What's interesting?: On the ascendency of an evaluative term

Mark Dorrian

doi:10.1080/20507828.2016.1178491

What's interesting? On the ascendency of an evaluative term

Mark Dorrian

Edinburgh College of Art

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

A celebrated aphorism of Mies van der Rohe runs – "I'd rather be good than interesting". However in design discourses today, this relation has been entirely overturned. Now it is good to be interesting, indeed better than to be only "good" (which is no longer what it used to be). Reflecting on this – with reference to the work of Sianne Ngai, Mario Perniola, Robin Evans and Mikhail Epstein – this paper considers the rise of "interesting" as a critical category and examines the sort of judgement-in-suspension that it seems to enact, addressing what issues might be at stake in it and what it means in relation to our understanding of design pedagogy.

Original language	English
Journal	Architecture and Culture
Volume	4
Issue number	2
Early online date	2 Sept 2016
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1080/20507828.2016.1178491
Publication status	Published - 2016

Keywords / Materials (for Non-textual outputs)

architectural pedagogy
aesthetic theory
design studio
architectural disciplinarity
interesting

Access to Document

10.1080/20507828.2016.1178491

DorrianAC2016What'sInteresting.pdfAccepted author manuscript, 168 KB

Inaugural lecture
Mark Dorrian (Speaker)
1 Apr 2015
Activity: Participating in or organising an event types › Public Engagement – Public lecture/debate/seminar

Mark Dorrian
- Edinburgh College of Art - Forbes Chair in Architecture
- Edinburgh School of Architecture and Landscape Architecture
Person: Academic: Research Active

Cite this

@article{9bf7d5499a924fd99a430f591fe2833c,

title = "What's interesting?: On the ascendency of an evaluative term",

abstract = "A celebrated aphorism of Mies van der Rohe runs – {"}I'd rather be good than interesting{"}. However in design discourses today, this relation has been entirely overturned. Now it is good to be interesting, indeed better than to be only {"}good{"} (which is no longer what it used to be). Reflecting on this – with reference to the work of Sianne Ngai, Mario Perniola, Robin Evans and Mikhail Epstein – this paper considers the rise of {"}interesting{"} as a critical category and examines the sort of judgement-in-suspension that it seems to enact, addressing what issues might be at stake in it and what it means in relation to our understanding of design pedagogy. ",

keywords = "architectural pedagogy, aesthetic theory, design studio, architectural disciplinarity, interesting",

author = "Mark Dorrian",

year = "2016",

doi = "10.1080/20507828.2016.1178491",

language = "English",

volume = "4",

journal = "Architecture and Culture",

issn = "2050-7828",

publisher = "Taylor & Francis",

number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - What's interesting?

T2 - On the ascendency of an evaluative term

AU - Dorrian, Mark

PY - 2016

Y1 - 2016

N2 - A celebrated aphorism of Mies van der Rohe runs – "I'd rather be good than interesting". However in design discourses today, this relation has been entirely overturned. Now it is good to be interesting, indeed better than to be only "good" (which is no longer what it used to be). Reflecting on this – with reference to the work of Sianne Ngai, Mario Perniola, Robin Evans and Mikhail Epstein – this paper considers the rise of "interesting" as a critical category and examines the sort of judgement-in-suspension that it seems to enact, addressing what issues might be at stake in it and what it means in relation to our understanding of design pedagogy.

AB - A celebrated aphorism of Mies van der Rohe runs – "I'd rather be good than interesting". However in design discourses today, this relation has been entirely overturned. Now it is good to be interesting, indeed better than to be only "good" (which is no longer what it used to be). Reflecting on this – with reference to the work of Sianne Ngai, Mario Perniola, Robin Evans and Mikhail Epstein – this paper considers the rise of "interesting" as a critical category and examines the sort of judgement-in-suspension that it seems to enact, addressing what issues might be at stake in it and what it means in relation to our understanding of design pedagogy.

KW - architectural pedagogy

KW - aesthetic theory

KW - design studio

KW - architectural disciplinarity

KW - interesting

U2 - 10.1080/20507828.2016.1178491

DO - 10.1080/20507828.2016.1178491

M3 - Article

SN - 2050-7828

VL - 4

JO - Architecture and Culture

JF - Architecture and Culture

IS - 2

ER -

What's interesting? On the ascendency of an evaluative term

Abstract

Keywords / Materials (for Non-textual outputs)

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Activities

Inaugural lecture

Profiles

Mark Dorrian

Cite this