"If white people are so privileged why is there a Black Entertainment Network and no White Entertainment Network?"
"Men don’t have privilege, there are women’s only gyms!"
"Why isn’t there a campus centre for straight/cis people!?"
SAME REASONS WHY IN MARIO KART YOU DON’T GET BLUE SHELLS OR LIGHTNING BOLTS WHEN YOU’RE ALREADY IN FIRST PLACE, ASSBAG.
This is honestly the best explanation I have ever seen.
Hahahahahaaa! Wonderful :)
There’s this thing that keeps coming up in conversations with designers that’s been bugging me, which is a kind of hand-wavey dismissal of good design as “skeuomorphic.”
For those of you living under an e-rock, “skeuomorphism” is design that makes digital things look like analog things (this is technically not actually what skeuomorphism means, but everyone has agreed to use it wrong and I have to pick my battles here). Skeuomorphism was famously abused in older versions of iOS (recall the green felt poker table background in Game Center, and the leather stitching in Calendar.app), and has largely been purged from the visual language of iOS 7. In the design community, skeuomorphism is like bell-bottom pants right now, and our skinny jeans is the so-called “flat” design popularized by the game Letterpress.
Now, it might seem irrational to you to have a strong, automatic, and emotional reaction to a design solution that makes a digital thing look like an analog thing, and that’s because it is. It’s usually a reaction I encounter among people who know about design but are not themselves using design to solve problems, or among young designers who haven’t done a lot of work for normal civilians.
Just like everything else in life, skeuomorphism is neither all-good or all-bad. Can it be overused or used poorly? You bet. Is it often an elegant solution to a difficult problem? That too.
Remember when the iPad was announced and everyone made fun of it? People didn’t understand what the iPad was for - Fraiser Speirs described that moment as “future shock.” But then people would open it up, and there was a little Braun calculator. A leather calendar. A Leica camera. A podcast player with fake reel-to-reel tapes in it. An a eBook reader that looked like a little bookshelf. My grandpa doesn’t know what the fuck a “game center” is. But a poker table? That he recognizes.
I’ve heard that Apple store employees periodically sweep through the store and reposition devices to be just a little bit inaccessible… slightly closing laptop lids, angling iPads beneath line-of-sight, and so on. That’s because they wanted people to put their hands on those devices and start touching them. Apple knew that within minutes of seeing all of that untrendy skeuomorphism, people would understand what the devices were capable of. It echoed Apple’s philosophy that “it’s not what a device can do, it’s what you can do with it.”
Design is interesting because it’s such a grab bag of seemingly-unrelated skills like typography, illustration, color theory, writing, layout and composition, systems thinking, coding, and more that I’m forgetting. I have a belief (maybe more of a hope) about this, which is that it’s basically impossible for any designer to master all of these skills in one lifetime, so they develop coping mechanisms to mitigate weaknesses in some or all of those areas, and that that set of coping mechanisms constitute an individual designer’s “style,” making their work special and interesting. I’ve been doing minimalist, “flat” design for years because I can’t draw for shit and I have no patience. I like the rationality and cleanliness of it, everything on the page and has a place and a reason, but more importantly, it’s a style that I can pull off. Humans vs. Zombies and Cards Against Humanity and the various political campaigns I worked on had “flat” websites years before Letterpress and iOS 7, and I spent years getting yelled at by clients because my work “didn’t look enough like a website.”
Now I’m delighted that the world has come around my way on simple, flat designs. But please, designers, listen to me when I tell you that flat design will leave us just as quickly as the green felt did, and to please just make your buttons look like fucking buttons; my grandpa will know where to click.
Malcom X (via sirmitchell)
you know those people that can literally carry on a conversation with anyone are amazing like wow how do you do that
ask them something you’d like to hear the answer to
David Foster Wallace, Big Red Son:
Every spring, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences presents awards for outstanding achievement in all aspects of mainstream cinema. These are the Academy Awards. Mainstream cinema is a major industry in the United States, and so are the Academy Awards. The AAs’ notorious commercialism and hypocrisy disgust many of the millions and millions and millions of viewers who tune in during prime time to watch the presentations. It is not a coincidence that the Oscars ceremony is held during TV’s Sweeps Week. We pretty much all tune in, despite the grotesquerie of watching an industry congratulate itself on its pretense that it’s still an art form, of hearing people in $5,000 gowns invoke lush clichés of surprise and humility scripted by publicists, etc. - the whole cynical postmodern deal - but we all still seem to watch. To care. Even though the hypocrisy hurts, even though opening grosses and marketing strategies are now bigger news than the movies themselves, even though Cannes and Sundance have become nothing more than enterprise zones. But the truth is that there’s no more real joy about it all anymore. Worse, there seems to be this enormous unspoken conspiracy where we all pretend that there’s still joy. That we think it’s funny when Bob Dole does a Visa ad and Gorbachev shills for Pizza Hut. That the whole mainstream celebrity culture is rushing to cash in and all the while congratulating itself on pretending not to cash in. Underneath it all, though, we know the whole thing sucks.