Composition In Design

Okay I have to admit my business has been doing rather well over the last several weeks and that is probably the main reason for the recent slow-up in postings here. It has also been interesting to see what levels of site visits are maintained when the posting rate changes.

The exact nature of business currently undertaken by my consultancy is still not able to be detailed, as it involves publicly listed corporations with direct implications for the related share prices. And such things are quite rare in these difficult economic times; well, when it comes to positive implications things are rare at the moment!

On less secretive matters though there is one area about which I could regale people long and hard on at the drop of a hat: design. Industrial design, creative design, production design – all kinds of design.

Like Karl Lagerfeld, I am not ashamed of superficiality when it comes to beauty. The superficial is important when the word is not being employed to merely convey 'shallow' or 'a facade.'

I think the great secret to the look of a design – and its intrinsic philosophical or intellectual implications – is in composition. Design composition comes from hard work, well-structured thinking, intelligent decisions. The word taste is used by people discussing art and design but the reality is a whole series of actions and choices and decisions that link functions and elements together.

Image composition is the secret to good photographs, and it is also true of any mechanical item where the function of that item is meant to be part of the lifestyle of the user of the item. The Germans like to have ze multi-funktional instrument, but then the market outside of other Germanic-minded people becomes limited if the product is stupidly ugly – but then a lot of producers make that mistake, not just the Germans!

Perfect composition creates greatness in design. Personally, I find the interior design elements of the new Mercedes SLS terribly flawed, and this detracts from the car's potential for greatness. It is true in any case, that many big corporate designers are stuck in the past – the SLS is a streamlined Dodge Viper look melded with the old original Mercedes Gullwing. Still it is visually appealing and that's what counts. It is not avant garde but why does it need to be if it looks modern and new, stylish and streamlined, and – beautiful.

Again, to quote Lagerfeld: 'a respectable appearance is sufficient to make people more interested in your soul.' I agree with him. A profoundly good and wise and wonderful person may certainly exist behind a rough or roughened exterior within a surrounding context of misfortune, accident, or privation. But I think the choice of the adjective 'respectable' is intelligent, and meaningful. And I have found that in business, in life, and especially in human personal relationships, a 'respectable' appearance will show you a person who will never let you down, but tiny little flaws in what they composed of their own appearance, will announce to you the virtual certainty of failures to come.

A person might show damage, material limitations, or even relative material poverty – but these are not flaws. Mitt Romney, on the other hand, is a person without visible damage, material limitations, or material poverty, and yet shows countless surface flaws to any student of human nature. You can judge a book by its cover. This book will have a substance seeking to make late middle age chic, an arrogance about who deserves to be wealthy, and a nature that fits easily into blue jeans. Some gun-slingers make their name though, by shooting people in the back. They're the ones who find it easy to smile all the time. They've never faced a real challenge or a fair fight in their lives. Watch a tyrant or a political brutalist: they're always smiling or at least being cocky. Am I right? That's not a respectable way to deal with other people. Give me a serious-looking guy. And always beware the Ides of March.

Best,
Calvin J. Bear

Overcoming The Modern Mental Staleness

In my own personal view of myself, I regard myself as the student of about three or four quite significant and at one time world-famous individuals, although they are mostly not that much remembered anymore. Professor Munro Leaf from Harvard was a tutor of mine for a short while – he created the story behind the first Disney fullscreen colour cartoon: Ferdinand the bull. I got engineering lessons from some people I won't name although one was trained in Nazi-occupied Holland and I'd have to say, gave the impression to me that he was of two minds about what Nazism meant to him.

As far as psychology is concerned I am very proud to say I was something of a disciple of the late architect, psychologist, and polymath Paul Ritter, the man who laid the foundation stones of the original World Trade Center towers.

The one thing that I can distil from having known all of these people is a clear impression – as a result - that today's world possesses a kind of a 'spirit of deliberate mental staleness' and the consequences of this are bound to reflect in its buildings, architecture, social patterns and ultimately in the inevitability of widespread political, economic and social failure.

To build things worthy of the appellation of 'greatness,' is a lot lot harder than the government of Beijing knows, for instance, and it's not about 'doing more big buildings,' and takes a considerable amount of substance more than just the facile supplying of money which can of course be easily accomplished by drug cartels operating in Miami, as much as it can by the central planning committees typical of most contemporary governments.

To be great you have to know how to transgress the protective and self-defensive psychological umbra of other people, be able to get under their skin in a nice way, and make them much more human, rather than simply more 'televisual...' And really, beyond 'more human,' you also have to progress things and propel people into the future. You have to be avant garde.

One of the problems about blandness and intellectual staleness prevalent everywhere today is in the expression of the style and substance of today's woman. I agree, for example, with a few other bloggers about the recent interpretation of 'Irene Adler,' played by Lara Pulver, in the popular new television series 'Sherlock.' At first it seems she's clever – maybe cleverer than Sherlock himself - independent, sexual, and very bad, only for the whole thing to disappear under the idea that she is a puppet of Sherlock's nemesis, Moriarty.

