A sequel to my ‘Telecaster’

[Prostheta]

"If it isn't broken, fix it until it is."

Those are some very sage viewpoints, and I applaud the introduction of Voltaire to this esteemed company. The Shakespeare sonnet excerpt is especially excellent, however I think it is one of those things that works differently outside of original intended context, yet possess their own internal consistency? Here in Finland there is the lovely verb, "hifistellä" and hence the descriptor of a person as a "hifistelijä". This is loosely describes the action of, or a person that continues to modify and change something beyond absolute requirement to the point of wasting time, money and resources. A lily gilder. I believe Shakespeare was almost making a sly oxymoron by describing that which defies and is even damaged through the act of description. Nonetheless, these unexpected and unintended conjunctions take on an inspiring life of their own.

Again out of full context, "Hell is empty, and all the devils are here" also works beautifully out of its specific context within The Tempest.

[mistermikev]

1 hour ago, Dave Higham said:

Not quite in the same vein, but there's a French expression, 'Le trop (ou le mieux), est l'énémie du bien'. It's attributed to Voltaire and translates into English as 'Perfect is the enemy of good'. In other words, when something you've made is pretty damn good, don't go and ruin it by trying to make it perfect! Something of which I have to confess I have been guilty in the past.

Shakespeare said,

Were it not sinful then, striving to mend,
To mar the subject that before was well?

Confucius said,

"Better a diamond with a flaw than a pebble without."

Watson-Watt, who developed early warning radar in Britain to counter the rapid growth of the Luftwaffe, propounded a "cult of the imperfect", which he stated as "Give them the third best to go on with; the second best comes too late, the best never comes."

Just thought you'd like to know. (Thank you Wikipedia)

 

"Perfect is the enemy of good" - I've always interpreted the same saying as to mean good is what you get when you fail at achieving perfect and in that sense -they are enemies.  

 

[Bizman62]

1 hour ago, Dave Higham said:

'Le trop (ou le mieux), est l'énémie du bien'. It's attributed to Voltaire and translates into English as 'Perfect is the enemy of good'.

I'd like to translate that a bit further and closer to the "more" phrase: As "trop" means "more" the Voltaire quote can also be understood as not to add anything to what's already good. Doesn't that say "more is too much" which in turns means "less is more (or better)".

"Le mieux" means "the best" which makes that saying translate word to word to 'Perfect is the enemy of good'.

 

[Prostheta]

Interpreting an author's specific meaning, or being inspired to derive your own thoughts and rationalisations are two very different practices. A meta-interpretation of this would be, "how to think vs. inspired to think". University taught me very little outside of the rote subject material, however it did teach me to teach myself.

[ScottR]

I've often considered "less is more" to be a paraphrase of "less is often more- beautiful, lovely, useful, practical, etc." fill in your own blank.

SR

[Bizman62]

54 minutes ago, Prostheta said:

Interpreting an author's specific meaning, or being inspired to derive your own thoughts and rationalisations are two very different practices.

Yepp. What did Voltaire mean? Is the English translation correct? If the Brits asked Voltaire, did he understand the question or the English translation?

Actually I found a flaw in my previous post, "trop" isn't actually "more", it's even more as it's "too much".

[Prostheta]

I'm not certain of Voltaire's meaning as I don't have a wider context to work from, and I'm sure that the original French carries subtle meaning or implication of itself.

I would imagine a number of possible interpretations would be valid, such as action vs. process mindedess; hence my mentioning of "hifistellä". Chasing unnecessary perfection whilst losing sight of any practical endpoint? That perfection - when seen as a gold standard - devalues that which is readily acceptable or good enough?

[Prostheta]

This is yet enough classic PG déraillement. 

[ScottR]

3 hours ago, Prostheta said:

This is yet enough classic PG déraillement. 

I don't Know if it is enough......yet, but it is certainly another one.

Classic indeed.

SR

[Dave Higham]

Dosesn't matter about the déraillement. It's my thread and I'm the one who quoted Voltaire.

When I show my wife (who is French) something I'm making, saying 'there's just that bit there that could be better', that's what she says. What she means is leave the bl***y thing alone, you'll  probably go and ruin it!

Edited November 17, 2021 by Dave Higham

[komodo]

In design, we strive for that absolute minimum to get the strongest idea across. Doesn’t matter if we are doing a photo shoot, making a logo, or laying out a design. You want to have it so that if you take only one element away, it fails. The utmost clarity. I always think of The Beatles and their strength in songwriting economy. It looks SO simple, but it’s the most complex in it’s simplicity.

[Bizman62]

4 hours ago, komodo said:

In design, we strive for that absolute minimum to get the strongest idea across

That's something I'm having issues with. I simply can't design in advance, instead I just have an idea and start making. My works end up being simple but that takes a ton of rethinking and remaking which often leads to compromises. 

@Dave Higham seems to be the contrary, starting from the logo and ending to the instruments the entire process seems to be well planned, thoughtfully designed, lean and clean.

