Why shouldn't design trends/styles be classified based on shared visual characteristics?
This is a very redundant question, are you stupid?
>>455782you can do what you wantbut wha characteristics will you use?
>>455784The same ones that have been used to define certain kinds of styles that get thrown around now.Frutiger Aero, Y2K, Alegria and so on.
>>455793Of this is an attempt to defend Cari, Cari doesn't just use visual characteristics in their descriptions so there's more to consider.Where they do use them they are often shared by so many other stylistic trends and historical movements that they don't really provide any useful distinction, and they qualify/quantify them using ridicously vague and subjective terms...for example "Blob World" is described as having->playful texturesWTF is that even supposed to mean?also->strange/uncanny forms>surrealist compositionsSurrealism is an established creative movement already, nothing in what they say explains why "Blob World" needs to be assessed independently or is different.Most of their categories are similarly over-vague when describing visual characteristics that may be present in near any style art/design like >translucency>large amounts of whitespace"large" compared to what? >more dramatic lightingDo they mean a higher degree of drama in the general lighting? Higher than what?Or do they mean a larger number of instances of dramatic lighting? More of then than what?When they do say, it's usually in reference to some other made up "aesthetic" with an equally incomprehensible definition, and existing movement/aesthetic that is well understood and could just as easily describe it, or both->Neo Vectorheart>A half-revival of circa-2000 Vectorheart incorporated with maximalist "gamer-grunge". All about 45-degree angles, punchy colors, and contrast.>Vectorheart>...vectorheart embodies the blazing speed of Y2K Aesthetic attitudes with futuristic forms and high-contrast typography that borrows from both Swiss modernism and utilitarian industrial design.It's just circular thinking, navel gazing puffers that isn't of any value in understanding any of it or categorizing it in a way thats useful..that's not to say that it can't be done, but these clowns aren't doing it and actually just muddy the waters because they're up their own asses.
>>455794Soft Colonial Wanderlust (2000s)ca. Late 1980s - Mid 2010s>...Maps, wanderlust and leisure travel via boat or small aeroplane. Chinoiserie/Japonisme and general Orientalism (think blue on white Ming Dynasty pottery used exclusively by white people). Carnivals and boardwalks, mail art, Neutral Milk Hotel's/Arcade Fire album covers, Baroque Pop, privileging of nature/ecology in art (throwbacks to Art Nouveau/Arts and Crafts Movement), sense of whimsy, hot air balloons, magical ways of looking at travel, phonographs, typewriters and general machinery of the decade that's on the verge of modernity being used today, but NOT exactly steampunk...LOFL
>>455794>>455795So ture about that. I think making a video going over why Cari is not good resource would also help. It also funny how they blame aesthetic wiki for "ruining" their labels when their labels where just bad to begin with.
>>455784on second thought, fuck all these commercial fuckwits
it can be a useful tool for examining trends but unless you actually explain what common influences the iMac G3 and Jet Set Radio have you're just making a Pinterest moodboard. to be fair to CARI they make some effort in doing so but this aesthetic autism scene keeps mistaking whale sharks for whales
it's for the idiots that constantly ask CAN ANYONE TELL ME WHAT THIS DESIGN MOVEMENT/ STYLE IS CALLED and it's just an image with a halftone filter on it
>>455782Because it's a money making scheme by grifters.
>>455821>examining trendsTrue, but defining trends involves an element of time that often has little relevance until much, much later when they can be viewed and sorted out from a historical perspective. Even at that point, any timeline you establish may have almost nothing to do with how those trends coalesced into any particular style or aesthetic, and impart little to no valuable information as to how that happened.But what CARI and its followers do is hyper-focused on time frames, often while by their own admission a particular trend is still current. Then they reference other allegedly concise and compartmentalized trends as being related but again it's with so little historical distance and perspective that it's meaningless.>common influencesThis certainly helps to understand how styles develop, but rather than being a timeline or a tree where X movement branches off into later derivatives, the development of artistic styles and movements is more like a thread map where threads connecting more contemporary trends that may have little in common visually lead back to the same ancient influences, while contemporaneous styles/movements may have little connection at all.Case in point- both chair designs in picrel are made by designers commonly associated with Art Nouveau but despite being made during its hetday almost none of the visual elements are anything like the ones used to describe Art Nouveau.But if you consider the overarching influence and gestalt of the Arts and Crafts Movement and Modernism in its original sense and the allegedly separate aesthetics of the various trends spawned by those movements over the course of a half century or more, then it all fits even though those chairs may not look like it.tl; dr: Meaningful categorization of artistic syles is not all about, or even mostly about looks or trends or time periodsIf that seems impossible to you, you need to study more until it seeps in.
>>455844And speaking of A&C and historical context, even now there are widely divergent opinions as to what it was/ is and how it fits into a larger picture->Some consider that it is the root of the Modern Style, a British expression of what later came to be called the Art Nouveau movement. Others consider that it is the incarnation of Art Nouveau in England.>Others consider Art and Crafts to be in opposition to Art Nouveau. Arts and Crafts indeed criticized Art Nouveau for its use of industrial materials such as iron. And as for Art Nouveau artists, the Arts and Crafts utopia was intrinsically contradictory: "the paradoxical confinement of the Arts & Crafts movement in an artisanal practice was completely out of step with the evolution of the status of the artist-decorator, but also with the democratic will of an art 'for the people and by the people' proclaimed by William Morris". For example, while Henry van de Velde understood the social discourse of Arts and Crafts, he was not an unconditional disciple of the movement and ended up turning away from it, considering it as anachronistic and tinged with quixotism.All of which makes CARI's allegedly authoritative micro- categorization of current "aesthetics" as distinct and definable within the space of a handful of years that much more absurd, to the point of self parody.
The fact that they describe Live Laugh Love as "snarky" reveals to me everything I need to know about Cari. The aesthetic is a bit shallow but overall pretty innocent. Seems like Cari is seething at normies literally just being happy (and drinking some wine).
fan-fiction writing neetbux kidults will inherit the earthyou will NOT take away their thing
