I started off at art school wanting to be a painter.
But my problem was the subjectivity of the whole thing.
How do you know if a painting’s any good, who decides?
Van Gogh was treated as a fool in his lifetime, and died a pauper.
Never sold a painting to a gallery and couldn’t get an exhibition.
Yet after he died the same paintings were suddenly considered genius and worth millions.
Who decides and how?
What are the rules?
Well, quite simply there aren’t any.
Whether a painting is any good or not is decided by a small, influential, group of critics and gallery owners.
So, if you’re a painter, their subjectivity decides your ability.
I didn’t like this.
It was like playing football with no rules, and the referee deciding who he preferred, on whatever grounds he chose.
So, when I went to New York, I switched to advertising.
I decided that at least, that way, millions of ordinary people in the street would decide whether I was any good or not.
And, while I was there, I made friends with a lot of guys studying Industrial Design.
We talked a lot about what they did on their courses, and I learned a lot.
I thought what they did was a lot closer to advertising than painting was.
Painting was a one-off object designed to hang in galleries and be viewed, considered, pondered over, and interpreted by the cultural elite.
Industrial Design was in three dimensions, advertising was in two dimensions, but both were about the mass production of an idea.
Both had to be able to work in the real world, not just an art gallery.
Both had to be about cost, and return on investment.
Both would be judged by how they performed against measurable criteria, not just whether they pleased half a dozen critics.
I’d never heard of The Bauhaus before these guys told me about it.
But one particular Bauhaus maxim flipped the light switch on in my head.
FORM FOLLOWS FUNCTION.
The most important word being “follows”.
Written in a less alliterative way, that would read, “Every part of the eventual design must have a reason, or it shouldn’t be there.”
Suddenly, anyone could take any piece of design or advertising apart and analyse it.
I loved the anti-elitism of it.
I loved the way we could lift up the bonnet and demand to know why something was there, and what it did.
This became my mantra, and over the years I’ve never deviated from it.
And yet, and yet…
One evening I was discussing this with the designer Richard Seymour.
He wasn’t quite as black and white about it as I was.
He said to me “Yes Dave, but form can be emotional function.”
In other words, a pleasing shape can also fulfill a purpose.
Just by being pleasing.
I wasn’t having it.
But, because of how much I respect Richard as a designer and a thinker, it stayed in my brain.
I know I can learn a lot about what I do, just from listening to him talk about what he does.
And then I found this extract from the diary of a British colonel, who was amongst the first to liberate a Nazi concentration camp in 1945.
“It took a little time to get used to seeing men, women, and children collapse as you walked by them and to restrain oneself from going to their assistance. One had to get used early to the idea that the individual just did not count. It was shortly after the British Red Cross arrived, though it may have no connection, that a very large quantity of lipstick arrived. This was not at all what we men wanted, we were screaming for hundreds and thousands of other things: food and medical equipment, and I don’t know who asked for lipstick. I wish so much that I could discover who did it; it was the action of genius, sheer unadulterated brilliance. I believe nothing did more for those internees than the lipstick. Women lay in bed with no sheets and no nightie but with scarlet red lips, you saw them wandering about with nothing but a blanket over their shoulders, but with scarlet red lips. I saw a woman dead on the post mortem table and clutched in her hand was a piece of lipstick. At last someone had done something to make them individuals again, they were someone, no longer merely the number tattooed on the arm. At last they could take an interest in their appearance. That lipstick started to give them back their humanity.”
And my world shifted a little bit.
It seems I was wrong.
Form can be emotional function.
RSS Feed
Twitter
Email
Thats a brilliant story! Thanks for sharing! Really makes you think about things in a different way
Not too often one follows reading a blog post
by retreating into silence.
Ciaran
Yes. Very emotional. Made me cry.
‘It was like playing football with no rules, and the referee deciding who he preferred, on whatever grounds he chose.’
So who decides whether an ad is good or not? Is it the effectiveness of the ad or the amount of creative awards it picks up? Again it’s all very subjective.
You state:
‘I decided that at least, that way, millions of ordinary people in the street would decide whether I was any good or not.’
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/feb/03/dairycrestgroup-sexpistols
This campaign is judged to be a great success, yet creatively it has been lambasted. It was even a Turkey in Campaign. The client seems happy and the public obviously took to it.
Flip that again and we have creative awards that reward pieces that were either scams or barely noticed by the general public, yet they get lauded. Of course Sergio Zyman has been writing about this in the not so distant past.
Like every creative industry what is considered good and bad is widely open to debate.
Great post by the way Dave. Puts all our little debates into perspective.
