# Memphis — style guide for coding agents

> Generated from the Aesthetary record for **Memphis**.
> Research: **Partly sourced** · Build guidance: 11 rules recorded.
> 22 sources attached.

## How to use this

Paste this file into your agent as context before asking it to design or build something in this visual language. It states what is established, what is our interpretation, and what nobody has established. Treat all three differently.

**The most important section is "Not researched yet".** Its purpose is to stop you and your agent inventing rules that sound right and are not recorded anywhere.

## What this language is

**Defining:** Squiggles, speckle and animal-skin laminates, unrelated shapes, loud colour paired against expectation

**Recognise it by:** Unrelated patterns — squiggles, speckle, kitsch geometric and animal-skin prints — drawn flat and printed on laminate and fabric, multiplied and paired rather than reduced, in loud colour combined against expectation. The diagnostic property is the decorated surface: the pattern is applied independently of the form beneath it, so changing the surface changes what the object means. No fixed palette is documented. Memphis is a furniture and object movement first; its graphic expression is a secondary derivation.

**Family:** Maximal & Ornamental
**Era:** postmodern, 1980s

**Scope:** Memphis was a Milan design collective (1980–87) making furniture, lighting, textiles and objects. This record is the flat graphic register abstracted from their surface decoration; its specific motifs and palette are Aesthetary's reading.

## What it is arguing

Decoration is legitimate content and good taste is an ideology worth attacking. Form is released from function so that an object can communicate rather than merely perform.

**It refuses:** Refuses the modernist doctrine that ornament is dishonest and that form must follow function.

## What it is not

Commonly confused with these. Getting the difference right matters more than getting the surface right:

- Pop Art
- Op Art
- Mod
- Neo-Brutalism

**What separates this language:** Arbitrary geometry as a revolt against good taste

_This is the record's own distinguishing line, not a comparison against any one neighbour. Where a per-neighbour difference is recorded it appears beside that name above; where it is absent, nobody has written it._

## Established rules

Grouped by what kind of claim each is. A requirement of the language and our own interpretation are not interchangeable.

**How to read each rule.** Every rule states two separate things, and neither stands in for the other:

- **Kind of claim** (the heading): Documented · Source not yet verified · Documented · Source attached · Seen in the work.
- **Evidence** (how it is established): Graded by our research brief · No source attached (`DOCUMENTED`) · From our catalogue entry (`SUPPORTED`) · Our reading (`CURATORIAL`) · Not researched yet (`UNKNOWN`) · No grade recorded (no grade in the record). Where a claim has its own canonical label, the Evidence line gives that label instead of the grade.
- **Product area**: which of the twelve areas the rule belongs to (Layout, Typography, Color, Imagery, Surface, Interface, Motion, Motif, Technique, Form, Hierarchy, Density), mapped from its raw area label in bold. "Context" means the rule is about the Aesthetic (its name, origin, lineage) rather than a part of the design. "Not mapped" means the raw area has no single area yet.
- The code in brackets is the `grade` field at `implementationConstraints.tokenRules.value.rules[].provenance.grade` in https://aesthetary.com/data/memphis.json. "From our catalogue entry" means: Stated in Aesthetary’s existing catalogue entry. An outside source is named only where one is linked to the claim.

### Documented · Source not yet verified

- **pattern** — Pattern is applied to a surface independently of the form beneath it; the decoration does not describe the object it covers.
  - Kind of claim: Documented · Source not yet verified · Evidence: Documented · Source not yet verified · Product area: Motif
- **composition** — No element in the composition subordinates another: the arrangement visibly refuses to resolve into a hierarchy.
  - Kind of claim: Documented · Source not yet verified · Evidence: Documented · Source not yet verified · Product area: Layout

## Found in research

What research established from sources Aesthetary opened and checked. Each line names its area, how it is known, and where it is scoped. "Seen in the work" means the source documents particular works or products rather than the Aesthetic as a whole.

