I have mixed feelings about Rand’s beliefs.

I do believe that there has to be rules in order to learn how to design. It forces the future designer to work with what he has, and learning how to be as effective as possible without having too many options to flood the creative process. It definitely is a “test of skill”, the “ultimate reward”, and motivating for there to be rules. By making the design work with little resources is the test of skill, and it is rewarding when you’ve made something beautiful even though you didn’t have a lot to use, and it is motivating to do the best possible job. If there aren’t any rules when learning how to design, the designer will get lost in fancy fonts and drop shadows without learning how to be an effective designer. Also, it makes the designer learn how to verbally communicate better because it will take more effort o make an good argument for the elements you chose. 

Rand states that when it comes to developing a grid and filling the grid, the “creative ability for the former is no less than that for the latter”. I do believe that creating a grid that will make the most of its contents does take creativity, but I also think that creating such a grid doesn’t require more creative ability than making the designs that will fill the grid. Although a designer must consider all elements that are going to be put into the grid to figure out how it’s going to work best, few creative and artistic choices must be made. When making the grid, size, positioning, layout are all things that must be creatively decided. When it comes to filling the sections with designs, content, typography, color, images, pattern, and so much more have to be decided. Without a completely effective grid, the design still has potential to work rather than if the grid system chosen is excellent but the design is lacking.