Humans live on their emotions. Emotions have shaped our past and they will guide our futures. Science had us fooled for a time that rationality was what counted, but the numbers didn’t add up. It turns out 85 per cent of all our decisions are emotional ones. We work on intuitions and feelings. That’s why people often buy a car because of its colour rather than its performance specs. It’s why an over-sized gorilla built out of ones and zeros can bring tears to the eyes. And why Disney is patenting a device that selects songs according to your moods. Look out - more industrial-strength emotion coming through.
Dave,
Maybe you should move on to William Morris: ‘Have nothing in your houses that you do not know to be useful, or believe to be beautiful.’
Swap ‘houses’ for ‘life’ and you’re away.
Matt beat me to it.
Was going to say, these days, advertising’s a bit like ad.
What’s good is often so subjective.
And increasingly, folks don’t understand the ads that win awards.
And sometimes, we don’t understand what makes a piece of work award-worthy.
http://ex-blank-page.blogspot.com/2009/02/in-reply-to-daves-great-posts-8.html
Matt and Ian,
Yes, that’s a recent occurrence.
Awards have now assumed the sort of dictatorial dominance that the little group of art critics used to have. Shame really.
Ben.
I love that quote so much I’ll nick it.
John,
Hume said, “Reason is motivationally inert” and I’m sure that’s true, but some people, like me, get very passionate about reason.
So reason becomes emotion.
It seems to me to work best when WHAT you do (product) is reason, HOW you do it (brand) is emotion.
Sorry Ian!
Slow day in the office, I’m usually the last to get to comment.
Interesting point by John W. We can have stronger emotional attachments to animated characters on a big screen than we would to our family members.
John,
“It turns out 85 per cent of all our decisions are emotional ones”,
…but 85% of all our options are based on reason.
Dave I’m interested to know how you feel about awards?
Do you feel effectiveness is overlooked in creative awards? Do you feel it’s right to have separate awards for effectiveness and creativity?
Matt.
I think awards are a bit of fun, and they’re nice to get.
The problem is when everyone treats them as the truth.
If this was the olympics, the first across the line would be the fastest.
the winner would be the best, no argument.
But it isn’t that way anywhere that a jury’s involved.
Awards are voted on.
And that makes them just other people’s opinions.
Brilliant post Dave, absolutely brilliant.
I’ve criticised you before, without the balls to leave my real name. Something that often irks me is that I feel you quote a passage or an individual simply to display your intellectual prowess. Not this time however. Fantastic post, which transcends advertising, and such a beautiful moving & well used extract at the end.
Obviously you don’t need to be told by me, and your achievements are testament to this, but your style of writing is remarkable and so easy to read.
I have criticised in the past & probably will again, but in the same way you only every boo a great footballer, ultimately it’s a sign of respect & envy.
Hi Jamie,
I do quote other people, but that’s probably to give myself credibility.
I failed my 11+ exam and 13+ exam then went to a school where all we could read was comics by the time we left school at 15.
Then I got turned down by 7 art schools.
So I probably overcompensate.
I quote clever people to prove I’m not stupid.
Bit harsh on yourself there lad, I’ve always thought your quoting other people was in the spirit of Montaigne, who said:
“I quote others only in order the better to express myself.”
Ciaran
On the subject of art being subjective, has anyone seen that fascinating documentary ‘My Kid Could Paint That?’ It’s all about this 4-year old supposed child art prodigy in the States, whose pictures start selling for up to $25,000. It’s really interesting in that it makes you think hard about how you come to think whatever you think about a piece of art. It’s hard to view the work itself separate from outside factors (who painted it, what the critics think about it, how much it’s worth/on sale for).
Dave - on the advertising awards vs. Olympics comparison: but certain events are kind of voted on - ie marks out of ten from judges on gymnastics. So they’re kind of subjective aren’t they?
Dave/Ben -
Did you know that William Morris quote is over the doorway as you walk into the furniture department in Heals? Great use of a quote, eh?
Dave
Is it possible to be in love with reason? What happens when reason - or the culture of reason - doesn’t love us back?
If we keep on wanting to pull back the curtain will we miss out on the magic?
John,
That question is like zen koan:
“Is it possible to feel emotional about reason? What happens when reason doesn’t feel emotional back?”
I guess what happens is we learn to be detatched from emotion.
That doesn’t mean having no emotions.
It means we have them, they don’t have us.
Dave,
I guess we sometimes have to quit the hippy shit. Strap on a helmet. And start shooting!
Ah, the William Munny option.
…it’s just that we both have got scars.
anca:
…but 85% of all our options are based on reason.
