You know… It's hard to knock this book — even though my initial reaction is to knock it — since the premise allows for absolutely anything to happen. So under what parameter can we judge this? Simply: does the stuff look cool?

It does, I guess, if you are into that look — there is a prevalent look along all the book I think. It just leaves me with that "battlecry of our generation": Whatever.

I've read that book. It was a total hoot, especially when it got kinda petty and "schoolyardish". There were a few put-downs and name calling in there, if I remember correctly.

Otherwise, it was cool to find out about how the pieces were put together (both the originals and the "remixes") and to see either improvement or utter failure in re-evaluating the work. It's a visual adventure.

Beginning to peruse, my initial reaction was a desire to see the book itself redesigned. The re-work therein varied in quality, but hovered beneath amazing. I certainly understand the "prevalent look" Armin mentioned and felt that it worked in some cases, but given the circumstances of some other projects the look was probably inappropriate and ultimately unsuccessful.

However, I will note that I could not stop turning the pages. The premise of the book was quite interesting and the comments on each other's work brought an irresistible drama to the experience.

The schoolyard analogy fits well, Al. I admit, I didn't know what to expect myself. Overall, the book was fun and why something like this isn't done more often escapes me. Online, I could really see the RE process taking off. Here's a place where loads of comments could be exchanged and voiced—instantly. Rethink Redesign Reconstruct Reblog.

My main probelm with the book is that most of the designers they hired are more fine artists than designers. sure, they own "design firms" that specialize in t-shirts and posters, but sadly most of the work boils down to "convert his style into my style." I admittedly did just a perusal, but it felt like most of the designers just chose to reinvent what was already there, or take it completely out of context and not have to answer to anyone. I wish more than a few had actually approached it as a problem solving exercise, instead of a beauty exercise. And I will admit that I love most of the artists they hired, but I'm not going to say they are great designers.

And I will admit that I love most of the artists they hired, but I'm not going to say they are great designers.

No one was hired. People were asked to participate and could specify which projects they were interested in tackling. I don't think anyone approached this as a job, which certainly set the tone for the solutions.

As a side, the olde "artist' vs "designer" thing is so not interesting. Who cares.

As a side, the olde "artist' vs "designer" thing is so not interesting. Who cares.

I totally agree. It's boring. Just as boring as when the old "illustrator vs. designer" arguement pops up on gigposters.com every once in a while. Nothing gets solved.

As a side, the olde "artist' vs "designer" thing is so not interesting.

Hmmm. Why?

Whenever that arguement comes up, it goes in circles. And it's pointless, in my opinion.

Now lurking on the border between artist and designer more than ever...

I agree- the argument's overdone, and it won't go anyware. It also has the potential to needlessly destsroy friendships and promote unconstructive argument and other bad things, ie: Leading to namecalling, and unoriginal, dull name-calling at that.

Our local stores don't carry the book, but it sounds neat, at least in the idea phase.

A biased account:

I may have been in the minority, but i really struggled with the pieces i 'remixed' - i challenged myself as if they were 'real world' projects.

I enjoyed the process, the results and the 'schoolyardishness' of it. I was glad to be part of it.

to me, it's genius was - It revealed the good, the bad and the ugly of the pure subjectivity of graphic design as it is practiced today. a naked look at what is REALY going on out there - for better or for worse.

I for one feel like any collection there is good (great) and bad (eww!) - but overal fresh and fun and genuine.

It's the process that's intriguing. I think most on this thread would agree that they listen to music while they work. That being said, I'm fascinated at how closely related the "art" of remixing has been utilized in contemporary music today and conversely in design.

I think it's fair to say that most designers "sample" constantly, and in many respects subconsciously. As was stated above, some of the work was not stellar, but nether are all musical remixes.

I haven't seen the book, but I really like the idea.

As I like to say: Form may follow function, but context changes everything.

On a tangent, (since you gave the link), it's the first time I've gone to Sagmeister's site. My reaction to the design: (No offense, but...) Are you kidding? Ewwww!!! I'm stunned. But hey, what do I know? Maybe clunky and awkward is "all the rage." However, I just can't forgive the clicking buttons: so 1997. Oh well, "whatever."

Okay, maybe I was being a little too critical just now. Not interested in ruffling the feathers of the Famous.

Whatever floats you're boat.

(I'm still surprised, though.)

I happen to like Sagmeister's site. It has a real whimsy to it, that matches his sensibilities and humor. The buttons are a real hoot.

Fair enough, Jason. It's not my cup of tea, but I can respect other opinions... and sensibilities.