Uncreative Design

Week 5 Discussion Questions

In shifting critical focus away from the author’s supposed intention to readership and the act of the interpretation, I can’t help but consider the boon this must have been to theorists and structuralists like Barthes and Foucalt. They did, after all, give themselves permission to continue their own line of thinking.

Calling a level-headed addendum to an essay about authorship “Fuck Content” seems like a strikingly well realized form for content (Rock’s essay), right? He goes on to imply that content can never be formless: “form without content (as if that were even possible)” Can anything be formless?

Consider what Rock implies about form and content the following quote: “The children’s book is the purest venue of the designer/author because the content is negligible and the evocative potential of the form unlimited” What does he mean? Is form being somehow equivocated to illustration? Is the opportunity to be didactic conducive towards pliable form?