John Maeda’s Laws: A group reflects on “The Laws of Simplicity”
One of our weekly requirements for “Time, Motion and Communication” is to read sections of John Maeda’s, “The Laws of Simplicity” and post our thoughts.
What follows are the collected refelections of our group.
Laws 1 & 2:
Brad:
Response to Law 1: Reduce
While reading this chapter, I couldn’t help but think about the newest laptop redesigns by Apple. They have recently adopted a few of the ideas that are talked about in this chapter, such as the clamshell bevels from the Shrink phase. Apple also used some ideas from the Embody phase, their new unibody enclosure means that the laptop was milled out of one piece of aluminum. This brings up quality materials and craftsmanship. I think the balance of what he talks about in this chapter is key. It reminds me of this quote by David Carson,“There’s a very thing line between simple and clean and powerful,
and simple and clean and boring.” — David CarsonResponse to Law 2: Organize
His first example in this chapter sort of dates the book, where he talks about the real estate market booming. I read these two chapters before we came to class and started brainstorming about ideas, and it sort of helped me come to my favorite idea for the project. His SLIP system would probably be the best way for our group to work with our idea. It also makes me want to start doing this with my schedule so that I can be most efficient when working on my homework. I was happy to find that the squinting method is so popular! (I can’t remember who taught it to me)
Rick:
One of the things I find most exciting about John Maeda is that here is a left-brained thinker in a traditional right-brained field. So when reading his Laws of Simplicity, I was happy to find his style of writing bridged the gap between those two worlds. After all, writing about a topic that both artists and engineers would find valuable isn’t the easiest of tasks.
For instance, his first law, Reduce, is something we deal with on a daily basis, but if its not understood by both the designer as well as the engineer, it’s a simple law that is doomed to fail. However, that being said even the most eloquent of reduced designed controls can still be a challenge for some audiences to navigate, no matter how simple the solution.
For instances, my neighbors purchased a new television and game system for Christmas, but were constantly complaining about having to pull out the TV, disconnect the DVD player and hook up the Wii every time the kids wanted to play, and then having to reverse the process when they were done.
During the design process, the number of RCA jacks on the back of the television had been reduced while a new set had been added to the front of the set for quick connection of game systems. Unfortunately, what was obvious to myself, a small door cut into the front decorative modeling of the TV, was a well-hidden feature to my neighbors. One can only imagine the wear and tear to their floors if I hadn’t pointed out the easy access jacks on the front of the set.
So, while reduction is good design, hiding it is not. Which brings us to John’s second law; Organize.
I think his example of the iPod controls hits the nail on the head. “What do we need VS What needs to be its own entity.” This seems to be one of the major challenges when it comes to intelligent design. After all, everyone organizes their lives in the most convenient of terms relative to themselves. What you might see as a cluttered desk, to me might be an incredibly intuitive and organized system. So how can you expect that one organization method makes sense to anyone else?
Therein lies the challenge.
Jesse:
When I started reading this book, I was excited to see what John Maeda had to say about Simplicity…well I was excited to hear what he had to say about anything, so it was actually an easy read for me. I read the forward, which I think was a good idea, because it gave me more of an insight into what he was going to be talking about, as well as some “instructions” on how to go about taking in these 10 Laws of Simplicity. And being somewhat OCD myself, I agre that Simplicity=Sanity.
Law 1 :: Reduce
This law seemed to me to be the most obvious of the Laws that is needed to reach Simplicity. I love Maeda’s quote, “The simplest way to achieve simplicity is through thoughtful reduction. When in doubt, just remove.” I feel this is something that many people, especially Americans need to learn. We have so much, especially compared to the rest of the world, so if things seem to get too cluttered, why don’t we just remove some of it? I’m sure we don’t need it all.I also found his idea of SHE to be very useful: Shrink, Hide, Embody.
Law 2 :: Organize
I mentioned in for Law 1 that if we just were to remove things that we do not need, then we would have less clutter. But then there is always the chance that what we have left over is still cluttered, what do we do with that? Well, Maeda’s second law says we should Organize. I like this law, very much. He incorporates his first law into this one as well, when he talks about organizing the pieces of paper and then reducing the amount of labeling. When Maeda talks about the “Tab Key”, it made me smile, because all I could think about was tabs in Indesign. I thought about typesetting and the few projects I have had to use tabs for in the past. I don’t know why that was important, but I found it to be something that related to me as a designer.
Now, when Maeda talks about the Gestalt of the Ipod, I thought that it was probably one of the best examples he could have come up with. I have only owned two Ipods, and they were both made in the third stage of the click wheel Gestalt example. So I could not relate as much.
I think squinting more to see less is something I will do more often. Not just literally, but figuratively and in my daily life as a designer.
