Technology Aesthetic

Technology has struggled with aesthetics for decades.  Modern tech devices really do not look much better than early ones, except in a few rare circumstances.  I doubt this struggle will ever end, because different people have different tastes.  There are a few things that could be done to improve the situation though.

There are several options when dealing with aesthetics in technology.  The first is hide it.  This is probably the most common.  The typical cell phone has an almost sleek looking body that serves only to hide the insides and offer very minor protection from damage (sorry, anything that is not waterproof cannot qualify as offering more than minor protection).  Most desktop computer cases serve the entirely utilitarian purpose of providing a frame to attach internal components to, again offering minor protection.  Laptops sometimes have customizable options, but still rarely serve any purpose well besides holding the components together and hiding them from the user.  Hiding is, by far, the most common way of dealing with tech aesthetics.  Real beauty is never a part of the equation.  Even hiding is not usually done very well.  An LCD screen encased in black plastic may hide the internal electronics, but it only barely does so.  Looking at the screen, it is still obvious that electronics are inside.  There is no suspension of disbelief; we all know what is hidden in there, and we cannot pretend otherwise.

The second option is exposing the technology.  Circuit boards and electronic components can look aesthetically pleasing, but it takes a bit of care and effort.  Some people in the tech industry enjoy the appearance of raw electronics so much that they will purchase computer cases with big windows on the sides, so the internal circuitry are visible.  Most people, however, do not like the unfinished appearance of typical electronics.  At a cost, it is possible to completely clean up electronics and make them look presentable in their own right, but this gets expensive very quickly as boards get larger (like the motherboard in a PC).  Most smaller devices, like phones, include very sensitive radio frequency circuitry that would be difficult to expose safely, so exposing the technology is not always a viable option.

The third option, which has never been done very well, is hiding, but focusing on making the hiding place beautiful.  Apple has tried this repeatedly, but still has not managed to get very far past basic hiding.  Touch screens and capacitive buttons (as opposed to tactile switch buttons) help this a lot by more effectively hiding the technology, but white plastic is still clearly very modern and unnatural.  The white plastic enclosures of most modern Apple products  just cries out technology.  The technology may be hidden on the inside, but the aesthetic advertises that this is a man made technological device.  It may look pretty to some, but it does not do a very good job of hiding the technology.

There is a fourth option, which has never been done on a large scale.  Part of the reason is that it would initially be expensive, and it might be difficult to keep up.  This is changing the aesthetic altogether.  This falls into the category of hiding, but it is far more flexible and more capable of beauty.  This kind of hiding puts suspension of disbelief as the primary goal.  Instead of enclosing the device in a mundane plastic enclosure, it could be contained in a wood (or realistic faux wood) enclosure.  Correctly designed, an LCD monitor could be made to look like a picture frame.  This could be mounted on an office wall, and if the cables were easily concealable, a static image on it could trick visitors into thinking that it was an actual photograph, instead of a computer monitor.  A flip phone might look like a large locket.  Buttons or keys could be made to look like stone (some sci-fi shows feature "ancient" technology that uses large stone blocks as keys for an input device).  Brass or other metals (or even realistic metallic paint on plastic) could be used to make keys that appear to have been made during the Victorian era or earlier.  Using materials that appear to be non-technological in nature it would be possible to hide technology in enclosures that do not advertise that technology lies within.  It might still be obvious that a cell phone is a cell phone, but the user (and spectators) could imagine that the device uses magic or mechanics to operate, instead of modern electronics.  The appearance of the device would not break suspension of disbelief.


Now none of these options are the "best."  Poorly hiding the technology is probably the cheapest option.  Exposing the technology satisfies a niche, but most people would prefer it hidden.  Hiding with a focus on aesthetics has worked very well for Apple, and many people like the idea of carrying a device that is clearly high tech without actually exposing the technology. 

Visually transforming technology could introduce a great variety of different aesthetics, and it could revolutionize how we interact with technology, but it would also carry some initial expenses.  Making technology into artwork requires real artists, not just industrial engineers trained to focus on the most practical designs.  Creating all of the hardware for producing beautiful technology would be fairly expensive.  Eventually, this expense would largely disappear as fabrication technology improved, and much of this hardware would be a one time cost anyway, but the art costs would still linger.  Ultimately, it would pay though.  There are many niche markets (some fairly large) that would make this very profitable if managed wisely.  Steampunk cell phones would probably sell fairly well already, without excessive marketing costs (word can get around quickly in the Steampunk community).  A Medieval theme would be popular for those involved in Renaissance Fairs and SCA, as well as for some historians.  Any variety of fantasy themes could be wildly successful (a cell phone could be modeled as a magical scrying device and an LCD monitor might have a frame that would be appropriate for a magic mirror) and the sci-fi market is largely untapped here as well (just within the Stargate series, there are at least 10 alien tech aesthetics that could be highly profitable; Star Trek and Star Wars would also be quite popular).  Nature based themes (a realistic wooden case, maybe even with knots protruding slightly) could be popular with the environmentalist movement, and they might even appeal to primitivists who are not opposed to using some technology.  Of course, there are nearly infinite possibilities in the anime and cosplay markets.  Already, case upgrades with some of these themes are popular, but case upgrades are just pretty pictures attached to the phone.  They do not beautify the phone itself.  Some designs would justify adding as much as $50 to the price of a phone (possibly more for larger devices), and it would probably be easy to get an extra $5 or $10 even for simpler (but realistic looking) designs.  The potential for profit is very high, and there are also possible reputation boosts for companies that do this well.

The point of this is not to denigrate current technology aesthetics, but rather to point out that they do not live up to their full potential.  The market for utilitarian designs and designs that "feel" modern and high tech is saturated.  There are multiple markets for designs that feel low tech or even no tech, but that are still high tech on the inside.  There are markets for designs that feel like sci-fi advanced tech as well as designs that feel mystical or ancient.  There are even markets for designs that feel like products of nature.  Tech aesthetic does not have to be all about hiding the technology.  It can be about making the technology appear to be more or less than it actually is.  There is a place for purely practical designs, but in a world with billions of people, there are many that want more than just practical utilitarian devices.

A friend of a friend once used the term "fashion device" to refer to a potentially useful electronic device designed to fit into a specific aesthetic.  Themed aesthetics does not have to stop at hand held or wearable devices though.  Even a laptop or desktop computer, an LCD TV, or a computer printer could be designed to have decorative value in addition to practical value (in fact, parts of the steampunk community have altered laptop and desktop computers to look like something straight out of Victorian England; these are currently the ultimate in useful decorations, but the potential is practically infinite).  Instead of hiding technology, we could be disguising it as other things.  We could be making technology look and feel like something entirely different, and we could do it without sacrificing utility.  Instead of ugly blocky speakers and screens framed in mundane black plastic, we could devices that are both works of art as well as useful tools.  Our houses could look like art galleries instead of collections of ugly but necessary blocks of multi-colored plastic and painted metal.  Long ago, aesthetics was considered more important in household devices.  In antique shops, it is sometimes possible to find sewing machines, radios, and even old television sets framed in high quality wood with artistic embellishments.  Modern technology has opened up many more aesthetic possibilities.  Now it is time to take advantage of them and beautify our tech culture.