Defining the Substance of Design Vs. Style
General Motors Corp.’s decision to reenter the automotive design wars after several decades of neutrality focuses attention on the not-so-thin line that divides design from style.
In the auto industry, designers refer to themselves by that designation, and they work in design centers, not styling studios. But in advertising and marketing, it is more common to hear announcers sing the praises of the new Mark II’s cutting-edge style, or of XYZ car company’s styling leadership.
Product designer Mark Dziersk, president of the Industrial Design Society of America, says understanding that one is substance and the other fluff is an issue the auto industry has often failed to come to grips with.
“They have to learn the distinction between design and style,” he said. “You take a good design--which includes the look, the function and the engineering, all fit together--and you use styling to make it extraordinary.”
All too often, though, the auto industry “gets lost and places way too much emphasis on form and styling and not enough on good design.”
Tail fins, Dziersk says, are a prime example of pure style: They looked good in their prime, but they added nothing to the function or efficiency of the vehicles they adorned.
Ford Motor Co.’s 1996-99 Taurus, the all-oval car, was an example of style over design. It cost the world’s No. 2 auto maker dearly in slowed sales of its bread-and-butter model, amid customer complaints of reduced headroom and oddball looks. Ford redesigned and restyled the car for 2000.
“Products are designed for a reason, and all of the lines should have a function. Style just adds things for fun,” said David Cole, a former Ford and Volkswagen designer (he worked on the New Beetle) who now heads the industrial design school at Academy of Art College in San Francisco.
“The German car companies don’t do that, and that’s why their designs are so long-lasting,” Cole said. “The Asians and some of the American companies suffered in the past from too much style, and the result was that they had no design direction.”
*
As GM moves to polish its tarnished image in the looks department, it aims to ensure that style serves design and doesn’t take precedence, says Larry Burns, vice president of product planning and research and development.
He says he and GM’s vice president for design, Wayne Cherry, “are joined at the hip now.”
Indeed, the design, planning and product innovation staffs are now located in the same facility and are expected to work together to make sure that new vehicles are well-designed before all else, Burns said.