Laws 3 & 4
Brad:
Law 3: Time
Maeda’s time law isn’t something I had ever really though about, but after reading through it, I can definatly see it in actions. I have never really worn watches(which drove my parents crazy when i was younger) because i try to never be in a hurry. Even though I try never to be in a hurry, i still am sometimes, but i think that maeda is right in saying that I would be much more hurried if i had a watch.
Over the past few years i’ve noticed the crosswalk signs with the count downs. I figured that they were so people would know how much time is left until the light turns red. but they are infact, as maeda says, to cool our impatient jets, so to speak.
Law 4: Learn
The most interesting part of this chapter for me was when he talked about relate-translate-surprise. This section reminds me of what we try to do as designers, understand a message, communicate it to our audience, with a surprise!
In a book that I am reading for my psychology of marketing class, it talks about how something called the knowledge gap encourages people to learn. In essence, not knowing something will push you to learning all you can about it.
Rick:
To be honest, I had mixed feelings when reading Maeda’s third law about Time. On the one hand I completely agree; people generally don’t like to wait and any perceived “time saver” is a win. We’ll go out of our way to find any time saving measure, whether it’s laying your clothes out the night before or scanning a map for a shorter, quicker route to work; we are all about saving time when we can.
I know when I worked at Forensic Technology I scoured Map Quest and Google Earth to try and find the most efficient commute between my home in Sarasota and my office up in Largo. After all, any time saved on a two hour round trip each day was a “win” for me.
However, that being said I’m not sure I can agree with John’s assessment that his law of Simplification is the answer to his law of Time. While we all wish to save time, it’s also true that we enjoy a sense of control. We decide how long we’ll wait, which roads we take, what time saving device we’ll try. But to relinquish control as illustrated by Maeda’s example of the random play function of the iPod Shuffle might in fact do the exact opposite.
Sure, it could be nice to have your song selections decided for you by the random nature of the Shuffle, but what do you do when you want to hear a specific song? With a system that doesn’t allow choice you’re stuck back in that line waiting, hoping, that it randomly plays. To my way of thinking, that’s time wasted.
But then we come to John’s forth law, Learn, and all is well again.
What might feel like a waste of Time – reading a manual, learning a new road to take to work, etc., in the end could save us time because we Learn ahead of Time what works and what doesn’t.
Don’t want to be a slave to random song selection of an mp3 player and waste time trying to select a specific song? Learn about the system and make an educated purchase based on knowledge. Afraid of wasting time locked in traffic during your commute to school or work? Do some research and learn a new path.
In short, what I’ve learned by reading John Maeda’s first four laws is that each becomes an integral part of the whole and that while one may suffice, together they are that much stronger.
Jesse:
Law 3 :: Time
This is the law that I should pay attention to the most. I fail when it comes to saving time (let alone money). I procrastinate with alot of my homework, usually saving it for the night before. I waste a large amount of my time doing things I really don’t need to be doing. Maeda’s law brings us back to his idea of SHE, and how we should “shrink” and “Hide and Embody” time. His example of the frozen clock intigues me. I never thought about how we can freak out if we dont know what time it is, or if time seems to have “stopped”.
Law 4 :: Learn
One thing that stood out to me in this chapter was when Maeda talked about visiting Wolfgang Weingart. He talks about how Weingart did the same talk several years in a row. But each year he simplified his talk more and more. This shows me that as time goes on and we do more of something, we learn how to widdle it down to only what we need. As designers (or even just as humans), we are constantly learning, and the more we learn, the more we can simplify things.
Laws 5 & 6
Rick:
Up to this point, Maeda’s laws have been pretty straight forward. He’s talked about solid, substantial things we should and shouldn’t do when it comes to design, but with Law 5 and 6 John switches gears and leaves us to think things out for ourselves. Yes, he gives us a starting point with the concepts of Differences and Context, but what we do with them, how we interpret them, is up to us.
Differences: a rhythm of Simplicity and Complexity.During one of my earlier design classes our instructor emphasis the importance of rhythm in our multi-page layouts. Loud and Quiet was his preferred terminology. The challenge - how do you alternate between louder and quieter designs to keep an interesting flow to your work?
Do we want to lull the audience to sleep and then knock them over the head with a loud, jarring design or do we try to establish a pace that keeps our audience engaged throughout? How your designs or design elements flow from one to the next is as important as the designs themselves.
Context: All elements should be of importance. Again, something that is to a degree intangible that we have to consider in our overall design process.
Referring back to John’s example of a blank page; white space on a page shouldn’t be an area where we ran out of “stuff” to add to our message. It is a part of the message and as such needs to be considered in the process. In short, design, as in anything, should be considered greater than the sum of its parts.
