Elizabeth Goodspeed critiques the current fascination with analogue aesthetics in the design world, highlighting a disconnect between the idea of being "handmade" and the reality of digital fabrication. As digital tools have made high-quality, polished work accessible, the appeal of analogue has surged. Designers now lean towards textures and imperfections that signal authenticity, even if those qualities are often digitally created. Goodspeed questions whether this trend truly reflects a return to analogue or if it merely repackages digital products under the guise of handmade. Goodspeed points out that many so-called "analogue" creations are not made with traditional tools but are instead produced using digital textures and brushes. This leads to a form of "fauxbi-sabi," where the intention is to mimic the charm of imperfection without the actual effort involved. The article notes that the creative infrastructure necessary for true analogue work—like time, materials, and financial support—is largely inaccessible to many artists today. Consequently, designers are trapped in a cycle of producing work that appears authentic while being fabricated through digital means. The article also delves into the historical context of analogue versus digital. Goodspeed recalls that what we now celebrate as analogue qualities were once seen as flaws. For instance, film grain and deep impressions in letterpress printing were once imperfections rather than desired traits. As technology has evolved, these limitations have been reinterpreted as virtues. She uses the example of Kodak’s 1888 camera to illustrate how the democratization of photography diluted the value of technical competence, prompting artists to seek out unique expressions that digital tools can’t replicate. This ongoing tension between technological ease and the quest for authenticity is at the heart of the current design discourse.