A lot of what is passed off today as interesting, exotic, erotic, and attractive – is simply trite.

And following on from the last post I wrote about the Heineken beer commercial, why the superficiality when they could have extracted so much more from a legitimate mondo-ethnic source like: Bowyer-Yin's “Meet The Tiger.” Playing on the presumed superficiality of contemporary people is a mistake; yes the ad works, but it could have worked so much more. What are they all afraid of, these drips who have been hogging the commercial world for so long? And that includes Rupert Murdoch, who is an old fool. And all the politicians who kow-towed to him for so long are going to have to deal with people like me and the blogs that will go down into history standing in stark contrast to the self-important nonsense that has been written up till now about reactionaries like Reagan and Thatcher and Harry Lee – the nonsense that was mostly put up by themselves and their appointees funded by them to create the propaganda. Lee, for instance, purports in the Wikepedia entry about himself, that he was an interpreter for the Japanese, and no one says a word about it. Well, of course, you won't hear any complaints from the 50,000 ethnic Chinese (at least) who were genocidally massacred by bayonet and knife by the Japanese when they first entered Singapore. So much for the bullshit from Mr. Lee about how he was a great torch-bearer for ethnic Chinese interests.

Calvin J. Bear

Heineken's Froth And Bubble

Decadence. The importance of this idea – especially today – should not be lost to you under the noise of the news media screaming at you about Greek debt and 'part default' and 'austerity.'

After the zenith of an age, there remains the overgrown and the overbuilt – unfunctional and existing only because of the wastefulness of the supreme owners of the money and the power that was construed at the height.

Are you familiar with that current filmic commercial advertisement for Heineken beer? You know, the one with the magician and the appearing rabbit, the guy, the girl, and the Chinese waiter and the curly-haired singer in the tuxedo... It's called 'The Date.' The Art Director was Alvaro Sotomayor.

This ad was not dreamed up in fifteen minutes, if you know what I mean. I know people, or at least once upon a time I did - at board level at Heineken. They are very much the kind who believe in a cosmopolitan ideal and a modern cosmopolitan world and lifestyle. And in that vision, Asia has long been a significant market for Heineken even though they are also totally a global brand.

It's a great ad. But it is also the very essence of the meaning of decadence: referring to everything yet tied to nothing, lacking in intellectual depth, pointless, meaningless, and possessing no moral values. Believe me I am the very last person to preach to anyone about moral values(!) however it is decadent; it expresses a decayed intellect and a nondescript salad-mix world. Okay today's kids will love it and care less about what it is being lost in the process. And okay it will sell beer. And that's the problem with decadence, it happens when the money no longer cares or needs to care about anything other than serving itself and devising rationales for its own careless behaviour.

The art deco world and the modernistic industrial gothic world were thought of as examples of decadence. They are not. Human beings used the overhangs of that overbuilt past wealth and there and we got a slightly positive image of 'decadence' as a result. No one is going to use anything from the imagery or the ideas or the economics reflected in this ad 'The Date.' They are all perfectly useless and meaningless. The argument will of course be raised that multi-ethnic, multi-cultural egalitarianism is the point. It's not the point; selling product is the point. And that's because a totally mindless lack of regard for any of the cultural motifs used in the ad is shown by the producers. It is all facile and fatuous. Cultures are cultures because they have depth and meaning. 'Fun' is not an excuse for terminal shallowness. When you have money, and you have the sense of humour to sponsor and project 'having fun' on a global media platform, you also have the cultural responsibility to demonstrate that you care about something too. Ultimately, this ad shows absolutely no respect for the past, and for the real people of the past, and for culture and no matter how many times these monied upstarts assert they are respecting the egalitarianism of modern 'mondo-cultural' youth, you really have to wonder whether it is all because they have no clue and are fatuous, rather than that they are just being 'carefree.'

Because they are forever just being superficial. And there is never any depth coming from them at all. And the froth and bubbles are starting to look a bit thin, more like scum, in fact, than froth. And that is what I think of the leaders of the Euro-zone, too. Everybody looks upon the guy with the date in the ad as if he is a superstar worthy of greater respect and admiration ahead of everyone else... Certainly this is the vision the Euro-zone leaders have of themselves, and certainly the way ratings agencies, most banks, and the Murdoch media, look at themselves.

It's a fatuous fantasy. Sort of forgiveable in a commercial about beer.

Calvin J. Bear

Lantern Festival

I have always been doubtful of the criticism about synchretism. Well, not only did I grow up in a highly multi-ethnic, multi-cultural society – there were two people within the household who, originally orphaned after World War II, grew to their teens not knowing that they were in fact full siblings, yet having originally been raised one by a Chinese family, and the other by an Indian family... One spoke only haka, the other mostly only tamil and a little english.