- **Typography** — Memphis's printed identity (catalogues, posters, the coordinated image) was designed by the graphic designer Christoph Radl, who met Sottsass in the 1980s.
  - Evidence: Documented · Source attached · Claim: `kcc:typography-1` · Covers covers the collective's printed matter, not the surface pattern.
- **Typography** — Radl says that in Memphis the graphics were decorative, like the famous laminates designed by Sottsass, De Lucchi or himself.
  - Evidence: Documented · Source attached · Claim: `kcc:typography-2`
- **Typography** — Memphis has a following among present-day type designers; for example, the decorative caps typeface Memphis (2014) is inspired by Memphis furniture. Such faces are later designs, not Memphis-era letterforms.
  - Evidence: Documented · Source attached · Claim: `kcc:typography-3` · Covers derived register, 2014 onward.
- **Typography** — A V&A-catalogued Memphis poster is described for its abstract image in green and red on dark blue, evoking Memphis furniture; the quoted description does not mention its lettering.
  - Evidence: Documented · Source attached · Claim: `kcc:w2-typography-1` · Covers one poster; designer unknown in the record.
- **Color** — Memphis colour was loud and combined against expectation: sources describe flamboyant colour, daring combinations and clashing pairings such as acid yellow against violent pink.
  - Evidence: Documented · Source attached · Claim: `kcc:color-1` · Covers 1981 onward collections.
- **Color** — Saturated primaries and pastels both occur in documented pieces: primary-coloured collars on Bedin's Super Lamp, red upholstery on yellow or blue legs on Sowden's Oberoi, and pastel ropes on Umeda's Tawaraya.
  - Evidence: Documented · Source attached · Claim: `kcc:color-2` · Covers individual objects; not a stated rule.
- **Color** — No fixed palette is documented. Named pieces run from red/black/white to mustard/rust/black/blue, and the Design Museum account records that no-one mentioned forms, colours, styles or decorations.
  - Evidence: Documented · Source attached · Claim: `kcc:color-3`
- **Color** — Du Pasquier rejects reading the bright colour as childish or the patterns as a joke.
  - Evidence: Documented · Source attached · Claim: `kcc:color-4` · Covers Du Pasquier, retrospective interview.
- **Imagery** — Memphis surfaces carried kitsch geometric and animal-skin patterns borrowed from 1950s popular sources (comics, cheap cafés), not pictures.
  - Evidence: Documented · Source attached · Claim: `kcc:imagery-1` · Covers 1981 collection.
- **Imagery** — Selecting and pairing signs, forms, colours and patterns from the catalogues of history and modernity was part of the method.
  - Evidence: Documented · Source attached · Claim: `kcc:imagery-3`
- **Imagery** — Figurative illustration appears in the collective's ephemera, for example the exhibition-opening invitation postcard of a dinosaur painted by Luciano Paccagnella.
  - Evidence: Documented · Source attached · Claim: `kcc:imagery-4` · Covers printed ephemera, not surfaces.
- **Imagery** — Sottsass's Bacterio abstracted the surface of a Buddhist temple in Madurai into a field of black squiggles.
  - Evidence: Seen in the work · Claim: `kcc:imagery-2` · Covers Bacterio laminate, 1978 (pre-dates Memphis, later its signature).
- **Surface** — Printed decorative plastic laminate from Abet Laminati, decorated by the designers themselves, was a key Memphis surface.
  - Evidence: Documented · Source attached · Claim: `kcc:surface-1`
