Being in the interior design business, I'm very conscious of holding on to two conflicting realities: 1. I think the services I provide are necessary and fundamental to human well-being, and that designing Beauty for someone's home is as necessary as a roof or plumbing. and 2. Interior design services, at least as they exist in today's society, are only for those who can afford them, i.e. they're a luxury, and therefore not as essential as a roof or plumbing. There are so many examples of Beauty and aesthetics being only for the wealthy. At times I yearn for them to become more of a common currency that everyone can value and enjoy.
I share this concern in my own business as an architect. As a way to make my knowledge available to those who can't afford my services, I maintain a blog on my website (https://www.cabarchitects.ca/blog) that covers a host of issues specific to my niche of the market. It's not a real replacement for what I do, so I have no fear that I'm losing any business. In fact, I use it as a tool to prime my clients on specific design issues in their projects, which helps things run more smoothly. At the same time, I've gotten feedback from people who aren't my clients that they've found it useful for their own purposes. So perhaps you could do something similar.
Thanks, Brian. I’m working on the such a document right now! Because of the internet people have low ball out-of-the-big-box price expectations, at least as far as furnishings go. They don’t know what else to consider beyond look and price. I too take to heart laying out the differences in quality, value and price for everyone.
Thank you for the insightful article, Michael. From your perspective, where are the ‘edges’ of aesthetic appeal? Let’s take the public transit example and expand upon it just a bit. If a subway system undergoes substantial investments that yield meaningfully enhanced safety, reliability, and timelines, but the stations and trains look no different to the traveling public than they did prior to the improvements, is the system not more beautiful than it it was previously? If that same transit system next lowers its ticket fees to become more accessible to the full spectrum of the population it serves, but still appears physically identical to the eye of passengers, is is not more aesthetically appealing to those whom the fee change benefits most?
Aesthetics complements other efforts. If there's a problem with a transit system, it is likely not just one problem, even if one seems to be worse than the others. If fares are lowered and efficiency increases, that may be enough for people to use it more. But what if we also made it more attractive? Unless the aesthetics change, we wouldn't say it is more 'aesthetically' appealing; we would simply say it is more appealing.
Absolutely perfect article! Thank you for the perspective.
Thank you for reading!
Being in the interior design business, I'm very conscious of holding on to two conflicting realities: 1. I think the services I provide are necessary and fundamental to human well-being, and that designing Beauty for someone's home is as necessary as a roof or plumbing. and 2. Interior design services, at least as they exist in today's society, are only for those who can afford them, i.e. they're a luxury, and therefore not as essential as a roof or plumbing. There are so many examples of Beauty and aesthetics being only for the wealthy. At times I yearn for them to become more of a common currency that everyone can value and enjoy.
I share this concern in my own business as an architect. As a way to make my knowledge available to those who can't afford my services, I maintain a blog on my website (https://www.cabarchitects.ca/blog) that covers a host of issues specific to my niche of the market. It's not a real replacement for what I do, so I have no fear that I'm losing any business. In fact, I use it as a tool to prime my clients on specific design issues in their projects, which helps things run more smoothly. At the same time, I've gotten feedback from people who aren't my clients that they've found it useful for their own purposes. So perhaps you could do something similar.
Thanks, Brian. I’m working on the such a document right now! Because of the internet people have low ball out-of-the-big-box price expectations, at least as far as furnishings go. They don’t know what else to consider beyond look and price. I too take to heart laying out the differences in quality, value and price for everyone.
Thank you for the insightful article, Michael. From your perspective, where are the ‘edges’ of aesthetic appeal? Let’s take the public transit example and expand upon it just a bit. If a subway system undergoes substantial investments that yield meaningfully enhanced safety, reliability, and timelines, but the stations and trains look no different to the traveling public than they did prior to the improvements, is the system not more beautiful than it it was previously? If that same transit system next lowers its ticket fees to become more accessible to the full spectrum of the population it serves, but still appears physically identical to the eye of passengers, is is not more aesthetically appealing to those whom the fee change benefits most?
Aesthetics complements other efforts. If there's a problem with a transit system, it is likely not just one problem, even if one seems to be worse than the others. If fares are lowered and efficiency increases, that may be enough for people to use it more. But what if we also made it more attractive? Unless the aesthetics change, we wouldn't say it is more 'aesthetically' appealing; we would simply say it is more appealing.