October 10, 2008

banksy and the village pet store

file under: design

ever since my last trip to london, and my visit to the Cans Festival, i have been a huge Banksy fan. apparently he has a new thing going on in New York: The Village Pet Store.

this store appears to be a complete departure from his street art, but it doesn't surprise me after reading Wall and Piece. he's done plenty of things that fall well outside the realm of street art, including "vandalizing" art museums by placing variations of known pieces on the walls and waiting to see how long they stayed up before anyone noticed (check out the films portion of his site, then click 'Museum').

what i like so much about Banksy is his unique combination of artistic ability and caustic social commentary. he seems to see the world in a way that many don't, and can express his vision in unusual, creative, and often surprising ways. some might consider him an artistic terrorist because of his non-traditional approach, but i think it's just a way for him to amplify and strengthen his message. if he wanted to put traditional art in galleries, he's clearly got the talent to do so, but that wouldn't serve his purposes. he wants as many people as possible, not just art-museum denizens, to see his work, to let it sink into their conscious and subconscious minds and either work its magic or wreak havoc.

the best way to appreciate Banksy is up close and personal, but for those who haven't had the opportunity, here are a few pieces and links to related information:

• One Banksy at the Cans Festival
• Banksy on Wikipedia
• Banksy images from Google
• Banksy group on Flickr

Posted by docrpm on 10.10.08 at 7:20 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

January 21, 2005

apple apologists

file under: design

i've noticed there is a certain class of people out there who love Apple, and are willing to accept (and defend) just about any product Apple releases, without question. if Steve Jobs released a machine without a CPU, saying that he didn't want to bog people down with the whole central processing thing, the Apple apologists would say, "yeah, i guess i could just use it as a beautiful paperweight; who needs a CPU?"

this has come up several times in the last week, specifically in relation to the iPod shuffle. it's a really neat piece of industrial design, and has a lot over the competition, but it's got no display. it seems that in reviews i read, and with people i talk to, there is some measure of acceptance regarding screen omission: "i really want a screen on my portable music player, and can't really imagine not having one, but this is Apple, people...it must be fine without it. let's get on with the shuffle!"

if someone else released a music player without a (coupled) user interface, i suspect it would languish on the shelves and then wind up being sold as a portable disk drive instead. but with Apple, there seems to be some sort of tacit belief that they know best when it comes to industrial and user–centered design. maybe they do, but i don't think i'll be shuffling anytime soon.

ps: just in case there was confusion, i really love most apple products. i'm a believer, just not an apologist.

Posted by docrpm on 01.21.05 at 5:46 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0)

May 24, 2004

coasters have two sides

file under: design

"these coasters are defective!!! why did i buy these damn things?"

buyer's remorse takes many forms, but one that's common for me is the form-function problem. i buy something that has great form and a supposed function, only to find that function forgot to show up.

or did it?

...

i've got a nifty set of rubber coasters from Crate & Barrel. elaine and i bought them about a year ago; what can i say - they were orange and yellow and square and looked cool, and i thought to myself, "damn, those would look fine on that IKEA coffee table." [it almost hurts to write this...]

well, that's all they did. they looked fine. they failed miserably as coasters.

a few minutes after setting a cold glass on one of the aforementioned orange squares, a small pool of condensation would gather. this pool would create a rather nice seal between coaster and the base of the glass, one strong enough that picking up the glass brought the coaster along for the ride. of course, the coaster wouldn't stay for the ride. oh no - it would detach itself from the glass about two-thirds of the way to your mouth. this resulted in the partially wet coaster going splat! on the table (face down, per murphy's law).

and so one of those orange coasters has been sitting on my desk for some time, wearing another cardboard coaster like a condom for condensation. the others sat forlorn on the coffee table, waiting for their day in the sun.

until saturday.

elaine was looking through the Crate & Barrel catalog (like a Victoria's secret catalog, it's not ours), and noticed some coasters with nifty little ridges to capture the moisture from whatever glass they held. she said, " hey, these are better than those crappy ones we bought."

