 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
j u l y 3 , 1 9 9 9 .
i was just reading the preface to the fall issue of surface (it has no url for some reason, or i'd share it with you). "By reconstructing the basics, designers are moving towards the moment when minimalism gets its final kick in the ass by the inevitably pending, but as yet unpredictable, mood swing of early 21st century style ... Menswer innovations are now in the details. Asymmetrical zippers and dress shirts with invisible closures are becoming de riguer." |
<< >> | |
|
my first thought is that i better get my ass in gear and can this minimalism shit. but my second thought, is this site minimalist or isn't it ... or it is! i think it looks minimalist, but if you do a page source check, more stuff comes through. my third thought: this is one thing that i love about the webthat you can turn most pages inside out and see their guts, so unlike the way we can investigate people.
|
||
|
|
what i love is concealing a complex structure behind a simple appearance. on my site, navigation, tables, framesets, and stylesheets all are built towards this end while displaying it themselves, at least, i hope, when implementing them. i hope the content does this as well. sometimes what i write is disingenuously basic, other times it turns over on itself in its self-consciousness. while i'm trying to sell something with the words and images themselves, i'm also trying to push something through them, as if words had pores. onomatopoetic: strictly speaking, of or relating to the formation or use of words which imitate sounds, like whispering, clang, and sizzle, but the term is generally expanded to refer to any word whose sound is suggestive of its meaning.
|
|