[Prostheta]

My own take on the process of design is to see it as exactly that; a process. I can't claim to have a hugely artistic mind, and I'm quite happy to wallow in the derivative. My satisfaction comes from analysing and understanding methods to designing process solutions that are efficient, repeatable and consistent. I even end up doing this during simple repetitive tasks with large quantities of the same component in basic manual sanding or routing operations. Mental optimisation. Neurodiversity has its uses when applied productively.

[komodo]

5 hours ago, Bizman62 said:

That's something I'm having issues with. I simply can't design in advance, instead I just have an idea and start making. My works end up being simple but that takes a ton of rethinking and remaking which often leads to compromises. 

Ah. There are lots of creative processes, but to use design again two things are very typical. Iteration, and what I like to think of as respiration. By respiration, I mean a long process of iteration where it is an additive phase, and then a subtractive phase. Many times over and over as you refine to get to the cleanest and strongest versions that communicate your original idea. We usually begin with a long process of discovery (distillation) to find that singular idea(s), that then use that as a North star in the whole process.

It really helps to have many minds on the same problem, as each will bring new things to the table which will often trigger new ideas and help to eliminate lesser ideas. Most anything you see, packaging, billboards, tv commercials, everything has probably been through this process or very similar. It's usually the bad ones that you can tell hasn't been.

[Prostheta]

I learnt this during my structured systems analysis and design methodology units at uni and used the acronym ADDIM to remind me of the stages in a systems life cycle. The same thing can be applied to many structured development areas. Analysis-Development-Design-Implementation-Maintenance. Without going in-depth, it should be apparent how this can become a cyclical process. Iteration implies an endpoint condition is satisfied whereupon the clockspring unwinds. A lifecycle approach is continuous unless the project is discontinued. The objective is assumed to never have a perfect state of existence, and is continually developing in line with demands or against identified shortcomings.

This literally shaped and refined my approach to design. It's not the only way, but certainly useful as a structured approach to quantify problems.

[ScottR]

2 hours ago, komodo said:

Many times over and over as you refine to get to the cleanest and strongest versions that communicate your original idea

2 hours ago, komodo said:

 

[ScottR]

2 hours ago, komodo said:

Many times over and over as you refine to get to the cleanest and strongest versions that communicate your original idea.

Let's try that again......

I agree with the goal, but in my case I find that my first version of any design concept ends up being closest to that goal  Reiteration tends to create mud in my case. I find that one of the toughest things to identify in the creative process is when it's done.

SR

[Charlie H 72]

32 minutes ago, ScottR said:

Let's try that again......

I agree with the goal, but in my case I find that my first version of any design concept ends up being closest to that goal  Reiteration tends to create mud in my case. I find that one of the toughest things to identify in the creative process is when it's done.

SR

Knowing when to stop is the hardest part! I find, similar to you, that I often end up circling back to the original concept, but in the iterative process I usually add, remove, or modify a crucial part of that design. So the final product may be quite similar but there is something important in there that I picked up along the way. Often the crucial change is only tangential to the reason I started iterating in the first place.

Either that or I don't change anything and I know exactly why I'm doing that version instead of the others that I came up with along the way, which has got to count for something. 

[Prostheta]

Funny how we both know that we're complete polar opposites of the spectrum when it comes to approach, @ScottR. I'm thinking that @Dave Higham has a nice mixture of both.

[ScottR]

6 minutes ago, Prostheta said:

Funny how we both know that we're complete polar opposites of the spectrum when it comes to approach, @ScottR. I'm thinking that @Dave Higham has a nice mixture of both.

Tru dat!

SR

[komodo]

One clarification. I was speaking of graphic design on a professional level, where iteration isn’t usually versions of the same thing. Rather, it’s a whole bunch of divergent versions/ideas/looks (additive), where each may then may be iterated on (additive), and then refined (subtractive), and only the best are chosen to share (subtractive). Often, this is only the first stage. It may be repeated over and over. 

Sometimes in our office when you have left it all on the table - blood, sweat, and tears - feedback may be “that’s a good start…”.  And it’s back to the well for all new fresh work of the same thing.

And, this is all pre-client. Clients are brutal in their ignorance. “that’s it?”

[Prostheta]

Slave and adherent to our respective fields. 

[ScottR]

22 hours ago, komodo said:

Clients are brutal in their ignorance.

Amen Brother.

Don't get me started.

SR

[ADFinlayson]

On 11/17/2021 at 7:49 AM, Bizman62 said:

That translates as such into Finnish as well.

I've quite often been pondering the saying "less is more" and the derivative above. The idea is clear to me, but the wording is confusing. Obviously it's a phrase meant to be contradictory and thus easy to remember - and lead into deeper thoughts:

• How much is much?
• Is "good/plenty enough" sufficient?
• What about "flawless"?
• When does "more" become "too much"?
• When is "less" too little to be praised as "more"?
• What does it take to make a flawless "less" to "more"?

 

I don't know much but I do know this - My mother said less is more when I came home with my first tattoo. My Mrs said less is more the first time I bought a new guitar during her tenure. Neither are true.

[Prostheta]

I think we might need to consult with @Dave Higham how we managed to get to this point. I'm certainly beyond that by now....all I remember was a beautiful Spruce top with multi-ply black-white-tort binding, then waking up here?