Press Release
Design: Emotional drive
Giving concepts a concrete shape is a challenge that a designer must face time and time again. But no matter how many times the process is repeated, it can never become routine. Unlike for an engine, for example, mathematical formulae and the laws of thermodynamics are only of limited use when grappling with the concreteness of a three-dimensional product.
Good design should follow function. But that doesn’t just mean mechanical function. The principle “form follows function” also applies to the elusive function of emotional drive.
The path taken to achieve an outstanding design cannot really be described, but only traced back from a finished product. There are no real natural laws available to help us achieve great designs, otherwise every design would be a design classic; in no other field is the process of approximation as essential as in the field of form-finding. For all the confidence that good designers have in their own style, a hint of uncertainty always remains, which only becomes a conviction once the finished product has been confirmed as embodying all of the relevant positive attributes.
Good design stubbornly resists any clear definition. This is largely because a product must first mature in people’s perception before it can truly be considered as good design. What’s more, good design is only fully realised when it is viewed in conjunction with its surroundings. A classic chair can only be classic if the other furniture around it also conveys something of a bygone age.
This explains why, when people are out in the streets, they tend to look at the smart fortwo more than any other car: With its fresh, cheerful look and its likable character, it stands out from the crowd and begs to be admired.
Does design have to be beautiful? Does design have to be popular? Is it acceptable for design to divide opinions? And does it really always have to follow function?
Good design doesn’t have to be about beauty. Agreeable, “love at first sight” design quickly descends into the realms of banality and universality. And yes, it is acceptable for design to divide opinions, because it is always preferable to inspire enthusiasm in some people and scepticism in others than to create simply a pervading sense of “niceness”. If something appeals to the majority, that means it is catering for average tastes. And averageness means mediocrity. That is why good design is initially always controversial.
But it is much easier to recognise a good design than to say what it is that makes it so good.
We know straight away if we like something. But when asked why we like it, we need to stop and think for a while. And the question as to how good design is achieved leaves us almost completely lost for words. Hardly anyone could come up with an answer to that question off the cuff. Possibly a designer.
The principles of good design
The great philosopher Immanuel Kant said that there can be “no objective rule of taste that defines in terms of concepts what is beautiful” – or must be beautiful. However, the tortuous search for some kind of definition has allowed a number of basic principles to be deduced:
- Good design makes us feel good.
- Good design becomes more prominent than the object’s actual function.
- Good design is bold, consciously breaking away from convention and traditional ways of looking at things, but never ignoring them completely.
- Good design respects tradition.
- Good design points the way to the future.
- Good design does away with unnecessary frills to concentrate on what is essential.
- Good design is highly functional.
- Good design provides a direction.
- Good design helps to create strong brands.
Thus giving a form to “things” is far from simple. Particularly when these “things” are not mere consumer goods, but elements in a deep, emotional relationship.
This becomes even more difficult when designing a product whose form is not the essence of the product, but instead must express the product’s underlying high-quality technical nature. A classic chair leaves no room for hidden finesse, and must make its impact through what it is and for its own sake. A car, however, is quite a different matter. Here the design becomes the user interface to our emotions and to our demands on the subtle perception of the technical capabilities that the vehicle represents. Our subconscious expects faultless technology, and our sense of aesthetics wants to be wooed.
These were the issues that the designers of the smart fortwo had to face. To fulfil the requirements, they needed to step back from the formal principles usually applied in automotive design, and take a completely new tack. Their design also needed to respond to specific social phenomena: the oil crises in the early 1970’s and 80’s that were the first hints to the world that natural resources are finite, the success of the car and the growth of private transport in general, leading to increased pollution and a shortage of parking space in cities.
These social developments soon inspired Mercedes-Benz to ask what a car must look like if it is to meet these requirements without depriving drivers in any way. It didn’t take long to decide what basic features a car of this kind must have: four wheels, two seats, an engine, and a length of approx 2.5 metres. That was back in 1981. Discussions took place, but the resulting proposals were not found to meet the stringent safety requirements of Mercedes-Benz. Ten years passed and the project was put on ice again and again until Mercedes-Benz Design in Sindelfingen finally managed, in cooperation with the Advanced Design Center in the USA, to reconcile form with function in such a way as to satisfy the company’s tough requirements. And to ensure that the vehicle had emotional presence.
