People may argue that preferences are changing in the fields of arts and fashion across difference eras because they follow the changes of people’s interest and needs. However, regardless of interests and needs, there is an innate and universal preference that did not change among different of arts or design. Preference of understanding and exploration in present and future are the same. Let’s take Baroque and modern style as examples.
For Baroque style, despite the combination of complex patterns and colors, the coherence is constantly showing in the arrangement of a variety of elements: patterns repeated in a regular and clear sequences; Certain objects are always depicted in certain colors. Thus, it helps people to understand and predict by the coherence and regular arrangements. Also, as there is a great amount of distinct and diversified elements, it gives people ample space to imagine and explore(mystery).
For modern art and designs, by framing artworks in plain colors and limited amount of materials and pieces, it is very clear to understand. People predict or categorize modern furniture by its function more than its color, which is more practical. It may seem like that this clarity and coherence sacrifice complexity. But it fact, the complexity is still reflected in the creative designs of the structures and variety of materials with different textures. Therefore, people may still find it a lot of fun to explore modern arts and designs.
Therefore, the innate and universal preference is still applicable no matter how the forms of arts and designs are changing.
Whereas speaking of reasons of the changes of forms, it related to the changes of eras and the way people process information. From colorful expression to plain or pure color, from the regular arrangements to creative structures, modern designs and arts shift the forms of understanding and exploration from diversified concrete information to the functional-oriented but creative and abstract concepts. It obviously caters the world with explosive information: we care more about extracting right information to make decisions instead of blindly acquiring more information. Also, exploring difference concepts rather than seeing concrete colors and patterns. It thus inspires us of different cognitive maps by artists and designers instead of just encouraging us to reinforce our own ones by concluding what we see from Baroque paintings. This modern way of presenting information is especially helpful in enabling us to find solutions to the emerging tough environmental problems.
What do you think of innate preference regardless of the forms of expression? Can you think of another example of modern environment that applied universal preference?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteYour post reminds me of IKEA. Many people love to buy its furniture. If you ask them why, you may get a great number of reasons. I would say one of them should be the preferred design. As you mentioned, it is easy to understand because the colors are plain and the whole structure is simple. However, it also has variety for customers to explore. For example, you may be able to remove several units of the furniture and make it totally different. Even though certain sets of furniture include complexity, the use of theme would provide coherence.
ReplyDeleteI think this insight really helps me understand why I like one design. As an individual, I may have my specific interest. However, the arts attract me are only those contain elements of preference which applies universally.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe comparison between Baroque and Modern design is certainly interesting, and I definitely agree that there are certain innate features that make a design preferable. As in your example, I think the best designs feature complexity, but organized within an overall structure. This fits within the matrix of preference; people as information processors need complexity and new information to maintain interest, but a perceivable overall structure for familiarity and ease of understanding. In the field of architecture, we are encouraged to experiment and innovate with design, but we are always working within an overall logic. A great example of this balance between logic and complexity is the Montreal Biosphere: http://www.archdaily.com/572135/ad-classics-montreal-biosphere-buckminster-fuller . Here, there is an intricate and complex web of parts, but the clear structural logic makes the system easily understood.
ReplyDeleteI am so attracted by the article title and thank you for bringing the topic of art that I do not know much about. I really like the idea that you apply the preference theory to a more abstract condition, in addition to physical settings that we've been talking about again and again. I find it very interesting that although the emphasis of coherence and clarity in modern art seems to have sacrificed complexity, complexity is still there and it just comes in different forms, such as creative structures and various material textures. Mystery could also come in different forms. We know that a curved path can enhance mystery, so how about a straight urban street? We find a store more inviting if we are able to explore what is inside by looking in through big windows. Also, seeing people having delicious food by tables outside the restaurant make us more likely to step into that restaurant. If a street is full of stores and restaurants with such “transparencies”, we may be driven by mystery and may be more eager to engage in the street life.
ReplyDelete