In an age where we’re told to always strive for efficiency, monetization, and TOTAL OPTIMIZATION, doing something purely for the fuck of it becomes a subversive, revolutionary act. Charlie is a very smart dude who has deployed a significant amount of his time and creative juices on something that makes no sense, will make no money, and can’t possibly change the course of history. The point seems to be to demonstrate that such things are still possible — that we can still follow a whim to wherever it leads. When grown-ups decide to PLAY, things get weird. Don’t believe me? Call 1-800-501-DOIT (no console required).
The thread running through the podcast of how creativity and capitalism interact put me in mind of the street artist Banksy and how the artworks he gifted to the people then got chiselled out of brick walls and taken away for ‘safe keeping and preservation’ or private sale as soon as he gained fame and his artworks started attracting big money. Now each new piece is tainted by ugly ownership battles that instantly follow.
The idea that being creative means giving permission to make mistakes and fail has always been complicated, if you work in a "creative" profession.
When I worked in the interior/furniture design business, I was supposed to always come up with new ideas, but these new ideas were *always* expected to work flawlessly in one try (especially if you work in the private sector for wealthy clients, and your designs are "one-offs") with the 'prototype' being the final piece you're selling to the client. Imagine you're designing a glass staircase for a lobby: out of building two staircases (one the prototype to run tests and the final product) how will you 100% ensure your new design is going to work as you intended, given that most engineers you consult will say "hey, I've never seen something like this so I give you no guarantees"?
So it's no wonder that in the end most architects/designers play it safe by copying from what they have already done in the past, or what others are doing.
Anyway, since you began this conversation by talking about book cover designs, this is my shameless opportunity to plug my own website (absurdbydesign.com) when people can check the covers I have designed.
The thread running through the podcast of how creativity and capitalism interact put me in mind of the street artist Banksy and how the artworks he gifted to the people then got chiselled out of brick walls and taken away for ‘safe keeping and preservation’ or private sale as soon as he gained fame and his artworks started attracting big money. Now each new piece is tainted by ugly ownership battles that instantly follow.
The idea that being creative means giving permission to make mistakes and fail has always been complicated, if you work in a "creative" profession.
When I worked in the interior/furniture design business, I was supposed to always come up with new ideas, but these new ideas were *always* expected to work flawlessly in one try (especially if you work in the private sector for wealthy clients, and your designs are "one-offs") with the 'prototype' being the final piece you're selling to the client. Imagine you're designing a glass staircase for a lobby: out of building two staircases (one the prototype to run tests and the final product) how will you 100% ensure your new design is going to work as you intended, given that most engineers you consult will say "hey, I've never seen something like this so I give you no guarantees"?
So it's no wonder that in the end most architects/designers play it safe by copying from what they have already done in the past, or what others are doing.
Anyway, since you began this conversation by talking about book cover designs, this is my shameless opportunity to plug my own website (absurdbydesign.com) when people can check the covers I have designed.