May 24, 2004 | View Comments (36) | Category: Our Thoughts
Summary: Let's not go around critiquing the world, let's just go around thinking for ourselves.
Before this gets out of hand, which it probably already has, yesterday's post was not meant as a call to arms against the more recognized designers. It was not a call to openly critique everything out there in existence. I forget that many of you probably weren't around when the Zeldman thing happened, but going around critiquing personal sites in public without informing the individual is kind of not a nice thing to do.
Let's Be Honest was more for people to recognize that I think we have started to develop these heroes in our minds just because everyone praises everyone else. If you like them for your own reasons then that is good, but what good is it to say someone is good just because Zeldman or someone else linked to them? Being a designer is about solving problems to the challenges you face. The problem I am seeing is a lot of people are wondering how Shea, Bowman, Cederholm, Inman, Didier and many others would do it instead of thinking for themselves how they would solve the problem.
Yeah, I wish I could add some of the creativity that those guys do to their sites, but I find everytime I try to design like them things just get even worse. If one of those guys laid out a well-formulated argument as to why tables should be used over CSS then most people would simply just nod their head. Think.
Designers put their flesh and blood into their own sites and I am sure Cederholm and Shea would not contest that fact. As I mentioned in the post I wasn't critiquing or bashing either one of these leaders, but more bashing the people who forget that they have their own minds to think with.
If you like something then talk about it, if you don't like something don't just post it because everyone else is or you think it will get you brownie points. The independent web should have independent thinkers. Look at this list:
Content-wise it is hard to beat those individuals. Why? Because they offer something to the table that isn't just the same ol stuff. They are independent thinkers.
I have conversations with people who offer their own opinions and then I turn around and look at their site and they are saying something completely different. That's where the inspiration for the post came from. Let's Be Honest also means being honest with yourself. I don't care if you challenge someone's design, I care if we actually start challenging ideas.
So to reiterate. A personal site in public does not mean that you should openly criticize someone's design. Challenging the content and ideas is one thing, but going after the design is another. If you really have issues with the design send them an email. I get them all the time ;-) (If you have something and don't feel like sending me an email I don't mind if you post it in the comments as many have done already).
Cederholm and Shea are big dogs for a reason. Not because they say so (at least I have never heard them say it), but for what they have contributed to the community. No reason to think any less of them.
Finally, learn to be your own designer. Improve upon your own style. Back in the days 37Signals were my greatest inspiration and I drew upon them to help me develop my design persona. Do the same for yourself. If you want to start creating CSS sites, understand the positives and negatives. Just start doing stuff for yourself.
Trackback URL: http://9rules.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/249
So wait, are you suggesting that people shouldn't openly criticize the big dogs' websites in public, aka in their comments?
And if so, doesn't that then invalidate your original post, when you wondered why no one openly criticizes the big dogs? :)
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the general idea you're trying to get across is it's good form to openly dicuss/criticize content on someone's site, but if you've got a beef with their design it's better to take it up with the designer personally? If so, that sounds reasonable to me!
Rob Cameron (http://www.ridingtheclutch.com)
You did a lot of backtracking. I was quite happy with the original post.
I agree that if there's something you feel is wrong with someone's design, or you can help them - then by all means email them and help them out.
However, if you want to publicly say something about someone else's site, then by all means do that as well.
This is supposed to be a community, but if you criticize anyone.. it feels like everyone jumps on you and gags you to shut you up.
Robert Lofthouse
I wrote this entry because I was getting the feeling that a lot of people were just getting the idea that I was only talking about criticizing people in public. If you wanna do that to my site then have at it, but I am trying to warn people that they shouldn't expect such a warm invitation from others.
If you say something publicly and do so intelligently then to be honest I have no problem with that, but I know others do and thats between you and them. Everyone has their own rules and standards that they live by, but everyone should be able to freely think on their own.
So Robert if you openly critique someone I won't condemn you for it :-)
Scrivs (http://businesslogs.com)
"Let's not go around critiquing the world, let's just go around thinking for ourselves."
