There was a point, a while ago, where drawing the line between Design and Art Direction was all the rage amongst design bloggers. If you read that link consider

There was a point, a while ago, where drawing the line between Design and Art Direction was all the rage amongst design bloggers. If you read that link considering this particular distinction (that is, Design as opposed to Art Direction), the impression it gives is that the author is considering function, yes, but not preaching anything about style. To be sure: he chose a minimalist ("under-designed") webpage on purpose to make a point. To wit: well-crafted Design (as opposed to Art Direction) can produce a User Experience orders of magnitude better than beautiful Art Direction that's not functionally tied to the content it surrounds. EDITed to add: In fact, at no point does the author say that minimum is preferrable to flamboyant. What he says in his conclusion section, rather, is: "Design without context is not design. It’s noise." That is: form without function is not design, and in fact it adds noise to the overall message. Another EDIT: I stand corrected about the definition of Art Direction. It is so much more than just the bling, and it's also supposed to be functional. But "pointless bling is noise" is still how I read the original article. Here's a nice link on Art Direction vs Design: http://www.alistapart.com/articles/art-direction-and-design/ http://www.alistapart.com/articles/art-direction-and-design/