Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The age of average

alexmurrell.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 493 posts

Re: The age of average

#181

Post by schrijver »

Last5Digits wrote: post #135

I'm always wary of articles like this. The feeling of things becoming mediocre strongly resonates with me, but I am aware that there could be a great many different biases at play. When I was younger, entertainment media felt magical. The complexity and depth of experiences I could get from even a second-rate story was immense. I remember staying up late at night to process the last movie I watched, or feeling that r…

The latter probably, but you could also say that means your standards have evolved, and it’s less easy to find material that challenges you. I tend to think it’s out there though, so I wouldn’t give up just yet! Our desires might be simple, but art does not need to deal with it in a simple or formulaic way.

Re: The age of average

#182

Post by Ekaros »

m3kw9 wrote: post #109

A few of the examples is a bit unfair like houses look the same, but in reality they are same because the structure works and the building code are more easily adhered when they look like that, instead of say a parallelogram, and it’s more efficient to work with the current set of technologies + materials that are readily available. I do agree we are not taking enough risks in art but instead trying to please everyon…

I would say that if you were to take similar use buildings from same period of time they would look very close to each other. Ofc, there is always some trend setters or outliers, but in general they would look pretty close to each other or follow certain formula. It is just less apparent as we see mix of those periods very often.

Re: The age of average

#183

Post by schrijver »

hgsgm wrote: post #161
Last5Digits wrote: post #135

I'm always wary of articles like this. The feeling of things becoming mediocre strongly resonates with me, but I am aware that there could be a great many different biases at play. When I was younger, entertainment media felt magical. The complexity and depth of experiences I could get from even a second-rate story was immense. I remember staying up late at night to process the last movie I watched, or feeling that r…

> is it because I've lived long enough to see the simple patterns underlying most of our desires and fantasies? Yes. And also, ironically because as you get older novelty is less important, so new stuff is boring regardless of whether is differ or same. In every generation kids have loved the new generation of Star Wars, despite us adults knowing that the best one was the one we say when we were kids.

This why I find the geek-o-sphere so tiring dissecting things like why are the new Star Wars movies bad… I have no problem believing that… the old ones might have been better, but they were also formulaic and badly acted and the reason they seemed so profound and amazing at the time was seeing them as a kid! Those spending time watching and hating on kids movies might better seek out something that can actually challenge them.

Re: The age of average

#184

Post by marcosdumay »

bumby wrote: post #139
crazygringo wrote: post #123

What the article describes is correct, but I don't think the words "average" or "homogeneity" or "conformity" are the right terms, as they seem to carry negative connotations here. Rather, the right word is "convergence". The point is, people like certain things aesthetically. It used to be that artists and designers were still trying to figure out what looks good, and trying all the things. But now we've tried so ma…

I've tried making this same point when it comes to auto designs (at least in the competitive, cost-sensitive ones). A lot of mid-sized cars look the same because the design constraints generally converge on the same handful of principles. They've converged not in the aesthetic sense as much as the engineering sense: because they work at a relatively low cost. (I'm speaking mainly about things like aerodynamics here,…

AFAIK, the reason cars look the same is that they are optimized to use the same mass-produced parts. Not really because of physical, aesthetic, or usability reasons.

Re: The age of average

#185

Post by vishnugupta »

I skimmed through the article and I could immediately correlate it with another article[1] that I could relate a lot with.

My frustration is primarily because of lack of good movies coming out of Hollywood which has been churning out remakes after remakes or some decade long running sequels. I guess a question worth asking as we stand on the cusp of first quarter of the new millennium is, what are the lasting cultural artefacts that we are building? What is it that we can call truly as our own? Could be a music form, architectural style, painting form etc.,

[1] https://areomagazine.com/2023/01/18/the-great-reboot-in-memo...

Re: The age of average

#186

Post by YellOh »

ryandrake wrote: post #148
bumby wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've tried making this same point when it comes to auto designs (at least in the competitive, cost-sensitive ones). A lot of mid-sized cars look the same because the design constraints generally converge on the same handful of principles. They've converged not in the aesthetic sense as much as the engineering sense: because they work at a relatively low cost. (I'm speaking mainly about things like aerodynamics here,…

Even if they had to ultra-optimize the aerodynamics so all the cars look like the same bar of soap (they don't have to), they could still at least paint the damn soap a different color. But, no. All you see coming out of the factory are white, silver, gray, black, the occasional red and the occasional blue. What's driving this? That's what the article is about. Is it actually pull from customers, or is it push from t…

Fwiw, the explicit advice I got from my parents about cars/houses was to never choose a unique looking one. I was told odd-colored cars are more likely to be broken into, and houses that draw attention (if placed in a neighborhood of otherwise very similar houses) are more likely to be robbed.

