Re: Design Philosophy

Like Jen, my philosophy, such as it is, is greatly informed by my experience with different disciplines. Specifically, various theories and theorists from Film Studies and Cultural Studies have influenced how I approach creating meaning. But at a higher level, my philosophy is twofold.

1. Solve the problem.
2. Make the solution cool.

The writers who define design as problem-solving really strike a cord with me. (For example: http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2011/08/24/design-solving-problems/)

Identifying the problem is step one. From this step, I can determine the audience and what particular approaches I can take create meaning. For example, if my problem is to get children excited about a science fair, I know that I can't be super subtle :)

As for making it cool, I am aware that it's an elusive concept. And I don't mean "cool," according to a particular social circle. I mean more like "what a cool/interesting/unusual/unexpected/creative way to solve this problem!" (I am not saying that I have accomplished this myself, but it's my ambition...)

While some of my favorite designers--Peter Saville, Barbara Kruger, for example--and my favorite movements--modernism, constructivism--are heavy on the COOL, I find that wayfinding and environmental design often exemplify the concept of the cool solution.

This bike parking sign combines two recognizable and universal symbols to cleverly create meaning:

This directional sign plays on the traditional symbols for men's and women's bathrooms and modifies it to by adding pointing fingers, personifying the "stick" figures.

This sign clearly indicates which floor the viewer is on while directing them to other floors/exhibits.

I think these do a good job of demonstrating "cool solutions."