Fred Brooks, author of the classic Mythical Man-Month, has a new book of his essays titled The Design of Design, where he explores the design (lowercase ‘d’) process. Brooks’ discussion is at times academic – in a good way. If you’re looking to read about Web standards or typography, look elsewhere – this is a deep dive into the processes of design.
It’s a worthy read, and contains the best definition of style that I’ve come across. It’s lengthy, but worth quoting entirely:
What is Style?
Precisely what is this characteristic way of working that confers designer recognizability on the products? This question is harder than it appears.
Definitions. The Oxford English Dictionary defines style, in the sense we are considering, as
14. Those features of literary composition that belong to form or expression rather than to the substance of the thought of matter expressed.
21. A particular mode or form of skilled construction, execution or production; the manner in which a work of art is executed, regarded as characteristic of the individual artist or of his time and place.
Webster’s Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913 Edition):
4. Mode of presentation, especially in music or any of the fine arts; a characteristic or peculiar mode of developing an idea or accomplishing a result.
Akin [1988], “Expertise of the architect”:Style as an expression of the designer’s personal and professional choices is a vehicle which helps limit the many degrees of freedom that design problems have.
A Characteristic of Detailing. We observe that different works by the same artist are different in the subject painted, or the genre and themes of music composed, but alike in recognizable style. Similarly, the Oak Park church by Frank Lloyd Wright has certain resemblances of parts and arrangement to other architects’ churches, but it has a close affinity of line, of detailing, of ornamentation, of palette, wth Wright’s residences. Whatever style is, it has more to do with details of design than with the main purpose or thrust.
A Hypothesis: Minimization of Mental Effort. All design, all creation, involves hundreds of microdecisions. Habits seem to be a mechanism by which economize on mental effort, by which we reduce the burden of decision making in everyday life. If this is indeed an inborn human, trait, it surely carries over into our creative activities. Absent substantial reasons to do otherwise, we make the same microdeicsion the same way every time. The bundle of microdecisions, consistently made, characterizes our work and gives it the particularity, the distinctiveness, that yields recognizability.
Consistency across Microdecisions. One would expect microdecisions to be consistent not only across time but also across sets of similar decisions. In related microdecisions, the same factors enter, and the same mind would naturally weight them in a consistent way.
A Frank Lloyd Wright will tend to use rectilinear elements instead of curved ones in all his decorations, and in his structures, too. A Seymour Cray will consistently opt for maximum performance over compatibility with his earlier computers.
Clarity of Style. To the degree that a designer does indeed achieve consistency across a wide range of macro- and micro-decisions, we say that he has a clear style, meaning that it is possible to describe it economically. It follows that recognitition is easier.
Even a baroque architecture can show clarity of style. Wright’s architecture was spare as well as clear, but those aren’t the same property.
When little consistency across design decisions is achieved, we call the style opaque or muddled. Somehow, consistency brings clarity, and clarity brings delight.
My working definition:
Style is a set of different repeated microdecisions, each made the same way whenever it arises, even through the context may be different.
Moreover, related microdecisions are resolved in related ways.
Style unquestionably exists. A few bars tell us that a work is Bach’s, or Mozart’s, or Schubert’s. A famous exhibition brought together many Rembrandts, and many works once attributed to Rembrandt but now recognized as imitations. The experts agreed as to what was genuine; even laymen could tell surprisingly often.
Reasonably knowledgeable people can readily tell a Seymour Cray computer from a Gerry Blaauw or Gordon Bell one. The authors of the Federalist Papers have been conclusively identified by details of their prose styles. Programmers can identify each other’s code. C. S. Lewis argues that Jesus’s miracles faithfully display the hallmarks of Father’s creative style.