Sometimes thinking for ourselves means critiquing, sometimes it means agreeing, sometimes it means saying something out of the back of your head we never ever thought of before, but often times our original thoughts are a mixture of many other people's thoughts, just said slightly differently or apt for the occasion. After all we are influenced to one degree or another by everything we experience.
So 'thinking for ourselves' is not easy. It takes a lot of passion and reflection. I think that when we put our heart and soul into it then we can be said to be thinking for ourselves. Imho, what makes the most influential thinkers stand out is that they put their heart and soul into their work much more than Pat Average. It is not their words that are so influential, it is the passion behind them.
Peter
"The problem I am seeing is a lot of people are wondering how Shea, Bowman, Cederholm, Inman, Didier and many others would do it instead of thinking for themselves how they would solve the problem."
If that's the case then maybe they should find another profession. We all have influences, but there's no need to be a cover band! Your own style starts with a pencil and paper and grows as you become proficient in Photoshop or whatever your layout program of choice happens to be. CSS is only a tool for making that layout come to life. There's different methods I'm sure but until we have access to the psd's of those greats you mentioned, were all on our own and can only guess at best.
When designing a layout the last thing on my mind is the people mentioned above, or any other designer for that matter. If I happened to have learned something from these people along the way (and I have) then I'm sure some of that knowledge will end up in there some way or another. Theory, praise or homage should be thrown out the window the moment you open up photoshop, or pick up that pencil.
Same thing if I write a song. I'm a guitar player and I have been writing songs for nearly 18 years. Inspiration comes from many different sources. But when I'm in the zone and a song is taking shape, I have never said to myself: "How would Jimmy Page make this bridge work, what chords would he use?"; or, "Maybe I should add a little funk in the chorus and pay homage to the Chili Peppers." It never happens that way. What does happen is when the song is finished, some wise-ass who knows nothing about the process of writing a good song - and the art of combining your influences to create something unique - will invariably say something like: "It's good but don't you think that chorus sounds a lot like the Chili Peppers?"
I'm my worst critic (a cliche but true). If it passes my test then that's all that matters (besides what the client thinks). As far as public design critiques go, I only take them seriously if, 1) that person is a designer themselves, and 2) if that person has their own portfolio open to the public :)
Terry (http://www.xdevdesign.com/)
I don't think you know any more what you're actually saying, or why you're saying it. Someone mentioned backtracking. I agree.
What's the knub of the message that you're trying to convey? Seems like you are showing us something of your own that you haven't quite digested yet. That's okay, but you should expect people to be confused.
Let me simplify, see how it sits with you. There are certain web designers you're jealous of. They're big names. You wonder why you yourself aren't a big name. So you write about how it's not important to be a big name, how it's far better to think for yourself. But this only barely disguises your desire to be a big name. To top it all, you assume everyone else thinks like you. Then you invite criticism, but you don't like it.
Next topic, this one's lost the plot.
Joel (http://biroco.com/journal.htm)
The problem I am seeing is a lot of people are wondering how Shea, Bowman, Cederholm, Inman, Didier and many others would do it instead of thinking for themselves how they would solve the problem.
That, I think, is the one statement that is harming your post. Now, I agree that on the one hand, people automatically praise those who are the "head honchos" of webdesign, even if they make a bad decision. Thats stupid. Thats like when you get people that come on here and agree with everything You say just because you now have whitespace and the vault as becoming very popular websites.
However, I know when I build my sites or think of designs, one of the first places I scour is the Vault for inspiration, then I might bounce over to zeldman, simplebits, 7nights, etc..., but I have yet to think, "man, if I was in zeldman's shoes". I have his book, and I turn to it because its very informative.
But to be brutally honest about something, I think Zeldman is fading away. I just don't think he is at hot as he used to be. I mean, I go to his site and I feel like I am just looking at a mirror of alistapart. The one thing that is kinda annoying, especially among the bigwigs, is that when news comes out, whether its Blogger, Digital web redesign, or whatever, they all have to post about it and link to each other about it.
