Aesthetics: No Excuses

In the creation of objects, one must design for both the conscious and unconscious mind. One must appeal to the conscious, rational centers, along with the unconscious, or subconscious centers.

The rational mind expects, or looks to understand form through objectifying patterns, complimentary colors, things that make sense. These little idea-ettes lead the eye and mind to read patterns, leading to understanding without actually examining the whole object. The mind groups like items with like items. These visual ideas can use historical references to create shortcuts in the mind, explaining different forms and functionality so the user can make sense of the object more quickly. Through different signifiers: historical forms, traditions, people’s past experiences with similar objects, I can help lead people to a rational understanding of the object.

This rationality, a certain predictability, calms the soul. It provides a sense of foundation, which you, the user can feel comfortable. I seek to give you assurances that everything is where it should be, and you can rest easy. This is not to say that these ideas or patterns, or colors, or forms will be simple. It is not to say that they will be easy to understand, but at their core, they feel right.

This cannot be the entirety of your interaction with the object. Be it a light, a phone, jewelry. I would call this a one trick pony. If the forms only conform to this, you will discover, and “figure it out.” When the mind feels like it has solved this puzzle, it will become bored with this and mentally discard the object. That is why there must be a balance between the rational centers of the brain, and the irrational wanderings of the subconscious.

These areas of cognizance, where we expect the unexpected, and wait or hope for something to challenge us, must be tapped each time we interact with items. Be it visually, tactilely, or emotionally, it is my job to try to incite and excite people over and over.

If the conscious mind is given a foundation of understanding and comforted by the rationality of predictability, only then can the subconscious be free to explore and fantasize. From this point of departure, things appeal to us that are not explicable. The subconscious is free to make connections that the rational mind cannot make because it is too wrapped up in reality. Perhaps they can reconnect some memories that were dormant. These are the things that we are drawn to. Not only that, these are the things that we cannot explain what draws us to them. Some of us who are lucky (or unlucky) enough to have a vocabulary to explain visual elements, can probably construct some sort of commentary on proportion, relations, hue, saturation, etc. But does that really explain why people like or dislike these things?

In my designs and choices for people looking at my objects, I am not really thinking about whether other people are going to like/dislike these things. My first concern, as many people know, and have commented, is to ask myself, “is this different enough?” Can we make this different enough so that it is outside the realm of what people have seen before? At the same time, I want people to know what it is, or at least I want people to feel comfortable near and around these things. I want them, the people or the objects, to feel familiar.

Upon immediate reflection, I hope these objects can generate gravity through a combination of familiarity and curiosity of the unknown. In different objects, the view from far away will be familiar and draw people in, while others will employ the guile and intrigue of the unknown, only revealing a familiarity within a close proximity. This doesn’t work as well in longer lasting relationships with objects. To really be long lasting, I believe there must be an instant familiarity, which leads to a rabbit hole of intrigue keeping interest close, slowly revealing inspirations.