A greenfield factory was built where completely new approaches could be implemented at every stage of the development process. Unconventional thinking was to permeate everything from the first product specification and the product objectives right through to the structure of the design process. The production processes, too, were to be completely new. In this way, not only was a new vehicle concept conceived, but all of the framework conditions were redefined.
The smart fortwo represented the ultimate challenge for designers right from the start, because the aim was not just to come up with a totally new, intelligent concept for automotive individuality, but also to reflect this concept in concrete form. The new vehicle would need to awaken positive curiosity, but not completely disregard existing ways of looking at objects. People should be touched positively by the form of this very short, two-seater vehicle, but at the same time should be able to take it seriously.
Though this design project was completely free from restrictions, and although its development was subject to no preconditions whatsoever, the design of the smart fortwo still needed to reconcile virtually all facets of formal incompatibility. Something totally new had to be born from contradictory requirements in terms of function, aesthetics and safety technology, to create a perfect synthesis from numerous theses and antitheses.
The smart designers, in their quest to identify the right direction for the fortwo, allowed themselves to be guided by four essential principles:
- Firstly, design creates joie de vivre,
- Secondly, that a smart will be experienced primarily through its design,
- Thirdly that, despite the car’s compact external dimensions, safety must not be compromised in any way,
- Fourtly, that the smart fortwo, for all its emotionality, must provide mobility and sufficient space for two people.
The task was therefore to create a design-oriented city-car that, while offering ample interior space, would satisfy both the high safety requirements of customers and (!) the safety philosophy of the company.
The designers drew their inspiration from everything that makes life worth living, and that makes a vehicle attractive and even lovable. Their imagination was fired by many of the kinds of products that we encounter on a daily basis – fashion, architecture and furniture – and by the ways in which materials are used and combined - but also by icons of automotive history such as the Citroen 2CV and the original Mini.
Ultimately, this process yielded the unique smart body concept that was to open up totally new possibilities: for example the variable colour concept, whereby the smart owner can change the colour of the plastic body parts of their vehicle, to give the car a new look whenever they see fit. Here the designers were inspired by structural plastic-metal connections on motorcycles The smart fortwo is widely viewed by design experts as a “successful” design: it has character, it stands out in a crowd, it is original. Not least for this reason, was the smart included in the collection of the New York Museum of Modern Art (MoMA), as a design that captures the spirit of the 1990’s? What could be a better indicator that this is truly a classic design?
The smart fortwo embodies everything that makes a design good. The smart looks practical, intelligent and honest. It has a strong emotional aura that touches us in a pleasant, positive way. Its characterful aesthetics speak for themselves. Its compact appearance, accentuated yet further by overhangs that are so short they are barely visible, conveys an inviting, modern, fresh sensation. The typical tridion look of the safety cell clearly communicates the safety function that it has been designed to perform. There could hardly be a more eloquent expression of that most basic principle of design, that form must follow function.
Now, almost a decade after the inception of the smart fortwo, smart designers face the question of what the next stage should be in the development of this car, this concept, this unique character. To develop something means to keep its strengths while at the same time turning it into something new. Creating something new without forfeiting any of a product’s original uniqueness – this sounds like a very tough challenge. And it’s true: this is very difficult, yet achievable. The example of Stuttgart Zuffenhausen shows us that the challenge can be met, and very successfully, too. What is needed is for the product idea to be treated with great sensitivity, and the characteristics that define the product and its form to be very clearly identified. On top of that, courage and far-sightedness are essential, and even the smallest details must be subjected to intense discussion. At the same time it is important to take a big step back from the product. If the right balance of proximity and distance is there – in other words, if the designers are able to take an intimate look at the product from an outside perspective – then the result will be a bold successor to the original product with the genes of its predecessor. It will be recognised as new, but accepted as tried-and-tested.
