Department : Industrial Product Design Programme : Industrial Product Design
İSTANBUL TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
THE CONCEPT OF STYLE: AN INVESTIGATION INTO ITS PERCEPTION AND ITS ROLE IN
INDUSTRIAL DESIGN
M.Sc. Thesis by Fulden TOPALOĞLU, B.Sc.
Supervisor (Chairman) : Prof. Dr. Alpay ER (ITU)
Members of the Examining Committee : Assist. Prof. Dr. Şebnem Timur ÖĞÜT (ITU)
Assist. Prof. Dr. Esin DÜZAKIN (Marmara U.)
İSTANBUL TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
THE CONCEPT OF STYLE: AN INVESTIGATION INTO ITS PERCEPTION AND ITS ROLE IN
INDUSTRIAL DESIGN
M.Sc. Thesis by Fulden TOPALOĞLU, B.Sc.
502041973
Date of submission : 29 December 2008 Date of Defence Examination : 22 January 2009
Tez Danışmanı : Prof.Dr. Alpay ER (İTÜ)
Diğer Jüri Üyeleri : Yar. Doç. Dr. Şebnem Timur ÖĞÜT (İTÜ) Yar. Doç. Dr. Esin DÜZAKIN (Marmara Ü.) YÜKSEK LİSANS TEZİ
Fulden TOPALOĞLU 502041973
OCAK 2009
STİL KAVRAMI: ENDÜSTRİYEL TASARIMDAKİ ALGISI VE ROLÜ ÜZERİNE BİR ARAŞTIRMA
İSTANBUL TEKNİK ÜNİVERSİTESİ FEN BİLİMLERİ ENSTİTÜSÜ
Tezin Enstitüye Verildiği Tarih : 29 Aralık 2008 Tezin Savunulduğu Tarih : 22 Ocak 2009
ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
To Prof. Dr. Alpay Er,
For sharing with me his time and his insights whenever I needed… and for his all time sincerity.
To Sliding Doors,
For having been all over my life with laughters, with cries, with craziness, with fun… with love.
To my eternal guide,
For it suffices to know that he is… and for all those times of eternity.
To my dream,
For the boundless dreams… for the ones that wait to be real… and for the breaths in the blue.
To my family,
For being so exceptional… so unconditional… and always there with so much love.
iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES v LIST OF FIGURES vi SUMMARY x ÖZET xi 1. INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Motivations for the Research 1
1.2 Aims and Scope of the Research 3
1.3 Research Questions 4
1.4 Structure of the Research 4
2. DEFINING AND UNDERSTANDING THE CONCEPT OF STYLE 6
2.1 Introduction 6
2.2 Defining Style 8
2.3 Two Levels in Defining Style: General Style and Individual Style 12
2.4 Elements of Style 17
2.5 Structure of Style 21
2.6 Functions of Style 23
2.7 Style and Content 26
2.8 Conclusions 28
3. THE CONCEPT OF STYLE INSIDE A HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE 31
3.1 Introduction 31
3.2 Perspectives on the Concept of Style before 20th Century 32
3.2.1 17th century England - Style as an Issue of Appropriateness 32
3.2.2 18th century England - Design Becoming a Matter of Public Concern 34
3.2.3 19th century England - Design Reform in the Wake of Industrialization 37 3.3 Perspectives on the Concept of Style before World War II in Europe 40
3.3.1 Style in the Transfer from Crafts to Industrial Production 41
3.3.2 Modernism and the Modern Style 46
3.4 Perspectives on the Concept of Style before World War II in USA 61
3.4.1 Style as a Tool in the Creation of Desire 62
3.4.2 Industrial Design Becoming a Professional Activity 65
3.4.3 Styling 67
3.4.4 Streamline Design 69
3.4.5 Modern Style in USA before the Second World War 73
3.5 Perspectives on the Concept of Style between 1945-1960 74
3.5.1 The Influence of the United States 75
3.5.2 Style in Relation to New Materials and Technologies 77
3.5.3 Modern Style in USA after the Second World War 80
iv
3.6 Perspectives on the Concept of Style from 1960 to present 93
3.6.1 The Stratification of Culture and the Concept of Style 93
3.6.2 The Concept of Style inside Postmodernism 96
3.6.3 The Concept of Style in Relation to Consumer Culture and Issues of Social and Individual Identity 102
3.6.4 The Concept of Style in Relation to Corporate Identity and Product Identity 106
4. AN EMPIRICAL STUDY ON THE PERCEPTION OF STYLE 112
4.1 Introduction 112
4.2 The Method of the Study 112
4.3 Analysis of the Results 115
4.4 Conclusions 128
5. CONCLUSIONS 130
5.1 Outcomes and General Discussions Based on Conceptual Analysis 131
5.2 Outcomes and General Discussions Based on Historical Analysis 136
5.3 Outcomes and General Discussions Based on Empirical Study 138
5.4 Further Conclusions and Discussions 140
5.5 Suggestions for Future Studies 141
REFERENCES 143
APPENDIX 148
v LIST OF TABLES
Page Tablo 4.1 Analysis of the responses to question 2 116 Tablo 4.2 Analysis of the responses to question 3 118 Tablo 4.3 Analysis of the responses to question 4 119
Tablo 4.4 Responses to question 5 120
Tablo 4.5 Responses to question 6 120
Tablo 4.6 Responses to question 7 121
Tablo 4.7 Responses to question 8 122
Tablo 4.8 Responses to question 9 122
Tablo 4.9 Responses to question 10 123
Tablo 4.10 Responses to question 11 123
Tablo 4.11 Responses to question 12 124
Tablo 4.12 Responses to question 13 124
Tablo 4.13 Responses to question 14 125
Tablo 4.14 Responses to question 15 125
Tablo 4.15 Responses to question 16 126
Tablo 4.16 Responses to question 17 126
Tablo 4.17 Responses to question 18 127
Tablo 4.18 Responses to question 19 127
Tablo 4.19 Responses to question 20 128
Tablo 5.1 A summary review of the words used in the definitions of style 131 Tablo 5.2 Different categories of style in industrial design 132
vi LIST OF FIGURES
Page
Figure 2.1 Poster designs in Art Nouveau style 13
Figure 2.2 A doorway in Art Nouveau style 13
Figure 2.3 A desk in Art Nouveau style 14
Figure 2.4 A table lamp in Art Nouveau style 14
Figure 2.5 Two works by Pablo Picasso revealing different styles (Left: Woman Ironing, 1904 Right: Girl with a Mandolin, 1910)
15 Figure 2.6 Products by industrial designer Luigi Colani, characterized by
biomorphic forms, that are visible in the camera for Canon, the Pegasus piano for Schimmel and the Feder pen for Messmer
16
Figure 2.7 Variations in the utilization of visual elements for the creation of logotypes in two different styles 18 Figure 2.8 Illustration by Papanek (1995) showing the changes in proportions
to make a car look aged 20 Figure 2.9 Illustration by Papanek (1995) showing the suggestion of cuteness
through the use of rounder and smaller shapes 20 Figure 2.10 The utilization of expensive materials in Vertu mobile phones to
indicate values of exclusivity and distinctiveness 25 Figure 2.11 The utilization of natural materials, simple forms and functional
structure in the birch stool by Alvar Alto, 1932-1933 25 Figure 3.1 Chairs in Gothic style by Thomas Chippendale, from The
