Friday, October 21, 2005


Did I miss something? I don't think I got the memo stating that it matters how your design work is labeled. It must be important to the "Modernists" and "Post-Modernists" because it's comical that these people really get their panties in a bunch when you don't call them by the correct name. If modernism is really just claiming everything they see that's appealing to their eye is modernist, I don't see how it can be claimed as a movement in the first place. Post-modernists seem to me like they haven't really done anything special to be claimed as a movement either because if they had, there wouldn't really be an argument going on, would there? All in all, I still am confused what the big labeling conflict is all about in the first place.

Although I'm stuggling to find many things to bring away from this article, there are two things I found interesting. One, I don't believe there is a certain style of design that is universally suited for all clients (contrary to the modernist's thinking). Two, I was really happy with the usage of the word "retarded" in the article.

So there's my modernist essay, since everything's modernist (just ask a modernist).


Post a Comment

<< Home