows but it's because I am typing it in the dark which the keyboard detected and adjusted itself accordingly...
Style is not much without utility. IMHO, of course.
Trolling using another account since 2005.
Since the dawn of civlization man has always lusted after the shiny pretty things over the dull simple things.
I'm thinking back in the 70's people still handed over cash for the rhinestone covered clogs and passed on the plain leather ones whenever possible.
Maybe a more interesting study would be in the psychology of why we pick the stylish clear box over the beige one? Are we collecting pretty objects to attract mates? If so, I should have bought that new Mac!
I'm thinking it's more the case that the author has "discovered" that there is a difference in styles from ten years ago.
--
hecubas
Hecubas
The power led for my case is so powerful it lights up the entire room. I thought it was so cool till I shut of the lights and realized I couldn't sleep. Looking directly at the led is dangerous enough, but to top it off the reflection from my closet mirror aims directly at my bed. Torn by the desire to get both sleep and leave my computer running at all times I modded my case with a piece of electrical tape and finally fell asleep.
When I worked for a graphic design company, I was perpetually plagued by the words 'Can you make it look more 3d?'
There was no room for creativity or real design. Sadly, the motivating factor in graphic design isn't to push the boundaries, it's to look like everone else.
0110100100100000011000010110110100100000011000100
You can't beat the default Tellytubbies style with which Windows XP comes. Its deep primary colors shout out profundity while its oversized iconography makes a bold statement that few can ignore. It looks so good I can't bear to turn off my PC. I leave it switched on with the monitor standing next to my stylish Barney dinosaur.
Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
Starbucks isn't just selling beverages. It's delivering a multisensory aesthetic experience, for which customers are willing to pay several times what coffee costs at a purely functional Formica-and-linoleum coffee shop.
- a statement by someone who has not experienced the superior aesthetics of the best of the old Formica-and-linoleum coffee shops, and of someone who has not experienced the superior aesthetics of a good espresso in the classic sort of Italian coffee shop that Starbucks is a pale immitation of. Starbucks to its credit usually has coffee that's worth more than what the diner this morning sold me for a dollar. Their beans are much better, and cost them twice as much, so of course the coffee they sell costs twice as much too - and the diner makes profit because it also expects most customers to buy food. But the experience of their shops is basically anti-aesthetic, or anaesthetic, numbing. There is no real design there, no real place, just a simulacrum. While they know enough to try to make a pomo virtue of this, it's lame. Still, when in a neighborhood without real Italian espresso, at least the coffee works.
"with their freedom lost all virtue lose" - Milton
I find it ironic that an article about substance over style has over 137 comments to it, but every one of them is below my (relatively lax) threshold level. What gives? No substance?
postmodernsideshow.com
I haven't read the book, but the first thing that struck me was the claim that we have entered some kind of "age" of aesthetics. I don't think that that is the case at all. Humans have certainly not been subsisting on the crudest of tools or the simplest things that would work. Take a glance at medieval weaponry and you'll see that even weapons -- objects used essentially for their utility -- portray a tremendous sense of style on the part of their owners and craftsmen. Throughout human history, objects that not only have had a functional purpose, but also appeal to the eye, have always been the mark of the elite and sophisticated. The difference is, I think, that now is the age of the pretty and useful object being available to the middle and lower socioeconomic classes.
Sorry Virginia, you are not a guru.
There was no room for creativity or real design
Real design is the ability to work within customer constraints while simultaneously expressing your individual creative spirit.
attractive things actually work better
Beautiful women are sometimes good in bed, but not always. I wouldn't say there's a correlation.
Plain women sometimes totally rock a man's world -- a remarkable wake-up call for one's understanding of women.
-kgj
You're looking at the downside of the "invisible hand" here, methinks.
Take anything by the Sharper Image for example. Their corporate motto is apparently "Style over Substance", though they are only one of the most blatant. A specifically good example would be their "Ionic Breeze." Selling points? Quieter than HEPA filters (that's because HEPA filters actually DO something). Empty BOXES are quiet too, and pollute your air less. Standardized tests show the Ionic Breeze's ability to remove airborne particles to be almost negligible. Tests also show it doesn't trap the particles it does catch very well such that they can be re-introduced to the environment. It produces levels of the oxidant gas ozone that accumulate over time, reportedly less than 0.05 ppm after 24 hours, but what after 48? The EPA's safe limit is 0.08, are you sure your ventilation is sufficient to keep it below that level if you have it on all the time? Do you trust the EPA's limit as being actually safe? (they dropped it to 0.08 from 0.12 in 1997 as apparently, 0.12 wasn't good enough). And what does it matter if the darn thing doesn't even remove dust and germs out of your environment worth a darn, because most dust and germs are not airborne? Oh, but it LOOKS SO SEXY.
There are countless products that people buy not because they are tuned into the brilliant aesthetics, but because the intimidation value of the brilliant marketing campaigns that convince them that if they don't have the product, they're deprived. That they need it to shallowly show off they have good taste when they really have no taste at all except that which was sold to them.