Style is an Implementation Detail

Why do some styles lend themselves to specific mediums so well: Is minimalism, art deco, or baroque the purest articulation of design? Not all design can be avant-garde; by necessity most design must be corporate, commercial, branded or respectful of its context. While an artist may crave mid-century minimalism a commission at the behest of the Mother of Cathedrals may defy his stylistic inclinations.

Design exists and must be removed from style. One cannot look upon the works of Christopher Wren and claim they are uninspired, debased or offensive to the human eye. Why is design universal and style not? Why do some styles which succeed as demonstrations of design compel us and others are left by the wayside, victims of their many critics? Why do the Triangle, Square, Circle, the Straight Line connect to the human soul and inspire joy? What does the texture of paper make us feel that makes it so right in one place and so jarring in another?

A material’s appropriateness emerges from its dialogue with purpose. Paper can whisper or shout, and its voice must harmonize with its message. In corporate design, this manifests as the necessary tension between innovation and recognition: the brand must simultaneously stand apart and belong.

Greatness in design transcends style while being expressed through it. Wren’s works succeed not because they adhere to or reject any particular style, but because they achieve what philosopher Roger Scruton termed “architectural truth” - they solve problems of space, light, and human experience while speaking in the language of their time.

The universality of design principles juxtaposed against the temporality of style reflects the difference between grammar and vocabulary. Design principles are the deep structure of visual language - its syntax and logic. Styles are the words we choose to speak with this grammar. Some styles endure because they express timeless principles with particular clarity or power, while others fade because they prioritize novelty over necessity.

The resonance of fundamental geometric forms stems not from their simplicity but from their completeness. They are not building blocks but rather distillations, the end points of reduction past which no further refinement is possible. Their joy derives not from what they lack but from what they fully embody: the resolution of complexity into clarity.

This suggests that successful design, regardless of style, achieves such resolution, not by eliminating complexity but by resolving it into clarity. Whether through minimalism or ornate detail, corporate restraint or artistic exuberance, design succeeds when it transforms the complex into the comprehensible without denying complexity’s existence.