Earlier quoted context omitted.
I disagree so strongly even though I also found the font horrible. Design is used to communicate. Whether or not you want to communicate "in the clearest way possible" is a choice. There are many other choices to be made and some may conflict with that choice. Some choices will resonate with you and some will aggravate. But only the author/designer can speak to whether the design was successful in it's aims
> Whether or not you want to communicate "in the clearest way possible" is a choice. This is far from "clearest way possible", it's not even in the middle. This choice impedes communication which makes is less useful, by your definition. > But only the author/designer can speak to whether the design was successful in it's aims I find it difficult to believe that the author's aim was to share a story in such way that'…
Anti-design is effective in making things memorable and engaging. When I attended Davis, I first thought the Social Sciences Building[2] was a bit of an eye sore. It was intentionally designed to be challenging. Now it is one of my most vivid memories of the campus.
1: https://99designs.com/blog/design-history-movements/anti-des...
2: https://localwiki.org/davis/Social_Sciences_and_Humanities_B...