3 ms·

> Look at books. Look at how little variation there is in presentation I look at a lot of books. I don't think you've summarized them well here. I suggest you

> Look at books. Look at how little variation there is in presentation I look at a lot of books. I don't think you've summarized them well here. I suggest you look at more yourself. You're missing a lot of beautiful art. That said, you're right that minimizing decoration and distraction is itself a treasured kind of expression enabled by independent publishing, set against a world where some six Lead Designers get to say precisely how everybody must read and see things this year. So I very much agree with your sentiment, but you happen to be doing a great injustice to books on your way to saying it. :)

cxr 2y ago
> I look at a lot of books. I don't think you've summarized them well here. I suggest you look at more yourself. You're missing a lot of beautiful art. This comment is pretty obnoxious. (I've stepped into a library, thanks.) For all the books that you're thinking of that don't fit the mold, when you put that set up against the set of those that do, it's not even close. I'm not talking about hypotheticals (i.e. the potential for stuff that could be made that deviates from the norm) or creative works that really exist but only at the margins (i.e. in small numbers by comparison). I'm talking about what people actually produce and consume in large numbers and the average experience for each context/form. There is undeniably a lot more homogeneity in books than blogs to a large degree. It's something like over a hundred or a thousand to 1.