Robert Guyser on a linked in forum got me thinking about ISMs like modernism and minimialism…

ISMs are about absolutes, a belief in a set of principles to guide how you see the world. As an example in the design world maybe there’s something like: consultancyism. A belief that there are set of formulaic processes that can solve ANY problem (i.e. research > prototype > design > release). This gospel-of-process by many design consultancies preaches that it can be applied to design anything and that’s easy on the ears for risk-adverse business-minds. A repeatable process makes them feel safe, comforted in their past. But like all ISMs, it puts the blinders on and limits our ability to come up with a real solution. If we all believed the gospel of modernism and minimalism, we’d live in a world of smooth black bricks Apple-pod-a-la-mode-style. Over simplification perhaps, but any mass-uni-directional philosophy would lead to a rather sterile world indeed. (Which is why there’s a movement away from it in the design community. London Design Week is showcasing quite a bit of biological forms this year. Lots of anti-smooth, anti-rounded-edge-rectangle designs, regressing back to super-ancientism perhaps (nature) .)

The rejection of the ISMs with the punk attitude is beneficial to the designer. The Anti. By not being “for” anything, it allows freedom and maximum flexibility to seek out a solution from any angle. The design itself could have a point of view, as punk does, but still not subscribe to any ISMs.