and then a light bulb went on - our crappy coasters have two sides. they're asymmetric, with one side totally flat, the other with raised dots, like a Lego designed to hold martini glasses. we had been resting our glasses on the flat side, not the Lego side. what if it was meant to be the other way around?

sure enough, it was. it's like our coasters have a new lease on life, and we've rediscovered joy and can live in harmony with IKEA and Crate & barrel products again.

this got me to thinking about the question of form and function. is it odd that an object designed for a very specific purpose could be used in multiple ways to serve that same purpose, with one usage superior to others? not really, actually. a hammer, for instance, could be used in many ways to pound a nail, although hitting the nail with the right side of the hammer brings Miller time that much more quickly.

the difference here is that the two ways of achieving the same end were not so obviously distinct. most coasters will work equally well whether used on one side or the other. those coasters that require a little more effort usually have very obvious sides (this side up, this side down). for some reason, the "up" side of our C&B coasters was not so obvious.

why did i pick the wrong way of using these coasters? after all, you'd have to be a few beers short of a six-pack to misuse a coaster, right? the only thing that i could figure out was the the display at the store showed the coasters in the improper orientation, and i just followed along, like a lemming off the cliff.

but all is right with the world now, and i can drink my martinis without fear of the dreaded splat!. it's all about the little things.

Posted by docrpm on 05.24.04 at 11:32 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

July 2, 2003

segs away!

file under: design

as i was walking home from the corner store this morning, what should i see rolling down the street, but a Segway.

i was beginning to think these things were a massive hoax perpetrated by Amazon and dean kamen, but it turns out that my conspiracy theory had a flat tire. yes, folks, for the small price of $4950, you too can buy your piece of transportation history.

or is it just a bunch of marketing hype?

...

i'm not sure...the thing that struck me most when i looked at the Segway was, where the heck are people supposed to ride these things? and for what will they be used (aside from causing rubbernecker traffic accidents)?

the Segway is not large. one small person on a Segway takes up about the same physical space as one really big person with feet planted on the ground. it's extremely quiet, seems to roll quite well up and down san francisco streets, and it turns effortlessly. in fact, i wasn't really able to see completely how its rider was directing it...it almost seemed to pilot itself.

with all of that said, it's pretty slow. most of the yuppies who run in noe valley would pass someone on a Segway. a little faster than walking, but not even close to the speed of a bike, car, or even skateboard. it also has about the same protection (i.e., none).

which leads me back to my questions above.

if it's slower than any other form of non-bipedal transport, yet slightly faster than walking, where do you ride it? the sidewalk, or the street? the sidewalk seems the most logical place, given speed and safety factors. what if the sidewalk is crowded? hmmm. bike lane? maybe, except there are three bike lanes in san francisco. in the street with cars? you wouldn't catch me out there.

the next question is perhaps the more important one - what mode of travel does it support? you can't use it for long trips (although david lynch might have something to say about that). i couldn't even realistically ride it to work, which is about 4 miles from my house. it would take me a long time to get there, and i'd probably get beaten up for riding the Segway before i got there. which seems to leave the intra- or inter-neighborhood trip as the probable usage of the Segway. (maybe there are other rural usages, but i'm going to be a city snob, for the moment)

so why would i spend $5000 on something to get around in the neighborhood, or to go and have a glass of wine with a friend who lives a mile or two away? i would just walk or ride my bike.

so from my perspective, that leaves two possible user groups: (1) people who travel only short distances and are not capable of walking, driving or biking, through disability, illness, or some other unavoidable cause, and (2) people who could take $5000 and flush it down the toilet without thinking twice. (NOTE: for those of you thinking about people who can't afford cars, think bike. or scooter. or skateboard, for the young or highly coordinated and risk-tolerant old.)

maybe i'm just being a cranky cynic (and it's not because of the heat wave, which is now gone).

anybody got any other thoughts? i'd love to hear that i'm really missing something here, because Segways seem like a really cool idea.

Posted by docrpm on 07.02.03 at 7:03 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)