5 Feb

… is a necessary component of true elegance, but did you notice how hard it is to define it. I find this question (as many other questions of this sort) pretty easy at an intuitive level, and quite baffling when one tries to articulate the notion. As saint Augustine would have said about time:

If no one asks me, I know what it is. If I wish to explain it to him who asks, I do not know. (Confessions, X,35)

Take shoes, as a random example. Sometimes you find some intricate detailing, but strangely everything falls in place with grace, and the result seems, against all odds, quite simple actually. Let me illustrate this with the work, often wonderful, of Camila Skovgaard (SS11).

Higher Order Simplicity

More complex, and still simple

And then, you just have to glue two relatively simple and mismatching ideas, and the result is… complicated:

More with less, not in a good sense

I know that if I look at them long enough, I end up liking them and finding them oddly natural. But when the spell breaks, I always end up with two halves of a shoe.

On a not unrelated note, let me show you these absolutely delightful boots. It is a Sören D. Petersen design, for Copenhagen. I find them sorely lacking from my shoe cabinet. Which is good, of course. I a way.

Slightly twisted classic

And you, my lovely shrimps, are you moved by simplicity or are you like these raving and wonderful lunatics, a partisan of non Turing-computable fashion?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: