I’ve always had a slight problem with books on design. Instead of creating practice spaces for users to follow the steps and learn the underlining ideas, most usually present the finished products. It’s as if they are saying, to paraphrase a great quote I heard the other day in reference to teaching writing through examples texts, “Here’s a finished cake. Go try to cook your first one.”

That’s not to write that The Non-Designer’s Design Book doesn’t have some little areas for the readers to try something on their own, too, but the first half seems very centered on showing examples of the techniques. Which, of course, are they themselves summarizes of other, more complex ideas. Summary of summaries with visual examples, in other words.

This is not Bad, per se. Many people can and do learn this way and having the examples of what to — and not — do can be helpful when designing your own stuff. However, for me, it’s not as welcome. I need the steps and the motions to follow. I want the theory and not just, “Well, these works with this — don’t worry about why.” I want a little more depth than the book presents.

Still, though. Yes, having things boiled down to the handful (in the first half) of Repetition, Alignment, and Proximity is useful. I don’t want to knock it for that. It’s a good book to have on hand for its abstraction of design ideas and examples. Those are all neat and good and all. It’s just, for me personally, I want a bit more. I want the why more than just more examples.

What’s the theory at play here? How does it work?