- **Surface** — The speckled effect is a printed surface decoration taken from 1950s laminate patterns; Abet also says its patterns derive from everyday materials including terrazzo.
  - Evidence: Documented · Source attached · Claim: `kcc:surface-2`
- **Surface** — Surface was a deliberate concept, the 'decorated surface': changing an object's surface changes its meaning.
  - Evidence: Documented · Source attached · Claim: `kcc:surface-3` · Covers Du Pasquier and Sowden.
- **Surface** — Beyond laminate, the collections used printed glass, celluloid, fireflake finishes, glitter and zinc-plated metal alongside real materials such as terrazzo and briar.
  - Evidence: Documented · Source attached · Claim: `kcc:surface-4` · Covers objects; only the printed-pattern component transfers to flat graphics.
- **Interface** — The collective's documented output is furniture, lighting, textiles, ceramics, glass and metal objects plus printed ephemera; no source describes screen or interactive work.
  - Evidence: Documented · Source attached · Claim: `kcc:interface-1`
- **Motion** — The only movement in the sources is physical: objects designed to be dismantled and transformed, not animation.
  - Evidence: Seen in the work · Claim: `kcc:motion-1` · Covers objects.
- **Technique** — Patterns were drawn as flat compositions; sometimes they were printed on textile or on paper for laminate.
  - Evidence: Documented · Source attached · Claim: `kcc:technique-1` · Covers surface patterns.
- **Technique** — One account says there were no construction drawings, no models, no developments; almost no Memphis object was ever manufactured in series.
  - Evidence: Documented · Source attached · Claim: `kcc:technique-2` · Covers furniture and objects.
- **Hierarchy** — Some 1981 Memphis pieces are organised around a centre: the Casablanca sideboard has a central 'totem' of cupboards with red shelves radiating outwards, and two other pieces project individually coloured, patterned elements from a centre plinth.
  - Evidence: Documented · Source attached · Claim: `kcc:w2-hierarchy-1` · Covers Sottsass furniture and lighting, 1981.
- **Hierarchy** — The collective aimed to create totemic, isolated, easily dismantled, transformable objects.
  - Evidence: Seen in the work · Claim: `kcc:hierarchy-1` · Covers objects in interiors, not flat compositions.
- **Hierarchy** — One V&A-catalogued object (de Lucchi, 1981) combines a diagonal composition with black-and-white stripes atop a pink block.
  - Evidence: Seen in the work · Claim: `kcc:w2-hierarchy-2` · Covers de Lucchi, 1981; one object.
- **Density** — Sottsass, the group's leader, disliked empty space and felt a need to fill it.
  - Evidence: Documented · Source attached · Claim: `kcc:density-1` · Covers Sottsass personally, interiors; not measured on Memphis surfaces.
- **Density** — Signs, forms, colours and patterns were multiplied and paired rather than reduced.
  - Evidence: Documented · Source attached · Claim: `kcc:density-2`
- **Density** — The Casablanca sideboard (1981) is covered in plastic laminate with a sponged pattern in red, black, white and yellow.
  - Evidence: Documented · Source attached · Claim: `kcc:w2-density-1` · Covers furniture, 1981.
- **Density** — The group's own graphic prints imagine interiors with pattern on every surface.
  - Evidence: Documented · Source attached · Claim: `kcc:w2-density-2` · Covers George Sowden lithographs, 1983; the closest museum-documented Memphis graphic evidence.
- **Density** — This decoration was framed against the undecorated minimalist furniture of the 1970s.
  - Evidence: Documented · Source attached · Claim: `kcc:w2-density-3`

