Crap

this post remained on the boiler for long. never knew if i should have been warranted the audacity to write something such as this, especially since i’m very new to design. finally decided that thoughts, no matter how naive, sometimes ought to be expressed, simply so that they may be read, contemplated upon, and there-by be better suited to refinement, possibly (and seemingly) for the better.

there was big talk. and there was small talk. there were idiots who said design as a field sucked. and there were idiots who proclaimed it didn’t. and then, there was…something, called me.

in principle, any field – be it engineering, be it medicine, be it political sciences, be it accounting, or be it cobbling or rag-picking – each is equally perfect. and each of them can, in a deeper, philosophical sense, be invaluable to humanity, or earth, or the universe even. and on the face of it, each of them is just a means of keeping us occupied and a means of getting us those two square meals we crave for. to live. live – unto what? no one knows.

i am very-much inclined to go down the “whole universe will get destroyed some day, so why live” route here; then again, shall not.

people have said to me that design is all about designing for humanity, and i’ve convinced myself (or, sufficiently allowed others to convince me) that design is a (figuratively-)divine field that has no bounds. i can design something as (outwardly-)simple as a visiting card, or a website, or a chair, or a car, or a naval warship, or complicated social architecture, or an entire system that will enclose within it every person alive today. and well, it’s really quite true. i can. and design is a field that’d give me all the freedom to do so.

but then – the more i see, the more i seem to get convinced that design isn’t really that special. it’s just common sense. true, the common sense does come after practising a fair-bit, and i need to be a ‘designer’ to be permitted that practice. i’ve just spent two days (unsuccessfully) trying to come up with a visiting card design for a client at my internship. i admit, maybe i suck at it. but, as i practised, and practised some more, over the two days, i saw myself get better at it.

it’s all about taking up the cause, and trying. and failing and trying. a guy with no formal education can try to sit and make something that helps rid him of some inconvenience in life, and well, he may end up solving one of the world’s biggest issues. who knows!

all i can see for now, is that i don’t really want to be (branded) a designer. i just want to be a guy who can use his common sense. and maybe help some people along the way. if that’s what you call design, then design it is.

even so, why does design suddenly feel so constricted. why do i not enjoy making tiny posters that’ll probably change no one’s lives? why can i not just walk up to dr manmohan singh and speak with him of all my ideas that’d help change the world? why do we let kasab live while he laughs his ass off at us from the prison cell? what use is all our might when we can’t even physically force pakistan to prevent erstwhile-arrested terrorists from roaming free? why…why?!!

design won’t let me achieve that. or maybe it will. i’m dazed.

–
from: 1 am. june 5, 2009.
(hence, the connections to the news from that day, such as that day’s events from kasab’s trial)

It’s like a bad case of a gloated bladder. I just want to say all this, but well…obviously, can’t. Thank who-so-ever that blogs were invented. :)

[1] Mamata Banerjee : Your speech today (about not wanting a Ministerial Seat, and working purely for the development of WB) blew me off. Must eat my words. I do hope what you said was not a stupid political gimmick. And if not, then well, open a school…and teach our bluddy political class a thing or two :P

[2] Lalu Prasad Yadav : I love the way you give speeches, and well, you do have a brazen-yet-classy personality. But well, suck it dude. You shuttle back-and-forth even better than those (ex-)trains of yours – apparently you’ve offered unconditional support to the UPA now – seriously? Eat dung man. O wait, u already do, don’t you?

[3] Prabhakaran : Ur dead. Sorry. Words would prove futile now :) Even so, does tata sound good?

[4] Indian Stock Markets : Did Lalu’s bulls run free today? Did he lose them too? First his seats, then his dignity, and now this? shucks…

[5] Arjun Singh : Yeah yeah oldie, ur party won. But seriously, haven’t you considered retiring. Or better, dying? Think long and hard on it. Maybe hell has reserved some seats for you. In-fact, i’m sure it has. If not, maybe you should go there and fight for your cause!

[6] Bombay Traffic : You’re too bad…Ruined an otherwise perfect day for me !

[7] Rahul Gandhi : Nice tricks dude…You sure know how to play it smoooooth…But seriously, the i-don’t-need-no-ministry trick, rocks!

[8] Varun Gandhi : Erm… (No comment) :P

[9] Varun Gandhi’s silence : You look good. Stay that way.

[10] LK Advani : Why so serious?

[11] Myself : Shut up, you jerk.

The past few years, i’ve often mulled over what perspective really is. As to how a person can do something simply because he perceives it to be righteous. And as to how the very same thing can seem incorrect for another. All this has led me along several lines of thought.

Like how there always will be two faces to every issue. Like, two extreme perspectives to observe an issue from. And going beyond that, there will be several other perspectives in-between the two extremes, depending on several factors such as an individual’s knowledge, upbringing, immediate surroundings, and so on. Another line of thought made me think along how there can really be no such things as perfection. And as to how imperfection possibly is the only true perfect truth.