Gentleman and Cabinet Maker's Director, 1754 35 Figure 3.2 Chairs in Chinese style by Thomas Chippendale, from The
Gentleman and Cabinet Maker's Director, 1754 35 Figure 3.3 Some examples from mail order catalogues, 1890-1915 42 Figure 3.4 Two works by Peter Behrens (Left: Table lamp in Jugendstil
style, 1902 Right: Table lamp designed for AEG Company, 1920) 44 Figure 3.5 Electric fan by Peter Behrens, designed for the AEG Company,
1908 45 Figure 3.6 Electric kettle by Peter Behrens, designed for the AEG Company,
1909 45 Figure 3.7 Hanging lamp by Peter Behrens, designed for the AEG Company,
1920s 45 Figure 3.8 Paintings by Piet Mondrian Left: Composition with red, yellow,
blue and black, 1921 Right: Composition with Yellow Blue and Red, 1921
48
Figure 3.9 Red Blue Chair by Gerrit Rietveld, 1918 49 Figure 3.10 Red Blue Table by Gerrit Rietveld designed for Schröder House,
1924 49 Figure 3.11 Hanging Lamp by Gerrit Rietveld, made of wood, glass and
tubular bulbs, 1920 49 Figure 3.12 Schröder House by Gerrit Rietveld, Utrecht, 1924-25 50
vii
Figure 3.13 Utrecht Armchair by Gerrit Rietveld, 1933 50
Figure 3.14 The outlines of some Bauhaus products, provided by Bürdek (2005) 52 Figure 3.15 Wassily Chair also known as Model B3 by Marcel Breuer, 1925 53
Figure 3.16 D 42 Armchair by Mies van der Rohe, 1927 53
Figure 3.17 Side chair Model B32 by Marcel Breuer, 1928 54
Figure 3.18 Teapots by Marianne Brandt, 1924 54
Figure 3.19 A ceiling lamp (1926), an ashtray, and a table lamp (1930), all designed by Marianne Brandt 54
Figure 3.20 A ceiling lamp (1926), an ashtray, and a table lamp (1930), all designed by Marianne Brandt 55
Figure 3.21 Desk lamp by Christian Dell, 1936 55
Figure 3.22 Frankfurt Kitchen by architect Margarete Schütte-Lihotzky, 1926 57
Figure 3.23 Chaise Longue, by Le Corbusier, Charlotte Perriand and Pierre Jeanneret, 1928 58
Figure 3.24 Fauteuil a Grand Comfort, by Le Corbusier, 1928 58
Figure 3.25 Armchair No:41 Paimio by Alvar Aalto, 1931 59 Figure 3.26 Armchair Eva by Bruno Mathsson, 1933 59 Figure 3.27 The unchanging Model T Ford, Left:1912, Right:1915 63
Figure 3.28 Advertisements from 1926 showing different models of Lincoln cars 64
Figure 3.29 Advertisements from 1926 showing different models of Lincoln cars 65
Figure 3.30 The utilization of chrome tail fins in 1950s American cars 68
Figure 3.31 Teardrop Car inside a windtunnel revealing its aerodynamic form, designed by Edmund Rumpler, 1921 70
Figure 3.32 Dymaxion Car No:3 by Buckminster Fuller, 1933 70
Figure 3.33 The streamlined form of Chrysler Airflow, 1934 71
Figure 3.34 A streamlined train from 1937 71
Figure 3.35 The Hotchkiss stapler by Orlo Heller, 1936 72
Figure 3.36 Pencil sharpener in streamlined style by Raymond Loewy, 1934 72 Figure 3.37 Toaster in streamlined style by Raymond Loewy 72
Figure 3.38 The streamlined form of Pininfarina Cisitalia Berlinetta 202, 1947 76
Figure 3.39 The streamlined form of Pininfarina Ferrari 166MM Berlinetta, 1953 76
Figure 3.40 The streamlined and simple form of Marcello Nizzoli’s ‘Mirella’ sewing machine of 1947 for Necchi company in comparison with a 1925 Necchi sewing machine 76 Figure 3.41 Organic Chair (designed in 1940) by Charles Eames and Eero Saarinen with upholstered, molded plywood shell 78 Figure 3.42 The organic form of Plywood Chair by Charles and Ray Eames 1945-1946 78 Figure 3.43 Tupperware bowl and seal made of polyethylene 79 Figure 3.44 Bubble hanging lamps steel frame and sprayed plastic shell by George Nelson Associates, designed in1947, produced in 1952 79 Figure 3.45 Fada Plastic Radio in streamlined style, 1946 80 Figure 3.46 Lounge chair and ottoman by Charles Eames, made of laminated
rosewood, aliminum and leather upholstery, produced by
Herman Miller Company in 1956 81
viii
Figure 3.47 Isamu Noguchi coffee table produced by Herman Miller Company in 1947 81 Figure 3.48 Barcelona Chair and Ottoman by Mies van der Rohe, designed
in 1929, chrome on steel frame and leather cushions filled with PU- foam, produced by Knoll Associates in 1953
81
Figure 3.49 Left: Diamond Chair by Harry Bertoia, welded steel wire. Right: Bird Lounge chair and ottoman, welded steel wire and upholstery, both produced by Knoll Associates in 1952
82
Figure 3.50 Different versions of Tulip Chair by Eero Saarinen, molded fiberglass, produced by Knoll in 1956, with its novel pedestal support
82
Figure 3.51 The sculptural possibilities of concrete utilized by Eero Saarinen in the architecture of TWA International Airport, New York, 1958-1962
83
Figure 3.52 Considerations of efficiency and practicality combined with the organic form of Vespa motor scooter, by Corradino d’Ascanio, 1946
85
Figure 3.53 Considerations of practicality and economy reflected in Fiat 600 designed by Dante Giacosa in 1955 85 Figure 3.54 The organic form of Olivetti Lexicon 80 typewriter (left) by
Marcello Nizzoli, 1948 in comparison with angular form of an earlier model Olivetti Ico (right), 1932
86
Figure 3.55 The influence of streamlined style in the coffee machine by Gio Ponti, manufactured by La Pavoni, 1947 86 Figure 3.56 Lady Armchair by Marco Zanuso, fabric covered rubber foam
upholstery, manufactured by Arflex, 1951 86 Figure 3.57 Theater chair by Carlo Mollino, 1950 87 Figure 3.58 Commode designed by Gio Ponti for Ideal Standard in 1953-54 87 Figure 3.59 The influence of American car styling revealed in Hansa 1500
Borgward of 1949 (left) and Opel Kapitan of 1957 (right) 88 Figure 3.60 The functional simplicity of Braun SK4 radio-phonograph,
designed by Max Braun, Dieter Rams and Hans Gugelot, 1956 89 Figure 3.61 The practical, neutral and functional form of Braun KM 32
Kitchen Machine, designed by Gerd Alfred Müller, 1957 89 Figure 3.62 Slide Projector by Hans Gugelot for Kodak, 1963 89 Figure 3.63 Stackable ashtrays designed by Walter Zeischegg for Helit, 1966 89 Figure 3.64 Fan leg stools of Alvar Aalto, made of laminated birch, produced
by Artek in 1954 90 Figure 3.65 PK 25 chair (left) made of steel and flag halyard, 1951 and
PK 91stool (right) made of steel and canvas, 1961, both by Poul Kjaerholm
91
Figure 3.66 Kartio glass pitcher designed by Finnish designer Kaj Frank for Iıttala, 1958
91 Figure 3.67 Egg chair by Danish designer Arne Jacobsen, made of molded
fiberglass, foam rubber upholstery covered with leather as well as fabric, 1957
92
