Dynamic boring is still boring

Once upon a time I went to an architecture fanzine launch. The designers had composed the zine with AutoCAD, and I found it very funny that this fanzine, heavy on visuals, was much about AutoCAD than anything else. Surely most of the architecture on display and discussed in the fanzine also had the indelible influence of AutoCAD. So it was an AutoCAD fanzine, foremost. "We shape our tools and our tools shape us," and so on.

Recently I’ve begun to notice most of the visual design that passes for fashionable nowadays looks like that AutoCAD zine. As if, among other things, the government issued a decree banning serif type. Creativity allowed as long as it applies cartesian sans. Now, it does looks fairly obvious to me many visual designers are coding or emulating results from dynamic typography, which spread like wildfire from fringe Processing tutorials to 10K+ Instagram accounts. What I can’t put my finger on is why I feel the results are so inert and uninspiring, as if still made with a software intended for designing very static buildings. It seems visual brutalism doesn't allow any perception of dynamism.