I guess thats fine because it helps search engines, it brings the community a little closer and it ties everyone together. But it doesn't take away from the fact that on a particular day, I find myself reading 6-7 postings all on the same subject. No offense, but there are redesigns everyday of websites, yet when Zeldman or Digital Web does it, its creates a stir among the community and its almost like if you were walking down the hall in 8th grade after an embarassing moment, everyone is whispering saying,
"Did you hear what Zeldman did", oh my....
I am not ragging on Zeldman, I think he is definitly of the elite, along with Shea, Keith, etc.. that is why I still frequent their websites everyday, because like you said Paul, they bring content that is original and that sets them apart.
Blah, I suck at writing sometimes. Unlike you, I find myself digging holes and putting together unformulated posts that are loose and sometimes can't tie all the material together, so for all of you who just read this post and said, HUH, I'm Lost. I am sorry :)
Bryan (http://www.juicedthoughts.com)
Eris -- Everything sounds like projection. But saying things sound like projection is a modern way of not actually thinking about what has been said on the grounds that it may just be an inner dialogue of the speaker and not actually a comment on the proposed topic. I don't see as that gets anyone anywhere, unless dialogue is to be perpetually reduced to points-scoring.
The only way anyone understands anything of value is through sharing of similar feelings and empathy. Do you think I do not understand Scriv's internal dialogue on this matter? How else would I recognise it if I had not to an extent felt it myself? Many people dismiss as projection truths they do not acknowledge in their own life. We can all play that game.
Joel (http://biroco.com/)
Joel, you don't who Scrivs really is. You read this website and you read what Paul writes in it, you read the views he wishes to express publicly, and you read between the lines of the text thinking to catch a glimpse of what he's really thinking.
I don't think you're adding much to this conversation by tearing him down, in fact, I think the subjects you're bringing up and the personal attacks you're making would be better served privately via email or IM.
This is a design weblog, let's keep it civil because remember, we're all in a happy community here :)
Mike (http://phark.typepad.com)
Mike -- I think you're missing the point I have made and how it relates to the discussion at hand, or are not particularly interested in it. You may wish to define the conversation as one thing, others may choose to define some other aspect of it. I don't mind plain speaking, and if people wish me to simply fuck off I'm happy enough with that, but don't dress it up or pretend that what I am bringing up is off-topic. You express your opinion, I express mine. I am not "tearing Scrivs down" at all, you are a little over-protective of the guy I think, or over-sensitive to plain speaking. I am simply pointing out that he is making his own personal issues sound as if they are topics to do with web design. Something, ironically, you are accusing me of. Perhaps you're projecting.
Joel (http://biroco.com/)
When I read "Let's Be Honest" I don't hear "it's okay to criticize the big dogs", and I think that you people who heard that are missing the points here.
1. Think for yourself.
2. Quit kissin ass.
3. Challenge the old to come up with something new and better.
He offers some opinions about brightcreative (which I disagree with ;-), but the most important thing there is "Nice site, I just wouldn't describe it as "probably the best entry thus far"." I totally agree, I was taken aback by that comment, too. I think Pauls' comments here applies to #2 above [1].
His comments about Cederholm, apply to #3: "Maybe I am just a little disturbed because a lot the sites I get for the Vault are Cederholm clones."
Hello? Look at the blog I write on. Though not in the vault, it has two columns and little arrows. I'll admit it, I didn't even think to do it differently until Scrivs posted this stuff (not yesterdays, but something a while back). Now I've got three headlines at the top, not exactly original either. I'm working on it.
Anyway, that was my take on this, and it works for me.
[1] Granted that poster may feel that BC *is* the best site in the vault, the whole "Everyone is quick with the praise" does exist.
Mike P. (http://www.fiftyfoureleven.com/sandbox/weblog/)
You're right... this topic has gone off the rails. Nothing of much worth is being discussed here.
Blogs come and blogs go. Big name designers come and go, just like anything else in life.
Don't over analyse this topic, which let's face it, is completely irrelevant to web design.
If you want to comment on others work, great. Some people will listen, others will not. Whoopee doo.
Andy.