Figure 3.68 The organic form of Kanterelli vase by Tapio Wirkkala, 1947 92 Figure 3.69 The organic forms of Fish dish, Wine pitcher and Bonbonniere
ix
Figure 3.70 Saab 92 of 1950, designed by Saab’s chief designer Sixten Sason 93
Figure 3.71 Ford Mustang of 1964 94
Figure 3.72 A bench in pop style, vinyl upholstery 99
Figure 3.73 Marshmellow Sofa by George Nelson, 1956 99
Figure 3.74 Safari Sofa by Archizoom 1967 100
Figure 3.75 Carlton bookcase, designed by Ettore Sottsass in 1981 for Memphis 100 Figure 3.76 Gothic Revival chair (left) and Queen Anne chair (right) designed by Robert Venturi, 1978-1984 101
Figure 3.77 An advertisement for Masonite wall panelling touching on the notions of taste, lifestyle and identity. Better Homes and Gardens, January 1962 105 Figure 3.78 French Connection's Fashion versus Style ad campaign, 2006 105
Figure 3.79 Braun Products 109 Figure 3.80 Logotype of Braun Company 109 Figure 3.81 From left to right, the Coca-Cola bottle, the bottle of Heinz Tomato Ketchup and the bottle of fragrance CK ONE 110
x
THE CONCEPT OF STYLE: AN INVESTIGATION INTO ITS PERCEPTION AND ITS ROLE IN INDUSTRIAL DESIGN
SUMMARY
There is an apparent increase in the emphasis to aesthetic values, in both cultural and commercial areas of life. This increase in the significance of aesthetic values brought forth an increased focus on the aesthetic attributes of products, as vital components determining consumers’ choices about product purchase, and the relationship they form with these objects. As a result, the concept of style has become ever more critical in the context of industrial design.
While there have been many studies in the field of industrial design focusing on product aesthetics, the concept of style has not attracted much attention on its own. Although style and its role for designed objects have been discussed at different times in design history, these discussions are predominantly based on views about the prevailing styles of the time, and in some cases revealing an ambiguity about the perception of the concept. This study explores the concept of style, its functions and its perception in the field of industrial design, and discusses the following issues: the meaning of the concept of style in industrial design, the elements that form style in products, the functions of the concept of style for the industrial design profession, how style is related to the technological, cultural and commercial aspects of design, and how the concept of style is perceived both in the historical and contemporary scenes.
Definitions and interpretations about the concept of style in diverse fields of art and design are presented and analyzed in order to identify similarities, and in the light of these observations to be able to draw analogies for the field of industrial design, and to suggest a definition for the concept of style for this field. Besides, the concept of style is investigated inside a design historical viewpoint. Perspectives from different times in design history are explored and discussed, in order to understand the perception of the concept style, its functions and its significance for designed objects. The analysis also focuses on the characteristics of different styles in design, and the historical background and conditions that were influential in their generation, aiming to observe the links between the concept of style and social, industrial, and economic dimensions of design. Moving to the contemporary scene, the concept of style is discussed in association with views from sociology, consumer culture and marketing, to explore why the concept of style in products is significant for people as individuals and as consumers.
In the scope of this study, a field research was carried out to find out the perceptions of industrial designers working in Turkey about the concept of style, through a quantitative survey that was conducted over the internet. The outcomes of the field research are compared with the observations and insights obtained from the theoretical part of the study, in order to find the level of congruence between the two.
xi
STİL KAVRAMI: ENDÜSTRİYEL TASARIMDAKİ ALGISI VE ROLÜ ÜZERİNE BİR ARAŞTIRMA
ÖZET
Yaşamın hem kültürel hem de ticari alanlarında estetik değerlere verilen önemde fark edilir bir artış var. Estetik değerlerin önemindeki bu artış, tüketicilerin satınalma kararlarının ve ürünlerle kurdukları ilişkinin önemli belirleyicileri olarak, ürünlerin estetik özelliklerine artan bir odaklanmayı da beraberinde getirdi. Bunun sonucunda stil kavramı endüstriyel tasarım için daha fazla önem kazandı.
Endüstriyel tasarım alanında ürün estetiğine yönelik bir çok çalışma yapılmış olsa da, stil kavramı kendi başına çok fazla ele alınmamıştır. Tasarım tarihinde farklı zamanlarda stil kavramı, ve tasarım objeleri için bu kavramın rolü tartışılmış olsa da, bu tartışmalar genellikle o zamanda görülen stiller üzerine olup, bazı durumlarda stil kavramının algısına yönelik bir belirsizliğe işaret etmektedir. Bu çalışma, endüstriyel tasarım alanında stil kavramını, işlevlerini ve algısını inceleyerek şu konuları tartışmıştır: endüstriyel tasarımda stil kavramının anlamı, ürünlerde stili oluşturan elemanlar, endüstriyel tasarım mesleğinde stil kavramının işlevleri, stilin tasarımın teknolojik, kültürel ve ticari yönleriyle ilişkisi, ve stil kavramının tarihsel ve güncel çerçevede nasıl algılandığı.
Bu tartışmaları yürütebilmek için, sanat ve tasarımın çeşitli alanlarından stil kavramına yönelik tanımlar ve yorumlar sunulmuş ve incelenmiştir. Aralarındaki benzerlikler belirlenmiş, bu gözlemler sonucunda endüstriyel tasarım alanına dair benzetmeler kurulmuş ve bu alan için stil kavramına dair bir tanım önerilmiştir. Buna ek olarak, stil kavramı tarihsel bir perspektif içinde de incelenmiştir. Stil kavramının algısını, işlevlerini ve tasarım objeleri için önemini anlamak amacıyla tasarım tarihi içinde farklı zamanlardan bakış açıları sunulup tartışılmıştır. Tasarımdaki farklı stillerin karakteristik özelliklerine, oluşumlarında payı olan koşullara ve tarihsel çerçeveye odaklanılarak, stil kavramının, tasarımın sosyal, endüstriyel ve ekonomik boyutları ile ilişkisini gözlemlemek amaçlanmıştır. Günümüze doğru gelirken, ürünlerde stil kavramının bireyler ve tüketiciler olarak insanlar için neden önemli olduğunu kavramak amacıyla, stil kavramı sosyoloji, tüketim kültürü ve pazarlama gibi alanlarla ilişki içinde tartışılmıştır.