So even if my favorite color was an easy option when choosing a car, I'd probably go monochrome as long as that's what the majority of other cars are doing, almost entirely for property crime reasons.

On writing this out, I have absolutely 0 idea how factually-based this is, but it is at least a thing some middle-class Americans tell their kids.

Re: The age of average

#187

Post by marnett »

epups wrote: post #155
bluetomcat wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They've converged because we think they're nice. Here is the trap. We think they are nice because globalisation works on a more profound level. The "visible" level of globalisation are the consumer products. What's also transmitted are certain intellectual ideas and schools of thought, certain aesthetics and forms of art. For example, the attempts to explain the economy on an individual behavioural and psychologica…

How would you differentiate "true" convergence, where everyone agrees a certain idea is superior, vs what you seem to describe here, a sort of imposition of ideas?

I also used to think that ubiquity was some sort of evidence of superiority. However, as was briefly mentioned upthread, you realize that often ubiquity has more to do with consumer products and the monopolies that capture markets. And ubiquitous consumer products often do not achieve that status due to superior design, but actually superior profit margins, which in the realm of manufactured consumer products, means the most efficient design for the most efficient manufacturing method. You realize that the manufacturing process can influence the design. The most ubiquitous door, urinal, toilet, and hand dryer are often not the most aesthetically pleasing or even, design-wise, most sensibility designed, but just the cheapest to purchase, most efficient to manufacture, or the only option.

So to answer your question, we typically call the latter in cultural studies capitalism.

Re: The age of average

#188

Post by ravenstine »

Am I the only one who thinks that this phenomenon has pretty much always existed? The only difference today, as far as I can tell, is globalization. Things are simply less exotic now because homogeneity is becoming less localized.

If I were to really grasp at straws to defend the other position, maybe the contemporary aesthetic has become overly minimalist and utilitarian, as opposed to being style oriented. Restaurants are now cement cubes, all new apartment complexes look like hotels with a white|beige|gray palette and are also cubic, modern cars are all white and bulbous-looking, skyscrapers are either cubic or (ironically) overly whimsical in architecture to the point where they appear to have no obvious function. Perhaps if standard designs and architecture were less boring, people wouldn't care so much about homogeneity.

Re: The age of average

#189

Post by anonymous_sorry »

ryandrake wrote: post #148
bumby wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've tried making this same point when it comes to auto designs (at least in the competitive, cost-sensitive ones). A lot of mid-sized cars look the same because the design constraints generally converge on the same handful of principles. They've converged not in the aesthetic sense as much as the engineering sense: because they work at a relatively low cost. (I'm speaking mainly about things like aerodynamics here,…

Even if they had to ultra-optimize the aerodynamics so all the cars look like the same bar of soap (they don't have to), they could still at least paint the damn soap a different color. But, no. All you see coming out of the factory are white, silver, gray, black, the occasional red and the occasional blue. What's driving this? That's what the article is about. Is it actually pull from customers, or is it push from t…

> All you see coming out of the factory are white, silver, gray, black, the occasional red and the occasional blue.

Isn't this just fashion?

I've heard it argued that times of popular optimism and plenty tend to favour bright colours, extravagant design and conspicuous consumption. Think Calvin Klein underpants deliberately on show above low slung waistbands, analogous to frilly lace ruffs and cuffs in earlier ages.

Times of austerity tend to be associated with muted shades, and perhaps virtue signalling rather than wealth signalling.

Since the 2008 banking crises I think we've been firmly in the the dull, serious phase.

Re: The age of average

#190

Post by assafweinberg »

crazygringo wrote: post #123

What the article describes is correct, but I don't think the words "average" or "homogeneity" or "conformity" are the right terms, as they seem to carry negative connotations here. Rather, the right word is "convergence". The point is, people like certain things aesthetically. It used to be that artists and designers were still trying to figure out what looks good, and trying all the things. But now we've tried so ma…

You're right in that there is a convergence happening across everything, and I think it's a product of the increased pace of communication facilitated by the internet.

Whether this impending mono-culture is "better" or "worse" is really just a matter of values. Engineers, who evaluate things on how well they perform, might see the convergence as a good thing - the proliferation of winning designs. Designers and artists who see creation as having its own intrinsic value and variety being the spice of life will lament the trend.

Post reply on HN