Andy H
Matt Pennell's use of the phrase "blogroll circle-jerk" in comment #4 of the original "Let's Be Honest" article probably describes it best. To hell with "being in the club". If you don't like someone's site, say so, and say why.
Zeldman's design reminds me of my dad's old books; it looks old. Mezzoblue's big red header hurts my eyes, especially with the blue underneath. K10K's design has stuff littered everywhere, and introduces horizontal scrollbars on my screen (using 800x600).
On the other hand, I do like the current Playground Blues design, because it's pleasant to look at, slightly retro but in a way that appeals to me. I also like Redemption in a Blog's design, because it's light and nicely summery. Simplebits' design is also nice to look at, and I like the pixel style.
Yes, that's all subjective, but I'm damn well not gonna simply fawn over someone's design just because the flock is. That's no better than rushing out and buying the latest [insert manufactured pop chart act] single simply because everyone else is. However, if a "big name" does a design I like, I'll say I like it. It's not about status, it's about what people actually make.
I'm not a designer, just a reader, but that doesn't preclude me from sharing an opinion on which sites I like and dislike. If anyone doesn't want criticism of their site, they shouldn't put it on the web, period.
Zac
In the end the web is big enough for everyone. I don't really plan on working with these top names, I wouldn't really want to.
If you can't handle someone saying something about your web site, and you're going to have a little cry about it - then grow up.
I will make a name for myself, but not by making friends with the "big guys" - but by concentrating on my work. I prefer to look up to people like Jeremy Keith, Eric Meyer, Andy Budd, Keith, Eris and some less well known designers. Would I consider working with these people - yes. Why? because they don't have egos, they are inspiring and they don't fall apart when the going gets tough.
The web is a community, and as such you should expect things that happen in the real community. You can't hide behind your computer and pretend like everything is going to be happy and nice - it never will be.
Have I shot myself in the foot? - No.
Will I get upset/angry if someone ever puts my work down? - No.
Will saying something about a guru's work make me lose clients? - No, unless of course one of the clients is a supposed guru.
We're all designers, we all have opinions.
Was I using standards based design etc before I heard of Shea, Zeldman etc? - Yes I was, but some of the articles/books they have written have inspired me slightly along the way.
Comment on people's work intelligently. Using "sucks/shit/crap" in your comments is pointless. Aslong as you don't make yourself look like an idiot, then there's no reason why you shouldn't openly criticize peoples work - you don't need to email someone to do it - unless of course you want to.
Robert Lofthouse
"no reason why you shouldn't openly criticize peoples work - you don't need to email someone to do it - unless of course you want to."
Common courtesy, perhaps? I realize it's mostly out of fashion on the web, but it does have its benefits.
As for "the gurus," I think maybe Paul ascribes too much status to them. He often makes it sound as if we're all crowded before their front steps awaiting whatever crusts or small change they throw out to the poor peasants on the street. Almost like hero worship.
Maybe I'm unusual in this, but I don't even have them on my list. I'll read them when someone else links to them if it sounds interesting, much the same as any other site I don't read on a regular basis, but I don't fawn on them or read their every word as if it were chiseled on that third block of stone Moses dropped in History of the World, Part 1. Good designers? Sure! Entertaining or thought-provoking? Not often.
And that's more important to me. Being stuck with a captive audience that still uses Netscape 4.7 as much as anything newer, the latest nifty CSS tricks are somewhat academic to me, and I don't get to do anything really design related very often anyway, a site template here and there, 3 or 4 a year and mostly modelled on our existing sites. Mostly I build web applications, which need to be fairly utilitarian in appearance.
I'm sure there was a point in this, but I haven't had any caffeine yet, so I've probably lost it....
JC (http://thelionsweb.com/weblog)
[quote]Common courtesy, perhaps?[/quote]
I'll email Johnny Depp (my fave actor) letting him know what I thought of the secret window, and i'll email Metallica to let them know that in my next music review - i'll be pointing out how much they've gone downhill... for the past several years.
Ah, the joy of sarcasm.
I don't have any guru's on my "list" really, 'cept for Eric Meyer.
