Content. Make sure you have it.

If it looks good, well, that’s just a bonus - fine and dandy. Socially, institutionally, and academically, we have sabotaged the aesthetic through our actions and desires. It has now become an empty casing, the epitome of superficiality that we see plastered in fashion magazines, newspaper blips and television sets dialed into American Idol. Visual junk food. Perhaps it is the sheer quantity of images that we are bombarded with everyday. Maybe it’s the underlying visceral Pavlovian response that we hate to admit aesthetics evoke within us. For whatever reason, aesthetics have been villanized and subsequently stripped of any value relative to arts disciplines. What we sometimes fail to realize is that we are a predominantly visual culture, and failure to admittedly engage such a large portion of what we value tends to give the aesthete a bad name, when actually we can trace the majority of artistic/design movements to a conscious embrasure of aesthetics, or a conscious denouncement of aesthetics which, in turn, created a new aesthetic ( i.e., cubism, impressionism, modernism).

This blog will most likely fall all over the map in relation to what it promotes or denounces. It may devolve into generalities on what contributors simply find interesting. It is hard to categorize what it will or will not address, given the evolutionary nature of the media. What it does aim to do is recognize the inherent nature of design disciplines, more specifically architecture to pass off the way something looks as completely subjective, and instead will look for undercurrents which reproduce a positive project while still maintaining experiential and spatial value. In addition, this blog will also highlight specific techniques, be it digital, manual, or 3-dimensional, and the impact that those may have in relation to the work produced. The purpose being, that as designers become more adept (and less impressed) with simply the capacity of new tools and methods to create “something new”, we instead use them to create something better.

Qualifier: This is not meant to be a proponent of image for image sake. I don’t think anyone would argue that as designers, we want to be empty, soulless vehicles for prettiness. It does, however, make the assumption that no image or aesthetic is completely empty, and that we can find value if we look close enough.