Skip to main content

Pretentious Twittery 3232 Responses

Last post: 2 months, 2 weeks ago | Thread started: Jan 2, 10, 9:47 a.m.

RespondNew TopicDisable Images

  • Dr_Sparkleshine

    http://www.andyrutledge.com/crea…

    Discuss.

    Jan 2, 10, 9:47 a.m. – Permalink
  • locustsloth

    blatant redundancy

    next note >+ add note

    You must be logged in to add a note. Login now or register for an account.

    Cancel
    Dog-earJan 2, 10, 9:48 a.m. – Permalink
  • locustsloth

    Meh, i pulled the trigger too early, thought this was regarding a particular Twitter-er being pretentious, when, in my view, the whole damn thing reeks of pretentiousness.
    It should be noted that i occasionally participate in said pretentiousness.

    Carry on with the pertinent content regarding this tread. Nothing to see here

    + add note

    You must be logged in to add a note. Login now or register for an account.

    Cancel
    Dog-earJan 2, 10, 9:55 a.m. – Permalink
  • lukus_W

    Creativity is not design, but both are necessary when producing something of interest to a real-live human being. Creativity creates possibilities and design is the harness which reigns-in and focuses the possibilities which are most suitable for the purpose at hand.

    I'm not sure what this guy's problem is - but perhaps his attack the notion of 'creativity' in this kind of arbitrary manner, provides a hint towards what his own personal design process lacks?

    next note >add note

    You must be logged in to add a note. Login now or register for an account.

    Cancel
    Dog-earJan 2, 10, 9:58 a.m. – Permalink
  • Dr_Sparkleshine

    NOTE TO THREAD VISITORS: The use of the word "twittery" in the title is in no way a reference to "twitter.com" or the use of said website. Rather it is used in it's pre-internet usage, "twit" meaning "A foolishly annoying person."

    Thank you. Carry on.*

    *just trying to start, you know, an actual design thread.

    + add note

    You must be logged in to add a note. Login now or register for an account.

    Cancel
    Dog-earJan 2, 10, 9:59 a.m. – Permalink
  • Dr_Sparkleshine

    It's like saying "creativity isn't music"..which is true as far as it goes..but some of the most influential musicians know jack about music theory, or throw it out the window when doing their most innovative and powerful work.

    Just cause a jazz pianist could reel off theoretically chord changes or a guitarist could run up and down scales at hyperspeeds doesn't make it "music".

    I find the people that make the arguments relating the theoretical aspects of a body of knowledge to actual competence in that same area tend to be over-educated, creatively thwarted twits who are disciples of some influential figure in their lives. Except for the rare few geniuses who are both theoretically competent enough to ignore all of it in their work.

    • Creativity == fuel, design == engine, energy == the complete and utter joy the audience experiences when viewing the work.– lukus_W1/2
      work.– lukus_W2/2
    next note >+ add note

    You must be logged in to add a note. Login now or register for an account.

    Cancel
    Dog-earJan 2, 10, 10:04 a.m. – Permalink
  • version3

    <crit>
    <excerpt>
    Creativity is Not Design
    (Design Test 2)
    </excerpt>
    <opinion>
    =SUM(((excerpt + layout) / interest) ≠ or < enticing)
    </opinion>
    </crit>

    next note >+ add note

    You must be logged in to add a note. Login now or register for an account.

    Cancel
    Dog-earJan 2, 10, 10:08 a.m. – Permalink
  • dskz

    I'm on board with this.

    next note >add note

    You must be logged in to add a note. Login now or register for an account.

    Cancel
    Dog-earJan 2, 10, 10:09 a.m. – Permalink
  • armsbottomer

    creativity ≠ design
    design ≠ fundamentals of design

    this article seems like a pointless argument over semantics

    next note >add note

    You must be logged in to add a note. Login now or register for an account.

    Cancel
    Dog-earJan 2, 10, 10:09 a.m. – Permalink
  • version3

    let me drop some realism on ya...

    chicken leads to egg
    egg leads to omelet
    omelet leads to fecal urgency

    next note >+ add note

    You must be logged in to add a note. Login now or register for an account.

    Cancel
    Dog-earJan 2, 10, 10:11 a.m. – Permalink
  • lukus_W

    "Design View is the playground of Andy Rutledge"

    I think this statement is quite sad and poignant. He doesn't let anyone comment on his posts. He is the only kid in the playground - he must get lonely.

    next note >add note

    You must be logged in to add a note. Login now or register for an account.

    Cancel
    Dog-earJan 2, 10, 10:17 a.m. – Permalink
  • dskz

    I don't think there is anything pretentious about design fundamentals but he does come off a bit harsh. I'm sure it's his shtick.