Bu çalışma kapsamında, Türkiye’de çalışan endüstriyel tasarımcıların stil kavramına yönelik algılarını ölçmek için, internet üzerinden yürütülen sayısal bir anketin kullanıldığı bir alan araştırması yapılmıştır. Alan araştırmasının sonuçları, çalışmanın teorik kısmında yapılan gözlemler ve varılan sonuçlarla karşılaştırılmıştır.
1 1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Motivations for the Research
There is an apparent increase in the emphasis to aesthetic values, in both cultural and commercial areas of life. In his book “The World as Design”, Otl Aicher expresses the authority of aesthetic values in contemporary life with intense words: “today true human existence is aesthetic existence” (Aicher, 1994). Similarly, this phenomenon has been identified and discussed by many scholars from different fields (Slater, 1997; Postrel, 2003; Lury, 1996), especially those focusing on material culture and consumption.
Naturally, the increase in the importance of aesthetic values brought forth an increased focus on the aesthetic attributes of products. Consumer culture is characterized by the aestheticization of commodities (Slater, 1997), and by the growing emphasis on the style, design and appearance of goods (Lury, 1996). Inside this setting, the concept of style has become ever more critical in the context of industrial design.
Style is a significant notion for all endeavors involving creativity. It gives the object of creation its character, therefore its uniqueness. It is what defines, what differentiates, what identifies the object of creation. The concept of style has been discussed most commonly in relation to objects of art, but style is also a crucial component for products, directly influencing their appeal to consumers. The concept of style is powerful, and its power lies in our intrinsic response to aesthetics. Consumers have various expectations from products like functionality, efficiency, economy, safety and beauty. Although their precedence with respect to each other changes depending on the object and the context in which it will be used, aesthetic concerns are a vital component determining consumers’ choices about product purchase, and the relationship they form with these objects. In the use of everyday objects, the aesthetic dimension enrichens the overall experience, and an object that
2
provides an aesthetic appeal is intrinsically more pleasurable to use (Sartwell, 2003). Aesthetically appealing products are also perceived as easier to use, and this effect has positive implications in the acceptance, use and overall success of products (Lidwell et al., 2003). To be able to use this powerful tool, and to appeal to consumers’ aesthetic expectations, many firms concentrate on the concept of style, and analyze existing product styles with the aim to create new and appealing styles for the intended markets.
Academics state some functions of style in industrial design as being a vital tool for communicating product values (Cagan and Vogel, 2002), and a central aspect differentiating consumer markets (Chen and Owen, 1997).Referring to corporate and brand styles, attention has been drawn to the communicative power of style: “Firms develop design styles. … House styles are more than a clever embodiment of a marketing brief. In the design personality of the firm, its enduring story, lies a direct communication with the customer.” (Francis, 2002). Style is seen as the representation of the overall identity that has been created to represent the values that the product is aimed to communicate, therefore it is strongly related to all aspects of design, be it cultural, commercial, functional, aesthetic or psychologic. In order to understand how product values are conveyed through style, a clear understanding of what constitutes style in industrial design is necessary.
While there have been many studies in industrial design, focusing on product aesthetics, its communicative function, and consumer response to visual and aesthetic attributes of products, the concept of style has not been given much attention per se. Although style and its value for designed objects have been discussed at different times in design history, these discussions are predominantly based on views about the prevailing styles of the time, and the moral value of the notion of style in design, in some cases revealing an ambiguity about the perception of the concept. But, a focused analysis of the concept of style, especially an analysis of what constitutes style in industrial design, how style is formed, and how it functions in this field, has remained somewhat lacking.
In the section named “The Status of Style”, in his book “Ways of Worldmaking”, the philosopher Nelson Goodman begins a discussion about the significance of the
3
concept of style with the questions: “Does this mean that concepts of style are mere instruments for the literary or art historian, curatorial devices for sorting works according to origin? Are styles like catalogue listings and excavation reports, simply aids in filing or have they aesthetic significance? Is stylistics merely part of the mechanics of scholarship or does it concern works as art?” Similarly, the motivation for this thesis is to explore the concept of style and its role in the field of industrial design, and to discuss the perception and the status of the concept of style in this field. What constitutes style for a product, is it concerned with a material appearance that is detached from structure and function, or is it an important tool communicating product values?
1.2 Aims and Scope of the Research
This research aims to analyze the concept of style in the field of industrial design and to discuss its role as an aesthetic design element. By this analysis, it is intended to discuss the following: the elements that form style in products, the functions of the concept of style for the industrial design profession, how style is related to the functional, aesthetic, cultural and commercial aspects of design, and how the concept of style is percieved both in the historical and contemporary scenes. The insights that will be gained through the research will aid the formation of more informed and clear approaches towards style in designed objects.
Style will be explored starting from perspectives in different domains of art and design, in order to grasp the meaning, the essence and the importance of the concept of style for various creative activities. By this analysis, it is aimed to gain insights about the similarities on the understanding and the functions of the concept of style in diverse fields, and using these observations as a foundation, to arrive at a definition for the concept of style in the field of industrial design.
Then, the research will move on to the analysis of style within design history, exploring the effect of changing conditions in the generation, utilization and the perception of style in design with a clear emphasis on industrial design, and finally exploring the concept of style in the contemporary scene. Style will be examined with respect to the modern-day issues and trends in the consumer culture like the rise
4
of aesthetic value and its effects on consumers’ perception and their demands on designed objects. By means of this analysis through time and through different domains of design, it is aimed to discuss and clarify what constitutes style in a designed object and how the concept of style is related to different dimensions of design. Finally, in the light of these analyses, an empirical study is designed to gain insights about how style is perceived by Turkish industrial designers, to find out their characterizations and understanding about the concept, and its function for designed objects.
1.3 Research Questions
The questions that will be explored by this research are:
• What is the meaning and the function of the concept of style in industrial design?
• What is the significance of the concept of style for the field of industrial design?
• What is the perception of the concept of style by contemporary Turkish industrial designers?
1.4 Structure of the Research
Chapter 2 concentrates on defining and discussing the concept of style in diverse fields of art and design, with the aim of gaining insights about the meaning and the significance of the concept. Definitions and interpretations about the concept of style are presented and analyzed in order to identify similarities, and in the light of these observations to be able to draw analogies for the field of industrial design, and to suggest a definition for the concept of style for this field.
In Chapter 3, the concept of style is investigated inside a design historical perspective, with an emphasis on the field of industrial design. Perspectives from different times in design history are explored and discussed, in order to understand the perception of the concept style, its functions and its significance for designed objects. The analysis also focuses on the characteristics of different styles in design,
5
and the historical background and conditions that were influential in their generation, aiming to observe the links between the concept of style and social, industrial, and economic dimensions of design. Moving to the contemporary scene, the concept of style is discussed in association with views from sociology, consumer culture and marketing, to explore the significance of the concept for people as individuals and as consumers.