## Positions by area

The overall position recorded for each area. "No overall position recorded" means rules exist for the area but no position above them; the rules still apply. It is not the same as "Not established", which means nobody has researched the area.

- **Layout** — Specified
- **Color** — Specified
- **Imagery** — Specified
- **Surface** — Specified
- **Motif** — Specified
- **Technique** — Specified
- **Form** — Outside this language. The area does not apply; this is not a gap in the research.

## Design grammar — web primitives

A starting grammar for a website in the Memphis graphic register: the decorated surface lifted off the objects, pattern drawn flat and applied regardless of the form beneath, loud colour combined against expectation. No palette or lettering is documented, so those here are this page's.

Three kinds of line: **On the record** names a rule this record holds (its wording is under Established rules) and states what it becomes on the web. **Web translation** is Aesthetary's choice for the web, derived from the rules it cites; change it if you have a reason, keep the cited rule. **Not specified by the source** means the research reached this but the sources say nothing about it; **Not researched yet** means the research has not reached it yet. Either way, follow the instruction and do not invent a rule. Structured version: `designGrammar` in data/memphis.json.

### Colour

| Role | Value | Contrast | Use | Kind |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| cream | `#FDF9F0` | — | The floor. | Web translation |
| ink | `#191512` | 17.3:1 | Text and edges. | Web translation |
| paper | `#FFF7EA` | 17.1:1 | Card fields; text sits here. | Web translation |
| mint | `#A8E6CE` | — | A tile and pattern colour; ink text only. | Web translation |
| coral | `#FF7B6B` | — | A tile and pattern colour; ink text only. | Web translation |
| lemon | `#FFD94A` | — | A tile and pattern colour; ink text only. | Web translation |
| blue | `#2456E6` | — | A tile colour, and focus. | Web translation |
| red | `#E33F2E` | — | Wavy underlines and fills; never text. | Web translation |

Other accents the record supports:

- Casablanca sideboard, 1981 (recorded as "red, black, white and yellow"): `#E33F2E #191512 #FFFFFF #FFD94A`

- **On the record · Documented** · `claim:kcc:color-1` → Combine loud colour against expectation: clashing pairings, not harmonies.
- **On the record · Documented** · `claim:kcc:color-2` → Saturated primaries and pastels both occur in documented pieces; neither is required.
- **On the record · Documented** · `claim:kcc:color-3` → Do not treat any one palette as the Memphis palette; none is documented.
- **Web translation** — Mint, coral and lemon lead here, with blue and red against them. _Why:_ The specific palette is our reading; these are this page's values. (`claim:color-scope-reading`)

### Typography

Family: heavy grotesque display with Archivo for text: this page's choice. Stack: `"Archivo Black MP", "Arial Black", sans-serif`

| Role | Size | Weight | Line height | Case | Tracking | Measure | Use |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| display | clamp(2.5rem, 7vw, 5rem) | 400 | 1 | uppercase | not specified | — | The name, set as tiles. |
| heading | 1.5rem | 400 | 1.15 | not specified | not specified | — | Object headings, in Archivo Black. |
| text | 1.125rem | 400 | 1.55 | not specified | not specified | 62ch | Everything read at length, in Archivo. |

- **On the record · Documented** · `claim:kcc:typography-2` → Treat the graphics as decoration, like the laminates.
- **Not specified by the source** — The sources do not specify a Memphis-era letterform or typeface. _Instead:_ Lettering is an open question. Do not use the decorative Memphis typeface (2014) as if it were period; it is a later design.
- **Web translation** — Archivo Black for display and Archivo for text. _Why:_ A plain heavy grotesque leaves the pattern to carry the decoration, which is where the research puts it. (`claim:kcc:typography-2`)

### Grid and layout

Objects on a floor: each block placed with its own offset and angle, the reading order intact. The sources do not specify a grid.

Tokens: gap `48px 24px` · offset `24–70px` · tilt `-1deg`

- **On the record · Documented · Source not yet verified** · `token_rule:me-r2` → Let no element in the composition subordinate another.
- **On the record · Documented** · `claim:kcc:w2-hierarchy-1` → Some pieces organise around a centre, with elements projecting from a central totem.
- **On the record · Seen in the work** · `claim:kcc:hierarchy-1` → Make objects totemic and isolated, each standing on its own.
- **Web translation** — Place blocks on the page like objects in a room, each with its own offset, keeping the reading order. _Why:_ Totemic, isolated objects; the graphic register borrows their placement, and the reader still needs an order. (`claim:kcc:hierarchy-1`, `token_rule:me-r2`)

### Shape and geometry

Tokens: radius `one corner per object` · edge `4px solid #191512` · cap `14px pattern strip`

- **Web translation** — Give each block one corner of its own: a quarter circle, an arch, a square. _Why:_ Signs and forms were multiplied and paired rather than reduced; the corners disagree on purpose. (`claim:kcc:density-2`)
- **Not specified by the source** — Form is not specified by the source. _Instead:_ Three-dimensional form belongs to the objects; do not claim these corners as Memphis form.

