Principle 2.3: Sometimes, function follows form.

Maybe obvious to some. But this principle really got me thinking about scenarios in which this is true -- and speficially, if this is a phenomenon that has become more common as our technology has grown more expansive, compelx and collaborative. Has the rise of computers and programable technology caused a rise in the role reversal of form and function? Does complexity allow us to be more creative in inventing functions out of the forms we're given?

The musical instrument, and music in general, gives us an excellent example of a long-standing tradition of function following form. The very first instruments were flutes made of bone -- and such, the first instrumental music was probably tuned and pitched to the frequencies hollowed bones were capable of doing. Flutes became more complex, and eventually were put together to make organs, which eventually became harpsichords, which became pianos -- each technology building on the technology of the latter. And, at each stage, music was defined by the constraints of the instrument being invented -- the limitation of two hands, the specific sound of the instrument, the range of notes that can physically fit within the instrument -- and not vice versa. The electric guitar singlehandedly sprouted entirely new genres of music and new sounds that Les Paul and Fender probably never would have anticipated.

Symphonies got their length, composition and instrumentation from the concert halls, dance halls and church services they were performed in. Folk songs were lengthened to how long people could dance for. The invention of the wax tube and phonograph shortened music to the "single" length of 3-4 minutes we know today. Vinyl gave us the EP and album form. Radio changed mixing and mastering loudness standards and practicies

Music, thus, might be considered a prime example of function following form. Even if instruments are designed to be played a certain way, they are inevitable interpolated and modified, and the techniques used to play them change dramatically.

Perhaps we can trace back function following form to the very first tools, the prehistoric rocks cavemen used. Rocks are technology, right? So simple, and yet found so many functions -- hammers, weapons, fire starters, sharpeners, drills, butchering instruments. All without never intending to do so! And as history progressed, the more function was imbedded in the creation of the form -- the first handle put on a rock creating the affordance of a handle, for example, and thus limiting the intention of the rock's form. Everything we have now is specialized -- different types of lamps, pots, mugs, fans, clothes hangers -- and that's just in my room.

I think a computer is equal parts the ultimate example and total deviation of this trend. Every part of a computer -- the transitor, the capcitor, the screen, the keyboard -- is purpose built for one very specific thing. The entirety of a computer is technically just a number crunching machine. It's the most specific, specialized instrument in the world.

And yet the computer is also the new rock -- it has an infinite number of uses, within its specific constraints.