Part 2. The Experiment That Changed My View on Style

Haven't read Part 1? Here's the link

Part 2 continues...

Recap: In Part 1, I explored the idea of developing a unique creative style by 'creating' instinctively, free from design constraints. This led me to question the balance between concept and style in art and design, and whether a consistent style could emerge naturally or if true experimentation resists uniformity. Part 2 here covers the insights I gained from this process.

Let's get back into it!

In the past, if I didn’t know how to do something, I’d learn about it, tackle it, and see it through. I never let technical limits hold me back. That was and is about ego. It was also what I taught those around me and I showed them how to approach things with this mind set. For me, it’s an embedded belief system that my subconscious keeps bringing to the surface. But what if not learning everything actually establishes a style? Let's continue to break it down.

Back then, I reached a stark conclusion: being adaptable and having a “versatile skill set” to follow the latest trends might just be the arch-enemy of developing a distinctive style. To follow or to lead. Is it that binary a question?

One still needs to be able to get the job done and yes, trends are important.

I looked into what a “style” was and is in other designers’ work. My initial, perhaps biased, conclusions were these: designers with a strong style likely had (1) a limited skill set to approach things differently, or (2) a strong desire to keep following the feedback that brought them the most positive response. (3) A super huge ego. It might be a bit of all 3, or it might simply be that they have a more narrow and self-indulgent perspective on design.

There was clearly more to it, and so I decided to run my own experiment to see if I could uncover an instinctive style within my work.

Letting Instinct Take the Lead “Was it possible to uncover a unique style of my own by letting go of constraints?”

I set some controlled conditions for this experiment, and the process was simple yet revealing. I began creating a series of artworks without any premeditated concept (well, as much as I could). Each pencil or paint stroke was based on instinct, with no plan beyond capturing whatever expression felt right in that moment. My aim was to see if, over time, a cohesive style would emerge, or if each piece would be a standalone expression. I allowed the one common factor to be the time frame in which they were created but only in terms of calling them a series of paintings, hoping this alone might form a natural stylistic connection among them.

Now, my conscious mind was always thinking, this output is overly detailed, I'd consciously much prefer to see simpler outputs. Simple shapes. But the subconscious had other ideas and it was also evolving.

As I progressed, I found that defining a singular style proved more difficult than I’d expected. It was frustrating at times as I thought (hoped) I was heading towards a singular style. Instead of a uniform approach, I encountered a broad spectrum of styles, each piece reflecting a different part of my creative drive.

Time was a good connecting factor though. If I created a set of paintings around the same time, they would naturally have a similar feel—but as mentioned, I wanted that definitive style as I jumped between time frames of output.

Lessons in Style: Embracing Versatility Over Consistency “When you allow your subconscious to get to work, it tends to prove your beliefs.”

If I genuinely wanted a specific, singular style, I’d have to shift my beliefs about adaptability and start potentially valuing the opposite of many things I thought I knew or believed about creativity. This led to a perhaps cynical new perspective on style: that it isn’t a purely intentional choice but rather “a blend of repetition and compromise.” Repetition gives a style recognisable structure, while compromise lets us work within the limitations of what we know or choose to avoid. I suspect there is more to it. I'd like to understand your perspective.

A New Perspective on Style. This experiment reminded me that creative exploration can sometimes reveal a lack of singular style. That’s perfectly fine. This varied output is less about inconsistency and more a celebration of versatility.”

The challenge with lacking a distinctive style is that it often doesn’t align with the typical 'human creative output categorisation system.' Many audiences tend to appreciate the ability to recognise an artist’s or designer’s work at a glance. Generally speaking, there is a perceived value. Of course, consciously, I can just pick one. Perhaps this is what other designers did. I just don't believe that.

The experiment taught me a lesson that reached beyond the painting or design process itself. The challenge lay not only in the act of creating but in recognising my own tendencies and biases. My multi-passionate nature—and yes, my ego—resisted repetition. It drew me toward new techniques, ideas, and possibilities, almost as if my subconscious needed to prove that I could approach art or layout or tension in a wide variety of ways. For me, this was a battle with my own beliefs. Was it a self defeating belief? Perhaps this is getting too self indulgent. "Ya think"?

Through this approach, I learned that the absence of a fixed style isn’t a flaw or inconsistency but rather a celebration of creative freedom. This is more than just painting for painting’s sake in this 'experiment'. This varied output becomes a tapestry of influences, showing the depth of a multi-passionate approach.

For anyone on a similar path, this openness to versatility might just be the very truest form of artistic identity. For all you single 'stylers' out there, I’ll admit, I’m a little envious.

Do you see a consistent style here from Part 1 or Part 2 of this article series? Let me know in the comments and help me complete this experiment with your ideas on style.

How does this concept play out in graphic design styles? Perhaps I can show you in a new Part 3. Let me know if you would be interested to read more on this topic.

Author: Nick Girling

Master Brand Designer

My artist name is Nicholas Girling.

All images and text ? Copyright Nick Girling 2024