Archive

December 14th, 2007

Chasing snaps

Years ago, while I was studying art at the Baskin Visual Arts Center, we were tasked with constructing an on-the-spot, interactive art piece. We had about 20 minutes to come up with a compelling art piece that embodied the fundamental principals of interactivity.

For this project I partnered up with one of my classmates. Five minutes later, we had our masterpiece. It was simple and direct. We stood before the class with two cardboard signs, a box of chewing gum and a stack of singles. The sign around my neck read, “Scream in my face for a dollar.” The sign by my partner read, “For a dollar, I’ll put another stick of gum in my mouth.”

It was the most beautiful play on an age old child’s game. We started out with 100 $1 bills and finished with close to $160, not that that was our aim by any means. Don’t ask me how he fit all that gum in his mouth; I really couldn’t tell you.

The reason I bring this up, is because this silly little piece has a lot in common with web design. Don’t believe me?

This is not print

gum experiment

In a brilliant article, Understanding Web Design, Jeffrey Zeldman sizes up the common misgivings and mis-disseminations about, well, understanding web design. The focus of Zeldman’s article was centered around how web design is evaluated, as design. The common comparison used by industry magistrates, is of course print and weighed against generated revenue as would make perfect sense.

Print design is a logical comparison (on the surface). It has a long standing history and is well understood1, given it’s comfortable similarities to other “design” based, visual media, such as painting. I’m not going to argue that. Those similarities however, in the way of web design, are icing only and not the whole cake.

The true “design” experience when it comes to the web, happens in the cracks and not on the surface, as with print. The precise moment when a user decides to interact with a web application, is where the design takes place. In this way, it makes more sense to compare an application such as Facebook, to two college students handing out one dollar bills so that people can pay them to stuff chewing gum in their mouths, than it does to compare it to, say, László Moholy-Nagy’s Konstruktion.

LaszloMoholy-Nagy's KonstruktionLaszloMoholy-Nagy’s Konstruktion

Click not “click”

In contrast to the industries’ revenue hungry critics and award givers, we web designers need to focus on the snap that takes place in that sacred moment of interaction. Beautiful design, makes for beautiful snaps. So, rather than chasing “clicks” to set a benchmark, let us seek the other kind of click and make for good experiences.

1 By understood, we mean not at all or at least not at any level worth mentioning, which becomes self-defeating in this case scenario.

One Response to “Chasing snaps”

  • Lauren Scime Said on:

    Web as a medium is much more akin to audience participatory installation/performance art than it is to painting or any 2d media. And a good web design is all about creating an environment that fosters user interaction. You have to set it up and encourage them to get involved - give them a reason.

    Money and public acts of humiliation are good motivators. That’s why Facebook is so popular.

    Another stick of gum, another thrown sheep…. All in a day’s work….

Run Your Mouth Off!

You can do this: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>

Repeat Penguin