You are a creator. Unfortunately, with great creations come great burdens. You are the balancer between the ever evolving techniques of the future and a silencing simplicity. We, as creators, try to make as many complex computer programs as possible to simplify our lives. Read that last sentence again, then you will understand my problem.
This story was originally published in Turn The Page #62, November 2017
The high-tech features on your phone are supported by a simple interface. I do not understand how we have managed to live with so many complications, which are all defined by things we want, when we do not need it to complete or emphasise our existence. I think that, like in Ockham’s razor: “Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem”, plurality should not be practiced unless it is necessary.
Not simplicity
To understand the term ‘simplicity’ we have to dig deep. The word seems rather straightforward, but the meaning racks my brain. First of all, let us look at what simplicity is not. Minimalism? People try to look for simplicity in this philosophy. Let us agree that this term, that literally means ‘less’, is not the one and only solution, as life can become more difficult if you do not have the right resources, or any at all. For example, being homeless means having less but it does not necessarily make your life any simpler. Owning everything in the world does not either. Simplicity as balance; I do not think so either. You can be in perfect balance with all your activities but still experience a lot of pressure. A poster can have exactly as much text or image on every spot but that does not mean it is easy to understand or read. So maybe ease is simplicity? They might sound like synonyms. Things that are simple are easy to do and to remember, right? I can argue that too, because someone being sad about 9/11 might be easy to understand but the feelings are not simple. On the contrary, sometimes easy things are the hardest to understand.
Bare in mind that all of the above can be explained by simplicity but simplicity cannot be defined by all of the above. Using simplicity is easy. Defining, or rather creating it is the work of a genius. Davinci said it best: “Simplicity is the greatest sophistication.”
Complexity
Let us take a look at what feeds simplicity: complexity. These terms are like night and day. However, the moon needs the sun so they can both be the best they can.
What if I tell you that chaos is, in fact, surprisingly simple? That would bring us to the theory of John Gribbin. In his book, he explains that all chaos and surface complexity arises out of deep simplicity. This can be clarified by two laws that all systems obey. A swinging pendulum, the Solar System, water dripping from a tap, everything is in some shape or form reliant on its starting conditions. A small difference in the initial push can heavily impact in where an object ends up. The second law is the law of ‘feedback’; everything a system does will eventually have an impact on its own behavior. Remember from this theory that simplicity underpins all complexity. Chaos can be untangled.
There is no simplicity without complexity. Every sentence I write is structured differently, because we believe sentences should differ. Words should alter. Constructions should alter. I should alter. I have trouble writing these sentences. You have trouble enjoying the text. Instead, we use different sequences and synonyms to make things more interesting and exciting to read (or listen to or see). People use complexity to make things interesting. Also, complexity is a must, just so we can define simplicity when we see it. The best way to look at it is like a sinus curve: below the midline we have complexity and above we have simplicity, and to exist they both must alternate between one another. If this does not convince you maybe John Maede can, in his book ‘Laws of simplicity’.
Design for simplicity
As I said in the introduction, a creator is a Semi-God in a universe where simplicity is heaven and technology represents earth. In the well-known book ‘Simplicity’, the British psychologist and inventor Edward de Bono writes about the rollercoaster of the 20th century, in which complexity was the engine but we, as human beings, felt a need to hold on to simplicity. It might be the thought-provoking study, it might be his style of writing, but I think the main reason why people absolutely love this book is the title. It is the lateral thinking that convinces you simplicity is a key value in modern day life.
How do we, as creators, advocate this phenomenon? How do you make our products so simple in order for them to be used to the fullest? An item should be designed in such a way that it proves it offers an endless amount of possibilities without scaring anyone off- it must balance seeming complex with being simple to use. When a product is too complex, it can insinuate a steep learning curve (require its user to have to learn new skills in order to use the product). Can a designer even do that? It seems like a paradox in this rapidly evolving technical world, in which we strive to make things easier. Maybe it is because technology is becoming more complex, that user interaction had to become more simple. The newest scientific gadgets are wrapped, preferably, in a log of wood. Because we understand the log of wood, we know it. After that make sure it has as few buttons as possible. Maybe one day Apple will succeed their quest to ‘no-buttons-at-all-land’.
The Apple Way
A keyword in this quest is ‘hiding’. All the things we do not need can be thrown away instantly. You do not need three different holes in your phone so make one and use bluetooth to listen to music. All the things we do need can be hidden. If you make a little bike lamp and make the hardware see through everyone will believe it to be a more complicated product than an iPhone.
The Public Transport Way
Another thing we must consider is time. If things take less time, or seem to take less time, they appear simpler. If going to the hospital is a 10 minute deal, it is as simple as dropping by. But make people wait eight and a half hours and it is harder. Did you notice what I did here? I made the two time frames of a different length so it would cost you more time to read it. Funny, right? The second sentence is so much less simple than the first. Well, quod erat demonstrandum (or QED if you like).
The Scandinavian Way
In order to become a master of simplicity, you must desire it more than anything. When determining whether simplicity is a real value, you must be prepared to trade off other values. Look at the Swedish furniture mega giant IKEA. One of their main points of existence is democracy and therefore they want simplicity in their products. They are willing to work on making functionality a reality to make the experience less complex. Rooms that are pre-decorated, drawn manuals and the uninspired, yet wildly successful ‘Billy’ bookcase.
The Only Way
John Maeda’s dictates in his ‘Laws of Simplicity’: Simplicity is about subtracting the obvious and adding the meaningful. I have read about a dozen books on simplicity and I need you to remember this. Question every feature of your product and modify if you can. Go out of your way to design simple and if, after you have considered every possible way, you still can not see the wood for the trees, start over.
So, I did write you a text (well, a sequence of words) about simplicity and balancing this with modern-day technology. At least, I would like to think so. The stupid thing about simplicity is the more you focus on it, the harder it is to see it clearly. Even with the relatively concrete tips I have written down for you, it seems to me you are even more curious for what simplicity is. So essentially, I made your career as a designer less simple. Sorry!