    • Yeah, it's interesting to think about - but I reckon it's a bit unproductive to lay down the law in circular essays.– lukus_W
    + add note

    You must be logged in to add a note. Login now or register for an account.

    Cancel
    Dog-earJan 2, 10, 10:27 a.m. – Permalink
  • instrmntl

    He seems like one of those css assholes that love updating their fine tuned blogs, but there actual work and design (when they have to put their knowledge to practice), is shite. Case in point:

    http://www.unitinteractive.com/

    • the majority of the work examples have cluttered pages with poor AI that would work better on a newspaper or a magazine.– instrmntl1/2
      magazine. I did like the design quiz thing tho.– instrmntl2/2
    next note >+ add note

    You must be logged in to add a note. Login now or register for an account.

    Cancel
    Dog-earJan 2, 10, 10:35 a.m. – Permalink
  • honest

    http://www.homebits.co.uk/acatalog/Doorknob_440x293.gif

    next note >add note

    You must be logged in to add a note. Login now or register for an account.

    Cancel
    Dog-earJan 2, 10, 10:49 a.m. – Permalink
  • monNom

    I read this article a while back. I don't recall being offended by it. It seemed like a straight forward teaching tool for 'creatives' to show where they may have blind spots in the design department. Certainly some 'designers' are lacking in the fundamentals.

    He's actually got some quality content in the articles at the bottom of the page.

    next note >add note

    You must be logged in to add a note. Login now or register for an account.

    Cancel
    Dog-earJan 2, 10, 11 a.m. – Permalink
  • must_dash

    common. sense.

    next note >add note

    You must be logged in to add a note. Login now or register for an account.

    Cancel
    Dog-earJan 2, 10, 12:03 p.m. – Permalink
  • mg33

    What a dick!

    + add note

    You must be logged in to add a note. Login now or register for an account.

    Cancel
    Dog-earJan 2, 10, 12:47 p.m. – Permalink
  • Iggyboo

    I am torn,

    I get the point he's trying to make but his tone is all wrong. If you want to preach to the masses to call out the hacks in your field why don't you allow people to respond to each of your questions and have a dialogue or do you feel that your above it? I am a bit disappointed with his description of people passing or 'failing' his test. And a time when it sounds like designers are getting ever closer to having a design union, or having a certification this kind of standardized testing seems well rigid and swiss. Which is fine I am all for common lines of continuity and layouts that have the basic principles but I think rules can be broken and work can come out amazing as long as you first need to know the basic principle. And I see many of them in there. I think he needs to open his post up to a dialogue on the site I'd be interested to see what others have to say.

    • so many grammar errors fuck it :) happy new year. QBN 2010 please allow for edit...– Iggyboo1/2
      I agree - could either be about educating students or providing a platform for his ego.. without dialogue it's possibly the later.– lukus_W2/2
    next note >+ add note

    You must be logged in to add a note. Login now or register for an account.

    Cancel
    Dog-earJan 2, 10, 12:59 p.m. – Permalink
  • Iggyboo

    Ok, this drove me nuts..

    http://show.andyrutledge.com/fee…

    this guys broadcast shits on both AIGA and on Communication Arts for not understanding interactive design, and according to Andy they create an atmosphere for low quality web design. That's an arrogant thing to say without any proof, other than that according to Andy that every site listed in Communication arts interactive annuals are only flash sites. I gave the guy a bit of lee-way prior to hearing this..

    • BTW, 2007 when this broadcast was made: http://www.commarts.… info design section... not every site is flash.– Iggyboo1/5
      flash.– Iggyboo2/5
      well to be fair a lot of them were flash in 2007, but 08 and 09 weren't, and I think a lot of that was just a web trend. Usability trends changed during 2k7 to more seo cms friendly systems.– Iggyboo3/5
      and content managements systems plus seo benefits came to the forefront. But calling flash executions a poor quality product in itself is silly.– Iggyboo4/5
      is just silly. The message comes before the medium always.– Iggyboo5/5
    next note >+ add note

    You must be logged in to add a note. Login now or register for an account.

    Cancel
    Dog-earJan 2, 10, 1:11 p.m. – Permalink
  • instrmntl

    he's another zeldman. i call bullshit.

    • Zeldman is a hack, Rutledge is ok in my book.– raf
    + add note

    You must be logged in to add a note. Login now or register for an account.

    Cancel
    Dog-earJan 2, 10, 1:19 p.m. – Permalink
  • omgitsacamera

    wtf
    this is harder than my us history final....

    + add note

    You must be logged in to add a note. Login now or register for an account.

    Cancel
    Dog-earJan 2, 10, 1:45 p.m. – Permalink

Login or Register to respond to this

Skip to main content