Brad
Law 5
Maeda’s point about the declining value of business cards was actually a surprise to me. I hadn’t really thought about it. I wouldn’t consider LinkedIn a replacement for business cards, especially since I find the interface to complex and cluttered.
In Tea with Tanaka, he mentions how the cup was unintuitive and unexpected. He was probably taking part in a Japanese Tea Ceremony, which is based off of the aesthetic of Wabi-Sabi. Wabi-Sabi values beauty in imperfection and profundity in nature, accepting the natural cycle of growth, decay, and death.
Law 6
First of all, I resisted the urge to draw on page 57.
I think that his best quote so far is, “When there is less, we appreciate everything much more.” Its funny that he talks about looking around you and being on a plane, because I was!
Maeda talks about how the white room affected how he tasted his sushi. In the same way I think that for me, The environment around me affects how I design. I think that having a controlled environment, such as my room or studio helps me to concentrate more on what I am doing.
Jesse
Law 5
I think Maeda’s early point in this chapter about experiencing differences is something that we should notice throughout our lives, in every aspect. Good and evil, right and wrong. We would be tired of one thing if that’s ALL we had. There needs to be something different or opposite.Maeda’s example of the designer Mori Hiroka’s business card, and how different it was, made me think about my own business card. It doesn’t really stand out, although it is (in my opinion) somewhat well designed. I feel the need now to go and change what I have and make it even more simple, not TOO simple, but still more simple. And different.
Law 6
I really like the analogie that Maeda’s professor talks about, with the lightbulb. I feel that we need to make ourselves shine light in a more broad spectrum than to just shine on one single spot. This is true with more than just design, or whatever we work with. This should be true with whatever we believe in.I think it would be very interesting to see a full printed progress bar on each page of a book. I think there could be ways that a designer could manage to make that look nice and not be overkill, as Maeda states it would be. Haha
Laws 7 & 8
Rick:
Well, I knew it would happen sooner or later - I disagree with John Maeda.
There … I said it.
I disagree with John Maeda, or more accurately, I disagree with Laws Seven & Eight.
Law 7: Emotion - More emotion is better than less emotion. Clearly Mr. Maeda has never met my first wife.
But all kidding aside, (I’m really not kidding) John discusses this law in terms of design; simple, modernist, bare, sparse, inexpensive to produce - i.e. cheap. But is this really the case? Do we always need the bells and whistles to appreciate something’s aesthetics? Certainly not.
So in my opinion as long as we maintain honesty and integrity in our design the emotion or lack there of should be equally appreciated. After all, subtle and dignified can have as great an impact as loud and obnoxious.
Law 8: Trust - In Simplicity we Trust
Yes and No. When reading this Law I couldn’t help but think about a series of commercials currently playing on local stations. I’m sure you might have seen them, the “Easy” button ads for Staples. Too confusing or complex - hit the Easy button. In gaming circles this is also known as the “I Win” button.
Sure, we all enjoy systems that are simple and easy to navigate or understand, but the trust part is where many people might have a problem. Too simple of a system and we tend to expect the worse.
We must be missing a page of the form, it can’t be this easy, I’m missing something. All have crossed my mind when dealing with a system that is too clean and streamlined. Why? Because of trust, and unfortunately in my experience trust can’t be a law, it has to be earned.
Brad
Law 7
I don’t think that emotions necessarily mean that it will be more complex. I find a lot of emotion in modern and contemporary architecture. I also have a similar addiction to checking my email. I didn’t really have much more to say about emotions, other than they are necessary to give your design life.
Law 8
I think I agree that the undo feature allows people to take more risks, but in turn makes them think about what they are doing less. I did not really like the analogy of the Master or the Average Joe. I feel like there is some sort of happy medium. His statement about putting the undo away when dealing with real people is kind of a no brainer. I think that trust is necessary in a normal relationship.
Jesse
Law 7
Maeda gets kind of deep with this law. “By connecting with the emotional intelligence inside yourself, the next step is to empathize with the environment that surrounds you.” When it comes to design, I don’t think it is okay to just simplify everything and not put any emotion into it. There needs to be something that drives what you’re creating. Otherwise it is nothing, and no one will care to look at it.Law 8
The fact that John Maeda didn’t know how to swim is actually kind of shocking to me. But learning that he didn’t know how because he didn’t trust the water, that is something that kind of surprised me even more. I never thought that that would be the reason most people cannot swim. And when Maeda talks about “undo”, it is funny to me, because I had to retype (undo and redo) the word undo twice just now. I am VERY reliable on cmd z. If I did was unable to undo designs with the software we use, I would freak out.