Chapter 4 presents the methodology, and the analysis of the quantitative survey that was conducted in order to find out the perceptions of Turkish industrial designers about the concept of style. The outcomes of the empirical study are compared with the observations and insights obtained from the theoretical part of the study, to find out the level of congruence between the two.
Finally, all the observations and outcomes of the research are synthesized in Chapter 5, and presented in the form of general discussions and conclusions, together with suggestions for further study.
6
2. DEFINING AND UNDERSTANDING THE CONCEPT OF STYLE
2.1 Introduction
The concept of style has been a critical subject of discussion and research, specifically in the realm of art, and in its different fields such as literature, painting, sculpture and music. For all domains of art, analysis of style furthers the understanding and appreciation of artworks, assisting interpretations about the ways of representation used, the meaning, and the expressive content of these works. Additionally, through the information provided by style, one can discuss and appreciate the authenticity, creativity and the aesthetic qualities of artworks (Ross, 2003). More generally, style is a major subject in the field of aesthetics and the philosophy of art.
Coming to design and specifically industrial design, the meaning of style and its role for the field are subjects that have been given less attention. Vickers (1992) observes that style has different meanings for everyone, and when applied to product design, it becomes even more ambiguous. Reviewing literature reveals this ambiguity as well, where the terms ‘style’, ‘styling’ and ‘design’ are sometimes used interchangeably, depending on the authors’ own perception of the terms. Consequently, the meaning of the concept of style in industrial design, and its role for the profession have remained vague and debatable.
However, style is also indicated by many scholars as a powerful tool for industrial design, a key factor that differentiates consumer markets, and that gives products an identity through which the product communicates to the consumers (Cagan and Vogel, 2002; Schmitt and Simonson, 1997). Chen and Owen (1997) indicate that style is a vital subject for design and it has always been so, since the beginnings of the profession and express their views on this subject as follows:
7
All man-made environments and artifacts have styles – no matter what their creator’s intention – because formal, visual styles are created by particular sets of the formal elements that are also the constituent components of all visible forms. Designers, as designated ‘form-givers’, are expected to understand the workings of this process and to use this knowledge to give sensitive, intentional style to the artifacts they design.
The concept of style encompasses many aspects of design, from commercial to cultural, from aesthetic to functional. Industrial design seeks to combine many different objectives in coming up with a feasible solution. (Walsh et al., 1992) The commercial, functional, social, aesthetic, cultural, and environmental aspects of industrial design are all related to the concept of style, because style is the instrument that is capable of embodying all these factors in a perceptible formal definition. Through the style of a product, suggestions regarding these factors are communicated to the consumers. Vickers (1999) suggests a significant account by observing that when evaluating a product design, we interpret its success or failure based on factors such as its form, its functionality, its construction, where we regard the total physical appeal of the product as its style, but this approach is unproductive if we leave aside the core questions like how that style is created, how it functions to make one product more successful than another one, and what factors are involved in our judgements about style.
To be able to understand how the concept of style is related to these factors, and to identify what constitutes style in products, the concept of style will be analyzed drawing from its definitions and interpretations in different fields. Schapiro (1994a) points out to the fact that there does not exist a grounded system of analysis in defining style, and naturally writers define style according to those aspects that are the most meaningful to their own perspectives and the problems they tackle with. But he observes that in the majority of the definitions three aspects of style are the most pronounced: ‘form elements or motifs’, ‘form relationships’, and ‘qualities’ (Schapiro, 1994a). Form elements or motifs will be taken as the elements of style, form relationships as the structure underlying how style is formed, and qualities as the functions of style. In this chapter, similarities between different definitions and analyses will be explored focusing on the questions: what constitutes style, how style
8
is created and what its functions are, and when found appropriate analogies will be drawn for the field of industrial design.
2.2 Defining Style
Style is a crucial notion for a wide range of subjects and academic fields. Consequently, its definitions inside different domains are various and covers a broad spectrum of characterizations. Besides its various domain specific definitions, the dictionary definitions for style are also numerous.
In Cambridge Dictionary, style is defined as “a way of doing something, especially one which is typical of a person, group of people, place or period”. Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines style as “a distinctive manner of expression (as in writing or speech)”. In the American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, the definition for style is: “the combination of distinctive features of literary or artistic expression, execution, or performance characterizing a particular person, group, school, or era”.
In all these definitions, style refers to the distinctiveness of expression, whatever the mode of expression may be. It is the totality of distinguishing and characterizing features of the expression. Coming to meanings of style in different academic fields, again, we are confronted with a broad range of definitions. These definitions from various fields will be evaluated to identify the core concepts that enter into the definition of style.
In literature and linguistics, Enkvist (1964) has analyzed and grouped different approaches to the concept of style. Some of these approaches are presented as: “style as an addition to a central core of thought or expression”, “style as effective presentation”, style as a choice between alternatives, “style as deviations from a norm”, and style as the frequencies of linguistic features. Evaluating such different views he arrives at the definition: “The style of a text is the aggregate of the contextual probabilities of its linguistic items.” (Enkvist, 1964). Enkvist ties style to context, and views style as the total of the frequencies of context-given linguistic
9
elements, furthered by his statement that style “… is a link between context and linguistic form”.
Art historian and critic Meyer Schapiro explains: “By style is usually meant the constant form – and sometimes the constant elements, qualities, and expression – in the art of an individual or group” (Schapiro, 1994a). For art historian Ernst Gombrich: “Style is any distinctive, and therefore recognizable, way in which an act is performed or an artefact made or ought to be performed and made” (Gombrich 1968). While for Schapiro, style is usually detected by the constancy, or in other words recurrence of the form, components or qualities of the art medium, Gombrich focuses more on the distinctiveness of these features.
Art historians use style as a way to categorize works of art, so they concentrate on the classifications that are made possible by the analysis of style. Goodman regards style as the elements of a work that are specific to an author, period, place or school (Goodman, 1978). Similarly, Ackerman remarks that the concept of style is used as a means to determine relationships among works of art that are made by the same person, group, and/or at the same time and place (Ackerman, 1962). Likewise, Feldman states that “… an art style is a grouping or classification of works of art (by time, region, appearance, technique, subject matter, and so on) which makes further study and analysis possible” (Feldman, 1972). Due to the utilization of style by art critics and art historians as a tool to group works of art, at the core of their definitions lies the classification function of style. The classifications made possible by the analysis of style facilitates broader studies and interpretations about artworks. Other than these various definitions of style in art history, all based on the classification function of style, Schapiro gives a definition that points out to the deeper meanings and ideas communicated by the concept of style: “… the style is, above all, a system of forms with a quality and a meaningful expression through which the personality of the artist and the broad outlook of the group are visible” (Schapiro, 1994a).
