“I don’t want to be interesting. I want to be good.”
Designing in pursuit of being original, or even interesting, can be a foolhardy prospect. Design that strives to be original for the sake of it, and typically at the expense of its real purpose of communication, often falls into a mire of stylistic tropes and shallow meanings.
Interesting quote. Often I have tried to bend around the project requirements to put in that thing called “my style of design”. Honestly, sometimes it works, sometimes it does not.
I see what he’s saying, but I think you do have an imperative to try to be original. There’s value in novelty, even if you fail, because you’re pushing the boundaries. Surely you should never lose sight of doing _good work_—but also never lose a spirit of experimentation.
I see what he’s saying, but I think you do have an imperative to try to be original. There’s value in novelty, even if you fail, because you’re pushing the boundaries.
Pushing the boundaries of what? There’s a difference between being original because it helps solve a problem or helps communicate something, what Rand and Mies are saying is that novelty alone can’t be the solution, because it doesn’t amount to anything other than fluff.
Such a great quote, very ppowerful. As unfortunately, it’s true, too many people actually make a site less usable, or worse at fulfilling its purpose just cause they get too carried away with trying to add the “wow” factor
I will have to add this to my personal mantra, I am always trying to be original but I take it to heart to just be good first and then attempt to be original if not to only find another solution to the problem but a better one because I never want to just design ‘fluff’
Re: boundaries… “Design that strives to be original for the sake of it,” is perhaps not design but art. Is the trick then to avoid claiming art as design?
I always found that being original took a really long time and was rather difficult. Being good was a lot more efficient. Both paid the same. I do try to manage both and be both or else I just might as well use clip art.
This is a great quote, I will think of this more often. I always seem to get upset at myself if I produce something that I think is good but than realize its probably been done before, which it most likely has.
…what Rand and Mies are saying is that novelty alone can’t be the solution, because it doesn’t amount to anything other than fluff.
Novelty alone isn’t the solution, but it’s not valueless. You arrive at good solutions by always looking for better solutions, and that’s a question of originality: seeing the same thing hundreds of other people have in a different (and better) way.
The web is full of good web designers (but I follow just few of them, and you are one of them) could you give us an example of what exactly are you talking about? because “original” and “good” sounds to me the same thing
I like to think that originality stems from doing exceptionally good work. That is, not something you can force. It’s the reward for hard and inspired work.
Thanks for this. I knew the Rand part, but I was unaware it was a paraphrase. I like both versions. As I hone my design skills, I’m constantly striving to be better, not more original. “Originality” was/is responsible for grunge fonts. Being “good” was responsible for Helvetica. Enough said.
Remember though, what one person might consider original another might consider derivative. And what one person considers good another might consider not so good. In the end, it’s all subjective.
Correct, but also note that being (or trying to be) sometimes original is essential to sustain creativity – so try to be original sometimes, but don’t show it to anyone before you have thrashed out the design really well.
That you won’t have the time to thrash out the design, for most of your original ideas, is sometimes reason enough not to try being original.
Being good will always get you good results, but being original can be a big risk, something to look for with caution and thinking as the results can be outstanding but also disastrous.
Its sick to use the lack originality as your personal truth and reason for you not to dream. Originality isn’t dead at all, the mediocre minds just have a great lock on everything and make it hard for those who have those original ideas..
If everyone only ever tried to be “good” which appears to mean: be good at something that already exists. Then true invention and progress would never happen.
What about: “Re-use whats great and be original when it isn’t” Or something like. However somehow squeeze in: “not all original ideas are worth keeping…” :) mmmm… well I must mean something in that.
What about: “Re-use whats great and be original when it isn’t
I think talking about reusing things is missing the point. My interpretation is that you should focus on solving the problem rather than over-engineering or over-designing a complicated solution.
Sometimes the best solutions will be original ones and interesting problems might require interesting solutions. However, originality and innovation should be products of the process rather than the goal which you aim for.
It’s not the difference between being good and being great, it’s the difference between being novel and being gimmicky.
This is the very reason why I generally only like Jason’s posts on his site: They are beautiful and invitingly short, yet they communicate entire volumes in a space that to others might take a long-scrolling page.
In struggling to do something well you’ll inevitably do something original. I suppose this is a question of mindset. Focusing on doing something original is more a struggle of ego. If it turns out well, then that’s probably the product of luck.
I“m kind of mad at Paul Rand right now. I was just reading from a book on Norman Rockwell and Paul has some not so kind things to say. I’ll get over it, I’m just a little sensitive when it comes to Norman Rockwell.
@Craig – You nailed it. We shouldn’t attempt to be original just for the hell of it, but we also shouldn’t avoid it if it is the best solution to the problem at hand.
In all cases, do what is right for the project. 99% of the time, doing what is right going to mean using a solution that has been used before. And there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.
Design Is History, created as a teaching tool for young designers just beginning to explore graphic design and as a reference tool for all designers. Chock full of great info. †
Articles
Unjustified Texts: Perspectives on Typography
Follow me on Twitter
48 Comments