connecting*the*dots

Alright, I’m a bit pissed.

Doesn’t anyone consider our profession a creative venture? I understand the library science angle (meaning I understand where they come from, not necessarily how they do exactly what they do all the time they do it), but doesn’t the remainder of the craft of information architecture help deliver a narrative expression? Not as in a Shakespearean format, but in the very least as a scripted experience, set in code and interface parameters, but flexible in exploration?

I got fired up over this because of a thread at the SIG-IA list, where it was suggested that we:

1. are not artists creating experiences
2. only create "web pages"
3. would have a "hypnotised mind" if we beleived otherwise

Where’s the inspiration folks? In taking the user along a path to pertinent information, we do script an experience for them. How they react to it is based on the work we perform; the ux umbrella designers.

If you’ve ever worked on a project in this field, hopefully you’ve created something more relevant than a "bunch of web pages." If not, then you’ve never designed a precise solution, one which creates navigation paths that readily resonate in the user’s psyche; or an interface which feels seemless and intuitive to the intended audience; or an information architecture that is succinct in it’s labeling, categorization and retrieval capabilities, which also has multiple points of contextual departure for the user, creating an underlining narrative structure.

I thought the days were long gone when you had to be broke with paint stained finger tips to be considered creative. I guess not.