Sorry, what does that even mean?
great story again Dave. I been quoted you recently a lot, in the hope I sound smart….
oh god. typo in last comment. Not too smart if I can’t spell…
Let’s hear it for the never ending surprises of the human mind!
Wonderful post. Thank you.
Thanks Matt.
Because of the time difference and depending when Dave blogs, I’m sometimes one of the first to reply.
Glad you share the same sentiments re: awards.
Sad it’s become so contagious.
I used to buy magazines for the ads I liked.
And it just occurred to me that so many of the good ads never won awards.
Jeremy,
Re “85% of our decisions are based on emotion, but 85% 0f our options are rational”
I take it to mean that we use reason to get us in the ball park of what we should do, then we use emotion to choose our preference.
So, first off I figure (rationally) that I need a car.
Then I figure (rationally) what sort of car.
Finally I figure (emotionally) which brand I want.
Of course that isn’t always true in all cases.
FMCGs are probably more emotional than rational choices.
But it may well apply more to consumer durables.
Especially distress purchases.
It’s an interesting debate.
I hate the way so many people talk about purchasing decisions as if people create a value / quality chart in their head and combine it with a brand preference diagram.
Great post. I think a lot of people will be intrigued by the notion of you admitting being wrong!
Dave
Thanks for the latest reasoned exchange. It’s been emotional.
Rob,
Dave didn’t actually admit to being wrong, just to having given the impression of being wrong.
I wonder is Socrates reading this blog somewhere?
Ciaran
Dave, even when we talk about FMCG, it’s reason that leads to the existence of those options in the first place:
There’s no rational explanation behind people’s preference for one type of chocolate or another. But if I’m the manufacturer, be sure there’s a rational reason behind my decision to make chocolate. Most people love chocolate. First of all, their “love” has a biological explanation: chocolate contains theobromine, the primary alkaloid in cocoa, which leads to that mood-elevating effect. Also, chocolate contains tryptophan – precursor to serotonin. Oh well, serotonin is necessary for the modulation of anger, aggression, body temperature, mood, sleep, sexuality, appetite and metabolism – the lower the serotonin level, the worse the human body functions. So… the fact that people need chocolate from time to time is not really an emotional thing…, only the brand choice is emotional – which sends us back to Dave’s theory about consumer durables, it seems there’s no difference.
But let’s forget about chemistry/biology, let’s assume even the need to eat chocolate is emotional. The very fact that most people love chocolate is a rational reason for me as a manufacturer to make chocolate. If the statistics showed that most people were allergic to chocolate, be sure I wouldn’t invest in this industry. So the simple presence of chocolate on the market (which constitutes an option for consumers) is reason-based.
Matt.
I think there’s a really interesting article on awards in today’s Guardian.
It concerns Ryan Giggs, but I think we can draw some parallels with advertising.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/2009/feb/17/ryan-giggs-footballer-of-the-year-award
Ciaran.
Ah yes, semantics indeed.
Rob
Dave
You beat me to it with Giggsy. How could I have let that happen?! Also, I hope I don’t sound too sycophantic but I’d just like to say hats off to your blog being bigged up in the Sunday Times. With so many so called leaders about it’s a real pleasure to exchange thoughts with the real deal. Long may it continue.
Thanks John.
I only got the Giggs article because Nick Wray (the only man in the world with 3 season tickets to Old Trafford) sent it to me.
I’m more The Sun than The Guardian.
…and Ben was reading the Sunday Times.
It’s good to get an all round take on things though.
I think Anca might just have stirred the pot again.
Ciaran and Rob,
There’s website http://www.thinkBuddha.org where they want to respond to the atheist bus campaign: “God probably doesn’t exist. So just enjoy your life.”
They want bus posters that say:
“Neither an entity nor a nonentity moves in any of the three ways. So motion, bus and route are nonexistent.”
Just picking up from another thread Dave, I wonder what that cabbie is thinking and I use that word loosely, about ‘Arry Redknap being at Spurs?!
I had a double take there once. Just before the game out came Warren Mitchell, a Spurs fan, who went straight into Alf Garnett mode for the Man Utd fans, ‘Bloody Man U. Get back to Manchester etc etc’. We jested back that we all lived in London.
Warren Mitchell is a Spurs’ fan?
I thought all Spurs’ fans had to drive a cab, play golf, and live in Ilford, by law.
Dave,
Sounds like a good excuse not to turn up at work and as a result miss out on all these online deeply intellectual discussions.
Ciaran
Is that opposed to ‘ammers fans who drive golfs, dream of getting cabs and live in Walford?
That should go into the bus slogan generator Dave.
