Stacks, clips, binders, staples, folders, piles, trays, bins, boxes, shelves, cabinets …

From papers to DVDs, pictures to furniture, food to receipts. Most of us use some sort of organizational system or a combination of a few. Things get groups by category or size; beds in the bedroom, food-related in the kitchen, books are tossed on a shelf, 8.5 by 11 papers are put in stacks by topic, dust settles in the corners. (You can take this metaphor further, our houses/apartment are organizers, our jobs are categories, etc … ) This is how one aspect of our thinking works, we group and associate things in order to make sense of everything around us … times when something defies this categorization system is when things get interesting.

On another note, I generally make one big pile/stack of stuff on my desk, a big pile composed of notes, change, papers, cards, bills and so on. Before I sit down to work on a project I like to organize my giant pile, it helps me get my bearings and helps me collate my thoughts. It isn’t so a strange thing when you think about it … that reorganizing a physical space can reorganize thoughts and memories …

Taken figuratively it can provide a gateway into how we approach the subjects of our work.

In my own projects I initially try to envision the material as a whole (the space within and around) I tend to see a subject as part of a greater mass of relations. On the other hand, some of my friends start by seeing the borders of a subject, trying to find what is within the subject area (the strokes).

Taken figuratively it can also provide a gateway to how we make our work.

You could make a form with a certain guided intent (generate strokes) or else perhaps generate form out of the mass of material, working with the space around a subject (cutting).

Both ways of seeing and doing can be very fruitful, but both can succumb to the relevance trap.

The ‘relevance trap’ is something I started terming the process by which I erect walls that prevent me from thinking in certain directions. It’s so easy to omit something or draw a border just because we have the impression that it “doesn’t apply” to what we are doing. I call it a ‘trap’ because if you eventually erect four walls, a floor and roof—you are stuck in a box. (At least until you make a door or window)

Something that is ‘relevant’ is just immediately applicable; I would go as far as to say that ‘relevance’ often is just a plain and obvious connection. The irrelevant bits are harder to connect to what you are doing, they are harder to see and require a bit more thought and time (in turn they can prove to be more rewarding).

I find that sometimes designers want things to make sense right away, to be rewarding without much thought. Questions like “what do you get out of this” or “what does this say to you” may be good at determining what is immediately sensible but if there is no residue or nothing to be found further—then it can be just boring. It’s easily forgotten that trying to make meaning out of the unfamiliar is sometimes very memorable. At least certainly more involving and invigorating than something that is bent on the obvious.

On that note: what if banana-eat-monkey? What if banana-became-monkey? What if monkey-loves-banana? How about banana-sold-at-grocery-store? Or monkey-becomes-man?

Hah.

Recently I have tried hard to refrain from using the words cute, interesting and weird in conversation. Not that I don’t use the words at all but I think it’s important to stop and think about what I mean when I use them. These three words are used casually in different contexts and sometimes it becomes a sort of substitute for further thinking.

What I mean is when someone says something is “cute” it seems to be saying a lot without saying all too much. It is as though the meaning of the word is commonly shared but I don’t think we have to take it at that set value, we can very easily make our own values in order to define a word. It’s just that sometimes “cute” comes off pretty hollow when more meaningful questions can be asked of it. After all something cute may merely mask something sinister…or less polemic maybe something telling about its context.

Instead of these words I now make myself stop and think. Why is it cute? Why is it interesting? Why is it weird? (How?)

Admittedly this happens to many other words (where meaning is lost rather than gained) but hey these three are keeping me occupied for now.

 *update: here are Jarrett's words upon this topic