### Imagery

- **On the record · Documented** · `claim:kcc:imagery-1` → Use kitsch geometric and animal-skin patterns borrowed from popular sources, not pictures.
- **On the record · Seen in the work** · `claim:kcc:imagery-2` → A field of black squiggles abstracted from a real surface is a signature pattern.
- **On the record · Documented** · `claim:kcc:imagery-3` → Select and pair signs, forms, colours and patterns from the catalogues of history and modernity.
- **On the record · Documented** · `claim:kcc:imagery-4` → Keep figurative illustration to printed ephemera such as invitations.
- **Web translation** — Draw patterns as flat, tiling CSS or SVG fills. _Why:_ Patterns were drawn as flat compositions for print on laminate or textile. (`claim:kcc:technique-1`)

### The decorated surface

The best-documented thing about Memphis: pattern printed on plastic laminate, drawn by the designers, applied regardless of the form it covers.

Tokens: speckle `printed laminate speckle` · laminate `Abet Laminati`

- **On the record · Documented** · `claim:kcc:surface-1` → Print decorative pattern on laminate, decorated by the designers themselves.
- **On the record · Documented** · `claim:kcc:surface-2` → Treat the speckle as a printed pattern from 1950s laminates, some derived from materials such as terrazzo.
- **On the record · Documented** · `claim:kcc:surface-3` → Change the surface to change the meaning.
- **Web translation** — Apply a pattern fill to any block regardless of what the block holds. _Why:_ The pattern does not describe the object it covers. (`token_rule:me-r1`)
- **Not specified by the source** — Real materials (terrazzo, briar, glitter, zinc) do not transfer to the screen. _Instead:_ Only the printed pattern moves to flat graphics; do not fake material with textures.

### Components

Anatomy, tokens and states below are Web translation: Aesthetary's specification for the screen. Each value line after them says whether it restates a rule this record holds.

#### Button

A small object: a lemon block with an ink edge, one rounded corner, and a patterned strip along its foot.

- Anatomy: lemon field; 3px ink edge; one corner rounded, three square; label in Archivo Black; chequer strip along the foot
- Tokens: background `#FFD94A` · color `#191512` · border `3px solid #191512` · radius `0 0 18px 0` · foot `chequer 8px`
- State, default: Lemon block, chequer foot.
- State, hover: The field swaps to mint: the surface changes, the form does not.
- State, focus: 4px blue outline, 3px outside.
- State, active: The field swaps to coral.
- State, disabled: Paper field, dashed edge, no pattern.
- Accessibility: Ink on lemon at 13.2:1, on mint 12.9:1, on coral 7.2:1.
- Accessibility: The strip is decoration.
- Accessibility: At least 44px tall.
- **Web translation** — Change the button's surface on interaction, never its shape. _Why:_ Surface was the concept: changing an object's surface changes its meaning, and the pattern is applied independently of the form. (`claim:kcc:surface-3`, `token_rule:me-r1`)

#### Card

A piece of furniture on the floor: a paper block with its own corner and a patterned cap or legs that have nothing to do with its content.

- Anatomy: paper field; 4px ink edge; a corner of its own; patterned cap (zigzag, squiggle, dots) or legs; heading in Archivo Black
- Tokens: background `#FFF7EA` · border `4px solid #191512` · radius `one corner, 40–90px` · cap `14px pattern strip`
- State, default: Paper block, patterned cap.
- State, hover: The cap's pattern swaps for another.
- State, focus: 4px blue outline.
- Accessibility: Ink on paper at 17.1:1.
- Accessibility: Pattern sits in the cap and legs, never under text.
- Accessibility: The whole card is one link.
- **Web translation** — Apply pattern to a surface independently of the form beneath it. _Why:_ The cited rule belongs to the Aesthetic's own medium; applying it to a screen component or motion is our translation. (`token_rule:me-r1`)
- **Web translation** — Give each card its own corner and cap rather than one shared style. _Why:_ Signs, forms, colours and patterns were multiplied and paired rather than reduced. (`claim:kcc:density-2`)

#### Input

A plain paper field with an ink edge; the decoration stays on the object around it, not in the box you type in.