Of course, Dave, that’s also opposed by Man United fans who nick golfs, don’t pay in cabs and who have upped sticks to Watford.
Wasn’t it Noel Gallaher who said, “I tell all United fans, all that money you spend on petrol driving up and down the M1 is going into our transfer kitty.”
(Oops, sorry Jamie, it just slipped out.)
Wasn’t it Liam Gallagher who said “you sonuva…mm.ugg..grr…” when United invariably win.
Cheers for that link Dave, nice article. It’s always amazed me that Giggsy and especially Scholes have been overlooked.
Actually, my cousin is starting to break through into the united team (Jonny Evans) so it gives me a lot more satisfaction watching them go on their run of late. Nice to see him do well (jammy bastard!)
I loved the quote:
When it was put to Tony Bennett that he had not enjoyed many hits, the singer replied: “No, but I like to think I’ve got a hit catalogue.”
Here’s hoping I have something akin to this when I look back on my career.
Bloody hell, that’s amazing Matt (that Jonny Evans is your cousin). How do you feel when you see him playing? I ask because I’m very vaguely related to Jermaine Defoe (my cousin is married to his cousin) and every time I see him play I feel a strange combination of ridiculous pride and total jealousy.
Any other readers of Dave’s blog tenuously related to sports stars?
This is a wonderful post, Dave. Given the importance of emotion in any purchase decision, affirming its position as as aspect of Function is critical. Distorting its importance can be fatal but so can distorting any other aspect of Function. Thanks, as always, for a great insight.
No but Nemanja Vidic and I both have a brother called Dusan. Does that count?
Is that THE Dragana Hartley?
My sister briefly went out with Wesley Brown.
That’s the closest I ever got to being related to a sports star, if you can call him that, Ant. My step father was in the crowd scenes of This Sporting Life. I went to the same school at the same time as Scholesy. Is that tenuous enough?!
We had a producer at BMP (Jean Rayment) who had been Barking Carnival Queen, riding around in a Zodiac convertible in a bathing suit.
She went out with Bobby Moore, before he was famous, who took her to the Ilford Palais.
Billy Walker (later to be British Heaveyweight Champion) was the bouncer, and he had to throw Terry Venebles out for getting drunk and getting up on the stage and singing.
Another tenuous link Ant and John.
At GGT we had a producer (Di Croll) who grew up next door to the Krays in Stepney, and her dad used to go drinking with their brother Charlie.
Being of a wooded persuasion and my partner a Richards I was briefly related to Ronnie and Keith of The Stones. They had just arrived in New York for a major tour and at JFK we blagged an upgrade on the back of it.
It is indeed me, Dave. Have just discovered your blog thanks to the S Times. Reminds me of happy days in Broadwick Street doing the Daily Mail Masterquiz ! Great to see that you haven’t lost any of your ability to provoke.
I’m about as far away from all that as you can imagine; currently typing this in a small, book-lined room overlooking a Cotswold graveyard…but that’s another story. Big hugs to you all.
wanna buy a book dave?
http://theescapepod.wordpress.com/2009/02/17/dave-trott-we-got-your-book-right-here/
A fine homage, Vinny. And another fine example of form being emotional function? I bet its form made Dave emotional…
Mr Trott,
Just saw “your book” on Vinny’s blog.
You should publish one.
Take it from me, I know what people want, I am in advertising
That book looks great.
You know, if you want to make a book in a limited run, and maybe sell a few, you could do worse than using blurb:
http://www.blurb.com/uk/?ce=google_eu_brand&gclid=CL6Ro7jn5ZgCFQ6wQwodZmwecg
Ant.
It’s incredibly surreal - he used to come round to ours to watch the utd games as a kid, as he didn’t have Sky Sports!
Very odd but we’re all proud of him - his younger brother plays for the reserves (unfortunately the footballing gene decided to skip me).
He also made his international debut when Northern ireland beat Spain 3 - 2 (Healy hat-trick). That was a great night.
It’s nice to see good people rewarded for hard work and dedication to a craft (which I suppose is also true of advertising awards).
Dave, re your comment on art:
What are the rules?
Well, quite simply there aren’t any.
Isn’t that part of the whole joy of art?
John - you went to school with the ginger wizard? Not bad. But I think the producer who got taken to the Ilford Palais by Bobby Moore is the winner, surely?
On a boxing tip, I once lent Lloyd Honeyghan a quid for parking and Michael Watson is a regular at my local cafe in Stoke Newington (I’ve never had the bottle to go up and speak to him though).
William Morris: ‘Have nothing in your houses that you do not know to be useful, or believe to be beautiful.’
thanks ben, i told my wife your quote and she changed the locks.