In musicology, Leonard Meyer suggests that “Style is a replication of patterning, whether in human behavior or in the artifacts produced by human behavior, that results from a series of choices made within some set of constraints” (Meyer 1987). This definition gives a different perspective on style, focusing on choices, and
10
drawing attention to the notions of freedom and replication in making these choices, in a medium defined by a set of constraints. According to him style is formed by the replications that result by the choices the artist has made, among all the possible choices that can be made while satisfying the constraints. This approach is in similar lines with some approaches in linguistics evaluated by Nils Erik Enkvist, which had been mentioned before, and which also present style as choices between alternatives and their resulting frequencies.
In the field of visual communications, Dondis interprets style as “the visual synthesis of the elements, techniques, syntax, inspiration, expression, and basic purpose” (Dondis, 1973). Therefore, he links style with content and purpose, seeing style as the synthesis of the basic purpose with the available means like visual elements, syntax and techniques. Similarly, philosopher Nelson Goodman points out to the link between style and content by stressing that style refers to the characteristic features of what is said and how it is said, therefore it includes elements of both form and content (Goodman, 1978). His definition for style is: “… the style consists of those features of the symbolic functioning of a work that are characteristic of author, period, place, or school.” He states that his definition does not contrast how with what (indicating form and content should not be perceived as disconnected) , but includes solely those facets (but not all) of both how and what a work symbolizes. Through this definition, he also extends the scope of his style definition beyond the works of art, and covers all man made objects and artefacts, which brings us closest to a definition that is applicable for style in industrial design. He indicates:
Throughout I have been speaking of style of works of art. But need style, as conceived here, be confined to works, or might the term “work” in our definition be as well replaced by “object or by “anything”? Unlike some other definitions, ours does not rest upon an artist’s intentions. What counts are properties symbolyzed, whether or not the artist chose or is even aware of them; and many things other than the works of art symbolize. Insofar as the properties in question are characteristic of an author or maker, style indeed pertains only to artefacts, unless “maker” covers also the person who presents an objet trouvé as art (Goodman, 1978).
In architecture, Eliel Saarinen defines style as a “form language” (Saarinen 1985). For the French architect and theorist Viollet-le-Duc style is “the manifestation of an
11
ideal established on a principle”, he views style as the well-structured and clear expression of a principle (Menocal, 1986).
In “The Illustrated Dictionary of Architecture” by Ernest Burden (2002), style is defined as: “The overall appearance of the design of a building including form, space, scale, materials, including ornementation; it may be either a unique individual expression or part of a broad cultural pattern.” In “The Dictionary of Interior Design” by Martin M. Pegler (1983) the definition is: “The characteristics of a design. The motifs, techniques, and materials typical of a certain period of time or of a particular designer.” Quite interestingly, neither in “The Design Encyclopedia” by Mel Byars (2004), nor in “The Dictionary of 20th Century Design” by John Pile (1990), there exists an entry for the word style. Similarly, style has not been defined specifically in the context of industrial design. Many authors discuss the importance of style for products, denote its functions, and stress its role in giving the product an identity, but throughout my research I have not come across any resource that has a definition for style in the field of industrial design.
Reviewing all these definitions, the major features defining style aredetected as: • Style is identified, suggested, revealed by distinctiveness. Style incorporates
difference, difference from standards, norms.
• Style is an attribute of an expression, of a way or manner of doing something, whether it be the creation of an artwork, an object, or the execution of a performance.
• Style involves a combination, a structuring, a synthesis of several elements, or components.
• Style involves choice: the choice between alternative elements, the choice between alternative qualities possible for these elements, and the choice between alternative ways of bringing these elements together.
12
• Style is related to content and purpose, in other words to what is being expressed and what is desired to be expressed.
• Style lends itself to recurrence. It can occur in different works.
• Style brings about associations, associations with qualities, with ideas, with people, with periods, with other styles.
• Style aids in grouping, in classifications.
• Style has symbolic functioning.
A major level of division in the various definitions of style is observed to be the concentration on different attributes of style. When explaining style, some concentrate on what style does or facilitates, some on the features that form style, some on how style is formed. These refer respectively to the functions, the elements and the structure of style. These definitions which approach style from different planes provide insights about the elements, the stucture and the functions of style, which will be explored further in the following sections. Another main issue mentioned in the definitions from different academic fields is the existence of two major levels for style: the individual and the general. It should be noted that these observations of the concept of style, which are drawn from definitions from different fields are noticed to be valid for every field, including industrial design.
2.3 Two Levels in Defining Style: General Style and Individual Style
When definitions and discussions from different academic fields are analyzed, it is observed that there exists two major levels in approaching the concept style. Many definitions stress the fact that style can either be an individual expression or it can be the expression shared inside a more general context, like styles of certain periods, groups, cultures or schools. Classicism, Baroque, Art Nouveau, Memphis, Bauhaus are some examples of general styles.
As an example to general styles, Art Nouveau is a general style observed in many different fields such as graphic design, architecture, interior design, which was
13
visible in the period between the 1880s and the 1910s. The most distinguishing characteristics of the style is the utilization of highly organic forms, usually based on floral and plant motifs, and curvilinear outlines and structures that are remarkably dynamic and flowing. Figure 2.1 shows Art Nouveau style poster designs by different artists, and Figures 2.2, 2.3 and 2.4 show respectively, a doorway, a desk and a lamp in Art Nouveau style, all works revealing the mentioned characteristics of the style.
Figure 2.1: Poster designs in Art Nouveau style
14
Figure 2.3: A desk in Art Nouveau style
Figure 2.4: A table lamp in Art Nouveau style
Wollheim (1987) states that general styles are different in type from individual styles, artists can work inside the general syles of the time or school they belong to, but they may also possess an individual style. He also views that general styles are ‘taxonomic’, they are detected by locating the common features of a group of works. This facilitates the classification of works of art, or artifacts, and makes the learning of a certain style possible. Coming to individual styles, Ross (2003) explains Wollheim’s claim that individual style has ‘psychological reality’ as meaning that each artist’s style being determined by his personality, values, interests and physical skills. She states that the basic assumption here is that we all have a personal identity and artistic activity expresses this identity. But Wollheim also gives room for the case that some works of an artist might lack an individual style or that it may reflect a quite different style due to changing values of the artist or a desire for stylistic change (Figure 2.5).
15
Figure 2.5: Two works by Pablo Picasso revealing different styles (Left: Woman Ironing, 1904 Right: Girl with a Mandolin, 1910)
A question that art historians deal with is whether a work or an artist should possess a distinguishing style, or can there be ‘styleless’ works and artifacts? There are contrasting views. Some view that style is inevitable, that cultures, their way of living, their beliefs and practices produce general styles, and similarly, the individual personality of each artist results in their individual style. Ross (2003) views this approach as “a sort of stylistic determinism”. Others question why any work must exhibit a unique style and advocate that style is not an inevitable aspect of artworks.
Looking at all these views, parallels can be derived for the concept of style in industrial design, where the prevailing social and cultural ideas and values of a certain time, or the ideas and values of a group of designers can result in general styles, as in the case of Memphis and Bauhaus styles, and these styles can be analyzed, learned and applied by different designers. Similarly, the personal values and approaches of designers can generate their individual distinctive styles, such as the individual style of Luigi Colani (Figure 2.6), Ross Lovegrove, Ron Arad. The designer can generate his distinctive style and carry on with it but he may also produce items exhibiting totally different styles due to his changing motives and objectives, as may be observed in the works of Philippe Starck.
