This book by MIT Media Lab genious John Maeda is about simplicitly. On first glance, it’s uncontroversial: everything is better when it’s simple, right?
It appears that things are more complicated-even worse: complex-than that. The central problem is stated in the first law:
How simple can you make it? vs How complex does it have to be? I think Maeda should have headed this himself, as the book shows clear signs of leaning heavily on being simplistic rather than simple. A sentiment perfectly expressed in his endorsement of the simplistic and utterly disappointing iPod Shuffle. Is simplicity just apparent simplicity: i.e. hiding complex options away in the menu bar? Or is it something deeper: things become complex either to cater for complex task or to satisfy simple tasks in changing contexts. True simplicity can only be achieved by being adaptive: the form itself must cater to unforeseen contingencies: i.e. Post-it, PalmPilot etc. Maeda is good when dealing with the emotional aspects of designs, and the writing reminds me of haiku version of Norman. But he aims mainly to inspire, rather than inform: his laws are not supported by any kind of argument and are thus intentionally vague (the simplicity/complexity rhythm).
As a case for reasonable simplicity Norman’s book is still far more advanced and subtle; as a source for inspiration - minimalism offers a better platform: see John Pawson - “Minimum”.
Leave a Reply