The church of minimalism
On how much we should adhere to Dieter Rams’ principles of good design
• • •
If you went to any sort of design school or took a class that has anything to do with design, you will undoubtedly have heard of the famous 10 Principles of Good Design. For those of you unfamiliar with what can only be described as design gospel, here’s a quick history: It was the 1970s and German designer Dieter Rams felt overwhelmed with the world around him. The colors, the shapes, the groove, it was just too much to handle. So with great resolve he came down from mount Braun, sat down on his Vitsœ 620 armchair and spoke thus:
Good design is innovative
Good design makes a product useful
Good design is aesthetic
Good design makes a product understandable
Good design is unobtrusive
Good design is honest
Good design is long-lasting
Good design is thorough down to the last detail
Good design is environmentally-friendly
Good design is as little design as possible
These holy commandments handed down from the man himself have been adopted by minimalists, college professors, and social media gurus ever since. Perhaps the most famous convert to Rams’ doctrine, one Jony Ive, took these principles to heart and made them mainstream again during the 2000s with smash hits such as the iPod, the iPhone and the Macbook Air, as well as not-so-hot-selling products such as the featureless 3rd generation iPod shuffle, and the iPod Hi-Fi.
One of the most prominent places one encounters this set of principles is social media. You see countless carousels, explainers, YouTube videos, listicles, and the like all selling the idea that this is what everyone should be doing.
Design literacy is important, it’s to visual communication what eloquence is to speech. We all need to communicate visually from time to time.
Between the lines
Reading this you might have noticed the not so subtle message hiding in plain sight: good design is minimalist design. Of course there are some indisputable statements in this list, One through five are pretty much rock solid; six is ambiguous to say the least; seven through nine are okay; and ten is just plain propaganda. However; before judging, we must take all of this in context. These 10 principles are meant for a world of mass production, where form and material optimization means also cost optimization. Perhaps what Mr. Rams should have said is that these are his 10 principles for mass market design, not a blanket statement on the whole of the design practice.
Design, you see, is for people; and people are complicated, what with culture and all that. If you don’t believe me, that’s okay, we can take a look at what the international council of design says: “Design is a discipline of study and practice focused on the interaction between a person — a ‘user’— and the man-made environment, taking into account aesthetic, functional, contextual, cultural and societal considerations.” Minimalism wants to be simple, it demands purity of form and deference to function, anything more than what’s “necessary” is cast aside and labeled as superfluous.
I’m not going to say that minimalism is bad, nor am I going to echo Dieter Rams and say that it’s the only good design; what I am going to say is that, as with everything, there is nuance. Minimalism is/was an aesthetic trend meant to resonate with the sensibilities of a certain group of people at a certain point in time. It will become dated, and then 20 to 30 years later, come back in style.
Judging what’s good
Design is meant to guide people through their interaction with the human-made. Can people understand what’s in front of them without excessive explanations? Does it fit their existing mental models for interacting with the world? Does it alienate them from their cultural context? A specific aesthetic does not a good design make; There’s only what people like and don’t like. As long as the aesthetics of the product don’t interfere with its purpose, then what does it matter what the specific taste of the intended audience is?
There are human factors to take into account when thinking about a design solution, these can be both physical and cultural. To give an example; the color red commands attention in humans because of its association with fire, blood, anger, and sometimes poisonous or dangerous animals (Kuniecki et al., 2015). In other contexts red can help us pick out ripe from unripe fruit. We use this biological truth to our advantage when we need to design something to command (or hijack) people’s attention *cough* notification badges *cough*. There’s many consideration to be made for people’s perception and cognitive abilities. A variety of choices is good up to a certain number; choosing from too many things at once can be overwhelming.
As long as the design is: Usable and accessible for the intended audiences; guides them through its purpose effectively; and does not interfere with their wellbeing, it’s fine in my book. Of course there are many other concentric layers of what good design could mean. We could include the commercial, environmental, political, ethical, and societal aspects of design; just to throw a few more wrenches in the works.
This person likes minimalist style, and that’s okay.
This person probably thinks minimalism is boring, that’s fine too.
In conclusion, it’s all relative
There’s no such thing as an universally recognized aesthetic for good design. We *sigh* live in a society… A society that shapes our understanding of the world around us. We also live in a body, a body with senses that make us aware of the world around us, and a brain to make sense of it all. These are the things that designers must understand, not a list of 10 commandments.