16
Figure 2.6: Products by industrial designer Luigi Colani, characterized by biomorphic forms, that are visible in the camera for Canon, the Pegasus piano for Schimmel and the Feder pen for Messmer
Although analogies are drawn between the concept of style for art and the concept of style for industrial design, it must be stated that this is by no means a way of positioning industrial design as an artistic act, though according to the way the designer choses and finds the opportunity to practice it, it takes on a varying range of characteristics from art.Art is an individualistic practice, where in the most idealistic conditions the artist is limited only with his own constraints, his own desires, his own inspirations. The purpose of art is not practical, but the basic purpose of the creation of a product is to fulfill a practical functionality. Together with the fact that the production takes place in an industrialized system, industrial design has numerous constraints to satisfy, whereas in art, the freedom of stylistic choice is uncomparably greater than it is in industrial design.This indicates the importance of the notions of choice and freedom in the formation of a style. It can be observed that the issue of personal freedom in making stylistic choices is a major factor assisting the generation and expression of style. As the degree of personal freedom in making choices regarding the product design increases, the probability of forming and following a unique personal style increases, and the style of the designer becomes more apparent in the final product. This is the case with famous star designers, who have gradually earned greater freedom to express their individual choices through the proven commercial success of their works. Also in the case of established design
17
studios or brands with their recognized design styles, it can be observed that their approach is design oriented, which gives the opportunity of a larger freedom in making design choices and the creation of products displaying distinctive styles.
2.4 Elements of Style
Reviewing discussions and theories regarding style in many academic fields like literature and linguistics, musicology, fine arts, architecture and design, it is observed that an analysis of style requires refering to both the elements that form a style, and the structure that defines how these elements are related to each other. The coexistence of components and composition is fundamental for the concept of style, and for this to occur the existence of several different components is essential (Chen and Owen, 1997; Edwards, 1945). It is critical to have features that are expressive, and styles are identified through these elements that perform the expressing (Walton, 1987).
For visual communications, Dondis (1973) lists the visual elements of style as dot, line, shape, direction, tone, color, texture, dimension, scale and movement which are the basic materials of what we see. For him style is the synthesis of visual elements with techniques, syntax, inspiration, expression and basic purpose. Therefore, the elements of style are not limited with the elements of the medium, but the notions like techniques, inspiration, expression, syntax and basic purpose also constitute the elements of style, as the components that enter into the synthesis that forms the style.
Menocal (1986) states that in architecture Frank Lloyd Wright views, the plan, the materials, the building methods, the scale, the proportions and the articulation as the constituents that generate the style of a building. For him the plan is the basic idea that initiates a consecutive process of shaping the elements of style. The plan determines the materials that will be used, the materials specify the construction methods, the construction methods indicate the scale or proportions, the proportions form the articulation and all these constituents generate the style of the building. All the formal elements of the design originate from a basic idea, which relates them in scale and character. The differentiation of a particular form result in different expressions. Menocal expresses Frank Lloyd Wright’s use of geometric
18
simplification and abstraction as a tool of generating “a sense of style”. He emphasizes Frank Lloyd Wright’s consecutive and interdependent manner of generation of style from a basic idea, but he also states that rarely and later in his career we can observe a different approach of imposing a style a priori on a building (Menocal, 1986).
Figure 2.7: Variations in the utilization of visual elements in the creation of logotypes in two different styles
In industrial design Chen and Owen (1997) categorize the formal elements of style as all the basic elements of the product that constitute and define the product’s body like materials used, colors, textures, and any graphics on the surface. A style can be generated by a unique composition and configuration of these elements. They
19
suggest that anything that defines the form, and the physical properties of an object is a formal element that enters into the generation of style. As for clarifying the difference between form and style, they express that form is the term that is utilized to describe the overall shape, structure, appearance, design, whereas style is used to state the distinctive characteristic of this overall shape, structure, appearance or design. For them “only those objects which have distinctive qualities have style, while all objects have form regardless of whether they have style; a style needs a form to present its visible appearance” (Chen and Owen, 1997).
An important attribute regarding the elements of style is their qualities. The elements have expressive qualities which Walton calls “style qualites” and Chen and Owen refer to as “stylistic features” (Walton, 1987; Chen and Owen, 1997). They are the feelings and psychological attributes that the elements evoke in the viewer such as smoothness, intricacy, lightness, unbalance, joy, stress. These qualites depend on the elements of style like shapes, lines, colors, materials, which are “intrinsically expressive”, and are modified by changing the character of these elements (Schapiro, 1994a). We can describe works of art or products using these qualities like flamboyant, sentimental, deliberate (Walton, 1987). Another way of describing style qualities is by the help of polar adjective pairs like cool - warm, harmonious - contrasting, heavy - light, which Osgood et al. (1957) have first utilized in the measurement of meaning (Chen and Owen, 1997). As an example to the expressive qualities that can be suggested by proportion and shape, we can observe illustrations by Papanek (1995) depicting how changing the proportions of a car can make it look young or aged (Figure 2.8), and how rounder and smaller shapes express cuteness through associations with baby features (Figure 2.9).
The expressive qualities of the style elements are also used to describe the style of artifacts. The expressive qualities of a single style element category like color may be used to characterize a style as joyful, due to the utilization of bright colors. For example, a characterization that enters the description of Art Nouveau style (Figures 2.1-2.4), is the organic, dynamic and flowing nature of the lines and forms. Here, the elements of style, line and form are isolated as the center of focus, and their distinctive qualities are expressed with the adjectives organic, dynamic and flowing. But the expressive quality of a style can also be due to the total effect created by the
20
combination of different style elements such as color, material and shape all contributing to create the expression of a chaotic or eclectic character as in the case of postmodern style. Postmodern style is characterized with words such as contradictory and eclectic due to the expression generated by the combination of different style elements with diverse expressive qualities (Section 3.6.2).
Figure 2.8: Illustration by Papanek (1995) showing the changes in proportions to make a car look aged
Figure 2.9: Illustration by Papanek (1995) showing the suggestion of cuteness through the use of rounder and smaller shapes
21
Each medium has its own elements of style, and basically these elements are all those that are involved in the generation of the object or work of art; be it a painting, a musical score, a literary piece, a building, or a product. Although the elements alter for each medium, the basic operation for the creation of style is common for all, that is constructing a distinct combination of the stylistic elements that are related to each other by an underlying structure.
