Adland hasn’t gone back to the 1950s, it’s gone back to ancient Greece
Dave Trott argues that advertising’s obsession with form over function has placed it firmly back within the days of Plato and his Forms.
Plato believed that this was an imperfect world. But somewhere there existed perfection, what he called “Forms”.
He said there was a perfect Form for everything.
Identifying the Form starts with the commonality in a group of things. For instance, what do a Shetland Pony, a Shire horse and an Arab Stallion have in common?
It’s like a really bad, wanky poem full of jargon that has been hidden in a kind of pseudo-intellectualism in its inapt-allegory of philosophy:
“We don’t solve problems
we are now advertising philosophers.
We make a pretty object
without questioning the job it has to do.
We assume if the form is liked
that’s job done.”
It’s full of lazy metaphor:
“But an Arab Stallion isn’t great
for teaching little children to ride,
but a Shetland Pony is.”
And has concrete elements:
“So Form FOLLOWS function.”
Does the author understand how to use a paragraph? Does he think mumbrella is linkedin? Is mumbrella linkedin? Is there some great hermeneutic meaning that I’ve stumbled on and been sucked into?
I don’t understand what you’re saying Ryan. But I understand Dave. But your words are bigger so you appear smarter. Dave got the function right. But you got the form right. I’m confused. I want to call one of you a twat.
Thanks Richard. Do your friends call you Dick?
I can’t read Trott’s articles. He’s a little too Full Metal Jacket for my taste. I’m not a masochists that would voluntarily get yelled at by a drill sergeant. I don’t know how he sleeps at night with the impact he’s had on writing on linkedin and writing online generally – comfortably and in opulent and plush surrounds no doubt.
But some people can’t sustain a thought.
So some people think writing like this is clever.
Impactful.
To them short and sharp is everything. Perfect for communicating online: the form serves its function.
To these people I say.
Give my twenty.
*me
I’m with M and Ryan Samuels.
This style of writing on LinkedIn has been poison for the platform and instantly devalues any message the author wishes to communicate.
Also agree on the point that some ‘pseudo intellectuals’ think this style adds impact – its all substance and wanna be style. What it actually has done is it has given a voice to those who shouldn’t have one, like Josh Fechter (look up his LI posts if you want to retch).
Finally, Dave Trott doesn’t know whether he is coming or going with this rubbish post. Go home, your drunk. The rest of us want to read something insightful and current, not this bullshit rant. Posting a pic of Plato means nothing, you are certainly no philosopher.
If he didn’t write his own wikipedia page, I’ll eat my hat – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dave_Trott
His articles are full on pseuds corner (and his knowledge of philosophy is very superficial, very much like the content of every piece of his I have ever read)
If he wants to make a simple point – in this case the huge generalisation that ad people are forgetting purpose – the just say that.
Or maybe he is frightened that if he strips away the metaphor and allegory, people will notice that he doesn’t really have much positive to say. Just another dull rant.
Have to agree with the sentiment expressed in this piece. The importance of function over form was once well put (and in a for – see what I did there – that gives practical advice to those shifting products) by Moskowitz’s findings for the Prego Pasta Sauce company:
“There is no perfect pasta sauce, only perfect pasta sauces.”
This is true but not true enough.
The question ‘What is the purpose of advertising?’ assumes the form should be advertising. And since advertising only serves a limited range of functions, you’re going to end up with an answer that generically references some stage in the marketing funnel.
It’s like asking ‘What is the purpose of a chair?’ then cultivating outrage when you’re told it’s for sitting.
I.
Thought.
Each.
Sentence.
Was.
Too.
Long.
‘No worries’ might work for a domestic campaign, but I doubt if it would work in international markets. Why? Because it isn’t true. Ask anyone trying to do business with Australia and they’ll mention company taxes too high, workplace laws too hard, unions too powerful… Truth is there are a lot of things to worry about when doing business with and investing in Australia.