Robert Lofthouse
Robert, This is completely different than the scenario you just mentioned. If you want to have a discussion with your friends about someone else's website, then ya, no one needs to know about it. But to make your analogy correct, you would need to place them in the same market, since that is how the web design community goes.
The analogy should read like this. Johnny Depp comes out with a new movie, the secret window, and 2 months later, Steven Spielberg decides he is going to write a movie that does nothing but criticize the secret window through humor and sarcasm. As you can see, an email from Steve to Johnny would be welcomed I believe.
Either way, If someone was going to criticize me publicly, I would want to know about, not because I think you have to, I would just want to see what others are writing about my site because I welcome the criticism.
A man once told me a quote, "Those with talent, create. Those without, criticize." I am not sure I entirely believe this yet, but there are those that sit around and do nothing but rip apart other's work. I think that is all Scrivs is trying to prevent. In my humble opinion, it should be a requirement before you criticize something to openly offer yourself for criticism.
I liked Dave's post in the last entry however. Time is much better spent coming up with new design.
Josh Bryant (http://www.thescenicroute.org/weblog/)
I work for a music zine. We do not need permission to criticize someone's work, nor do we discuss it like we are "kids".
Have I ever criticized someones web site openly in detail? - No. Do I feel like I should be able to without permission if I ever wanted to? - yes.
Do you think if I criticize a large band, that they email me crying or saying that it wasn't nice? No, they just deal with it, because after all - they put their work out their, so that people could have an opinion.
I spend a lot of time working on my web design/development skills, I don't have time to rant on about everyone else's design in general, nor do I care.
The main point is - They're not gods, they're people - kiss their asses if you want, or put them down - either way, they should be able to handle it. I think it's a case of: People get so much praise that they flip out if anyone dares to say anything bad.
I also personally don't believe Johnny Depp would care that much if someone said anything bad about him, in most cases he probably has only ever read 10% of what people have wrote about him
Back onto the subject of web design. As I said, email them if you feel the need to, don't if you don't want to. If you want to help them about a technical aspect, then sure enough send them a few emails. If you just don't like a few parts of the design and feel the need to post it in your blog, then fair enough - aslong as you make a point.
As an old friend of mine once said - "It doesn't honestly matter what "person x" is doing, it only matters what you are doing. You don't get anywhere by worrying about what people say/do, and you don't spend all your time kissing people's asses".
You don't get anywhere by being 100% nice.
Robert Lofthouse
Noob alert: How do I go about looking at some of the design work of the previously mentioned:
Didier
Andrei
Shea
Budd
Keith
ChozSun
Make no mistake, people remember negative opinions about themselves much clearer than rave reviews.
hass (http://hass.spikehost.net)
I'm totally with Robert on this one. There's no reason for someone to keep their opinions about someone else's work private as long as those opinions are expressed in an intelligent and curteous manner. This remains true whether it be praise or criticism. Honestly I don't understand why praise is allowed in public while criticism is relegated to email.
However, the person dishing out the criticism or praise must realize that their words will be a reflection of how others perceive them. And *how* they express that opinion is just as important as the opinion itself.
Chris McDougall
As a sidenote, love the blue color palette for the WS logo, Paul. The red was nice, but I felt it was a little too warm.
Funny that the winning logo turned out EXACTLY like the one I was imagining for the contest. I just didn't bother to submit it.
Chris McDougall
This may be the biggest "duh" statment to be made all day but it seems people aren't bringing it up.
It's really sad when I hear about people who make sites and are worried more about if So-And-So likes it when client who actually paid for it is sitting in the cold. If the clients love and it's accomplishing it's goals than you did your job. Not when So-And-So puts it on thier site!
Also -- people who can't take criticism need to let the egos go, but not forget to listen. That's the best advice you're ever gonna get when it comes to design. If it's purely malicious, it's a different story and blogs don't neccessarily fit in the customer paid category so my whole rant may be pointless...
Would say more but #20 seemed to spell it out very well, great comment Robert.