And it was virtually a complete accident that they were employed within the same household too, with my father and mother going through birth and immunisation records with a schooling register that was being formed post-war, from memory I think just to work out what real ages students were, and discovering the facts of the situation when they realised who the actual individuals were these particular details referred to. I won't go into how the matter was eventually revealed to all the people involved, suffice to say it all went extremely well indeed.

The internet is doing one thing very well and that is to underscore that the world of human beings is actually only one world. People today can and do rapidly access information and cultural ideas and aspects from across the entire globe and there will be an inevitable social, cultural, conclusion to that in the future.

Fifteen days after the beginning of the Chinese Lunar New Year, is the lantern festival. I understand this as a Taoist tradition – because that was the predominant Chinese ethnic cultural group dwelling in that part of the world where was raised. I do think in fact, that it is indeed a Taoist tradition fullstop, but of course it has been changed around in varying parts until today, say for example in Singapore, it is quite a bizarre, commercialised, spurious portrayal of something, I'm not sure what, but certainly something the Singapore government feels will appeal to the tourist dollar. Singapore is the very 'least Taoist' place in the world that I can think of!

Synchretism is one thing, but then there is such a thing as simply a bad human, and there is such a thing as a bad type of government or system, or a malicious tyrannical dictatorship- these things are not about differences of philosophy; they are about evil motivations and corrupt and evil motives. Whether they are disguised or rationalised spuriously, or whether they are open and obvious, it is possible to detect the difference between what are merely distant philosophies, and otherwise simply narrow-minded, single-minded, self-aggrandizing and self-important attitudes.

However, just for the moment, I shall focus only on the Lantern Festival, its beauty and its subtletly, and its myserious aspect, which is typical of all things Taoist. On the lanterns, there are meant to be puzzles of various kinds, that you can contemplate and try to solve, as the light breezes touch the swinging brightly-coloured candle-holders... as they slowly sway on long strings in the warm evenings...

Best,
Calvin J. Bear

Fantasy, Gambling, And Fast Money

Listen, the only kind of money you want to concentrate on going after is fast money.

I can't be sure of what type of person reads this but I've made myself a rule not to compromise on my own style and expressing what my innermost thinking is based on what experience has taught me. The fact is I known that many people carry preconceived positions on many things and worse still, there is individual brain psychology going on that manhandles whatever anyone says, not just what I might say.

Jesus Christ said this: the love of money is the root of evil; do not rely on material riches because when they fail you, what will you then do?

Money, you see, in the form of something captured, or kept, or held to you, is static. Meanwhile everything around you moves. Money, and even the value of it, while you're still holding it, can seem to evaporate into thin air because of the scale and rate of external change. If you have a real lot of it (money), do you know that if you stack it, the notes on the bottom can actually wear away over time? There are banks that I have seen in Switzerland and Germany, with special stacking machines made typically in those countries – machines that all they do is stack and re-stack notes to slow down this wearing away process.

Today, you see the mainstream media carrying on about how the IMF(!) is the reason that countries (for instance such as those countries under pressure in the Euro zone right now) can have a viable and valid currency. And that is absolute rubbish.

The only reason you can have a viable and valid currency is that people have a belief in it.

Nobody believes in the IMF except those inside its closed circle of power and who want to preserve its power and position of political influence and I would add, interference.

Consequence: money is evaporating under everybody's nose because the IMF is not imaginative enough to engage people's genuine belief which is starting to move away very fast.

So we have this set of socially common misconceptions about valuable things which includes an aversion to gambling, fast money, and fantasy.

Nonetheless, if Mrs. Georg Philipp Telemann never gambled, and her husband not have felt an obligation to pay her debts, her husband would have written far fewer baroque pieces of music for us to enjoy today. If fantasy were not so powerful, we would not be able to anticipate the sci-fi movie spectacular coming out this year John Carter of Mars, originally written by Edgar Rice Borroughs of Tarzan fame. Fantasy makes Hollywood movies! And lots of money!

Lynn Collins in the new John Carter Of Mars movie

In the search for the real and the substantial, the usual default human position is risk-aversion and what appears to be prudence and restraint. This default position arises from a mental laziness, and a fear, and a group delusion about safety and security. Now my meaning here is that in order to attempt anything with a chance to succeed that involves risk, imagination, unique action, and daring – you have to accept that to possess the skills required and to train for them to function successfully is more elevated a thing than even is in the hands of the people in the IMF right now... So I don't really look down on what I have been calling mental laziness and the fear of failure – that fear is real and a sensible feeling. Jesus Christ, in my own view, did not come to speak to everyone and what he really was saying was directed at the human in its peak potential state. In that state, magical thinking, is both realistic and capable of affecting the external material world. But all that stuff, is not for ordinary people, but extraordinary people.

Best,
Calvin J. Bear