- Anatomy: 3px ink edge; paper field; label above in Archivo, bold; error as a line of ink text with a red wavy underline
- Tokens: border `3px solid #191512` · background `#FFF7EA` · radius `0` · height `2.75rem`
- State, default: 3px ink edge.
- State, focus: 4px blue outline.
- State, error: Ink text beginning "Error:", underlined with a red wave.
- State, disabled: Dashed edge.
- Accessibility: The label is real text above the field.
- Accessibility: Error is words, not colour alone.
- **Not specified by the source** — Forms are not researched yet: the collective's output was objects and printed ephemera, not screens. _Instead:_ Keep the field plain; put pattern on the surface around it.

#### Navigation

A row of tiles that do not agree on colour, corner or angle; the current one is ink with lemon text.

- Anatomy: tiles in mint, coral, lemon, blue; each its own corner and a small tilt; current tile ink, label lemon
- Tokens: tiles `#A8E6CE #FF7B6B #FFD94A #2456E6` · current `#191512` · current-text `#FFD94A` · tilt `-3deg to 3deg`
- State, default: Each tile its own ground and corner.
- State, hover: Red wavy underline.
- State, focus: 4px blue outline.
- State, current: Ink tile, lemon label (13.2:1), aria-current.
- Accessibility: aria-current on the current page.
- Accessibility: Ink on mint, coral and lemon; paper on blue at 5.6:1.
- Accessibility: The current tile differs in ground and in label colour.
- **Web translation** — Let no element subordinate another. _Why:_ The cited rule belongs to the Aesthetic's own medium; applying it to a screen component or motion is our translation. (`token_rule:me-r2`)
- **Web translation** — Set each link as a tile with its own colour and corner. _Why:_ No element subordinates another; a row of tiles that disagree keeps them equal. (`token_rule:me-r2`)

### Motion

- **Web translation** — Motion in the sources is physical: objects dismantled and transformed, not animation. _Why:_ The cited rule belongs to the Aesthetic's own medium; applying it to a screen component or motion is our translation. (`claim:kcc:motion-1`)
- **Web translation** — Do not animate. State changes are instant swaps of surface. _Why:_ The only recorded movement is physical, and surface change is the documented concept. (`claim:kcc:motion-1`, `claim:kcc:surface-3`)

### Deliberately not added

- **A fixed palette** (color): No fixed palette is documented; named pieces run from red/black/white to mustard/rust/black/blue. Mint, coral and lemon are this page's.
- **Memphis-era letterforms** (typography): An open question. Radl designed the printed identity; the sources name no typeface. The 2014 Memphis typeface is a later design.
- **Form** (shapeGeometry): Not specified by the source for the graphic register.
- **Interface conventions** (components): The collective did no screen or interactive work. The four components are contemporary translations of documented rules.
- **Screen motion** (motion): The only movement recorded is physical.

## Not researched yet

Nobody has established a position for this language on:

- Typography
- Interface
- Motion

**Do not fill these in.** An absent position is absent research, not permission and not a blank for you to complete. If the work needs a decision in one of these areas, make it on other grounds and do not attribute it to this language.

## Grade your own work

8 checks: 1 mechanically testable, 5 needing a person to look, 0 needing a source Aesthetary does not hold, 2 with no recorded position. Scores do not add up. A failure against a required rule and a departure from something we invented are not the same result, and no total should let them cancel.

### Recognition — does this read as the intended Aesthetic?

- **[visual_human · recognition signature · Evidence: No grade recorded]** Strip every logo, word and borrowed image out of your work, then show it to someone who knows the collection. Do they land on this Aesthetic? The signature to hold is: Unrelated patterns — squiggles, speckle, kitsch geometric and animal-skin prints — drawn flat and printed on laminate and fabric, multiplied and paired rather than reduced, in loud colour combined against expectation. The diagnostic property is the decorated surface: the pattern is applied independently of the form beneath it, so changing the surface changes what the object means. No fixed palette is documented. Memphis is a furniture and object movement first; its graphic expression is a secondary derivation.
  - _If it fails:_ The work may be competent and still read as a different Aesthetic, or as none. Nothing below matters until this passes.