Ritz (http://threesheetsmedia.com)
So here's the last thing I'll say about any of this:
1000 college students were given an aptitude test and their outcomes normalized (i.e., the mean score was converted to 100).
The same 1000 students were given the same test two weeks later, but asked to answer the questions *as a "genius" would*. The arithmetic mean score rose by over twenty points.
That's what heroes are for.
The whole point of holding some other designer in high regard is to try their mind on when addressing a design problem. It's the difference between imitation and emulation: how would Harley Earl solve this challenge? How would Zaha Hadid? How would Issey Miyake?
You internalize your heroes, and ideally, you move beyond what they were able to achieve, or you transplant one or another of their insights to a new context.
Critique is an inevitable and an invaluable part of the process. The (or one) problem is that 90% of what gets thrown around in these comments has nothing to do with honest critique.
Here's something important that Clay Shirky had to say on the topic:
"Go to any party -- architects, fashion designers, mathematicians -- and you'll hear the same thing, and usually so subtle, so sophisticated: 'Well, I enjoyed the piece, but I thought it was a little derivative', 'The building is interesting on its own terms, but it isn't very well integrated with the neighborhood.' Tiny sprinklings of corrosive doubt, offer by people gnawed by envy, and seized on by those made sick by over-exposure to quality.
So when my turn with the magic wand comes around, I'll use it to turn the snarkiness dial down, way down. Criticize, sure -- if something's bullshit, say so, and if you have an insight about how something might be better, sing it, and sing it loud. It is New York, after all. But when you feel yourself about to criticize something because you just can't stand how *good* it is (and you know you do this, we all do), at that moment, stop.
Stop, because it will turn you into the kind of small-minded champion of mediocrity we all came here to escape. Every day, you've got a choice -- am I gonna be one of the 45, or am I gonna be one of the 7 million. And being snarky about other people's good work ain't gonna help you with that."
And you know what? He's absolutely goddamn correct.
I now return you to your previously scheduled broadcast.
Adam Greenfield (http://www.v-2.org)
"That's what heroes are for."
or familiarity... You'd hardly expect their scores to go down. Not to mention that the second time, the test was probably taken more seriously.
Not to criticize the rest of your points, but that's a fairly dubious example.
JC (http://thelionsweb.com/weblog)
This is kids' stuff.
Scrivs, I expect better from your whitespace site.
Move on, and close these comments.
Bye.
Keith
Agreed, Keith.
People like Shea, Bowman, etc give fantastic advice about practical web design on their blogs. That's why people read 'em. Real, working web designers learn through them.
Here we seem to get pointless debates about crticizing other people's work.
Ever done anything in public guys? Get used to it.
Andy H.
Andy H
Andy,
There is more to "web design" than just the technological aspects. Whitespace shines light on these less discussed topics--people topics.
And I am sorry you failed to see the point of this discussion.
Hargreaves (http://www.uppercanadahockey.com/)
Damn, this might be the longest I have ever seen this site go without another post.
Everything all right Scrivs?
Bryan (http://www.juicedthoughts.com)
He's either:
A. Waiting for the community to calm down before he shows his face again :P he did post something and then back track after all... or
B. He's busy setting up his company - which is the most likely reason.
Robert Lofthouse
So, Paul, how about something new?
One of your great project management entries maybe?
Something about Content Managerment, and Content Delivery Planning? ;)
Phil Baines (http://www.wubbleyew.com/blog)
Keep track of comments to all entries with the Comments Feed
©2003-06 9rules, Inc. | Thoughts Feed | Notes Feed
Amazon Stores: Powertools | Jewelry | Books | Health | Landscaping | Kitchen | Movies
#1
Often the smaller voices we hear that are simply idle reflections of the big thinkers see no reason to think. They are like mirrors, feeding off the shining brilliance of the web "gods" -- it's enough to keep them happy.
People who comment on blogs like yours sometimes don't even have a web presence to voice their opinion, yet I can hear their independent thoughts on Whitespace. They may keep quiet, yet their thoughts are their own.
Hargreaves (http://www.uppercanadahockey.com/)