4 ms·

This guy is good at baiting the clicks, but I'm not sure why his opinion holds weight. He's got a pretty average looking website & logo, and isn't really know f

This guy is good at baiting the clicks, but I'm not sure why his opinion holds weight. He's got a pretty average looking website & logo, and isn't really know for his work in any design circles..

lachiephilipson 10y ago
I don't understand this sentiment; one mustn't have mastery over a field to be critic of it.
- tvanantwerp 10y ago
  But it would help. The web is full of critics who themselves couldn't hope to achieve what they call out as mediocre. All I've learned from this series of blogs is that forward slashes are bad. Criticism without showing a better alternative is so pervasive and so draining. Teddy Roosevelt put it well: "It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat."
  - coldtea 10y ago
    >But it would help. Not necessarily -- it actually could hurt. A lot of masters are too self absorbed in their own work and own preferences to have a wider appreciation of the field -- and especially to appreciate a valid style that's nonetheless against their own aesthetics. That's what a critic is supposedly above. Plus, for them there are always potential issues of rivalry and personal interests at play (since they compete for the same gigs with people they criticize).
  - TheOtherHobbes 10y ago
    That's not what this kind of criticism is for. It's not just an excuse to say "That sucks." It's about pointing that there may be alternatives to beliefs, customs, and cliches that have become accepted as standards. I don't always agree with Schiff, but it's always good to have a voice that calls out industry standard trends and doesn't just assume they're worth following because everyone else follows them. There's too much of that in corporate design, and a dissenting view is welcome.
- erikb 10y ago
  Yes but people who value a field will put effort into achieving something more than mediocricity in it.
y7 10y ago
This is where critical reading comes in.
coldtea 10y ago
Lester Bangs and Greil Marcus aren't known for their music either. And the former had an average sounding LP out.
- lobo_tuerto 10y ago
  It's not the same being good at something than being known.
  - coldtea 10y ago
    Technically no, but "known for X" is also used as a stand-in for "person is good at X".
    - lobo_tuerto 10y ago
      But we know better, don't we? ;) Stand-ins aren't always correct. There be fallacies, beware.
      - coldtea 10y ago
        This reminds me of: http://www.cheerupemokid.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/2015-05-28_rescue.png http://www.cheerupemokid.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/2015...

This guy is good at baiting the clicks, but I'm not sure why his opinion holds weight. He's got a pretty average looking website & logo, and isn't really know for his work in any design circles..

lachiephilipson 10y ago

I don't understand this sentiment; one mustn't have mastery over a field to be critic of it.

tvanantwerp 10y ago
But it would help. The web is full of critics who themselves couldn't hope to achieve what they call out as mediocre. All I've learned from this series of blogs is that forward slashes are bad. Criticism without showing a better alternative is so pervasive and so draining. Teddy Roosevelt put it well: "It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat."
- coldtea 10y ago
  >But it would help. Not necessarily -- it actually could hurt. A lot of masters are too self absorbed in their own work and own preferences to have a wider appreciation of the field -- and especially to appreciate a valid style that's nonetheless against their own aesthetics. That's what a critic is supposedly above. Plus, for them there are always potential issues of rivalry and personal interests at play (since they compete for the same gigs with people they criticize).
- TheOtherHobbes 10y ago
  That's not what this kind of criticism is for. It's not just an excuse to say "That sucks." It's about pointing that there may be alternatives to beliefs, customs, and cliches that have become accepted as standards. I don't always agree with Schiff, but it's always good to have a voice that calls out industry standard trends and doesn't just assume they're worth following because everyone else follows them. There's too much of that in corporate design, and a dissenting view is welcome.
erikb 10y ago
Yes but people who value a field will put effort into achieving something more than mediocricity in it.

y7 10y ago

This is where critical reading comes in.

coldtea 10y ago

Lester Bangs and Greil Marcus aren't known for their music either. And the former had an average sounding LP out.

lobo_tuerto 10y ago
It's not the same being good at something than being known.
- coldtea 10y ago
  Technically no, but "known for X" is also used as a stand-in for "person is good at X".
  - lobo_tuerto 10y ago
    But we know better, don't we? ;) Stand-ins aren't always correct. There be fallacies, beware.
    - coldtea 10y ago
      This reminds me of: http://www.cheerupemokid.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/2015-05-28_rescue.png http://www.cheerupemokid.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/2015...