George Walker took issue with the use of the golden ratio for furniture design on his Design Matters blog. I thought it was an interesting perspective.
http://georgewalkerdesign.wordpress.com/2010/01/29/golden-rectangle-a-different-viewpoint/
Scott
Well, it was an interesting read, but I'm not sure that the author really understands the Golden Ratio (Phi). While he argues against the Golden Ratio in design he simultaneously suggests the use of 'pleasant' ratios (3:5, 5:8, etc.) all of which come from the Fibonocci Sequence (0,1,1,3,5,8,13,21,34,55,89,144,...) which just happens to be the same thing as the Golden Ratio
(essentially the Fibonocci Sequence is a rational approximation of an irrational ratio). Pick any two neighboring values (aside from 0,1,1 which are seed values) and divide them and, depending upon which you divide into which (the order) you will either get the approximate inverse of Phi (Golden Ratio) OR a close approximation of Phi. This is where the author's ratios come from.
So while arguing against the influence of the Golden Ratio he is simultaneously arguing for its influence?!?!
In point of fact:
3:5 (gives you
0.60, the inverse of Phi)
5:3 (gives you
1.67, very nearly Phi)
5:8 (gives you
0.625, the inverse of Phi)
8:5 (gives you
1.60, very nearly Phi)
By the time you get to 89:55 you get
1.61818, and the further up the sequence you progress the closer you get to the absolute Golden Ratio. At 832040:514229 (the 31st and 30th values of the Fibonocci Sequence) the ratio has really closed the gap at
1.618034 which looks suspiciously like the Golden Ratio.
Phi (Golden Ratio) rounded off: 1.618034, it's inverse (1/Phi) is 0.618034
There are plenty of beautiful creations that defy the Golden Ratio, so there is no absolute reason to be beholden to it, but it can be a useful
guide in the design process. We tend to have a natural selection for the Golden Ratio in our aesthetics because in nature violations of this rule frequently coincide with negative mutations hence we have a biological preference towards that which is consistent with good genes.
Thanks for posting the article, however. I always enjoy good philosophical debates!