### Fidelity — are its defining rules present?

- **[unassessable · no recorded position · Evidence: Not researched yet (`UNKNOWN`)]** Nothing is recorded as a requirement of this Aesthetic. There is no rule here that your work must hold — which means nothing you do can fail this dimension, and nothing you do can satisfy it either. That is missing research, not freedom.
  - _If it fails:_ Not applicable. An empty dimension is an absence of research, never a pass and never a failure.

### Implementation — were those rules translated appropriately into this medium?

- **[visual_human · Documented · Source not yet verified · Evidence: Documented · Source not yet verified]** Your work may depart from this — but knowingly, not by accident. Pattern is applied to a surface independently of the form beneath it; the decoration does not describe the object it covers.
  - _If it fails:_ A defensible departure, and you should be able to say why you made it.
- **[mechanical · Documented · Source not yet verified · Evidence: Documented · Source not yet verified]** Your work may depart from this — but knowingly, not by accident. No element in the composition subordinates another: the arrangement visibly refuses to resolve into a hierarchy.
  - _If it fails:_ A defensible departure, and you should be able to say why you made it.

### Avoidance — known failure modes, neighbour drift, cloning

- **[visual_human · neighbour drift · Evidence: No grade recorded]** Could your work be mistaken for Pop Art? That language is: Mass-culture imagery flattened; commercial by intent
  - _If it fails:_ Not necessarily wrong, but you are closer to Pop Art than to this Aesthetic.
- **[visual_human · neighbour drift · Evidence: No grade recorded]** Could your work be mistaken for Mod? That language is: Short, crisp and British; poster language, not layout language
  - _If it fails:_ Not necessarily wrong, but you are closer to Mod than to this Aesthetic.
- **[visual_human · neighbour drift · Evidence: No grade recorded]** Could your work be mistaken for Neo-Brutalism? That language is: Heavily styled, where Web Brutalism is unstyled
  - _If it fails:_ Not necessarily wrong, but you are closer to Neo-Brutalism than to this Aesthetic.

### Accessibility — the Aesthetic preserved without its inaccessible practice

- **[unassessable · no recorded position · Evidence: Not researched yet (`UNKNOWN`)]** Does this Aesthetic conflict with any usability floor? Nobody has recorded one for it.
  - _If it fails:_ Nothing — and that is the problem. An unrecorded conflict is not an absent one. Hold AA on reading matter and decide the rest on other grounds.

## Rules for the agent

1. Do not invent rules for any area listed under **Not researched yet**.
2. Do not treat an absent position as permission to do anything you like — say that the language has no position, and decide on other grounds.
3. Keep our interpretations separable from the language's own requirements. If asked to justify a choice, cite which kind of claim it came from.
4. If you need something this record does not contain, say so rather than producing a confident answer from the aesthetic's name.
5. When you self-score against "Grade your own work", score only checks marked `mechanical`. Declare `visual_human` and `evidence_dependent` checks unjudged rather than guessing, and never score an `unassessable` one.
6. Evidence "Not researched yet" (`UNKNOWN`) is never a failure. It means nobody researched the dimension, so departing from what is written there costs nothing and must not be reported as a defect. "No grade recorded" is not a grade either: do not treat it as our decision or as an outside source.
7. In **Design grammar**, a "Web translation" line is our choice for the web and may be changed with a reason; the rules it cites may not. Never present a translation as a property of the language.

## Provenance

- Record: `memphis` · status `draft` · research `partly_researched`
- Full structured record: https://aesthetary.com/data/memphis.json
- Human-readable record: https://aesthetary.com/a/memphis.html
- This file is a snapshot. The record may have changed since; check the page above.

_Aesthetary is an alpha. Where a page says nothing, nobody has done the work yet._