Yes, all of this sounds clichéd. And it most probably is.

Anyone wonder why i’ve tagged this post with Design…? You see, that is the beauty of it all. It is all about how we perceive a problem. That’s precisely where Design begins. Or, is there really a thing such as a beginning? Hmmm…

That’s all.

1 year lay slain behind him. And forward lay the 3 he’d wanted to face.

To speak, sans retort. To sketch, sans unaskedfor critique.

He now thought he’d earned some of it. Mistakes had been made, grave ones at that. He’d known a log time ago, whence his mother had asked him thus,

There are two kinds of people in this world. The former evade the errors whence informed. The latter, commit the foul, and learn off the recoil. Frighteningly, there’s a rare, third type – those who don’t learn even once bitten. Who, son, will you be?

He knew he belonged to those few that his mom feared he might. Even so, he promised her he’d try to learn the off first bite. Walking barefoot among snakes was something he couldn’t stop himself from doing.

Some day, ma, i’ll teach those snakes to stop biting. And if i can’t, i’ll know, “Atleast, i tried.”

3 years of pure Design. Apparently, they teach it at IIT Guwahati. Design? He knew not whether it could ever be taught…

And to think of the questions they’d ask. “What’s the scope of Design?” People, for you, Design has no scope. For, if you chose Design, turned up at this college to be taught the same for 4 years, paid the fees, aaaand still don’t know of the scope – then, i guess you’re plain dumb.

Still, he figured he’d share his views with them. He began, with Architecture.

Architecture, he said, is all about ‘making it’. Architects may build condominiums, they may build bridges across infinite fluid expanses. Painters, sculptors, craftsmen – they’re Architects too. They all build, whatever is conceived. In his view, an architect knew how to make the design go, from a raw idea, to, a revolution. The boy wished, that someday, he’d get to be an Architect. In the true sense of it.

But first, he’d garner his strength to being the Designer. The one that conceives. The one that observes the world.. The one that draws up a cure, and the one that speaks up to convince the world to change (for the world, sadly, caccooned within set-patterns, follows redundant orthodoxy unto a grind).

The boy would try be a Designer. And someday, an Architect.

i had originally composed this as someone else’s homework assignment. but i guess i took a liking to the subject of ‘functionality versus utility’. the result, lies below.

creativity has No limits. however, it is often seen (as is the case whence directives and duties do not restrain an individual’s freedoms) that creativity is unfocussed. function and utility, thus, present means to harness the genius that a creator possesses, unto an end that is both, constructive, and aesthetic.

in much the same way that pairs are innately inseparable, creativity and its constraints, work in harmony. it would be impractical to build the most elegant bridge in the world, and abandon structural integrity in lieu of a curvaceous mould. on the flipside, it would be horrifically mundane for a buyer if the virtues of variety and uniqueness were entirely absent, and each home was simply a repetitive embodiment of functionality..

often it is seen, that an innovator, in his quest for brilliance, ignores functional constraints that dictate a structure. often, scenic bridges (akin to a recent case in london – the millenium bridge) have not lasted 48 hours from their inauguration, since certain flaws had crept into their exuberant designs.

then again, some of the stand-alone masterpieces of architecture are some of the most lacking structures when it comes to utility or practical-applicability. take the pyramids at giza, or the moai structures on easter-island in the pacific. in fact, these structures and their constructions are actually blamed as one of the causes for the fall of those civilisations. even so, no one regrets the fact that the pyramids exist, do they? :)

yes, coming back to functionality, i must reaffirm that, the so-called ‘limits’ imposed upon an architect’s (or any inventor, for that matter) designs are actually beneficial to his creations. it only matters upon the perspective he(or she!) adopts whilst complying with the guidelines; why not look upon each requisite as an added avenue unto further expression of genius?

originally : March 27, 2008

Greed, they say, is a vice possessed only by man. Animals, apparently, never suffer from immoralities such as greed. Tigers and such predators also possess the ability to take life at will; even so, a tiger will hunt only when needed, and at all other times, won’t hurt a lamb – not even if you stuck the docile fellow up the feline’s jaws. Life, it seems, devours only whence it is needed. Man, is an obvious exception – it would seem that his intelligence makes him eligible for such misconduct, for, there is no creature above him, that may set right his fallacies.

Now i’ll narrate a small observation, one i made over a sultry afternoon, not too long ago. Read the rest of this entry »

Life experiments with itself. Tiny defects crop into the molecules that drive life, and often fail. But every once in a while, a defect turns Life itself around. Mutation, the biologists call it. Over time, it gets slated as Evolution. What causes these defects to crop into the mosaic of Life, is one question that could be answered. However, the fact that these defects DO crop up, and seem to work, albeit with miserably low probabilities, is worth noticing here.

If long-drawn Philosophy is not what you tend to palate frequently, i’d sincerely suggest you move onto another post; for this one is rather, well, top-heavy. [ :) ]

Read the rest of this entry »