DesignAddict Forums


	> Edit your post


	title of this thread your message Persons on this board often complain that a product is all bling and no substance, OR they talk about the rigor of a design and the quality with which it was made. Question: Can't we have substance AND bling? Designer/engineers ought to be able to do both. Afterall, doing both is just a design/engineering problem, isn't it? If I were to come to you and say design me an XYZ; then gave you the following constraints--rigorous and innovative design, high material and construction quality, and lots of bling--a good designer could give me this couldn't he/she? There is nothing intrinsically mutually exclusive about substance and bling, is there? It occurs to me that some of the designers that are most admired, like Charles Eames, produced substance AND bling. His products were often brilliantly conceived, exceptionally well built, apparently with a useful life approaching the half life of radioactive waste, and full of bling (in the sense of being exhuberantly stylish). But there is also less exhuberant bling than the Eames. Hans Wegner understood that one of his thorough exercises in leaving things out required some restrained bling to keep his work from looking like a hollowed out Presbyterian church pew. And there is bling that is narrowly affordable that it becomes a standard of aristocratic taste. Think Rolls Royce here in preceding generations. Think Bentley today. These vehicles have always had bling to go along with their fantastic prices and high quality of materials and long lives. associated web images (optional) associated web link (optional) your email your password create a forums account \| you forgot your password?