Times are a changing, how much and for how long its hard to say. This is the second “green” revolution, the other was back in 73 and it also was coupled to a short nasty ressession/stagflation. The last one did change things for a while, but people are people, they like stuff so a lot of good work languished.

I will figure out how put up some of my stuff. The majority of it will be a combination of ID, PDD and invention if thats ok with you.

So – re the synonyms of “unobtrusive”. Yes, I have a dictionary and Thesaurus and I teach English (advanced) so we needn’t argue the list’s contents. But it’s actually rare in English to find two words with identical meanings (true synonyms). Words are more often similar or related. So that list represents words that are similar, some more than others. It isn’t reasonable to expect “unobtrusive” to be interpreted as equal to ALL the words in the list – it can equal (or be similar to) any of them depending on circumstances. Of the list, “noticeable” and “obvious” seem perfectly reasonable things for a GOOD design to be. In fact, I think almost all good designs are so “obvious” that one wonders why the design wasn’t thought of before!

As to Dubai – yes sorry, I do accept it is the Las Vegas of the Middle East, so a tasteless choice! (I should have used Egyptian pyramids as a n example, instead. Now they’re good really design – and I say they’re both obvious and noticeable, so ot unobtrusive!) But I still say that some of their skycrapers scream for attention, they don’t whisper! One doesn’t have to check the details to be amazed, each of the buildings (several) just standsout and demand attention. So I’ll go back to the two synonyms of “obvious” and “noticeable” and say, what’s wrong with that?

Going back to the start – it wasn’t Zippy’s list of 10 rules for good design that he published, it was someone else’s. I just challenged one point in the 10 and then said that “unobtrusive” isn’t (to me) a necessary rule. More, I even suggested that Zippy’s designs probably include things that can be interpreted as “obtrusive” – in a good sense (i.e. noticeable or obvious), so I wasn’t criticising Zippy or his work.

So this all boils down to what “unobtrusiveness” means and we’ve already seen it can mean “not obvious” or “not noticeable” and I’m simply saying that I think many good designs can indeed be either obvious (a Lamborghini in amongst a group of other cars) or noticeable (Zebra Crossings with their associated Baleisha Beacon’s – they are effective only because they are noticeable!). So what’s the problem?

As to the ”I want ones of those” quote and the view that the sooner we change the word ‘want’ for ‘need’ the better, I understand the point. In a business justification sense, needs have value whereas wants do not. However, take the iPod. Well it’s hardly a need is it? Which poor person in some third world country has a dire necessity for an iPod? (And by the way, Apple may not shout about themselves but they sure do make sure that the iPod is shouted about! Each new launch is carefully stage managed to ensure such.). Our world’s full of good designs for objects we simply do not need but lots of us certainly do want. Ecologically, we will be better of if we stop making and recycle all the products we don’t need (please start with chewing gum and outdoor heaters) but I expect it’ll be a cold day in hell before we see that happen.

Chau.