[Sigia-l] Why "design" makes some of us cringe.

[David Heller]

>> the difference between designing and being creative.

>Why should there be a difference? Indeed, one might wonder if it's even
>possible to be creative without being a good designer or be a good
>designer without being creative.

I would suggest that you can definitely be creative w/o being a good
designer, but you can't be a good designer w/o being creative.

Creativity is required for design, but not all creativity is design.

When I was writing my piece tat you snipped, I was thinking what is the
difference between art & design. Both are creative endeavors, but to me
the difference is problem solving. Both are intentional acts, so that
wasn't enough to make it "design", but design is different from art.
Even graphic design is different from art.

It can be argued that Michelangelo was solving a problem when he painted
the Sisteen Chapel (I was just there so its on my mind), but that means
he was an amazing graphic designer, who made a painting whose problems
were, "How to teach lay people about Christian folklore? How to inspire
great reverence for this space?" (for example?) ... But no one would
ever call this design. 

Why? What separates it? Is it because it is a painting? Does the medium
pre-dispose art from design? Then my graphic design question wouldn't
make much difference then would it? But it does? Purpose, goal &
direction all inform our senses to tell the difference between art &
design. We have the two words, we use them differently and they invoke
different meanings when we use them. But for as long as I'm alive the
Sisteen Chapel's ceiling will be art and IBM logo will be design.

Maybe one difference is the place in the economy in that intention. This
is something we haven't thought about. For example many of the Eames'
chairs are considered art. Why? It's a chair. The problem being solved
is for sitting, right? But these chairs were never intended to be sold,
or used. Their intent is to decorate and at most inspire. Most of these
chairs no one would even want to sit in, so in essence we would call it
"bad design" but beautiful art, no?

I like this idea of bringing in the economic component.

Thoughts?

-- dave