Form Vs. Function Updated

The million-dollar question: “ is form more or less important than function?” As an art student I have been sitting with this question since my 8^th grade art teacher asked me to design a tea set who’s form trumped its function. While explaining the assignment, a wire-headed and overtly eccentric, Mrs. Eskin said, “Make me a pretty tea pot, it doesn’t have to work, but it should look good.” At the time my peewee 8^th grader brain couldn’t understand why someone would want something that didn’t work, but I made the stinking teapot anyway. My cups leaked water like rivers and the ceramic pot couldn’t withstand the fire of a stove. No use ever came of that tea set, but I did receive an A. In the eyes of my art teacher, form was more important than the functioning of my tea pot, but in the business sense, this would be an utterly useless product that would ultimately fail.

Basically whether form was more important than function and vice versa depended on the perspective of the person in question. In Mrs. Eskin’s eyes the form was the winner, but my mother would have enjoyed a working teapot much more than one that she could just look at.

This historical antidote brings me to the following point: whether or not “form is more or less important than function.” I believe it is entirely dependent the object’s intended purpose. If an object’s function is decorative, such as a painting, its form will be more important than its function because the success of its function is directly related to the aesthetic value of its form. Some may argue that the function of this painting is to please the eye and complete a room.

Since the use of the object is derived from a consumer enjoying its “form.” If an object is performance based (meaning that the object was purchased in order to help a person accomplish a task such as the qwerty keyboard then certainly its function comes before its form. The person using the object is more concerned with using the object to complete a task than he is to enjoy looking at it.

There are many cases in which products need form and function to complement each other in order to create a successful product. For example, a touch screen cell phone creates a new function and form. It changes the form into a compact and easy to carry device that eliminates extra size by getting rid of the touchpad. The function of the form is to allow for the screen to be used for multiple purposes. Form and function now override into the same realm.

One may say form and function ALWAYS correlate with each other. Well, they do, but there is a scale where they do not align and one is rendered significantly inferior to the other. Someone may purchase one of the examples mentioned, but will never have purchased it for the intention of form or function. The tea pot I created, its function is to be used for holding liquids, but it did not successfully do that, yet I still received an A. This was because the focus of the project was to create something that was artful and not intended to be used.

The ultimate product would be one where a manufacturer combined form and function to create the ultimate product. For example, a lamp that’s function is to generate light, but creating a form that maximizes the efficiency and beauty of the lamp. An optimal form that can help spread the light further and brighten the room, by directing the bulb in such a way brings both form and function together to create success.

So the point is that form and function, are two interchangeable preferences that are based off of the object in question and what that object was meant to “do.” There is essentially no right answer whether form or function is more important or whether one is present or not. The bottom-line is in some cases both go hand in hand and create a products success, while in other situations it really depends on the viewer/user of the product.

Maren Epstein