Laws 9 & 10
Rick:
Irony. Everyone enjoys it but no one wants to pay for it.
So, it’s kind of ironic that I’ve failed to post in awhile when Maeda’s Law 9 is all about Failure.
Law 9 Failure - Some things can never be made simple.
Absolutely. I have to agree with John 100% here. Some things just can’t be simplified - but is this really failure?
Well, Yes and No.
The problem is our preconceived idea of what failure is. For most of us, failure is a bad thing. You didn’t get it right. You didn’t win. You were not productive. You lost. But what many seem to miss is that failure in its own right can be a reward. You’ve learned something about yourself through trying and the opportunity/situation in which you’ve applied yourself. In John’s book, this means you’ve tried to simplify something but found that you couldn’t, AND, that it’s OK that this thing, object, situation can’t be simplified.
In other words, Failure is Good.
Sometimes its really true, that the beauty is in the details.
Law 10: The One - Simplicity is about subtracting the obvious, and adding the meaningful.
Hmmm, sounds like we are back where we started with Law 1 - Reduce, but in reality what John has done is distill his laws down to their very essence by introducing “The One Law” based on three key elements.
Away, Open and Power
So, why after 9 Laws are we suddenly switching gears and talking about “The Law” and key elements? Well, as Maeda points out, “Simplicity is hoplessly subtle” and based on “intuition versus intellect.” In other words, you can’t teach “simple.” Rules don’t apply here, it’s something you have to feel and as such, a defining law just doesn’t work. It’s too clumsy, too bulky, it’s not sensitive enough. Simplicity needs to be felt, and that’s where the key elements come into play.
Away - More appears like less by simply moving it far, far away. At first glance this appears to be refering to manipulating data by hiding it, or lack of it, through an illusion of distance. But remember, we eventually need this data, so it must be complete and intact. No, instead what John is suggesting is to outsource tasks whenever possible. Clear your “work area” and work remotely.
Open - Openness simplifies complexity. John illustrates this key by writing about several open source computer programs that are available and sings the praises of having multiple users with complete access to all the code helping each other like some virtual commune. Unfortunately, I just can’t agree. Call me a cynic if you will, but I just see more harm than good coming from complete business openness.
Yes, Law 8 is all about Trust, but really, trust needs to be earned. Just opening the floodgates and trusting that everyone will be honest and work with integrity is just asking for trouble. And in my book, trouble increases complexity.
Power - Use less, gain more. If you think you’ve heard this one before, you’re right. Ben Franklin - A penny saved is a penny earned. Yeah, a bit underwhelming if you ask me. To say I’m disappointed in John’s last key is an understatement as it seems like nothing more than a verbal rendition of the proverbial shell game.
I think it’s pretty obvious to all that if I don’t actually use something I haven’t lost it, nor have I gained it - I’ve just maintained a status quo. So I think that Power would be more effective if expressed, “Use wisely, gain more.”
In John’s example he refers to the use of battery versus plugged in power to illustrate this key, but my solution seems to be a bit more elegant in as much as it can be applied to all forms including political and the power of leadership.
But regardless of my views on these three specific keys, I think it’s best to think of Away, Open and Power as nothing more than guides. They can point you in the right direction, but really it’s up to you to interpret them and make the journey yourself.
Jesse
Law 9
I think it is really interesting how we use so many acronyms these days. For instance (and I do this on a regular basis, so I am not bashing anyone), we say “lol” and “btw”. These are acronyms that we use VERY regularly, mostly with texting and IM. I find that this can definitely get annoying, but it is also an effective way to get across what you are feeling.I also find it funny that these days we as humans seem to somewhat glorify our imprefection. For instance, Failblog.org. This site is incredibly popular lately, and it has snuck its way into my vocabulary all too much.
Law 10
I really like Maeda’s quip “More appears like less, by simply moving it far, far away”. This is something that I can see us as designers using. That isn’t necesarrily a good thing all the time, but it can be. I think we can take what we come up with, and instead of stripping it away to only what it needs to be, we push it further away and hope it looks like it is the bare essensials.
Brad
Law 9
I found that for the class project, I had to compromise a bit because I was setting almost impossible goals of usability. It turned out better for me when I began accepting a little failure to keep it from being to complex for me to understand. I also found that my instinct was much different than my team members, it helped in some areas, where I took something for granted, but in other areas it just seemed it make things more complex.
Law 10
I think google is a prime example of Law 10. Subracting the obvious, and adding the meaningful. It subtracts the indepth user interface, which is an obvious part of a website, and adds the meaningful, better search results.
Law 10 is not only applicable to design, but to life in general. Its always best, in my opinion, to subtract the things around you that distract you, and add the meaningful, such as relationships and goals.
