Reducing complexity is a real cultural concern in recent years. Its often cast as a positive goal: increasing simplicity- but I think that a diminutive can’t be increased. Complexity is our true target.
Similarly, that diminutive, “focus”, has become the goal achieved through “more simplicity”. From my decision analytic perspective, the problem is one of complexity leading to more difficult decisions. Why is complexity harder? Because complexity increases uncertainty. If there are two alternatives, the decision space is smaller than when there are one hundred. We use metaphor and models to reduce complexity and make decisions easier. This is the paradox of choice. More alternatives make decisions harder not easier.
In a shorter span of time I probably made four times many photographs, most of which will prove redundant, and editing down that set is going to take uninspiring hours of peering and comparing.
Is the answer really to reduce our decision space in reality? Is it really better to have fewer clothes or fewer browser bookmarks? Or to return home after an afternoon of image capture and realize that the potentially great image is marred by being just slightly out of focus? Wouldn’t have been better to just grab the same image 3 times, knowing that they might be identical, but that it also could be that one and one only really was successful?
I challenge the advocates of “less is more” to convince me that they doing any more than reducing the number of alternatives they have available and thus simply artificially making decisions easier.
I believe it is possible to do better by living in a rich, complex, uncertain environment full of way too many choices and lear to decide better. A world filled with only chocolate and vanilla? Ugh. Give me chocolate raspberry. Gelato, sorbet or artisan ice cream. My choice.