Profile
Behance URL
http://www.behance.net/Venkov
My Circles
- Apricot Mantle Illustration (Public)
- Bulgarian Designers (Limited)
- Design in LatinAmerica (Public)
My Busy Line
Status
I am available for...
- Freelancing
- Consulting
- Total Profile Views: 1652
- Total Project Views: 4186
- Total Project Appreciations: 113
- Total Comments I Posted: 211
- Total Feedback Left: 0
- Member Since: 4/23/2008
1 2 3 Next
Comments
Nevertheless it's this kind of narrativity that makes an object what it is: without it the object would be souless and totally without contextualization. Here I'm both talking about branding (context and history) and the will of a designer of expressing some values through the way he shapes an object.
But after your last post I perfectly understand which kind of narrativity you were talking about, though I cannot stop myself from finding it quite limiting.
It looks like my objection rised from a mere misunderstanding: I thought you were saying that every kind of narration is impossibile in a functional object. But you were rather talking of “pure” narrative forms, as in art.
The real problem is that boundaries between art and design are sometimes much more blurred than we sometime like to admit. Obviously design is for mass production and art isn't but still they do have a lot of common traits.
After all what we now call great masters of art were once simply called craftsmen.
However, information is not primary a product of narrativity, it is the story, the context, connections, that stands for "narrative", primary.
You are pointing to iconic objects, but their form of narrative content is not their connatural element, only a auxiliary feature.
The narrativity we are talking about, or at least the narrativity I was pointing to, is about elements that are all in all coherent.
And design, canno't acomplish this, simply because it has not elements that could be narrative without a known informational extension to some problem, but that is not the "true" narrativity, to put it the simple way.
Well, what a discusion, haven't seen one like that since I'm here : )
The way a designer shapes a product is the way he is trying to tell something more than only communicating its affordances. After all objects can be emotional engaging too.
in functional object, we derive forms from the function of the object. There is no need "telling stories" in a simple object, because something you use everyday is primary just for mere using, not observing as a sculpture for example. It would be nonsense use sculpture for something, wouldn't it?
Things that are products of stories or complicated contexts, like scuplture have forms derived just from them, which is of course harder to acomplish succesfuly, that is exactly why we call them art.
In objects, we can follow just the clues given by the function of the object, every object for use has them.
The only thing object and art has in common is motion, as we know, motion can be in every form, but motion is secondary form definition, the first are the ones named above.
That is why it is not wise to make objects narrative, mixing the aesthetics of art and objects usually results to superficiality or an aesthetic pose.
I'm not saying such an attempt is out of range for success, just that is merely impossible and requires a lot of skill both in designing and art to create something worth time working on it.
I appreciate it