Re: [-empyre-] genre when it suits

[YOUNG-HAE CHANG HEAVY INDUSTRIES <tfa@chollian.net>]

Hi Danny,

"Do you have any thoughts on the relationship of your work to the forms of
web design that are usually associated with Flash technology's development?
(e.g. the http://www.k10k.net/ crowd)"

Well, first of all, we don't know anything about Web design. Quite a few
people still remember a statement we made way back that we'd only learned
how to use about 8% of Flash. That was shortly after Kim Machan of MAAP gave
us a free copy of Flash 4. We'd like to say that we're still using it, but
we had to move up to MX the other day -- for tech reasons that we don't
fully comprehend. Now we know how to use about 3% of MX.

Second, K10k.net is a beautiful site, and we have nothing but admiration for
what it does. What is the relationship of our work to it and other
cutting-edge design? There isn't one, as far as we can tell.

"I find it interesting to think about how a work like "Dakota"
[http://www.yhchang.com/DAKOTA.html] might look if given the kind of diverse
typographic (or even just colour)  treatment that would come intuitively to
the average designer. It obviously wouldn't be as striking for the
additional sensory information. But I wonder if you think/talk about these
explicit distinctions in that way."

We're like the guy or gal who open their closets every morning and end up
putting on the same outfit. They either do it because they believe in that
one outfit or because they are too unconcerned about shaking up their look
even a little bit or because that's all they've got in their closets. In any
case, it suits their style -- it's easy, it saves time, it allows them to
get on with other things.

There are a million colors, 500 different fonts, and frankly, we don't know
what to do with them. We've used red two or three times, but don't feel all
that good about it. It's a problem.

Young-hae and Marc



On 5/23/05 5:25 PM, "Danny Butt" <db@dannybutt.net> wrote:

> On 5/10/05 1:43 AM, "YOUNG-HAE CHANG HEAVY INDUSTRIES" <tfa@chollian.net>
> wrote:
> 
>> We wanted to make something small -- not for aesthetic but for
>> practical, economic reasons, because it seemed cheaper: no studio, no
>> materials except for a computer, a dial-up connection, a Flash program and a
>> Web domain. 
> 
> I had a question for Young-hae and Marc about typography and Flash, and do
> you have any thoughts on the relationship your work to the forms of web
> design that are usually associated with Flash technology's development?
> (e.g. the http://www.k10k.net/ crowd).
> 
> To give my own thoughts: It seems to me that the artificial constraint of
> the old-school terminal style typeface, counterposed to clearly identifiable
> (parodic?) genres of type manipulation, writing, and audio, generate the
> reflexivity which allows it to be viewed as art, by withholding from the
> viewer the typographic significations that would generate "complete
> immersion". thus the works require the user to acknowledge their role in
> "completing" the work in a visual-affective sense. I find it interesting to
> think about how a work like "Dakota" might look if given the kind of diverse
> typographic (or even just colour)  treatment that would come intuitively to
> the average designer. It obviously wouldn't be as striking for the
> additional sensory information. But I wonder if you think/talk about these
> explicit distinctions in that way.
> 
> (I'd also like to hear from art historians on yhchang in the context of
> text and modernist conceptual art - or am i barking up a wrong tree here?
> woof!)
> 
> Danny
> 
> --
> http://www.dannybutt.net
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> empyre forum
> empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
> 
>