Limitation equals style

I find it interesting that many stylistic choices in art come from eras of less-advanced technology. 

Take the humble post-script—the “P.S.” These came from a time before computers, in which adding a new sentence in between the ones you already wrote was impossible. So, if something just had to be said, you wrote it after your signature. Now, we see the P.S. still used in emails, in marketing material, even though technology has rendered it irrelevant.  You can just move your cursor where you want, and add the new sentence in. But stylistically, the P.S. remains a fun choice

The same is true with news. You’ve heard people say “don’t bury the lede,” as in, don’t make us wait for the most important information. My dad used to tell me stories of his newspaper days when articles were written to be trimmed from the bottom. As they laid out printed article slivers to be sent to copy, sometimes those articles were too long. With no time for a rewrite, they would just clip the last few paragraphs with scissors to make it fit. (But now we need AI to add paragraphs to articles to make them fit, apparently). 

During a moment of distraction today, I watched a 10-minute breakdown with director Ryan Coogler of the various film formats he shot his later movie Sinners on. The less-technologically-advanced film formats are styles we still adore. 

You have limitations today. You have to make sacrifices to make it all work, and to deliver your work on time. Isn’t it wild to think that someday the limitations we complain about could become styles future generations copy?