2.5 Structure of Style
Examining how style is formed in works of art and in all man made objects brings us closer to understanding the structure of styles. The structure defines how the elements of a system are arranged, organized, and constructed. It involves the relationships that exist between the components. An understanding of the structure together with its components is essential both for the analysis of styles and for the construction of new styles. As Schapiro points out, even though ‘form elements’ are the most apparent constituents of style, and are vital for the expression, they are not adequate for the identification of a style. To be able to differentiate styles, “… one must also look for features of another order and, above all, for different ways of combining the elements in search for a new effect or solution of a new problem” (Schapiro, 1994a). He adds that exploring style is usually seeking for properties that are defined by an organizing principle which is reflected in the individual parts and in the overall pattern. Architectural critic Trystan Edwards stress the relation between architectural composition and architectural styles, drawing attention to the fact that no style can be formed without the existence of composition (Edwards, 1945)
Similarly, Smith (1981) explains the differences between styles occuring as a result of the differences between their elements and the relationships between these elements. He explains how style is formed using the physical properties of matter as a metaphor. Just as properties like density, conductivity, color are not defined by any of the parts, but are dependent on their existence, and are defined by the relationships between the atoms, electrons, and their recurrence throughout the matter’s phase, style is also dependent on the existence of the parts, but defined by the relationships between these parts, namely the structure these parts rest upon. He further suggests
22
an account for the formation of different styles as: “Some styles, like some phase (for example liquid or solid solutions), can tolerate considerable diversity in the shape and constitution of their parts, while others (like simple molecules and covalent crystals depending upon the precise symmetry of nearest-neighbor interaction) are intolerant of substitution: if different parts are introduced, the whole structure will adjust to a new form.” (Smith, 1981).
Likewise in industrial design, style is formed through the choices concerning the number of structural components of a product, how to combine these structural components, and the elements defining each structural component like its material, form, color, texture, ornamentation, and graphics. Taking a chair as an example, it can be composed of several components like legs, a base, a back support, arm supports, and components fixing these to each other, each of them defined by its form, material, texture, color, ornamentation, or it can be made as a single component defined by its form, material, texture, color and ornamentation.
Chen and Owen (1997) express that people differentiate between products by the way its parts are shaped, colored, arranged, and a style cannot be distinguished from others if it does not have different components and variations in the relationships between these components. All authors affirm that in order to differentiate a style, an analysis of both the elements and the structure that determines the relationships existing among these elements is essential. Due to the necessity of the coexistence of elements and structure for the formation of a style, an analogy can be drawn between language and style, the elements of style being the vocabulary and the the structure being the grammar of styles (Edwards, 1945). Edwards state that beyond the vocabulary and grammar is the sense of the language and this sense is expressed by style. By this analogy he also tries to emphasize the expressive function of style. Using a parallel metaphor, architect Eliel Saarinen has defines style as “form language” (Saarinen, 1985).
An important notion mentioned about the structure of style is its hierarchical composition and this notion of hierarchy is usually helpful in analyzing styles. Meyer proposes that styles and their constraints are linked to each other in a hierarchical way (Meyer, 1987). Chen and Owen also explain the hierarchical analysis of style by
23
suggesting that we can classify a Braun coffee maker inside European style, German style and more specifically Braun style, and that these styles constitute three different levels in the style hierarchy. They state: “The discrimination could also be made more finely, even down to a specific period of work for a specific designer. By the same token, it could also be aggregated more coarsely to a universal 20th century western style, distinguishable from styles developed in other historic periods” (Chen and Owen, 1997). The hierarchical characteristics of style facilitate classification of styles under different levels and is commonly used in the field of art history.
Reviewing all these views it can be concluded that in all man made objects, styles are formed through a distinguishable combination of possible stylistic elements. Variations in the structure of the combinations together with variations in the constituent stylistic elements result in the creation of different styles. Style also gives way for hierarchical analysis and this facilitates making structured identifications of styles at different levels.
2.6 Functions of Style
Literature and art history are the two major fields among all others, where the concept of style had been analyzed most thoroughly. In his article ‘Style’, art historian Meyer Schapiro (1994a) states the functions of style as ‘establishing connections between groups of works’, ‘system of forms with a quality and a meaningful expression’, ‘a vehicle of expression … communicating and fixing certain values … through the emotional suggestiveness of forms’, ‘style reflects or projects the “inner form” of collective thinking and feeling’ and ‘style as a value term’. From his analysis of style the most pronounced functions of style are detected as: classifying, connecting, communicating, expressing and reflecting.
Similarly, Enkvist (1964) has examined the existing views about style in linguistics and literature, and identifies very similar functions for style, such as helping classification of works according to period or group styles, expressing and presenting the context, and adding effectiveness. Goodman (1978) asserts similar functions of style: associating works with periods, regions, schools; distinguishing works from others; relating them to each other; and exemplifying and expressing qualities an
24
d feelings. For him style is strongly related to the ‘symbolic functioning’ of works. Through the style of artifacts, qualities, feelings, and values are symbolyzed. Walton (1987) underlines the expressive function of style suggesting that “style is not the expression but the means of expression”.
Coming to industrial design, style has similar functions. Style helps in the identification and recognition of objects and products. Through their styles, and the distinguishing characteristics typical to their styles, information like, the time, school, brand and designer of the objects can be deduced, or exactly identified. Information provided through style also makes classification of objects and products possible. This function is critical for the design historian, but also for consumers. since the consumers shape their perceptions and choices about the products through these processes of identification and classification. Schmitt and Simonson (1997) explain that styles differentiate products and services, and help customers categorize and subcategorize products through the intellectual and emotional associations they provide. Likewise, Person et al. (2008) express that many studies in literature focus on two functions for the use of a consistent brand style, to assist recognition in the market, and to transfer previous product beliefs to a new product under the same brand name. This indicates that besides the functions of identification and recognition, style has an associative function. A style can initiate associations with ideas, values, beliefs, people, brands, periods. As Person et al. have pointed out companies try to use previous product associations in the new products they launch by creating products under the same general style of the brand.
Style is also an expressive tool communicating product values. In the conceptualization of design focusing on product characteristics, the product can be taken as the reprenter of values that have been loaded on it and that can be grasped out of it through the suggestiveness of its form (Buchanan and Margolin 1995; Cagan and Vogel 2002). Crilly et al. (2004) discuss the communicative function of product appearance and place visual product form inside a conceptual framework of a communication process. The communication of values can be achieved through the expressive qualities of the individual elements of style, and/or the total expression created by the synthesis of different elements. For example, the use of a style element like expensive and rare materials in a product can express exclusivity
25
(Figure 2.10), or the use of inexpensive and natural materials combined with simple forms based on functionality can express democratic values (Figure 2.11).
Figure 2.10: The utilization of expensive materials in Vertu mobile phones to indicate values of exclusivity and distinctiveness
Figure 2.11: The utilization of natural materials, simple forms and functional structure in the birch stool by Alvar Alto, 1932-1933
To use as a guide in forming a ‘style description framework’ that is aimed for analyzing the style of objects, artifacts and especially products, Chen and Owen (1997) have made an analysis of the functions of style in various fields and have selected classifying, attributing, expressing and stimulating as the most representative for their objectives. Classifying refers to the categorization of objects through their styles being particular to a period, a culture, a group or a designer. Attributing refers to the assigning of specific style qualities and features to certain styles, and using these stylistic qualities for recognition of other instances of that style, or similar styles. Stimulating refers to the generation of a different style by first
